Re: new project car

[todd candey <tcandey@wwa.com>]

Glen Powell wrote:
> OK. I stand corrected on the pan, I thought it was based on the 4KQ/ur-q pan.
> Why would Audi go to all the trouble of modifying the old 4K pan?
> 
> I do realise that the Q Sport uses the 4K front glass & angle, roofline and doors, but that does not automatically mean that they could not have 
used the 4KQ/u
> 
> Anyone know why Audi used the 4K non-q pan?
> 
> -glen

Glen, maybe not completely corrected.... keep in mind that this was a 
homologated race car that production numbers only had to meet 200 to 
become certified. That being the case, prolly anything's posible.

One thing that I've heard about the windscreen angle is that the more 
sloped one, (ur-q), had too much glare while driving at night. I don't 
know if that was actually a contributing factor or not, but sounds 
interesting.
As far as the q/non-q pan, tough to say. They could have used the 4kq 
pan, but this too is different than the ur-q. I took a good long look and 
a few pictures of a sport while at Andersons, and there is something very 
interesting about the pan for the sport.
That car uses control arms that have a ball joint at the outer end, and 
then 4 adjustable length rods that attach to the chassis. 2 of those rods 
bolt into the subframe like the 4k/ur-q, but then the other 2 (which are 
on the outsides of the normal 2) attach to very heavily reinforced 
gussets in the floor pan. I don't know the exact reason or theory, but 
would guess that it allows for adjustment of suspension travel in 
relation to the adjustment of the vehicle's ride height.

Now, I won't swear to which rear pan section they started with, but I can 
tell you that the rear section is not identical to either the q or non-q
pan that is found in the early chassis.

Please, as Glen mentioned, anyone else who has more info on this, would 
you share it????

Todd Candey