Re: 1993 90CS

[adams@churchill.columbiasc.ncr.com]

> 
>    Have a 1993 90CS 5 spd.  The lack of  response at part throttle,
> especially below 4000rpm, is terrible.  Makes me think that the advertised
> 172 hp is a figment of Audi's marketing.  The dealer says "they all run
> like that." Audi's ad comparing the 90 Sport to BMW is a joke.( BTW, I also
> own a 535i also a 5 spd.) Can anyone out there make any suggestions?
>    P.S. Audi ought to check out the VW VR6. Throtle response personified.

>From a design perspective the Audi V-6 was designed with broad mid-range 
torque in mind, like the new 1.8-20V Turbo.  The VR6 is a peaking engine
much like older BMW engines.  The newer BMW engines add variable timing
(VANOS) specificaly to give a broader torque band.  In addition the broader
band engines are better suited for an automatic transmission.  The lack of
peaking torque will give an impression of linear acceleration in a 5-spd.
And a torque peaking engine would appear non-responsive in an automatic.

I can say that I have never found the mid range (part throttle) response
of the Audi V-6 to be bad at all.  Of course I am comparing my wife's
auto 90CS (93) to my 5-spd 325is.  At the time when we purchased the
Audi, we felt it was more responsive than the 190e-2.6, 325i and 850GLT
(all automatics).  I was especially disappointed with the VANOS 325i.

I also let a friend of mine, who had a VR6 Corrado (5-spd) at the time,
drive our Audi.  He commented that it felt more powerful than his VR6. 
He added that you could jump on the throttle at any time and it would
take off.  BTW, he traded his Corrado on a GTI, a true VR6 fan!

My first paragraph comes from _Gut_Fahrt_.  Which had an article 
comparing the Audi V-6 to the VR6.  It was more acurate than Eliot's
"why VR6 is the best engine in the world", and explained the differant
purposes of these engines.

regards,
Daniel Adams