I really don't like poly's.
People replace 150K old rubber bushes with poly and say how they've transformed the car.
A few things to consider:
They weren't fitted by Audi despite being available: why?
Ask the makers what their revised suspension setting recommendations are. They'll think you're mad and say 'just standard' I know because I asked them. This cannot be correct. Poly's have less compliance, that's the point of them. If there is less compliance, there is less requirement for toe angle as this is there to allow for standard bushes to move into a running position when loaded. In theory a stiffer bush will require reduced toe.
I seem to remember that the suppliers of the materials for making these don't recommend using the material for this purpose, but I may be wrong on this. Certainly DePont banned Slick50 from using the brand Teflon in their products as they said there was no way the product could work in the way Slick claimed, so it does happen.
Poly is not a great bearing material in this context and yet is being asked to do exactly that, run on white grease over a metal tube. The reason metalastic (rubber) bushes are so good is a) they eliminate the need for a bearing surface and b) are almost impervious to grit / salt etc.
Changing to poly changes the damping rate of the suspension slightly.
Ultimately if there's no alternative I'd use them over a rubber bushe that was hanging out, but otherwise I'd go for as close to original as possible: it'll feel great, last 100K miles and won't start squeaking next year.
