RE: A4 "Better" than an M3 for 6K?

[Eliot Lim <eliot@u.washington.edu>]

wow, what a debate..  i think the reason why there's such a big argument
is that there are way too many variables involved:

- how much more exactly does an M3 cost over an A4Q? $8K? $10K?

- what can you do to an A4Q with say, $8K?  you're not going to get
M3 levels of power unless you add twin turbos.  who makes twin turbo
kits for the A4Q?  nobody that i know of.

- to address the wet or snowy road argument, consider the fact that
(as dave eaton said) driver skill is probably going to be the
determining factor here .  so what levels of driver skill are we
talking about here?  tommi makkinen in any rwd car will blow most of
us away in the most powerful quattro.  this is completely random, isn't
it?  quattros are definitely easier to drive fast under slippery
conditions than a powerful rwd, i don't think anyone would argue with
that.

- if we want to pin down some variables to arrive at a more meaningful
conclusion, i might suggest that we look at the motorsports arena.
how about the various touring cars series where A4Qs go head to head
with 320i's.  i don't think there's much difference in power output,
but the audis have to be hadicapped with extra weight to make everyone
else competitive.  we can also assume that the difference in driver
skill is much narrower than joe blow and billy bob.

the results pretty much speak for themselves.  the a4Q is inherently
better chassis wise than a 3 series bimmer.  a 3 series bimmer without
a power advantage or weight handicap will lose to an a4q everytime
given the same level of driver skill.  when you compare apples to
oranges (such as M3 vs a4q on dry/wet/snow) an infinite number of
"conclusions" can be arrived at and the arguments will be endless and
futile.  everyone is right and everyone is wrong!


eliot