[Roger Galvin]

Picking up on Eddy's point as to why life expectancy was so short I believe that Audi made the steel liners as thin as possible, in the order of 30 thou, so as to keep as much alloy in the engine and a little (heavy) steel as possible. Having dismantled dozens of WR engines over the last few years lateral bore wear often approaches 30 thou at around 80-90K, dependent obviously on the regularity of servicing (oil changes) and the manner in which the car is (ab)used. Audi thought they were playing safe by changing them at 60K however, failed cooler pipes, knackered valve guides and/or turbos, broken manifolds etc etc and any other well known achilles heel of quattros might have been sufficient to make it sensible for the dealer to change the engine prior to 60K.

One has to remember that Audi were also on a learning curve, they originally only intended building the 400 required for homologation. They had not done the extensive high mileage durability testing that a modern is now subjected to. In 1980 people were used to a car being knackered by 100,000 miles and throwing it away due to it rotting away before their eyes. You need to remember that cars such as the Mini Metro hadn't been launched when Audi stunned the world with its computer controlled, four wheel driven, turbo intercooled, fuel injected monster. Compare one to a modern and it is diminutive in proportion, yet in 1980 it was a relatively large car