What do you DISLIKE about your B9 A4?
09-07-2018, 06:46 PM
#171
Audiworld Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2. "D" mode in the DSG sucks. I think "S" mode is great. I find the DSG very enjoyable to use as an "on demand" manual. For example let's say Im going to pass on the highway and I know Im going to want brisk but not full power acceleration. I'll just tap the left shift paddle once, dip into the throttle and go. The car stays in temporary M mode long enough (when it's nominally in S mode) and when I'm done I'll bump it back to S mode. Perfect. This is basically how Ive driven an MT for 25 years, minus the clutch pedal. Left in auto mode I find the tranny is sometimes indecisive in maneuvers like that. Perhaps I haven't yet figured out exactly how to dip into the throttle to invoke 1 vs 2 vs 3 gear downshifts, but I'm also trying not to spin the engine much over 4k for now. I'll have to play with that more when I'm past break-in. I can see how some might say it's a rough-ish tranny, from a traditional auto perspective. But from a MT perspective, I'm happy with it! So, my complaint here is basically that I wish D mode didnt exist, or that I could set S as the default. But I get why D mode needs to exist - it enables them to claim their MPG's.
5. The Nav/map's auto day/night mode. Getting nitpicky now. Auto-switching to dark mode based on ambient light is a cool concept, but I think it switches to dark mode too soon. It can be high-noon on a sunny day and if the road Im driving has a lot of trees and shade, the system switches to dark mode. Kind of annoying IMO. I think auto-switching only at sunrise & sunset is a better approach.
09-08-2018, 02:40 AM
#172
AudiWorld Member
Is not the dark mode on the nav linked to the auto headlights setting? I have mine set to late and both of them seem to delay coming on in comparison to other vehicles I see.
I also drive mine in auto mode, which means it uses 'D', personally I can't see what the issue is. You in the USA have bigger things to worry about ;-)
I also drive mine in auto mode, which means it uses 'D', personally I can't see what the issue is. You in the USA have bigger things to worry about ;-)
09-23-2018, 07:03 PM
#173
AudiWorld Member
Thread Starter
Belated, but thanks, mlbcard, for the forbes article link. I've long suspected it was a "safety" reg thing, and that confirms it.
ShwartzS6, thanks for the suggestion. I have the sport seats but I'm curious now if the regular seats will feel different to my neck. But I'd be surprised (and disappointed) if they did.
cuke2u, thanks for the suggestion about the auto headlights setting. I'll try that!
ShwartzS6, thanks for the suggestion. I have the sport seats but I'm curious now if the regular seats will feel different to my neck. But I'd be surprised (and disappointed) if they did.
cuke2u, thanks for the suggestion about the auto headlights setting. I'll try that!
10-03-2018, 09:28 AM
#174
I was wondering if anyone else was experiencing this. To say that I am disappointed with the interior integrity of this car would be an understatement.
When I was finishing up the lease on my last vehicle, a Cadillac ATS, I was considering purchasing a wide variety of options, from a Mazda 3 to an ATS-V and several in between. At the end of my search, I decided I just didn’t want to end up in a cheaper feeling car after having had the solid, luxury sportiness of the ATS, but I didn’t want to spend ATS-V money. The Audi was a wonderful driving car in the middle of my price range consideration, and so it became my purchase decision.
Within four months of owning this vehicle it had developed more irritating rattles and creaks than my ATS had in four years. I used to say that it almost ruined the experience of the entire car: now I say that it DOES ruin the experience of the whole car.
The reason is simple: in every other respect, this vehicle is fantastic, and far and away a better car than the ATS (excpt maybe in sporty feel, but that is another story). But the general lousiness of the interior integrity makes the car SEEM cheap. The entire experience of driving a car comes when one is in the interior (of course), so when the interior is creaky, rattly, and annoying, it really does ruin the entire experience. If I had wanted a cheap feeling car, I would have bought a cheap car.
I apologize if this post seems troll-like or sour-grapey. I am not normally given to over-wrought hyperbole, and generally I stay balanced about things of this nature. But I have had the car for almost one year now, and for me, this lack of interior integrity is unforgiveable for a luxury automobile.
10-03-2018, 06:58 PM
#175
AudiWorld Member
Thread Starter
A couple more things to add to my own list. I'm currently at ~1 month and 1300 miles.
1. In addition to dimming issues, the rear mirror is mounted too low in the windshield and you can't raise it. I'm used to rear mirrors sitting more above eye level, not in my direct field of vision. This mirror sits right in my direct field of view, barely above eye level, creating a giant front blindspot, annnd reflecting under-dimmed headlights into my direct view at night. Ironically, the admittedly beautiful, nearly frameless design of this mirror is one of the aesthetic things I remember really liking about the car's interior when I was still shopping. But this mirror is a great example of function following form.
2. The garage door opener. For my life I cant figure this thing out. I have two door openers I want to program into it. Both are the exact same model, of identical age. Door 1, I somehow got to work after like 10 tries. I have no idea what I did "right" on the 10th time. Door 2 (my wife's spot in the garage, so it matters less), I haven't gotten to work yet. I've found plenty of threads complaining about this so I know there's nothing new here, but I still can't believe how failure prone this system is. In 2018, is it really still a challenge to create a device that learns and repeats radio signals?
But ultimately I bought the car so I guess these gimmicks helped serve their purpose. <frustrated head-shaking>
1. In addition to dimming issues, the rear mirror is mounted too low in the windshield and you can't raise it. I'm used to rear mirrors sitting more above eye level, not in my direct field of vision. This mirror sits right in my direct field of view, barely above eye level, creating a giant front blindspot, annnd reflecting under-dimmed headlights into my direct view at night. Ironically, the admittedly beautiful, nearly frameless design of this mirror is one of the aesthetic things I remember really liking about the car's interior when I was still shopping. But this mirror is a great example of function following form.
2. The garage door opener. For my life I cant figure this thing out. I have two door openers I want to program into it. Both are the exact same model, of identical age. Door 1, I somehow got to work after like 10 tries. I have no idea what I did "right" on the 10th time. Door 2 (my wife's spot in the garage, so it matters less), I haven't gotten to work yet. I've found plenty of threads complaining about this so I know there's nothing new here, but I still can't believe how failure prone this system is. In 2018, is it really still a challenge to create a device that learns and repeats radio signals?
But ultimately I bought the car so I guess these gimmicks helped serve their purpose. <frustrated head-shaking>
10-03-2018, 07:37 PM
#176
AudiWorld Senior Member
think about it—if it was easy, any Joe Schmoe crook could buy a raspberry pi off with a battery and a garage door antenna on it to stash in your bushes on Monday night, come back and get it Tuesday night, and return Weds while you’re at work to “push play” to rebroadcast that signal and open your garage door right back up—and maybe your neighbors too.
Thieves can do the same thing with these wireless car key fobs. They have a giant antenna that can read and rebroadcast the key right through your house and that is why even today’s immo systems are already becoming obsolete and RFID shields are so popular. You can go on YouTube and watch security cam videos of people doing this to a car in someone’s driveway in less than 15 seconds.
That is also why the new 3 series just announced this week in Paris has keys that stop broadcasting entirely when they detect that they are laying flat for extended periods of time e.g. on a counter. Every mfgr of every security-specific radio device on the planet is trying to stay a step ahead.
Long response for such a specific thing but I guess what I’m saying is, trust me, you don’t want your third-party garage door opener to be easy to program.
Last edited by mplsbrian; 10-03-2018 at 07:40 PM.
10-03-2018, 08:30 PM
#177
AudiWorld Member
Thread Starter
^^^ That's a great reply - thank you! Rotating codes on garage door openers rings familiar now after reading your explanation.
I remain frustrated, but I guess for a different reason then. If garage door transmitters are legitimately hard-to-almost impossible to emulate, then maybe car makers shouldnt be putting transmitters into cars and trying to advertise as a "feature" because it's not. It's just something that raises expectations and then disappoints, at least for me. I never really had a problem with my own transmitter clipped to my visor.
Heck, when I was a kid I was the "garage door opener" for my parents.
I remain frustrated, but I guess for a different reason then. If garage door transmitters are legitimately hard-to-almost impossible to emulate, then maybe car makers shouldnt be putting transmitters into cars and trying to advertise as a "feature" because it's not. It's just something that raises expectations and then disappoints, at least for me. I never really had a problem with my own transmitter clipped to my visor.
Heck, when I was a kid I was the "garage door opener" for my parents.
Last edited by SkiingInABlueDream; 10-03-2018 at 08:32 PM.
10-03-2018, 08:39 PM
#178
Audiworld Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^^^ That's a great reply - thank you! Rotating codes on garage door openers rings familiar now after reading your explanation.
I remain frustrated, but I guess for a different reason then. If garage door transmitters are legitimately hard-to-almost impossible to emulate, then maybe car makers shouldnt be putting transmitters into cars and trying to advertise as a "feature" because it's not. It's just something that raises expectations and then disappoints, at least for me. I never really had a problem with my own transmitter clipped to my visor.
I remain frustrated, but I guess for a different reason then. If garage door transmitters are legitimately hard-to-almost impossible to emulate, then maybe car makers shouldnt be putting transmitters into cars and trying to advertise as a "feature" because it's not. It's just something that raises expectations and then disappoints, at least for me. I never really had a problem with my own transmitter clipped to my visor.
See, the essence of the security isn't that it's hard to learn how to emulate or replicate a remote, but you can do it after 10 tries. If that were all it took, then the bad guy just needs to leave his sniffer (Raspberry Pi in an earlier example) sitting there for 5-10 days. The security is that after you've taught Audi HomeLink that your system uses a rotating code, you then told your opener inside the garage to accept the new Audi rotating code. The bad guy can't do that part unless he has access inside your garage already.
Frustration with how bad HomeLink is is justified. It's not Audi-specific -- it's true for all other car brands that use HomeLink. It's just really really poorly implemented.
10-06-2018, 08:23 AM
#179
AudiWorld Member
Thread Starter
^^^ Alright, makes even more sense now. That would explain why in every failed attempt, when the car asked me if the garage door was working and I said no, Audi said something like, check settings on your door opener's main unit. I'm assuming the message was to put the main unit in learn mode to tell it to accept the Audi's signal. If that's explained in the Audi's manual, then I must have missed it.
This all said, is there any reason to believe the system overall is any less secure with Audi Homelink as a transmitter instead of the opener's original transmitter? By "secure" I mean from a technology perspective, and excluding say, someone from the service shop where you left your car overnight driving to your house and using your car to enter (which sounds like a Darwin Award-earning approach to crime).
This all said, is there any reason to believe the system overall is any less secure with Audi Homelink as a transmitter instead of the opener's original transmitter? By "secure" I mean from a technology perspective, and excluding say, someone from the service shop where you left your car overnight driving to your house and using your car to enter (which sounds like a Darwin Award-earning approach to crime).
10-06-2018, 09:18 AM
#180
Audiworld Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^^^ Alright, makes even more sense now. That would explain why in every failed attempt, when the car asked me if the garage door was working and I said no, Audi said something like, check settings on your door opener's main unit. I'm assuming the message was to put the main unit in learn mode to tell it to accept the Audi's signal. If that's explained in the Audi's manual, then I must have missed it.
https://homelink.com/program/instruc...No/1/usenglish
This all said, is there any reason to believe the system overall is any less secure with Audi Homelink as a transmitter instead of the opener's original transmitter? By "secure" I mean from a technology perspective, and excluding say, someone from the service shop where you left your car overnight driving to your house and using your car to enter (which sounds like a Darwin Award-earning approach to crime).