quattro digest, Vol 1 #3283 - type 44 syndrome, redux

[Larry C Leung]

I can answer that (200, post face lift)

200's especially MC2 motors do have better low end response due to the
compression and smaller (K24) turbo.

BUT, they also way noticably more, due to ProConTEN, airbags and the
associated bracing behind the dash (required passive restraint knee bar)
and some of the other things added to "face lift" the car. Nothing can
hurt the sporty feel more than weight.

By the same token, 200's are MUCH better in frontal collisions than 5K's,
in fact the combination of ProConTEN and Airbag made it one of the best
cars in a collision for it's day. It's a tradeoff that is even being
payed for today. Now, it's hard for even a smaller car (A4 for example,
nearly late type 44 weight) to end up weighing less than the big type 44,
alot having to due to required (and appreciated) safety equipment. It's
just that the A4's, current A6's etc, have a much better designed
suspension, recovering the sporty feel lost on the later type 44's.

LL - NY




> Message: 2
> From: auditude at get.net
> To: quattro at audifans.com
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 15:21:11 -0700
> Subject: re: type 44 syndrome, but no Audi content
> Cc: t44tq at mindspring.com
>
> TM t44tq at mindspring.com wrote:
> >
> > Mike,
> >
> > As a fellow type 44 owner, I strongly disagree. The type 44s,
> > especially in turbo quattro form, were, when new, some of the
> nicest
> > sports sedans out there, with all- weather capability to boot.
> > Especially in 5k form (pre-89 facelift), the road feel and
> driving
> > dynamics are quite nice for a big car.
>
> Hey Taka,
>
> Are you writing that the road feel and driving dynamics between the
> 5kq's and 200q's
> are different?  Is this for reasons besides the dash, door handles,
> and different motor
> (MC-1 vs. MC-2)?