It's official, a 2.3 4000 quattro is amazing....

[Huw Powell]

> > The 2.3 NA, however, is a good motor and a great upgrade in the 2.2 cars
> > considering the cost and effort required.  Comparing it to a turbo motor,
> > however, is just plain old unfair!
> 
> ... especially since Brendan's car actually moves ... ;-)

it was certainly a relief seeing it drive away!  (ditto the winky
smiley)

> If someone wants a bit more tractable power that is actually
> useful in most day to day driving situations, I would argue that the NF
> conversion might well better fill those requirements ...

an argument we spent most of last year refining into his final decision
- sealed by the hands-on experience with the 90.

the principal difference between the n/a and the turbo is - passing. 
I'm still getting used to how to use the 90's torque (which is greater
than its hp) to best execute slowpokes.  Passing is where the turbos
shine, of course.  50 to 90 in a second and a half comes in real handy,
but only about twice a month in my driving.  Whereas about five times a
week I pull out onto a 55 mph road in front of a blind curve, and
redlining the thing twice is a real nice technique for clearing out of
the way of vehicles I couldn't see.

One of these days I'll even try to find an fpr with a red line cutout so
I don't blow this darn motor up - I've been to 7k a few times too many
under full load (fun though).

-- 
Huw Powell

http://www.humanspeakers.com/audi/

http://www.humanthoughts.org/