Vacillating between 90 Quattro and Coupe Quattro

[Jukka Majanen]

>"Mark W. Byrum, Jr." <markbyrum at erols.com> wrote:
>
>>As respects structural rigidity, I was speculating that since the CQ was, in
>>the rear, an open bay with a hatch and the sedan has cross-members at the rear
>>seats with a smaller trunk opening, the sedan would be stronger.  But I also
>>note that the sedan is lighter by a couple hundred pounds.  Perhaps more
>>strengthening went into the CQ since it is more of an "open tub" in the 
>>rear as
>>opposed to the Coupe's conventional trunk.  You also have two additional doors
>>and associated hardware to deal with in the sedan, and yet it is lighter.
>
>Drive both, take a couple of spirited 'quattro' turns, then evaluate.
>
>For me, the sedan is much more rigid resulting in crisper turn-in and more 
>fun when negotiating the twisties. I've driven a few, and there is a 
>definite difference in rigidity between individual Coupes.
>
>BTW, downside of the 20v's increased power is the complete banishing of the 
>old I-5 trait of incredible low-end torque. Nothing much happens below 3500 
>rpm. A lot of fun is to be had above that, though- and the 20v sounds a lot 
>sportier than the 10v.
>
>Tom
>
>PS If you need to carry even moderate amounts of luggage every now and 
>then, the sedan's trunk is pretty useless. You can just about forget a road 
>trip with two people, unless you use the back seat.
>

Hi Tom and all

This is funny, four holed body more rigid than a two -one, gimme...
OK, those cars are 10 years old, nothing special between those.
It all depends, how are those kept and equipped.

CQ trunk isn´t better than sedans´ , two six-packs and a small ( 60 pound
Siberian) dog, when we´re getting to to the summer cottage.

j-pm    ´91cq