Budget quattro/ 2.3 l 4kq

[Larry C Leung]

So true, the US need for bigger (4000 vs 80/90) numbers was the cause of
this confusion. To add to the confusion, I think the US division was
trying to forget the Ur80's which, if I recall correctly, were not
exactly shining examples of reliable German engineering. And speaking of
numbers, I believe a US contemporary to the 5000 (nee 100/200) was the
Pontiac 6000. I just wonder if it really was 1000 more better.....

LL - NY

On Thu, 29 Nov 2001 20:34:50 -0500 Huw Powell <audi at mediaone.net> writes:
>
>> > I just want to mention that pretty much the only way you're going
>to
>> > get the I-5 in an FWD is to get a Coupe GT, as the 4ks only had a
>weak
>> > little 4-cylinder engine and drum brakes in the back.
>>
>> Note:
>> This is only for USA.
>> In canada all of the 1984 and up 4000s FWD came with the 5 cylinder
>engine.
>> i.e. same drivetrain as the Coupe
>>
>> The 4 cylinder 4000 is so rare up here that I have yet to see one.
>
>I always find it confusingly helpful to think of the 4k and cgt as
>80s
>and 90s, which is what they are, really.
>
>2wd 80's have 4 cyl engines, 80Q's 5's
>all 90's have 5 cylinders, fwd or Q, and coupes are 90's.
>
>would love to see/drive a 1.8 16v turbo coupe, if anyone ever built
>one!
>
>just to further murky the already muddy slurry...
>
>oh, and another random thought - there may come a day when there are
>more Audis on the road with the "wrong" 5 cylinder engine in the them
>than the "right" one.  Then it will be even more confusing... but not
>as
>bad as all those old dorF trucks and cars with yvehC V8's in them.
>
>--
>Huw Powell
>
>http://www.humanspeakers.com/audi/
>
>http://www.humanthoughts.org/