[200q20v] What is Ur? and other dumb ?'s

Wed Apr 4 22:43:37 EDT 2001

Chris,
	Those numbers were at altitude, however, the R&T magazine I have a copy of
has a road test at 0-60 of 7.2 and 1/4 of 15.4 at 88.5 mph.  This is very
similar to the Taurus SHO (I've owned both) and at sea level the two were
very comparable.  I know that I am running a little slower at altitude than
I would at sea level but when I look at the R&T test it seems to be right
on.  As far as the GTS goes I guess I find it hard to believe that they got
slower from '86 to '88.  I always loved the opportunity to race these
relatively slow Ferarris because they were easy pickings and usually
thoroughly embarassed the owners in my '78 (a little modified)Camaro :)  No
question the times will vary by driver but the MPH should be relatively
stable.  MPH at the end of 1/4 mile is usually very immune (i.e. no more
than about 1-2mph) with launches, etc.  Was the one tested in Sports Car
Intl. a German model, were there any differences??  I would imagine that
they may be a little lighter, less emissions control maybe???  I don't know
enough about that, but I'm sure one of you guys do.  Has anyone out there
run a sub 15-second 1/4 with a bone stock 200?  Regardless of times, the
thing that I find most amazing about the 20 valves is the constant pull over
the RPM range, for a T-charged engine it is unbelievable.  It changed me
into a believer 2.5 years ago that you can build a responsive turbocharged
engine.
--Calvin

-----Original Message-----
From: C1J1Miller at aol.com [mailto:C1J1Miller at aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 5:32 AM
To: calvinlc at earthlink.net
Cc: 200q20v at audifans.com
Subject: RE: [200q20v] What is Ur? and other dumb ?'s

The reference to cars that the 200q20v can keep up with is directly from an
Audi brochure, using factory published numbers.
http://members.aol.com/c1j1miller/brochure.html
Audi's performance numbers are not off from some of the magazine's reviews;
for example, Sports Car International:
http://members.aol.com/c1j1miller/sci-6-91.html
gives a 0-60 of 6.13 and 1/4 of 14.78 @90.6mph.
"On the dragstrip, the Audi 200 Quattro is one of the fastest accelerating
luxury cars we have yet put through our track test regime.  Only the BMW M5
beats it, and it may be argued that the BMW is realy a sport sedan heavier
on the "sport" than the "sedan".  Clutch slip seems to be the limiting
factor, as the revs can be heard to climb, but the tires stay firmly hooked
up.  We launched at 4,500 rpm with the rear differential locked.  The
resulting 0-60 time of 6.13 seconds beats many a sports car, including the
Nissan 300ZX, Pontiac Firebird Formula/GTA/Chevy Camaro 1LE, Eagle Talon TSi
AWD, Ford Probe GT, Taurus SHO, Thunderbird SC, Mazda RX-7, Toyota MR2
Turbo, and the Porsche 8\944 S2.  In such company, it handidly beats the
Lexus LS400, Infinity Q45, and Jaguar XJ6.  "

The brochure from audi used numbers from Road and Track/Car and Driver's
reviews of various model year cars... the Audi didn't beat the ferrari
testarossa, but did beat the 1988 328 GTS; the audi didn't beat a corvette,
but didn't trail it by much...

You guys willing to replace clutches and possibly trannies?  AWD at a launch
can easily break things...

You gave some performance numbers from your 200q; was that at altitide
(Denver)?  Remember that the turbo may add boost to keep similar HP levels,
but there is more lag, so 1/4 mile and 0-60 numbers may suffer...
Chris

In a message dated Wed, 4 Apr 2001 12:43:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
"Calvin & Diana Craig" <calvinlc at earthlink.net> writes:

<< Tom,
    As far as the 1/4 mile & 0-60 times go.  I think most, if not all of
these
are a LITTLE exaggeration for a stock 200.  Chipped...that's another story.
I'll describe each of the car's mentioned here as far as perf. goes.

Ferrari 328 GTS C&D Review 0-60 5.6, 1/4 = 14.2 at 97
Corvette C&D Review (1986 model) 0-60 6.0, 1/4 = 14.5 at 95
Testarossa ran low 5 second 0-60 and mid 13 second 1/4's...quite an
exaggeration.

The Corvette's it totally depends on the year.  85-92 were low to mid 14's
in the 1/4.  93-96 were high 13's...97 to present are low to mid 13's....mid
70's to 84 were low 15's (the only vette's I know of in the last 35 years
that the 200 could keep up with).  The thing is though, that none of these
haul 4 adults, none of 'em do worth a damn in the snow and bring the Ferrari
328 or mid 80's corvette up here to Denver and I'll spank it's butt in the
thin air :)  I have done a few runs with the 200 and it does just about what
R & T and C&D said it did...low 15's in the low 90's.  However, even
including one Trans Am that we built that skidpadded at just over 1.0
G's...I have NEVER owned another car (excluding the S4) that was as stable
at 140 mph as the 200...simply incredible!!!  The S4 I can accomplish high
14's in the 1/4 in stock trim.  It's a bit of an exagerration on these cars
that the articles say it can keep up with BUT it doesn't lessen the point
that there are only a handful of sedans built in '91 that can keep up with
the 200.

--Calvin (1/4 mile junky)

_______________________________________________
200q20v mailing list
200q20v at audifans.com
http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/200q20v
 >>