s40 (2.0T, 2003) or audi A4 B5 (1.8T, 2003) ??

[afahmi]

Title : s40 (2.0T, 2003) or audi A4 B5 (1.8T, 2003) ??

Hi Guys,
Just nak pendapat korang,
1) in term of maintenance which one more costly(i:e maintenance of standard service)?
2) for 5-6 years of age, which one prone to have more problem?
3)spare pare and performance availability, which one easy to find?
4)in term of their turbo..which one is more reliable?

little bit about my Bground, currently own lynx h/batck mod to mazda GTR 210 engine(but only 180whp)..I think it is time for me to go for conti but i had a hard time to choose between this 2.. i started with turbo hence that's is why i'm not including bimmer n merc in my list hehe..

the fact that i like about s40 are:
- price cheaper than the latter (same year)
- the most safest car.
- its turbo of course(got big Ts)
- but it is 2.0, hence FC and roadtax will be more than my current car

for audi:
- it's 1.8T same as my current engine mazda GT-R(hence the fuel consumption should be the same or less, roadtax same)
- german made (hehe)
- the design for me more beauty :)
- but i read alot of a4 b5 having gearbox problem for NA, 1.8T should be ok

i'm 0 knowlegde about conti cars n also their workshop..so i really need your opinion between this 2 cars..

thanks

 

[sprinter]

broo....mind to attach those car pics?

 

[5115]

here is pic of volve S40 2003

145hp/185nm
0-100 9.5 sec

get it from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volvo_S40#Engine_specifications

 

[5115]

here is pic of Audi A4 B5 1994-2001 (i wonder the audi 2003 u mentioned look like this/)

148hp/210nm 1994-2001
178hp/235nm 1999-2001 (facelifted)

get it from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_A4#B5_.28Typ_8D.2C_1994.E2.80.932001.29

 

[5115]

currently market price for these 2 car is among 40k-70k.with these cash u actually can:

1.get an old e36 318 (25k-30k),convert to SR20/RB20/1jz (~RM10k plus labour)
- powerful
- lost comfort & handling of bimmer
- save cost

or convert to 325 manual (5k-7k)

2.get an old e30 318/320 (10k-15k) and convert to to SR20/RB20/1jz (~RM10k plus labour)
- same as option 1 but cheaper

or convert to M50B25 manual (half cut 5k-6k,manual set 5k-7k)

3.get an e34 (15k-20k) & do the same like above or supercharge it (~10k)

4.get a fiat coupe 20V turbo (60k-70k) and u'll have a smiling face

 

[Ingolstadt]

The problem with the bimmer,is that the design is super outdated. The 2003 A4 is the final and most reliable of the long running A4 B5 (From year 1994 - 2002).

The Volvo is more spacious than the A4, service and maintenance is one of the costliest amongst continental cars - I know a good friend that supplies Volvo, Volkswagen and Audi spare parts so i know what I'm talking about.

Both handles very well, but like you said thread starter, I also cannot tahan the looks. Yes, the Volvo is safer by some margin. But can you take it if you know the Volvo S40 you mentioned is essentially our good ol Proton Waja? They both took the platform of Mitsubishi Carisma.

I would definitely take the Audi, first for the looks, second for the looks, and third for the looks, fourth would be for the interior build quality and looks. Oh, the cheaper roadtax as well.

However if it were the S60, which is also around this price, it would be an entirely different question.T5 tsk tsk ...

Take a look at the S60 my friend.

 

[finkl1]

my personal opinion, as I have sat S60T 2003 and A6 1.8T 2003 european right hand drive.
Both being manual, as it is less traffic congested area outskirt, but congestion is like klang valley, most of the people prefer manual than automatic.

Volvo is renowned for weight, so straight away, you will see that pick up is bad for the volvo.
comfort wise and cabin size is nothing to shout about. As the S60 i drove is very wide and long, I had alot of issue parking in the city. Even normal parking lots pose a great effort of multiple gear changes. For me, I felt miserable driving them, eventhough safety and all.

As for the Audi A6 1.8T (not A4 that i drove ) was driven for 2 months. In between I had driven a Honda CRV, Accord, Skoda and Mercedes, but I still find myself drawn back to book the Audi.
Straight a 2003 car, but clocking of 98k mileage when I rent it, the car still felt superb.
No turbo lagged when I switch gear and pedal the accelerator. I had the confidence to overtake cars at even a 60mph with oncoming traffic in 4-5 secs, so you can imagine how much of torque it still has at that speed.

City driving on the Audi is more likeable. Turning corners, uphill car parks, balancing with the manual was no major issue. I could estimate good distances, front and rear. It looks like those Nissan Cefiro cars, but the car is both spacious as well as made in quality in all aspect.
Parking although is not superb, but it felt the same as parking a Waja.

Turning circles are exceptional, unlike the volvo.

I would still spend my money on the Audi. I have not sat a BMW 3series but BMW local members are always stating their cars are better. No comment on that.
However, Audi autos do have gearbox issues of the before 2001, B5s, so one needs to carefully inspect the car before buying. Parts are also expensive to maintained, but since you have chosen any conti cars, you should expect this.