Article from Jalopnik. Damn, I really like this car, but this sounds like an unholy maintenance nightmare...
http://jalopnik.com/here-s-why-the-v8-audi-s4-is-an-awful-used-car-1676466510 (http://jalopnik.com/here-s-why-the-v8-audi-s4-is-an-awful-used-car-1676466510)
B6 and B7 S4 yeah they're pretty bad. SLUDGE EVERYWHERE TIMING CHAINS EVERYWHERE
This picture is why I ignore those that dump on GM LS pushrod engines. Hell you can buy a factory new Coyote 5.0 from Ford for less than it costs to replace the timing chain on this engine.
(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--FmyUTkKo--/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636/qzluvlolghztvktp1ljl.jpg)
Oh lord, that article is a tedious read.
Quote from: Laconian on December 30, 2014, 02:10:42 PM
Oh lord, that article is a tedious read.
Yeah, that's par for the course with Jalopnik bloggers.
$3000 for the parts is a bit nuts.
But labor could be a few cases of beer..
and a few pizza deliveries.
I've been looking into these
Has Char found another outlet for his writing?
Quote from: Colin on December 30, 2014, 02:41:39 PM
Has Char found another outlet for his writing?
Lol no, it's me Nick. I love these cars but this article shocked me. $8000 to replace the timing chain on an S4... wow.
Quote from: Laconian on December 30, 2014, 02:10:42 PM
Oh lord, that article is a tedious read.
He types like a 14 year old that just discovered hyperbole and literary devices
His Ferrari ownership blog was unbearable.... only worthwhile entry was the sober summary at the end.
Timing chain up against the firewall? How absolutely awful. Means the engine has to come out. It just shocks me what ze Germans do. Imagine the awfulness that will come in 5-10 years from all these turbo motors, esp. the hot-vee V8s.
Germans design for performance first, maintenance maybe. Timing chain will last the length of a lease, so it doesnt matter. Let the second hand market do the engineering
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 30, 2014, 03:25:37 PM
Germans design for performance first, maintenance maybe. Timing chain will last the length of a lease, so it doesnt matter. Let the second hand market do the engineering
Explains why Cadillacs now retain their value better than the German marques, for the most part.
I almost bought a used B6 S4 a couple years ago but between the timing chain of doom inside of the assbackwards engine and horrendous fuel mileage I decided to pass.
Real shame because otherwise that engine is very sweet.
Quote from: r0tor on December 30, 2014, 04:07:23 PM
I almost bought a used B6 S4 a couple years ago but between the timing chain of doom inside of the assbackwards engine and horrendous fuel mileage I decided to pass.
Real shame because otherwise that engine is very sweet.
The whole car is otherwise sweet, especially the wagon.
Quote from: Rockraven on December 30, 2014, 03:30:35 PM
Explains why Cadillacs now retain their value better than the German marques, for the most part.
IDK, Caddys def sell for less than Germans despite being priced the same so that might play a part.
I thought this had been common knowledge for years, hell since these were new.
Ive seen alot of real nice v8 s4s for sale but i wouldn't want to pay to play on this one. Probably better off with the older 2.7 or pony up the cash for the newer sc model.
Hell the v10 s6 might be a better cost to own used option.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 30, 2014, 04:32:22 PM
IDK, Caddys def sell for less than Germans despite being priced the same so that might play a part.
Nope. You'd be shocked. I was when I compared CTSs with BMWs, Mercs and Audis in the same year/spec.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on December 30, 2014, 04:36:43 PM
I thought this had been common knowledge for years, hell since these were new.
Ive seen alot of real nice v8 s4s for sale but i wouldn't want to pay to play on this one. Probably better off with the older 2.7 or pony up the cash for the newer sc model.
Hell the v10 s6 might be a better cost to own used option.
I wasn't aware. It definitely pays to do your research.
Quote from: Rockraven on December 30, 2014, 02:04:20 PM
This picture is why I ignore those that dump on GM LS pushrod engines. Hell you can buy a factory new Coyote 5.0 from Ford for less than it costs to replace the timing chain on this engine.
(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--FmyUTkKo--/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636/qzluvlolghztvktp1ljl.jpg)
How many bloody chains are in there? :confused:
I count 4. This game is fun, good way to teach kids about the perils of German engineering
Well, the S4 joins the M5 (among others) that I will never own, despite their affordable entry fee on the used market, because the cost to repair is prohibitive. Other cars on my list are any car with a turbo and any car with a DCT.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on December 30, 2014, 04:36:43 PM
I thought this had been common knowledge for years, hell since these were new.
Ive seen alot of real nice v8 s4s for sale but i wouldn't want to pay to play on this one. Probably better off with the older 2.7 or pony up the cash for the newer sc model.
Hell the v10 s6 might be a better cost to own used option.
2.7TT has its own "have to drop the engine" problems.... weak ass K03 turbos and improper oil plumbing
Quote from: FoMoJo on December 30, 2014, 05:23:02 PM
How many bloody chains are in there? :confused:
4 - same as in the Coyote ;).
(http://distantvisions.net/images/coyote/coyote-timing-chain-medium.jpg)
Skimmy skim skim skim on that article, jeez.
And the timing chains on Coyotes are all in front, not in the back like the Audi V8. Not like that makes a difference, with how things are packaged now you probably have to pull the engine for access regardless.
Quote from: Secret Chimp on December 31, 2014, 01:04:21 AM
Skimmy skim skim skim on that article, jeez.
And the timing chains on Coyotes are all in front, not in the back like the Audi V8. Not like that makes a difference, with how things are packaged now you probably have to pull the engine for access regardless.
Nope.
I can't picture any modern car where you DONT have to drop the subframe to service the timing chain. I know pretty much anything with the GM 3.6 DI has to have the subframe and Trans dropped out to service. Seems par for course these days
But more importantly, make your damn motor where you shouldn't HAVE to service the timing chain.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 30, 2014, 10:53:35 PM
2.7TT has its own "have to drop the engine" problems.... weak ass K03 turbos and improper oil plumbing
Parts for the 2.7T are probably cheaper, and much more widely available.
Quote from: GoCougs on December 30, 2014, 11:07:01 PM
4 - same as in the Coyote ;).
(http://distantvisions.net/images/coyote/coyote-timing-chain-medium.jpg)
Coyote has considerably simpler chain routing. The Audi's chain routing looks like it was penned by Daedalus himself.
Quote from: MX793 on December 31, 2014, 07:51:11 AM
Coyote has considerably simpler chain routing. The Audi's chain routing looks like it was penned by Daedalus himself.
A work of art.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on December 31, 2014, 07:25:37 AM
Parts for the 2.7T are probably cheaper, and much more widely available.
Time to drop the engine and reengineer it isn't though
One swap I've seen that makes sense is the 4.2 V8 from the A8 into B5s. It has a timing belt, but the belt is at the front of the engine and you don't have to drop the motor to change it. That process is fraught with problems as well though too.
http://www.clubtouareg.com/forums/f73/diy-timing-belt-4-2-v8-34691.html (http://www.clubtouareg.com/forums/f73/diy-timing-belt-4-2-v8-34691.html)
And in the end, you have a car that weighs more than an RX300, with the weight balance of an OG Saab, the reliability of a late 90s VW and the performance of a bolt on G35 :zzz:
For the same $$$ Id prob just get a 1G CTS-V
Quote from: MX793 on December 31, 2014, 07:51:11 AM
Coyote has considerably simpler chain routing. The Audi's chain routing looks like it was penned by Daedalus himself.
But four chains nonetheless - I just couldn't resist ;).
Perhaps simpler "routing" but all in all the Audi has a simpler chain system as it uses only three chains to drive the cams (the 4th chain is used to drive some sort of accessory - probably the oil pump) whereas the Coyote uses four chains. The Audi V8 was also the more demanding motor - higher red line (much higher in the RS4 - 8,200 rpm) and 5 valves per cylinder such that shorter (stiffer) primary chains (i.e., chains that actually drive the cams) were likely beneficial/necessary.
Quote from: GoCougs on December 31, 2014, 10:17:16 AM
But four chains nonetheless - I just couldn't resist ;).
Perhaps simpler "routing" but all in all the Audi has a simpler chain system as it uses only three chains to drive the cams (the 4th chain is used to drive some sort of accessory - probably the oil pump) whereas the Coyote uses four chains. The Audi V8 was also the more demanding motor - higher red line (much higher in the RS4 - 8,200 rpm) and 5 valves per cylinder such that shorter (stiffer) primary chains (i.e., chains that actually drive the cams) were likely beneficial/necessary.
It's total chain length that drives the "stiffness", not the individual chain lengths. Two 10" chains will have as much stretch as a single 20" chain of the same link geometry. Hard to scale from a photo, but I doubt the Audi's total chain length (ignoring the accessory chain) is much less than the Coyote's from crankshaft to camshaft. Plus the longer chains running between intake and exhaust cams introduce potential for more intake/exhaust variation on a given cylinder bank than the Ford's shorter cam-to-cam chains. Not that chain stretch is that much of an issue with modern motors...
The intermediate "idlers" on the Audi design will also introduce additional friction and rotating mass into the valvetrain, which is perhaps more pertinent than the slight differences in overall chain length.
I'd also wager that the new Voodoo engine, with its rumored 8000+ RPM redline, will use the same cam chain layout as the standard Coyote.
Quote from: SVT666 on December 30, 2014, 10:16:54 PM
Well, the S4 joins the M5 (among others) that I will never own, despite their affordable entry fee on the used market, because the cost to repair is prohibitive. Other cars on my list are any car with a turbo and any car with a DCT.
The M5's engine isn't as bad as this. The major are the rod bearings and it's a 2K preventive maintenance thing. Also, it's a 500hp V10, much more exotic than this Audi's 340hp V8.
My brother is toying with the idea of buying a certified pre-owned Gallardo, using the pro "it's got an Audi V10". Hmmmm. :hmm:
LOL, I've been saying this on the board for a while now. Nothing on that car screams (we thought this out) From the shit engine, the the garbage AWD system - Audi/VW has always been a fashion brand for pretenders and always will be.
Quote from: MX793 on December 31, 2014, 11:07:17 AM
It's total chain length that drives the "stiffness", not the individual chain lengths. Two 10" chains will have as much stretch as a single 20" chain of the same link geometry. Hard to scale from a photo, but I doubt the Audi's total chain length (ignoring the accessory chain) is much less than the Coyote's from crankshaft to camshaft. Plus the longer chains running between intake and exhaust cams introduce potential for more intake/exhaust variation on a given cylinder bank than the Ford's shorter cam-to-cam chains. Not that chain stretch is that much of an issue with modern motors...
The intermediate "idlers" on the Audi design will also introduce additional friction and rotating mass into the valvetrain, which is perhaps more pertinent than the slight differences in overall chain length.
I'd also wager that the new Voodoo engine, with its rumored 8000+ RPM redline, will use the same cam chain layout as the standard Coyote.
Actually, it's many things that define "stiffness" (which is a layman's term for linearity = stiffness, backlash, bandwidth, hysteresis, response, etc.) such as mechanical design, material, and application (i.e., tension/loading).
Said two ganged 10" chains will not have the same "stretch" as a single 20" if they are they are tensioned differently. And two 10" chains will likely have far higher natural frequencies than a single 20" chain, plus the designer can tailor each chain to its local application - one chain to be beefier and higher tensioned for example.
What Audi did is fairly common in industrial applications - in general, the more chains/longer the chains, the worse the "stiffness" (linearity) of the system. Not saying the Coyote is flawed it's just that the the Audi chain layout is inherently the better dynamic system - fewer chains, less total chain length, equal length primary drive chains, and the ability to tension each chain differently to suit the localized application.
Quote from: GoCougs on December 31, 2014, 12:04:37 PM
Actually, it's many things that define "stiffness" (which is a layman's term for linearity = stiffness, backlash, bandwidth, hysteresis, response, etc.) such as mechanical design, material, and application (i.e., tension/loading).
Said two ganged 10" chains will not have the same "stretch" as a single 20" if they are they are tensioned differently. And two 10" chains will likely have far higher natural frequencies than a single 20" chain, plus the designer can tailor each chain to its local application - one chain to be beefier and higher tensioned for example.
What Audi did is fairly common in industrial applications - in general, the more chains/longer the chains, the worse the "stiffness" (linearity) of the system. Not saying the Coyote is flawed it's just that the the Audi chain layout is inherently the better dynamic system - fewer chains, less total chain length, equal length primary drive chains, and the ability to tension each chain differently to suit the localized application.
Audi is the Fox News of Cars. If it were true before, it becomes False as soon as they start doing/saying it. You cannot predict the way the will fuck up the simplest of things.
Hmmm. A bit of research says Ford is behind the curve in using all these chains. In fact I wasn't able to find an example of a modern DOHC engine using 4 chains. Just a small example:
BMW S65 4.0L V8 - two chains:
(http://www.m3post.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=795925&d=1355471328)
Nissan VQ V6 - three chains:
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRQMc4jLMgzggbTvJYcBhga_rYMooteeGHKYscjXtZlVGWxICdMOQ)
GM 3.6L V6 - three chains:
(http://i989.photobucket.com/albums/af16/puppabriggy/PA050024.jpg)
Quote from: GoCougs on December 31, 2014, 12:04:37 PM
Actually, it's many things that define "stiffness" (which is a layman's term for linearity = stiffness, backlash, bandwidth, hysteresis, response, etc.) such as mechanical design, material, and application (i.e., tension/loading).
Said two ganged 10" chains will not have the same "stretch" as a single 20" if they are they are tensioned differently. And two 10" chains will likely have far higher natural frequencies than a single 20" chain, plus the designer can tailor each chain to its local application - one chain to be beefier and higher tensioned for example.
That depends very much on the machine. I don't believe that is applicable here. If I take a single-speed bicycle and replace its single long chain with 2 chains (and an idler sprocket shaft to connect them), I do not decrease the "slop" in the chain drive (in part because I actually increase the overall chain length by doing this).
QuoteWhat Audi did is fairly common in industrial applications - in general, the more chains/longer the chains, the worse the "stiffness" (linearity) of the system. Not saying the Coyote is flawed it's just that the the Audi chain layout is inherently the better dynamic system - fewer chains, less total chain length, equal length primary drive chains, and the ability to tension each chain differently to suit the localized application.
I'm not sure there's less total chain length with the Audi configuration vs the Ford configuration (removing physical size differences between the motors from consideration). I'd have to draw it out, but my gut is telling me that if there is a difference, it's negligible. Ford's "primary" drive chains are likewise equal length from crank to exhaust cam, and each chain in the Ford, as with the Audi, has its own independent tensioner. The Ford configuration likewise has the option of using different gauge chains (heavier for the long primary chains, lighter for the secondaries).
The biggest advantage of 3 chains with idlers sprockets that I can see is that it permits smaller sprockets on the cams (and therefore a potentially more compact head) since you can do all of, or part of, the gear ratio work via the idlers.
Cougs is on a tear here, this is hilarious
Quote from: MX793 on December 31, 2014, 12:45:57 PM
That depends very much on the machine. I don't believe that is applicable here. If I take a single-speed bicycle and replace its single long chain with 2 chains (and an idler sprocket shaft to connect them), I do not decrease the "slop" in the chain drive (in part because I actually increase the overall chain length by doing this).
I'm not sure there's less total chain length with the Audi configuration vs the Ford configuration (removing physical size differences between the motors from consideration). I'd have to draw it out, but my gut is telling me that if there is a difference, it's negligible. Ford's "primary" drive chains are likewise equal length from crank to exhaust cam, and each chain in the Ford, as with the Audi, has its own independent tensioner. The Ford configuration likewise has the option of using different gauge chains (heavier for the long primary chains, lighter for the secondaries).
The biggest advantage of 3 chains with idlers sprockets that I can see is that it permits smaller sprockets on the cams (and therefore a potentially more compact head) since you can do all of, or part of, the gear ratio work via the idlers.
I'm not a fan of the word "slop." There is a lot more going on in a drive train be it gears, belts, chains, etc., as mentioned, and I'd already mentioned the advantages of decreasing individual chain length, as well as decreasing the total # of chains. It's unlikely a coincidence that pretty much no one else uses four chains. I don't see any counterargument to Audi having the inherently better cam drive design.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on December 31, 2014, 11:52:20 AM
The M5's engine isn't as bad as this. The major are the rod bearings and it's a 2K preventive maintenance thing. Also, it's a 500hp V10, much more exotic than this Audi's 340hp V8.
The M5's transmission is the really scary item.
Quote from: SVT666 on December 31, 2014, 02:53:48 PM
The M5's transmission is the really scary item.
I've always thought BMW's manuals were pretty decent? Never heard about any big issues with them.
Quote from: SVT666 on December 31, 2014, 02:53:48 PM
The M5's transmission is the really scary item.
Transmission and all, I would take the M over the S4 GOLF GTI.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on December 31, 2014, 02:56:35 PM
I've always thought BMW's manuals were pretty decent? Never heard about any big issues with them.
Its not the manual to be worried about.... the SMG is the problem
IF someone could put the DCT from the F10 into the E60 theyd make the perfect M5
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 31, 2014, 03:09:09 PM
Its not the manual to be worried about.... the SMG is the problem
IF someone could put the DCT from the F10 into the E60 theyd make the perfect M5
Ohhhh, I don't consider the SMG M5's of that generation to be an actual purchase option. I don't know why anyone would since we(in america) were given the REAL transmission will the rest of the world got stuck with the SMG.
Why would anyone even want an M5 with the SMG?
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on December 31, 2014, 03:12:46 PM
Why would anyone even want an M5 with the SMG?
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/not-quite-up-to-pacing-page-2 (http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/not-quite-up-to-pacing-page-2)
QuoteMW responded with a six-speed manual-gearbox option, which we've been anticipating for a year. Yes! This'll push the bad-boy Bimmer a big step closer to perfection. We thought.
Uh-oh, not so fast. This M5's shift-for-yourself six-speed is consistent with others we've experienced from BMW. In fact, it's the same six-speed employed in the previous-generation M5. And therein lies the rub. The new M5's V-10 was designed to be allied with the seven-speed SMG. Bolting the same engine to the six-speed entailed a proviso. With the SMG, the driver had the option of disabling the dynamic stability-control (DSC) system. When you opt for the manual, you don't get that option. A little dashboard button labeled MDM — for "M Dynamic Mode" — raises the DSC intervention threshold, but unlike the SMG version, it can't be completely shut down and is always on guard. When wheelspin is detected, DSC goes to work, damping the throttle, sometimes squeezing the big cross-drilled brake rotors.
Would you be surprised to hear that this doesn't have a positive effect on acceleration? Or lap times on the Streets of Willow? Or making a hot exit from a slow corner? Of course you wouldn't. Because that's precisely what happens. This M5 was a half-second slower to 60 mph than the SMG version we tested in January 2006 — 4.7 versus 4.2 — and a half-second slower through the quarter-mile: 13.0 seconds at 114 mph versus 12.5 at 118. DSC also inhibited lane-change performance (60.8 mph versus 65.6) and skidpad results (0.83 lateral g versus 0.89).
All of this is attributable to product-liability issues, specifically, concerns about axle tramp, a.k.a. wheel hop, during full-throttle launches, which could break expensive drivetrain bits and irritate the well-heeled owners BMW would prefer to keep happy.
Strange, given that the E39 made the same amount of torque, and IIRC had the same gear ratios. Not so strange, given the fact that the 1G CTS-V used to lunch rear ends on launched, and the aftermarket had to step in to save them.
I'd still get the 6MT version. It's not a racecar. I want more fun.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 31, 2014, 05:15:27 PM
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/not-quite-up-to-pacing-page-2 (http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/not-quite-up-to-pacing-page-2)
Strange, given that the E39 made the same amount of torque, and IIRC had the same gear ratios. Not so strange, given the fact that the 1G CTS-V used to lunch rear ends on launched, and the aftermarket had to step in to save them.
The DSC issue was fixed on later manual cars it can be fully disabled. I'd have gotten the manual if it were available here.
I'd only consider the SMG in the US at significant savings vs a manual car.
Quote from: GoCougs on December 31, 2014, 12:24:07 PM
Hmmm. A bit of research says Ford is behind the curve in using all these chains. In fact I wasn't able to find an example of a modern DOHC engine using 4 chains. Just a small example:
GM 3.6L V6 - three chains:
(http://i989.photobucket.com/albums/af16/puppabriggy/PA050024.jpg)
I'd be concerned about all the tensioners and guides in this setup...as with the Audi S4. Much risk of wear, as proven in the S4, as well as additional resistance. Better to go for a simpler setup, even if it means strapping the cam drives together with a chain. No chance of "slop" developing there and zero guide wear and resistance.
Quote from: FoMoJo on January 01, 2015, 07:11:47 AM
I'd be concerned about all the tensioners and guides in this setup...as with the Audi S4. Much risk of wear, as proven in the S4, as well as additional resistance. Better to go for a simpler setup, even if it means strapping the cam drives together with a chain. No chance of "slop" developing there and zero guide wear and resistance.
GM's 3.6 also has a history of timing chain failures and stretching or tensioner issues...
Quote from: MX793 on January 01, 2015, 08:07:22 AM
GM's 3.6 also has a history of timing chain failures and stretching or tensioner issues...
Do you actually think he will acknowledge that?
Quote from: FoMoJo on January 01, 2015, 07:11:47 AM
I'd be concerned about all the tensioners and guides in this setup...as with the Audi S4. Much risk of wear, as proven in the S4, as well as additional resistance. Better to go for a simpler setup, even if it means strapping the cam drives together with a chain. No chance of "slop" developing there and zero guide wear and resistance.
Again, the Coyote has the more complicated setup owing to the use of 4 chains = Coyote has more tensioners (4 vs. 3; each chain needs one) and at least as much chain guiding (and probably more - wow, look at all that black) vs. either the S4 V8 or the GM 3.6L.
(http://distantvisions.net/images/coyote/coyote-timing-chain-medium.jpg)
Hmmm. Maybe the Coyote folks should have taken a queue from the Ecoboost team - 3 chains (= 3 tensioners) and less chain guiding (but really not - the Coyote is a derivative of the 20+ year-old Modular, so Ford was hamstrung a bit):
(http://www.homebuiltairplanes.com/forums/attachments/general-auto-conversion-discussion/4857d1257478172-another-nice-looking-engine-internalwaterpmp.jpg)
(http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t162/2helicoil1/NA%20LS2/NA403AssemblyTimingChainValveSpring.jpg)
Engineering superiority.
(http://distantvisions.net/images/coyote/coyote-timing-chain-medium.jpg)
(http://www.latemodelengines.com/image/longblocks/LS7440big.jpg)
Imagine an LS7 with 10 years' worth of advancement, esp. direct injection and pooprod VVT. I sure hope GM has the guts at some point...
Id rather they fix the top end so it doesn't blow apart before 50k. LS7 is possibly the least reliable ls, dont know why you are so obsessed with it. Id rather have a nice modded ls3 that will match the hp of the 7 without being a 15k dollar boat anchor in a few years.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on January 01, 2015, 06:17:10 PM
Id rather they fix the top end so it doesn't blow apart before 50k. LS7 is possibly the least reliable ls, dont know why you are so obsessed with it. Id rather have a nice modded ls3 that will match the hp of the 7 without being a 15k dollar boat anchor in a few years.
You think a modded LS3 making the same power as an LS7 will somehow outlast it?
Quote from: hotrodalex on January 01, 2015, 06:31:28 PM
You think a modded LS3 making the same power as an LS7 will somehow outlast it?
A: General motors sells a crate ls3 with more power than the ls7
B: the ls7 issues seem to be related to rocker arm geometry (or so i gather according to the vette and aftermarket community) the ls3 has no such issues.
So yes, id have more faith in a 500hp ls3(modded or factory crate) over a stock ls7.
Quote from: hotrodalex on January 01, 2015, 04:48:15 PM
(http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t162/2helicoil1/NA%20LS2/NA403AssemblyTimingChainValveSpring.jpg)
Engineering superiority.
Fuck chains
(http://www.hotrodders.com/gallery/data/500/medium/DSCI0608.JPG)
Where's r0tor and josh? :lol:
My old 2.8 Cologne had gears. With "fibre" tooth ring.
Quote from: mzziaz on January 02, 2015, 03:03:41 AM
My old 2.8 Cologne had gears. With "fibre" tooth ring.
My personal favorite were the later, 4.0L SOHC Colognes with timing chains on the front and back of the motor. One ran from the crank to an idler (where the cam is on OHV Colognes) and then chains ran from the idler up to the camshafts. One of the cam drive chains was in front and the other in the rear.
Quote from: MX793 on January 02, 2015, 08:17:17 AM
My personal favorite were the later, 4.0L SOHC Colognes with timing chains on the front and back of the motor. One ran from the crank to an idler (where the cam is on OHV Colognes) and then chains ran from the idler up to the camshafts. One of the cam drive chains was in front and the other in the rear.
That's terrible. Sounds like a PITA to work on.
Quote from: SVT666 on January 02, 2015, 09:40:04 AM
That's terrible. Sounds like a PITA to work on.
When trying to make an OHC engine from an OHV design as cheaply as possible, corners much be cut.
Quote from: MX793 on January 02, 2015, 09:53:43 AM
When trying to make an OHC engine from an OHV design as cheaply as possible, corners much be cut.
I had this engine in my '93 Aerostar. Only had it for 3 years but it was a great highway cruiser. For some reason, it sounded really nice as well.
Quote from: FoMoJo on January 02, 2015, 10:44:39 AM
I had this engine in my '93 Aerostar. Only had it for 3 years but it was a great highway cruiser. For some reason, it sounded really nice as well.
Yours would have been the OHV version of the 4.0L. The SOHC version of the 4.0L came out in '96.
Quote from: MX793 on January 02, 2015, 08:17:17 AM
My personal favorite were the later, 4.0L SOHC Colognes with timing chains on the front and back of the motor. One ran from the crank to an idler (where the cam is on OHV Colognes) and then chains ran from the idler up to the camshafts. One of the cam drive chains was in front and the other in the rear.
Hilarious
The real answer to horrendous used S4 reliabilty is
(http://preview.netcarshow.com/Lexus-IS-F-2008-hd.jpg)
Quote from: HotRodPilot on January 02, 2015, 01:30:09 AM
Where's r0tor and josh? :lol:
Too busy trying to count my timing chains...
I admit, i shopped around the idea of a used isf a while back.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on January 02, 2015, 05:02:25 PM
I admit, i shopped around the idea of a used isf a while back.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7-oDaKPdtI#t=73 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7-oDaKPdtI#t=73)
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on January 02, 2015, 05:02:25 PM
I admit, i shopped around the idea of a used isf a while back.
Who hasnt... great sounding yamaha V8 thats even more reliable then the base rock solid IS. Plus tge cars with torsen diffs drive superbly
Quote from: r0tor on January 02, 2015, 05:21:33 PM
Who hasnt... great sounding yamaha V8 thats even more reliable then the base rock solid IS. Plus tge cars with torsen diffs drive superbly
I looked around pretty hard for a couple months, very hard to come by atleast in my area.
Especially the good years... super rare
Meh, V8 sound track and Toyota reliability but comically small back seat, ricer-ish styling queues and weak slushie AT. I'd probably take a (B8) S4 over an IS-F, and that's saying something.
No it isn't.
Quote from: GoCougs on January 02, 2015, 10:57:25 PM
Meh, V8 sound track and Toyota reliability but comically small back seat, ricer-ish styling queues and weak slushie AT. I'd probably take a (B8) S4 over an IS-F, and that's saying something.
In real life, it looks more ordinary then an M, RS, or V car
Quote from: r0tor on January 03, 2015, 10:09:52 AM
In real life, it looks more ordinary then an M, RS, or V car
Not a chance, it stands out and not in a good way (ricer-esque lowering job, bit of a goofy body kit).
The Cadillac V cars are the blingiest of the performance sedans.
This is why I drive a Camry V6. Performance and reliability, bitches! :rockon:
Even after reading this thread, I went to autotrader.com and started looking up S4's and RS4's to see what they're going for. :facepalm:
B8 S4s are holding their value inconveniently well
Quote from: CALL_911 on January 05, 2015, 10:37:02 AM
B8 S4s are holding their value inconveniently well
Because they aren't epic pieces of shit like all the other models. I drove a Stage 2? APR version - quick.
Quote from: Char on February 06, 2015, 04:57:49 PM
Because they aren't epic pieces of shit like all the other models. I drove a Stage 2? APR version - quick.
I don't particularly care for the A4, but the S4 is one of my favorite sedans on sale today
these things are so cheap now.
http://newlondon.craigslist.org/cto/4884323018.html (http://newlondon.craigslist.org/cto/4884323018.html)
High mileage german cars are bad. I would hesitate before spending any money on a german car with anywhere near 150K on it, an audi worst of all.
A 150K mile V8 S4 is a high probability nightmare, IMO.
Wowowowowowow
I wouldn't DD that thing for free though
Its not the cost of entry that kills you on these things.
I'd buy it and race it into the ground. Well worth the $$$.
Quote from: hotrodalex on February 09, 2015, 09:45:16 PM
I'd buy it and race it into the ground. Well worth the $$$.
I'm sure you could think of better cars to race into the ground than an S4, even for that money. I see the S4 as one of the best all-around cars you can buy, but if I were buying something to race, it sure as shit wouldn't be an S4.
I didn't mean actually race, just drive around town like a maniac.
Might be worth it to have your own symphony orchestra following you around (that 4.2)
U might as well swap the 4.2 out of an old A8 into a B5. Damn near the same thing for less overall headaches (not even kidding)
But then u are still left with a little Corolla size car with Rikishi hanging off the front bumper. For the same weight/$$$ you could have a 540i
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on February 10, 2015, 05:51:05 AM
U might as well swap the 4.2 out of an old A8 into a B5. Damn near the same thing for less overall headaches (not even kidding)
But then u are still left with a little Corolla size car with Rikishi hanging off the front bumper. For the same weight/$$$ you could have a 540i
Nah might as well put that money into the 2.7.
Audi S4 Snow Burnout - Launching and Getting Sideways (also testing rear LSD)... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ru0P-05dz_8#ws)
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on February 10, 2015, 05:51:05 AM
U might as well swap the 4.2 out of an old A8 into a B5. Damn near the same thing for less overall headaches (not even kidding)
But then u are still left with a little Corolla size car with Rikishi hanging off the front bumper. For the same weight/$$$ you could have a 540i
Haha yea swapping a 4.2 into a B5 does not sound like a brilliant move
Lol Jalopnik is so full of shit sometimes. How many Audi chain V8s do u count on this "recommended used car" list?
http://carbuying.jalopnik.com/here-are-ten-of-the-best-2000s-cars-on-ebay-for-less-th-1690428960/ (http://carbuying.jalopnik.com/here-are-ten-of-the-best-2000s-cars-on-ebay-for-less-th-1690428960/)
Jalopnik is total nonsense, but it's entertaining
Anything written by that "Tavarish" guy is generally crap. He's the one that tried to flip a Gen 1 CTS and did everything catastrophically wrong
Quote from: CALL_911 on March 10, 2015, 12:59:44 PM
Jalopnik is total nonsense, but it's entertaining
+1
Quote from: 2o6 on March 10, 2015, 02:53:52 PM
Anything written by that "Tavarish" guy is generally crap. He's the one that tried to flip a Gen 1 CTS and did everything catastrophically wrong
Lol, yeah, that was a funny one.