Reality Cheques - long

[QSHIPQ <QSHIPQ@aol.com>]

Over the 5+ years here, many discussions on the percieved and the real
'quattro advantage'.  Most of the discussions yield and wield justifications
more than reality, IMO.  The marketing boys call this Post Cognitive Disonance
Theory.  Justifying your purchase, post action.

Quattro has advantages and a solid record of superiority.  Let's explore the
reality of that claim.  Obviously, with no holds barred, Audi has laid claim,
nee proven, that awd is superior in Rallying and Road Racing.  Please note,
that we are talking about 10-11/10ths driving in both situations, the
definition of driving at the limit of adhesion.  If you look hard at what Audi
has done to achieve that, the similarities to our road cars is only of four
driven wheels, not of HOW those four wheels are driven.  Specifically, audi
ran fixed f/r split diffs in most of their 80's rally and racing efforts, and
it was rarely the 50/50 most road cars have, and HP 3 times more than our
stock q's.  Move to the BTCC and the 90's, the fixed split became in cockpit
variable (soon could have been computer controlled to track/conditions), and
monstrous differing tire sizes f/r became the norm.  Superiority proven, sea
anchors the penalty vs the M3.  Now, as we enter '98, the governing bodies
have outlawed even the anchors, in favour of 2wd.  Many posts from me
regarding the 'inevitable of this action', as well as the backwards digress in
technological thinking from the sanctioning bodies.  But all is not lost.
Computers are smarter, faster, and cars are designed better.  3d rolling
chassis dynamics before the car is even built can be had with the basics of
computers (one resides right on my pentium that is downloadable for free from
U of M).  

The Bavarians have been most successful in chasing the high performance
chassis market.  4 valve heads on 3 liter motors in the 3/Z line, 4 valve
heads on 3 and 4liter motors in the 5 line really set some high standards,
some of which saying 'quattro advantage' might bring smiles to knowing
drivers.  RWD, limited slip "only".  The Japanese zapped some serious arsenal
of their own, the toyota supra and the Rx7tt come to mind, both rwd, and AT
the front of the pack track or street.  The venerable dodge/mitsu tt
stealth/3k and the 911tt are the only two real production cars (stealth no
longer produced) that use awd to put the power down.  I argue, after driving
the dodge tt AT the track, the awd is more toy than weapon in stock form, so
that really leaves the 400hp 911tt as THE contender of awd in a production
car.  Really high HP, right where awd shines 'advantage'.  One could look
around in that HP territory and find a handful of cars with RWD chassis' that
the 911 doesn't "blow away", so ya gots to wonder, did the chassis need awd
for 400hp, or did the 400hp need a chassis for rwd?

Bringing the race 'to the street' cars is the reality, and there the quattro
advantage is starting to wane some.  I have personally driven a couple of new
M3's at quattro club events, where the best of the 'advantage' drivers have
the opportunity to stand on record, arms akimbo.  "Not exactly" is the reality
of that mindset, even in the rain, where the M3's better balance, braking and
handling, overcame the percieved and real advantage of quattro, even to the
most tweeked of q's.  One of the q instructors owns a 4 door M3 with front
pads and lines only, runs with the very front of the 'fast' pack at every
event.  Driving, not trailering his car to events.  

Porsche cars enjoy some of that same ease.  The 968 at RA QCUSA was doing very
well against the best, with only track tires added.  The 944t/s of the late
80's are phenomenal track cars as well, at used prices competitive to quattros
with half the miles on them.  And good brakes from the outset.  And for those
who doubt the prowess of the 951, the tech boys at porsche would have loved to
caimpaign (and most own) 951 chassis instead of the 911, it's faster (I asked
at a Porsche test session at Mid-OH).  A quick watch of porsche club events
certainly shows this to be a common understanding.  Not good for marketing
tho...

Quattros at 10/10ths are a handful, torsen cars more so than non.  The ease
and "advantage" of quattro as I have always seen it, is the ability to drive
at 8/10ths easily almost 100% of the time.  Beyond that 8/10ths is a place few
find themselves often, and those that do, know exactly my point.  Q's can
bite, and hard.  The best way to explore these limits are the Winter Driving
Schools, there are several out there, most allow studs (kinda cheating in my
book), Bridgestone's doesn't.  And it IS a track.  That is where you can learn
what driving at the limit (and beyond) is all about without having to get a
roll cage and your ProRally license.  

Back to reality.  Quattros are fun, some fast and faster, some handle very
well.  I encourage a good car, advocate it, from chassis to motor.  Quattros
have the awd traction advantage. As technology advances, that advantage in a
street car is at a VERY high horsepower level, 400+, and needs an experienced
driver at the wheel to 'prove' much of anything....  And B4B, to hop into a M3
or 540IM rock stock and be balanced, tuned, and braked from the factory has
some serious advantages of it's own.  For the price of an A8, you could get a
540IM. Or a used '91 M5 and a new M3, put Bridgestones on the 540, and only
Bridgestone equipped quattros might 'show' tail to the 5 in snow.  Let's
encourage the advancement of total chassis cause with the powers that be at
audi, post cognitive disonance theory should be just that, give us the beef,
not things to beef about.  The quattro is a great start, sure would love
brakes and HP to help the disonance some.

Competition in the high performance market is at a peak, a great opportunity
for real cars and advantages to create demand from buyers.  Unfortunately,
that competition doesn't really include the 'quattro advantage'...  Here's to
hoping for big changes in Ingolstat.

My .02

Scott Justusson
'87 5ktqwRS2
'86 5ktqw
'84 Urq