RS2 turbocharger

[Pantelis Giamarellos]

Dave hi,

Why was I almost sure that it would be like that?
But since this factor of the equation was not covered specifically I had to
post the doubt.

As for the RS2 top end now this is what I like the most with this car (apart
from the space available to carry all of little Ion's (my 3 year's old son
for those who do not know) stuff)

Take care
Pantelis


----- Original Message -----
From: Dave Eaton <Dave.Eaton at clear.net.nz>
To: <quattro at audifans.com>
Cc: <urq at audifans.com>; <pantg at otenet.gr>; <torsen at audifans.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 2:38 AM
Subject: RE: RS2 turbocharger


> in the comparisons i posted, the gearing was chosen so that it was the
same
> (gear ratio and diff ratio) - actually in most cases marginally favouring
> the rs2.
>
> dave
> '95 rs2
> '90 ur-q
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Pantelis Giamarellos" < >
> Subject: :Re: RS2 turbocharger
> Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 18:38:26 -0700
>
> Just a small comment regarding the comparison of in gears times between
the
> RS2 and the ur-q.
>
> The RS2 is equipped with a six speed gearbox and has a significantly
higher
> top speed compared to the ur-q.
>
> I do not have the gear ratios of both cars handy at the moment but I tend
to
> believe that those two cars do NOT share the same gear ratios.
>
> A comparison of the gear ratios may reflect that one of the two cars has
> lower gearing (and better acceleration in gears) than the other.
>
> So shouldn't we also calculate this factor when comparing in gears times
of
> acceleration?
>
> After all the ur-q does not have an in-gears acceleration time for 6th
gear
> and 240 km to 270 km.
>
> Take care
> Pantelis
>
>