Mark2

That is interesting and is probably explained as your failures were sudden-straight to red no yellow stage. The yellow stage indicates battery charge degradation is gradual I.e. the charge is not being replaced. Lack of belt tension maybe gave intermittent charge- no charge red light, charge no light at all. This is my take but am no expert.

This is a question we have all been asking. The Vehicle Construction Agency are not interested, it yesterday’s news, it’s old technology which will be redundant by 2030 when we will all need driving electric- in your dreams!

I have heard but have nothing in writing that the BSG failure is due to water ingress and replacements have been modified. however your dealer has not confirmed whether the BSG is charging or not. When mine failed I drove 5 miles and a breakdown truck patched in another battery to allow me to drive to his garage, which you can do but the battery is not charging so eventually thus will run down.

That is just the sort of story I would expect from Audi, how is it that other dealers get it so wrong?

There was no recall. Audi just waited till the alternator failed thn took responsibility.

7 years starts from the car registration

If your battery is only 2 years old I cannot think it has failed unless one cell has gone down. Best get it professionally checked and show Audi the report.

When I had my alternator failure, the battery drained but this is a lead/acid type and can take a full discharge and recover. I think the dealer is swinging this so a professional test should prove it.

That is not the affected part number. The one off my invoice is A4N1 903 028 B If you check the earlier posts this is the one with the extended warranty so you may not be covered

I am sorry to say but the Audi technician only has the capability to read off a computer screen and not use his brain. however he has diagnosed the starter generator as the failure. you need to look back at old posts in this string and yiu will find the part number and the Audi extended warranty which you can present to them.

If anyone is desperate I for have a spare Audi BSG sitting on a shelf in my garage, I am happy to sell it to anyone as long as they pay the shipping cost and replace it with their new one when it arrives

Did they check the BSG is charging the battery, if not why not?

Frankly what has a service history got to do with a known component failure. There have not been any service recalls fir this component so how can Audi suggest lack of service history is a problem?

The alternator went at about 35000 miles, whole car died on a roundabout no steering no door locks etc. since replacement of the starter generator no probs in another 10,000 miles.

I used to use Bristol but did not like their attitude so moved to Bath-same group though but nicer people.

Shaun Collins at Bath Audi is well aware of my RS6 generator issue and if you have problems ask for him and use my name.

Bath Audi are familiar with this problem so you should be ok. Cannot see any connection between Adblue and alternator.

When I suggested to Audi they have a ‘ battery not charging ‘ light they told me this was no longer an EU build spec requirement. With so many systems requiring power you would think such a light should be even more important , but the Brussels mandarins who all go to work on a bike do not think so?

When this happened to me it lasted about 20 miles but that was having the aircon on etc

Looks like StandFree has it, I will see if I can return my stock item and upgrade.

Hi Kari, do you know the part number of the new replacement upgraded Starter / Generator as I will swap the spare I have in on my garage shelf for the upgrade?

It was out of warranty but I had an extended warranty but that did not kick in as Monmotors got Audi UK to fess up, paid the recovery fee, courtesy car plus the repair

My RS6 suffered the same as you will see from my posts, Bath Audi have the experience and should sort this under warranty

I have been in correspondence with DVSA for the last 6 months including requesting FOI data in the dealings with Audi, their responses have been lamentable as you have seen from previous posts. However I am not giving up as they are suggesting FOI data cannot be released as it is confidential and I need to ask Audi, which I will do but have also gone back to DVSA as they are inconsistent with their answers. If anyone wants to raise this with them pleaae do so as they have an ongoing investigation ther more pressure the better. Here is my reply to DVSA- Dear Ms Keeling, Ref 2409-056095 FOI Request Relating to Audi 48v/12v mild hybrid failures Thank you for your letter dated 22 January. I regret the lack of transparency from your Agency gives me grave concern hence my further questions. If we go back to first principles, DVSA is a Govt body with the strap line ‘Helping you stay safe on Britain’s roads’, which is exactly what my questions are aiming to do. However, it appears from your answers and reticence at being open that you are actually more interested in protecting manufacturers than the British Public. My justification for saying that is because of what I see are inconsistencies in DVSA’s responses to my questions STAGE ONE 1] What are the visual and audible warnings triggered when the alternator fails to charge? You state you do not hold this information. However, in your email 15 August you stated -Our understanding of the failure modes is the vehicle has a two-stage warning both of which are visual and acoustic, and the vehicle fully meets type approval requirements. You must therefore hold this information or the response of 15 August is not true. This information is not classified by you as being client confidential as it must be in the public domain, meets type approval and must form part of your ongoing investigation. 2] How is the driver informed that the failure is that the alternator is no longer charging the battery? You state you do not hold this information. However, in your email 15 August you stated-Should there be a failure of the alternator, the warning strategy is triggered You know the warning strategy is triggered as you have said so, I am asking what this is. You could not make this statement unless you know what it is so you must hold this information. 3] How does this stage warn the driver that continued vehicle use will lead to ‘roll out’ and that he should park the vehicle safely as soon as possible? You state you do not hold this information. However, in your email 15 August you stated -Should there be a failure of the alternator, continued use will cause the vehicle “to roll out” and coast to a stop. If you know continued use will lead to Roll out you know if there is a warning to the driver of this fact YES or NO. If you do not hold this information is the question part of your on-going investigation. Why have you not asked the manufacturer to answer this as it is fundamental to this safety issue? 4] How long does Stage One last before Stage Two kicks in? You state you do not hold this information which is consistent with your 15 August email but you go on further to say the warning messages provided ‘have been considered acceptable through type approval processes’ Therefore, you must know all the warning messages which are produced so you must have the answers to my stage One and Stage two questions In your letter 22 January you state that the answers to the above questions are available in the manufacturers handbooks which is not the case. There would not be a multimillion USD law suit in the USA relating to this safety issue if it was covered in the handbook nor would hundreds of UK motorists be subjected to dangerous vehicle roll outs if this were covered in the handbooks On 6 November you advised me -We have withheld information that falls within the scope of your request under section 31(2)(c) (the purpose of ascertaining whether circumstances which would justify regulatory action in pursuance of any enactment exist or may arise) of the FoIA. This is because we believe that the release of the information would be likely to harm our ability to effectively conduct future investigations into whether regulatory action is required against any manufacturer Now we are talking about a safety issue where the British public are safeguarded by the DVSA why have you not asked the manufacturer if you can release information? Your email 22 January states Section 43(2) (commercial interests) of the FoIA was also applied to the request for correspondence. I confirm that this exemption was correctly applied. In my opinion there is a risk that other manufacturers could use this data to obtain an advantage over Audi and its competitors. This statement by you has the effect of you protecting the profits, reputation and brand image of a manufacturer rather than the safety of the British Public. Considering all manufacturers are concentrating on EV technology exposing answers to the safety issue is hardly going to given any competitors an advantage. This in my view is a convenient statement for you to hide behind rather than probe the manufacturer for answers. This is totally inconsistent with your stating ‘you do not hold this specific information’. Either you hold it but will not release it because you value your cosy relationship with the manufacturers or you do not hold it. The more I read back over this correspondence for the last 6 months the more I get the impression that DVSA have no teeth when dealing with manufacturers, you appear to accept manufacture’s statements at face value, there is little probing by you and then you put up a screen of smoke and mirrors and of FOI legislation to wriggle out of what you see as awkward questions but what I see as a member of the British public as fundamental vehicle safety issues which , by the grace of god , have not yet led to any fatalities. Please reflect on your inconsistencies and respond in clear concise terms with believable answers.

I do hope you told the dealer that if your diagnosis turned out to be correct and the alternator is at fault then they will reimburse the diagnostics they have undertaken which have proved worthless?