tubo vs super -- Re: [s-cars] was, 0-60 , 1/4mile, now:Re: superchargers are bad, mmkay?

[James Bowes]

a 2001 S4 sedan weighs in at 3593 lbs, while a 1994 S4 sedan weighs in at 
3839 lbs.. not sure where the 600 lbs comes in


James


>From: "Gabriel Caldwell" <gabriel at ts.bc.ca>
>To: "Bill Clancy" <clancybill at yahoo.com>,"Richard Harris" 
><rnharris at bellsouth.net>, <s-car-list at audifans.com>
>Subject: RE: tubo vs super -- Re: [s-cars] was, 0-60 , 1/4mile,now:Re:   
>superchargers are bad, mmkay?
>Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 13:33:49 -0700
>
>~600 lb. diet + 6 speed.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Richard Harris" <rnharris at bellsouth.net>
>To: <s-car-list at audifans.com>
>Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 10:13 AM
>Subject: RE: tubo vs super -- Re: [s-cars] was, 0-60 , 1/4mile,now:Re:
>superchargers are bad, mmkay?
>
>
> > Both the C4 and B5 S4 are rated @ 258 lbs of Torque down low. I own
>both
>and
> > the B5 is much stronger. Maybe it's the gearing. A stock B5 will
>destroy a
> > C4.
> >
> > Richard
> > 1992 S4 Fast ...down to mysterious Hydraulic fluid leak
> > 2002 S4 Faster
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: s-car-list-bounces at audifans.com
> > [mailto:s-car-list-bounces at audifans.com]On Behalf Of Bill Clancy
> > Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 12:56 PM
> > To: kirby.a.smith at verizon.net
> > Cc: s-car-list at audifans.com
> > Subject: Re: tubo vs super -- Re: [s-cars] was, 0-60 , 1/4mile,now:Re:
> > superchargers are bad, mmkay?
> >
> >
> > all good questions.   I guess it will take me time to get you the
>answers.
> >
> > thanks for replying....
> >
> > I think I just got bagged by the Audi-S-Car list supervisor.    This
>reminds
> > me of being 8 years old and my mom catching me lighting matches or
>pissing
> > in the back yard.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Kirby Smith" <kirby.a.smith at verizon.net>
> > To: "Bill Clancy" <clancybill at yahoo.com>
> > Cc: <s-car-list at audifans.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 9:51 AM
> > Subject: Re: tubo vs super -- Re: [s-cars] was, 0-60 , 1/4mile,now:Re:
> > superchargers are bad, mmkay?
> >
> >
> > > Things to consider: Is your bypass valve functional or leaking? Are
>you
> > > using too heavy of an oil?  Mobil 1 15W-50 vs 10W-40 makes a
>difference,
> > > even in warm weather, I perceive.  Don't try to operate the engine
>in
> > > lug mode, i.e., full throttle under 2500 rpm.  There is only so much
>an
> > > Audi DOHC system can compensate for.  Is your wastegate frequency
>valve
> > > in need of replacement?
> > >
> > > kirby
> > >
> > >
> > > Bill Clancy wrote:
> > > >
> > > > but, read into this.   I am asking for help man.
> > > > has anyone been able to get the turbo to respond quicker?     if
>you
> > read
> > > > the data, it is supposed to have 265 ft-lbs of torque at 1800.
> > > > ahhh.....I'm not getting that.   I need 3000 rpm to get torque.
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Bill Clancy" <clancybill at yahoo.com>
> > > > To: "Dave Forgie" <forgied at direct.ca>; <s-car-list at audifans.com>
> > > > Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 8:59 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: tubo vs super -- Re: [s-cars] was, 0-60 ,
>1/4mile,now:Re:
> > > > superchargers are bad, mmkay?
> > > >
> > > > > OK... you got me.  yes, I bad mouthed the S-car.
> > > > > but my argument/question was why not a supercharger?
>Mercedes
> > makes
> > > > that
> > > > > SLK kompressor.   I have never driven one, so I don't know if it
>is
> > any
> > > > > good.
> > > > >
> > > > > thanks for your feedback.
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Dave Forgie" <forgied at direct.ca>
> > > > > To: <s-car-list at audifans.com>
> > > > > Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 8:50 AM
> > > > > Subject: tubo vs super -- Re: [s-cars] was, 0-60 ,
>1/4mile,now:Re:
> > > > > superchargers are bad, mmkay?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Bill:  Your San Francisco hill story has more to do with
>having a
> > > > > > standard transmission instead of an automatic than it does
>about
> > having
> > > > > > a turbo instead of a supercharger.  If I had to live in San
>Fran
> > (and I
> > > > > > visit fairly often), my daily driver wouldn't be a heavy car
>with
>a
> > > > > > standard.  It would be something automatic.  Same for bumper
>to
> > bumper
> > > > > > commutes anywhere.  The S-car was not developed to service
>that
> > need.
> > > > > > Or at least not a std. trans S-car (they had autos in Europe,
>even
> > on
> > > > > > the 20vt).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't think your arguement holds.  Regardless, rather than
> > continuing
> > > > > > to bad mouth the S-car, you should probably just sell it, and
>get
> > > > > > something with a sport-matic/ tiptronic/manumatic.  Everyone
>will
>be
> > > > > > happier, even your favorite chick.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Dave F.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > S-CAR-List mailing list
> > > > > > S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> > > > > > http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > S-CAR-List mailing list
> > > > S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> > > > http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > S-CAR-List mailing list
> > S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> > http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > S-CAR-List mailing list
> > S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> > http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
>
>_______________________________________________
>S-CAR-List mailing list
>S-CAR-List at audifans.com
>http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
>
>_______________________________________________
>S-CAR-List mailing list
>S-CAR-List at audifans.com
>http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list