what does /o/ think of the Audi A2?

Weird car. Looks like the TT's retarded relative, has very low air resistance, is pretty light because it's made almost entirely from aluminum, never really came with a great engine option unless you were looking for maximum MPGs, where you had the same inline 3 diesel as the Lupo 3L.

It was way too expensive at launch and sold terribly.

That's one sad looking shitbox

File: A2-service-hatch[1].jpg (176KB, 1512x1211px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 1512x1211px

>>17836420
Rumors were the hood was sealed shut and pic related was the only access you get to anything.

In reality the hood can be opened, but it doesn't have any hinges so it actually has to come off the car.

File: 2008-smart-passion-05.jpg (94KB, 470x265px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 470x265px

>>17836481
So like a smart? The front hood just pops off and is literally just held on by a strap.

If they sold it like the shitbox it is it would have been alright but they were asking too much

>>17836420
the fact that it's all aluminium is pretty cool

>>17836508
Yeah kinda. Although I think the A2's flip-down service hatch is a bit more elegant than popping off the hood and having it dangling there by a strap if you want to check the oil or change the fluids.

Ugly bavarian shitbox. Bet that thing has some glorious bodyroll

>>17836420
I guess the only problems were that it was expensive and looked a bit weird. And that I don't like Audis. I suppose a follower to the A2 could be a Prius-like car.

I kinda wanna try stuffing a VR5 into one. If it's been done to a Lupo it should work with an A2, right?

File: 35[1].jpg (36KB, 640x427px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 640x427px

>>17836561
...On second thought, let's not.

>>17836420
If it had better looking headlights it might have the same meme credentials as the twingo

>>17836420
they're surprisingly fast because they're aluminium.

one of the few Audis that has some kind of unique selling point

Won the "WORST FUCKING CAR TO WORK ON" where I worked at.
I remember everyone cringing every time one came into the garage.

File: Audi S8 1998.jpg (34KB, 600x350px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 600x350px

>>17836605

>>17836420

Audi's failed attempt at an fuel efficient car. Made out of aluminium ( never rusts ).
It used the regular 1.4 TDI ( which is a 1.9TDI without a cylinder ) which was used in the Polo and Fabia. Very economical and sturdy engines, but loud af.
The A2 also had a unique 1.2TDI, specifically designed for the A2, and it did some crazy numbers ( over 80 mpg easily ).
But other than that, it was too expensive in order to qualify an fuel economy car. It's stupid.

If this car was affordable, it would've been a hit. But they had a price tag which was insane. The Lupo 3L on the other hand was a huge succes, and the BlueMotion Polo which came abit later started all the fuel saving craze.

Like most things in life, the first attempt is not very bright. And this is what the A2 is : Audi's first attempt at a fuel economy minded car.

>>17836522
Engine is in the back.

>>17836420
horrid to work on

>>17836899
Yeah, I was mainly talking about the A2. The Smart just has a bunch of reservoirs in the front.

>>17836420
Very economical, but way to expensive

Another case of Audi tax on the price desu

>>17837292
They can't be bought new anymore, so I don't understand the overpricing

ugly as fuck

>>17836420
way ahead of its time. I drove it and it was the future.

owned one, sure it's hideous but it handles amazingly, is surprisingly fast and is roomy as fuck

File: 1478161408052.jpg (119KB, 800x789px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 800x789px

>>17836420
It should fucking kill itself

File: audia2-74s[1].jpg (83KB, 800x594px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 800x594px

>>17836420
Another car that is ahead of its time. Expensive to own.

Good car desu

How much did it originally cost?

>>17839582

>$22,000 in 2000, which translates into $35k in 2017.

>Unfortunately, the cost of working with aluminium, particularly with small production runs, meant that the A2 was more expensive than other cars in its sector, competing with the A-class and losing. Much of the high production cost was due to so many parts not being "off the shelf" and being specifically optimized for the A2. From Autobild in 2003: "The A2 is not one of the models with the highest return on investment". The same article quotes the sales figures for 2002 as being 20,000 in Germany against 80,000 for the A-Class and "...lots of money for a car that is only 3.8m long."

It can do 90 mpg‑US easily.

>>17839626
That was considered alot in 2000? That doesn't sound so bad... what was the demographic?

>>17839634

To Europeans at that time, it was a lot.

Professional jobs in the city: 25 - 35

>>17839645
So i guess you could easily get a cheaper car that is just as reliable.

File: CAZXHleUcAAny5F[1].jpg (48KB, 600x374px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 600x374px

>>17839651
yeah, A-class is cheaper than A2. They are reliable as Toyota. However, the A2 was notable for being constructed from aluminium, which in combination with its efficient engines, made it an extremely economical car on fuel. The problem of this is being too ahead of its time.

>>17839634
Would you pay 35k for a fwd hatchback with ~70hp and the redeeming feature being "well it's very light"?

My mom got one in 2001 and drove it for 15years, literally no mechanical issues.
There's one small thing: for some reason when its very damp and cold its possible for the entire cluster to light up. May be a rodent chew in the wiring loom, but that goes away for good if you restart the car.

Right now i drive it, because i'm not complaining about a free car. Due to the low weight (less than a metric ton) and short gearing it pulls surprisingly hard up to about 120km/h and then you have a long 5th gear to go up to 180km/h before the gear resistance eats up too much engine power (rev-wise it could easily hit 200, maybe if you put in a top-end tarbo...)