BMW I6 vs Audi V6 vs VW VR6

[whodom@awod.com (Hugh Odom)]

> re: engine power vs BMW 2.8l
> 172hp vs 189/190 hp?  What's the big deal.
> If you want to complain, take aim at the 
> Audi auto transmission.  Very sluggish.
> 

>a) audi 2.8 is 12 valve.
>b) bmw 2.8 is 24 valve.

>Audi's 2.8L w/ 30 valves w/ variable intake manifold and
>camshaft puts out 193hp.

I think his point was 18 hp doesn't seem like a vast horsepower difference.   

What I want to know is (never having driven either car), why does the auto
press universally "rave" about the VW 2.8 VR6 (172 hp or so) and universally
rate the Audi 2.8 as "lukewarm", "adequate", etc.  The VR6, with only 2
valves per cylinder, is considered very flexible, revs easily, etc.  Every
review I've read of the Audi describes it as "peaky" and lacking in power at
low speed.  From a design standpoint, it seems that it would be easier to
get power out of the Audi.  The VR6 is somewhat limited by the head
arrangement (one head for two cylinder banks) which necessitates uneven
length intake and exhaust ports and restricts the placement of the valves
and the shape of the combustion chamber.
Come to think of it, I wonder if that VR6 would fit in a 5 cylinder slot?  

Any opinions out there?

Hugh
81 Coupe (gone but not forgotten)
no Audi's at present
91 Ford Ranger
53 Hudson Hornet (really)