Junkyard Find: 1994 Audi 100 Station Wagon

Murilee Martin
by Murilee Martin

We examined part of the endgame of the Audi 5000 debacle in the United States with a junked 1990 Audi 100 Quattro sedan in Denver. Having banished the toxic Audi 5000 name, Audi called these cars Audi 100s until everyone was thoroughly confused, then renamed it the A6, which they still use today.

Here’s a sort of unusual example I saw at a Denver yard a month ago: the final year of the Audi 100 name in the United States, and it’s a wagon.

234,126 miles! Pretty impressive, I’d say.

We can assume that approximately 228,000 of those miles were clocked by a meticulous first owner, who took care of every single maintenance item as it became due and fixed small problems as they arose. Then the person who applied this tasteful decal took ownership, and within a year the car was here.

Delmarva Public Radio is in Maryland, as are the breweries and coffee shop represented by these stickers, so we might guess that the car’s final owner bought it in Maryland and then moved to Denver (where cannabis is legal and so cheap that you can find it in junked Suzuki Swifts).

From there, it didn’t take long before something on the Audi broke that cost more to fix than a few boxes of Snoop Dogg’s Peanut Butter Gems, and that was that.

The prices you get for scrap cars have crashed (down to $20-$50 a ton in most parts of the United States), and so the next stop was my local self-serve wrecking yard, which will sell few parts from this oddball machine.

Vorsprung durch Technik!







Murilee Martin
Murilee Martin

Murilee Martin is the pen name of Phil Greden, a writer who has lived in Minnesota, California, Georgia and (now) Colorado. He has toiled at copywriting, technical writing, junkmail writing, fiction writing and now automotive writing. He has owned many terrible vehicles and some good ones. He spends a great deal of time in self-service junkyards. These days, he writes for publications including Autoweek, Autoblog, Hagerty, The Truth About Cars and Capital One.

More by Murilee Martin

Comments
Join the conversation
5 of 39 comments
  • Never_follow Never_follow on Jan 13, 2016

    Sad end to a nice wagon, even if it's got pretty basic specs. Rear facing third rows always make me smile, and the bench and hardware are actually still worth a chunk of change to the right buyer. I'm really curious as to how they killed a 2.late though. There's nothing too fragile on that thing other than electronics, and in such a basic model, not too much to go wrong.

  • NomNomChomsky NomNomChomsky on Jan 14, 2016

    I owned one of these. The platform is actually fairly reliable, particularly by the standards of that era VW product. If you DIY you can keep one running for small dollars. Keeping them perfect will cost you a mint. The drive train and body are solid. Electrics are a bit more iffy, about par for the era. Climate control is reliable but complex, so all fixes are expensive and/or annoying. I liked the styling and Quattro enough to hunt down an S6 Wagon. Drove it for five years. Built the engine. Now it's for sale. These are really great cars, just not cheap to keep. The stuff that breaks generally won't leave you stranded.

  • Jalop1991 In a manner similar to PHEV being the correct answer, I declare RPVs to be the correct answer here.We're doing it with certain aircraft; why not with cars on the ground, using hardware and tools like Telsa's "FSD" or GM's "SuperCruise" as the base?Take the local Uber driver out of the car, and put him in a professional centralized environment from where he drives me around. The system and the individual car can have awareness as well as gates, but he's responsible for the driving.Put the tech into my car, and let me buy it as needed. I need someone else to drive me home; hit the button and voila, I've hired a driver for the moment. I don't want to drive 11 hours to my vacation spot; hire the remote pilot for that. When I get there, I have my car and he's still at his normal location, piloting cars for other people.The system would allow for driver rest period, like what's required for truckers, so I might end up with multiple people driving me to the coast. I don't care. And they don't have to be physically with me, therefore they can be way cheaper.Charge taxi-type per-mile rates. For long drives, offer per-trip rates. Offer subscriptions, including miles/hours. Whatever.(And for grins, dress the remote pilots all as Johnnie.)Start this out with big rigs. Take the trucker away from the long haul driving, and let him be there for emergencies and the short haul parts of the trip.And in a manner similar to PHEVs being discredited, I fully expect to be razzed for this brilliant idea (not unlike how Alan Kay wasn't recognized until many many years later for his Dynabook vision).
  • B-BodyBuick84 Not afraid of AV's as I highly doubt they will ever be %100 viable for our roads. Stop-and-go downtown city or rush hour highway traffic? I can see that, but otherwise there's simply too many variables. Bad weather conditions, faded road lines or markings, reflective surfaces with glare, etc. There's also the issue of cultural norms. About a decade ago there was actually an online test called 'The Morality Machine' one could do online where you were in control of an AV and choose what action to take when a crash was inevitable. I think something like 2.5 million people across the world participated? For example, do you hit and most likely kill the elderly couple strolling across the crosswalk or crash the vehicle into a cement barrier and almost certainly cause the death of the vehicle occupants? What if it's a parent and child? In N. America 98% of people choose to hit the elderly couple and save themselves while in Asia, the exact opposite happened where 98% choose to hit the parent and child. Why? Cultural differences. Asia puts a lot of emphasis on respecting their elderly while N. America has a culture of 'save/ protect the children'. Are these AV's going to respect that culture? Is a VW Jetta or Buick Envision AV going to have different programming depending on whether it's sold in Canada or Taiwan? how's that going to effect legislation and legal battles when a crash inevitibly does happen? These are the true barriers to mass AV adoption, and in the 10 years since that test came out, there has been zero answers or progress on this matter. So no, I'm not afraid of AV's simply because with the exception of a few specific situations, most avenues are going to prove to be a dead-end for automakers.
  • Mike Bradley Autonomous cars were developed in Silicon Valley. For new products there, the standard business plan is to put a barely-functioning product on the market right away and wait for the early-adopter customers to find the flaws. That's exactly what's happened. Detroit's plan is pretty much the opposite, but Detroit isn't developing this product. That's why dealers, for instance, haven't been trained in the cars.
  • Dartman https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-fighter-jets-air-force-6a1100c96a73ca9b7f41cbd6a2753fdaAutonomous/Ai is here now. The question is implementation and acceptance.
  • FreedMike If Dodge were smart - and I don't think they are - they'd spend their money refreshing and reworking the Durango (which I think is entering model year 3,221), versus going down the same "stuff 'em full of motor and give 'em cool new paint options" path. That's the approach they used with the Charger and Challenger, and both those models are dead. The Durango is still a strong product in a strong market; why not keep it fresher?
Next