5KCSTQ 1.8T?

["Graydon D. Stuckey" <graydon@apollo.gmi.edu>]

On Thu, 14 Aug 1997 MSV96@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 8/13/97 Ti Kan writes:
> 
> <<Despite its great power potential of the 1.8T, turbo and all, a four is a
> four and lacks the suaveness of the V6...>>
> 
> And the I5 2.2t for that matter....which is why I feel that Audi made a HUGE
> marketing mistake deciding not to continue developing that motor for export

Hmmmm, I think they were long overdue in canning the I-5.  It was a dumb
design in the first place, but it was advanced enough to work for them in
the early '80s.  In 1997, the I-5 is hopelessly outclassed by all the
multi-valve V6s and V8s on the market.   I do wish they had replaced it 
with a turbo V6 S series car.   Maybe we'll get that soon though. :-)

> the A4 1.8tq is undoubtably a very nice car, think about what it *could* be
> like with a I5 20v turbo motor instead of a 4 (yes, albeit a very nice
> high-tech 4...) No offense intended to A4 owners...just my perception. And

I was thinking how nice the 5000 CS TQ would be with the 2.8 V6 NA or the 
1.8T 4-banger under the hood.   It woiuld be much smoother, quieter, and 
the torque would be lots better than even a mildly upgraded I-5.   Oh 
yeah, the 5KCSTQ would handle better too due to the weight reduction.   
That would also improve the braking deficiency with the 5KCSTQs.

> who knows...someday when they are older and depreceated I may buy one cuz I
> do like them very much, but can't justify the cost with the plethora of cool
> used q's to be had for cheap.

Me too.  :-)

Later,
Graydon D. Stuckey 
'89 Thunderbird SuperCoupe
'86 Audi 5000 CS Quattro
'86 Mazda RX7 GXL 2+2
'85 Mazda RX7 GS