shift at 3k

[nicksimc]

>Well, not here necessarily. My previous Audi was a 5ktq, and man alive
>you didn't want to have that thing below 3200rpm. =) But with both the
>5k and the A6 (both heavy cars, especially the A6 which runs right into
>4,000 pounds), I have gotten 30mpg on the highway here (and highway
>driving speeds around here are 75-90mph).
>
>Best regards,
>Brad
>
>2000 A6 2.7 biturbo quattro   http://www.quality.nu/bradw/audi/
>2 turbos, 1 driver ... no limits

Ti Kan has also corrected me on the fact that the A4 1.8q would indeed have 
turbo.  Either way, my point was *supposed* to be that since we are all 
driving 
different models and different years, there is no 'standard' by which we can 
argue where to shift.  Unless we all use the same exact model of the same 
exact year, 
etc, everything is just speculation and driving style.  Ideally we would all 
get together with 3 or 4 different models, test drive them on a closed track, 
and 
compare models vs. shifting habits.  I was merely attempting to show the 
difference the car makes by comparing my experiences (however limited in the 
A4.)  I 
shifted differently in the A4 than I would in mine, and also noted that this 
might merely be because  the engine noise wasn't as apparent (part of the 
reason I shift 
low in my 4k.)   Obviously the A4 having turbo explains a bit.

The mileage I gave for my car I calculated myself, but the A4 mileage was 
quoted by my boss... And we all know we are smarter than our bosses, right?  
Anyway, as they say, 'Your mileage may vary.'

Again, my question is whether the 'ruler flat' torque curve was engineered 
this way in order to spare the quattro system undue stress under hard 
acceleration (as 
my co-worker postulated?)

M Nicksic