86 to 87 GT differences (2.3 v. 2.2)

[Larry C Leung]

I do know that they gussied up the Quantum (Santana/Passat) Syncro wagons
sold here in the US in 1988, the last year that they were sold anywhere
(I believe they switched to the new sidesaddle engined body in the world
markets already by then). They were all full content, the full luggage
compartment trim with cargo cover, power windows and locks, sunroof, etc.
I was very familiar with my friend's '88. I once considered an '86 for
sale earlier (it turned out to be a bad example, a total slug), and it
was considerably down market, crank windows, manual locks, etc, and no
roof bars (tho the person selling may not have been the original owner).

LL - NY

On Sat, 19 Jan 2002 11:26:50 -0000 "rob hod" <rob3 at hod3.fsnet.co.uk>
writes:
>
>    At a guess I would say 'Special Build' was/is a marketing term.
>After
>all it's very common for a model thats near the end of its life to
>get
>dolled up with pretty stuff and fancy names to try and ensure the last
>few
>examples don't get left in the showroom.
>(Not that i'm decrying the late CGT. I think they're the best of the
>line
>and I wish we'd had the 2.3 in the UK)
>
>To me 'Special Build' is a US only term with no meaning in other
>countries
>and AFAIK all the CGT's just rolled off the line (with their varying
>levels
>of trim etc) so there's no sense of them having been individually
>finished
>in any way.
>
>   As usual I could be wrong ..
>
>rob
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Wayne Reser <wreser at siscom.net>
>To: <Kwattro at aol.com>; <rob3 at hod3.fsnet.co.uk>
>Cc: <quattro at audifans.com>
>Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2002 8:51 AM
>Subject: Re: 86 to 87 GT differences (2.3 v. 2.2)
>
>
>> Is there really such a thing as a genuine  87.5 CGT "Special
>Build"?
>After
>> the related discussion, I don't know how special it is among its
>earlier
>> brethern .  Audi on the other hand, seemed to have thought enough of
>it to
>> put "Special Build" right on the manufacturer's window sticker.  I
>assume
>it
>> had meaning of some kind.  Or maybe it was a clever marketing ploy.
>Hmmm.
>>
>>
>>
>> > Talking US cars here....
>> > It's more difficult to tell the 2.3's from the 2.2's than you guys
>are
>> > indicating.  The digital dash was standard on the 86 Comm. Ed,
>which had
>> body
>> > color spoiler and mirrors - thereby making it easy to mistake as a
>87.5.
>> > Also, the 86 had an optional digital dash and all of the interiors
>were
>> > possible to get optionally (including red leather), so the
>interior
>can't
>> > tell the difference.  One of my 86's had analogue, the current one
>has
>the
>> > digital dash.  Also, it seems that some early 87 non-2.3's had
>body
>color
>> > spoiler and mirrors in the US.  I've seen 'em, and so have
>others.
>> >
>> > What does this mean?
>> >
>> >  It means that you have to look under the hood or in the rear
>wheels to
>> > really tell the difference.  The only other difference that can
>be
>noted,
>> I
>> > believe,  is that half of the window trim is body color, unlike
>the 86
>and
>> > early 87.  Before that, it's black.  Of course, this won't help on
>the
>> > graphite or black cars.  Also, it should be noted that the 87.5 is
>not a
>> > special build, other than we think of it that way.  The 87.5 was
>supposed
>> to
>> > be the 88 and carry on, but the model line then changed.  Yes, it
>was a
>> half
>> > year hot-rod, but for all intents and purposes the only special
>build GT
>> was
>> > the 86 Comm. Ed., which really wasn't that special anyways, unless
>you
>> like
>> > red leather.  Hope this helps.  Any other questions regarding the
>GT's?
>> >
>> > Later!
>> > Carter J
>> > Kwattro at aol.com
>> > 1986 4000CS Quattro (Princess)
>> > 1986 Coupe GT (The Beast)
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>