Re: Fastest stickiest Audi? Opinions welcome.

[Alexei M Voloshin <Alexei.M.Voloshin-1@tc.umn.edu>]

Were the skid pad and slalom tests conducted with both BMW and Q having 
the same model tires?? 
If not, I would attribute the the better performance of BMW to having  
superior tires.

AWD: *more weight, yet faster starts!
     *top speed should be about the same. 
     *maybe slower than FWD in mid range speed sprints, but I doubt that 
the owners of TQ's will complain to much about lack of midrange burst.

Alex




On Sat, 28 Sep 1996, Fringe Ryder wrote:
 
> That's been a debate for a long time.  Under dry conditions, the Audi
> skidpad values are lower than the equivalent BMW and the slalom is slower.
> However, the Quattro often does better than the non-Quattro of the same Audi
> for the skidpad.  
> 
> That doesn't give you a full picture of handling, but it does tell you that
> perhaps AWD isn't the most important part.
> 
> Of course, the lack of Quattro gives you something else critical for great
> handling - less weight.
> 
> To be honest, I wouldn't be buying a Quattro if I still lived in Los
> Angeles.  It's a nice car, but the BMWs feel tighter and more tossable.
> However, I now live in the PNW, where ice and frozen bridges are around much
> more than I'd anticipated.  The BMWs are apparently better than most cars
> for that, but not close to Audi Qs or even Subaru.
> 
> Regards
>