One of the most persistent dangers of doing this job is finding cars that I want to buy for myself. Especially since I have kinda-sorta been thinking about another “fun” car ever since I sold my MG. An old Audi has been on my list of cars to look for since time out of mind, but since they’re so rare, they’re usually not much of a temptation. But then I find these two, nearby and reasonably-priced. Our Lady Of German Engineering, give me strength. Since I’m not realistically in a position to buy either one of them right now, I’ll just show them to you and see what you think.
We looked at a couple of pink Hondas yesterday, and I was surprised by the outcome: the Bubblicious-colored Element came out on top. Was it just that the CRX was so sad-looking? Maybe so. The Element’s ad did show a couple of red flags (pink flags?) that I didn’t notice at first glance; there is a chance that those interior photos don’t go with that car. Hopefully everything is on the up-and-up, and it serves someone well. They certainly won’t lose it in a parking lot.
For me, it’s simple; I like the Element, but I have wanted a CRX since they came out. It’s one of those cars that has just never been in the right place at the right time, but I wouldn’t turn this one down on account of some faded paint and a boop on the nose. It’s maybe a little bit more expensive than it should be, but that’s where prices are going. It sucks, but that’s the way it is.
My parents had a lot of unusual cars when I was growing up, but they kept coming back to two automakers: Chrysler and VW/Audi. That will come as no surprise to anyone who reads this column regularly and knows my taste in cars, I’m sure. I’ve had plenty of Chrysler products over the years, but I never went back to VW, and I’ve never had an Audi of my own. As with CRXs, it was never the right car in the right place at the right time. Audi gets a bad rap for reliability, particularly the newer ones, but these old models are fairly simple machines. Electronics may fail, power features may conk out, but the basic guts of them are sturdy. And with the exception of the Quattro models, they’re usually cheap – if you can find one. Well, I found two, so let’s take a look at them.
1986 Audi 4000 CS – $2,500
Engine/drivetrain: 1.8-liter OHC inline-4, three-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Kalamazoo, MI
Odometer reading: 190,000 miles (but it’s broken, so more than that)
Operational status: Runs and drives well
Audi changed its cars’ names when it brought them over to the US, and I couldn’t tell you why. In Europe, this car is called the Audi 80, but here it’s the 4000. The CS designation marks this car as a “Commemorative Design” edition, available only in 1986. I don’t remember the exact details, but it was basically a fancy interior and maybe some special wheels. Neat, but not really anything special. The CS package is more commonly seen on the 4000 Quattro or the Coupe GT, making this a pretty rare car. But as we all know, rare doesn’t necessarily mean valuable.
The 4000 Quattro came with Audi’s five-cylinder engine, but the 2WD version made do with a 1.8-liter four, usually coupled to a three-speed automatic, which is what this car has. It’s not what you’d call speedy, but it gets the job done. The seller says it has had a lot of recent work done, and it runs and drives great. In fact, it was daily driven not too long ago.
This is the only photo we get of the interior, and it’s not much to go on. It has what looks like aftermarket vinyl covers on the front seats. The seats should be suede or velour under them, and I would hope that they’re in good condition, but I fear they’re not. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the power stuff doesn’t work, too. It’s just how it is.
Audi started galvanizing the bodies of its cars sometime in the ’80s, so it’s rare to see one with much in the way of rust. But of course, other stuff can rust too, like suspension arms and brake lines, so it’s still worth checking it out underneath. I do see a little bit of rust along the leading edge of the hood, and possibly a bubble or two in the rear wheel arches, but for a forty-year-old Michigan car, it’s in remarkable shape. The aftermarket cherry-bomb muffler poking out from under the bumper worries me a bit; I hope it’s not the only thing quieting the exhaust.
1986 Audi 5000 CS Turbo – $2,200
Engine/drivetrain: Turbocharged 2.2-liter OHC inline 5, five-speed manual, FWD
Location: Laingsburg, MI
Odometer reading: 131,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
This car would have been known in Europe as the Audi 200, and it was the flagship of the line until the V8 sedan came out in 1990. One of the Audis my family had when I was younger was a 5000 CS Turbo like this, and it was a damn nice car. This one doesn’t look quite as fancy as the one we had, but it has one feature none of our Audis ever had: a five-speed manual transmission.
The turbocharger adds almost fifty horsepower to Audi’s legendary inline five, and from what I remember it’s all up top. Performance off the line is about the same between the turbo and non-turbo versions, but passing gear is a whole other ball game. It probably wouldn’t feel nearly as fast to me now, since I’m used to a Chrysler Hemi, but back when I was 18, the turbo kicking in made me giggle. This one has only 131,000 miles to its name, and recently had a new clutch, brakes, and timing belt installed. The seller does mention that it has an oil leak that needs some attention; they think it’s coming from the pan gasket. But other than that, it’s in fine mechanical shape.
The interior of these cars is really nice, and this one is in good shape. There’s a smudge or something on the driver’s seat bolster, and some discoloration on the door panel, but otherwise it’s clean. Again, I’m sure there is something broken in there, there always is, but the seller does say that the air conditioning works beautifully.
The outside looks really nice, but there is one rust spot on the right rear quarter panel. Apparently it was involved in a fender-bender and repaired ages ago, and now the repair has started to rust a tiny bit. You can redo it, or just ignore it, which is what I’d probably do. It also has some rock chips in the leading edge of the hood; I’m guessing it lived on a gravel road at one point.
Personally, I’d be happy with either of these. They both have their strengths and weaknesses: the 4000 is going to be a bit pokey, but it’s a much simpler car. The 5000 would be more fun, especially with its manual transmission, but it’s an order of magnitude more complicated. Either one is more DIY-friendly than any Audi made in the last twenty years, though. Which way would you go?
I’m choosing the 5000 because I’ve already owned an A4000Q. I found the sedan shape unaccommodating to my hobbies, so I moved on to a VW Quantum Syncro (my favorite futuristic car name ever). One unsung merit of all these cars was the unswerving highway stability of these cars. Like a thrown hammer, they just tracked heavy-end first with almost-autonomous accuracy. When you locked all the differentials at highway speeds, they tracked like a train, laser-locked to the vanishing point ahead. I’ve never felt anything like it, and I miss it 40 years later.
I’m not an Audi guy so I don’t really know the difference between these but given that they are about the same price and one has a manual and runs and the other has neither of those features, the decision is clear…
Who are the 27 people who voted for the not-running automatic? People who can’t drive stick, I guess?
?? The 4000 runs too, according to the ad and Mark’s write up. So, my reading and math says it’s only missing one of the “features.”
That said, like you, I’d take the 5000 over it in an Ingolstadt second.
And I’d set aside at least the asking price of it to fix the things I don’t want to drive without.
I’ve had a VWAG product and will never buy a new one, but the 5000 seems tempting. And I’ve never owned a 5-cylinder car.
I clicked on the 5000’s link and it’s been delisted, so I guess it has already found a new owner.
Oops! Read it too fast. It’s only the odometer that’s broken, but that’s already one probably unobtanium thing that would bother me forever.
I miss my old Audis. I had an 84 4000S quattro and an 86 4000CS quattro. Amazing machines. But my buddys dad had a 5000 turbo quattro wagen. OMG what a rocket for the time.
Even adding the time that 5000 might spend in the shop, I’ll still get everywhere faster.
Audi 5000 for me just for the manual transmission alone. I’ve heard stories that the slushboxes on these suck ass in more ways than one.
So one with a manual is gonna give a more reliable and more enjoyable ownership experience.
Old car with a turbo? Uh, no thanks.
I may get there slower, but I’ll always get there.
I had the 4000 Coupe, and at one point asked my mechanic how many miles I could get out of the 5 cylinder. He said “Nobody knows”. Then he pointed to a turbo 5 with over 200k, but also gave the disclaimer that the rest of the car would disintegrate long before the drivetrain. True…my Coupe’s dashboard was held in place by gravity.
(Long winded way of saying I’d take the 5000)
It’s a day for Default ’80s Car Face, I see. I’ll take the in-slightly-better-shape 4000, please.
That 5000 is fantastic! If it were closer to me I might buy it. I was looking for one of those or a 200 a few months back and didn’t see any that were in such nice shape or that cheap. I owned a 4000 4cyl auto at one point… it was surprisingly solid and handled well, but that is a hateful engine/transmission combination – the gear ratios are just a poor match to the power-band.
Quattro, 5 spd and 5 cyl noises all day long. The interior looks terrific, too. Cherry on top.