"Rules" or Reigned?

[QSHIPQ <QSHIPQ@aol.com>]

>Way to go Pat,
>Uhh, I fully agree with second Pats motion or whatever.
>1.)  AWD rules, esp in the wet.  In the dry, I would day AWD and RWD can
>be even due to less weight in the RWD car, but that is even, I still think
>that the AWD car has more traction, but the RWD car is lighter and could
>be faster on straights.
Hmmm.  Well this goofball went to a qclub event in the rain with an M3 with
stock tires, and passed the most tweeked of audis running.  You offset awd
"rules" with chassis dynamics.  Audis understeer, are nose heavy, and have
subpar brakes.  So that is a LOT of awd to make up for.  M3 is 50/50, awesome
brakes from the factory, and neutral handling at the limit.  I think if you
take a look at the reviews of awd vs traction control the documentation
doesn't support the "awd rules" (I posted some of those ramblings a year+
back).  

Hanging the corporate hat on AWD (and torsen centers, IMO) without keeping up
with the latest and greatest, just shows that the advantage is waning.  For
SNOW you may have a point in "control", not sure I'd jump on the "performance"
bandwagon tho.  After going to steamboat, what makes control and performance
in low CF, has more to do with what's sitting in the seat, than any
technological wonder.  

Midpack is midpack.  How 'bout for every midpack, audi commits to a
frontrunner.  Just like they did in the past racing efforts.  We all know they
CAN do it, it's a why question, specifically a why not question.

I recall my post after driving a 540IM.  And Graydons post a year later.  Hey,
you drive one of these "other" machines, awd isn't even close to the first
thing out of your mouth in defense.  Maybe if more folks took rides in the
competition, the demands on the Lords of the Rings might be more pointed.
There are no excuses guys, just a tougher competition. Is Audi in, or out?

I say, "you're in, ok, ante up."

My .02

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