Re: S4/91 200: which is faster?

["Gary G. Erickson" <erickson@teleport.com>]

Sargent Schutt wrote:

> Umm, I am curious about the *faster* comment. My understanding was that
> the 91 200q was actually quicker (acceleration) than the US S4/S6
> because of the gearing on the newer cars (six-speed euro boxes with only
> 5 gears in the US). Also, the S4/6 is heavier (not by much)? So while
> the stock 91 200q has 11 fewer HP, it is actually faster than the 92-95
> S4/6. Anyone know the answer to the weight/gearing issues?

I was able to listen in on a similar conversation that Ned Ritchie had
with a '91 200Q owner a year or two back.

Essentially what I got out of it was that the S4 initially had a bit
more grunt from the overboost that's allowed but due to the gear skip in
the S4 the 200Q would start to pull ahead and in the end had more
performance potential.

That said, I had the opportunity to drive a '92 (or '93? it had the
carbon dash trim) at the track day at PIR last November.  While I don't
think I'd like it as a car to take out on the track, I'd love to have
one to use as a commuter vehicle.

Please bear in mind that all of this has come out of my (admittedly)
rather fuzzy memory, so all disclaimers apply.

Gary

-- 
Gary G. Erickson         Secretary -- NW Quattro Club
 503-702-5789           mailto:erickson@teleport.com
   http://www.teleport.com/~erickson/pnwaudi.htm