And the mustang wins!

[quk@isham-research.demon.co.uk (Phil Payne)]

In message <199802111116.DAA16462@theta2.ben2.ucla.edu> Michael Williams writes:

> The thing is though, from what i have read, i cant remember what magazine 
> it was, maybe it was Automobile...anyway, they gave a detailed reason why 
> the 5 valve technology was really only applicable to what audi likes to 
> do with the long stroke short bore way of makingengines.  It was found 
> that in that application, there was a distinct advantage of 5 valves over 
> 4 valves, but whenthe bore i think got over maybe 85 mm, that advantage 
> turned into a disadvantage and it was deemed that 4 valves was better.  

I'm not saying that BMW (or anyone else) are wrong to continue with 4-valve 
technology.  What _is_ wrong, to my mind, is that Audi have been prevented from 
racing a technology that they have adopted for the consumer market.  Whatever 
the justifications, Audi have gone for 5-valve technology and 'quattro', and 
the Touring Car series should give us a chance of seeing whether that decision 
was correct or not.

There's no end of bullshit around on the Internet saying that quattros are 
slower than RWD cars like BMWs.  Let's race 'em on equal terms and see.

-- 
 Phil Payne
 Committee Member, UK Audi [ur-]quattro Owners Club