Re: churning butta

[QSHIPQ <QSHIPQ@aol.com>]

In a message dated 98-03-31 11:38:08 EST, you write:

<< Ok.  So now you're saying that C&D...the reviewers opinion...that the A8
> needed more tire, is pretty silly.  Do we want to take what they say in one
 >sentence as gospel and ignore the next?  Seems like you do!
  >>
Josh you miss the point.  "We blame the tires...  Seem mismatched to the car's
chassis" = that is the exact quote.  Now, what they exactly didn't do was to
make a comparison to another A8 with different tires.  Let's not forget the
apples here.  Reread the reviews of the Bimmer and the Lexus, neither one of
those had great tires either.  Again, you up the ante, the others get the same
consideration.  So, the bottom line is, that with 16in wheels and 60 series
tires, 2 cars came out ahead of the audi.  So, it can be done.  It wasn't.
History.  Given the price of the mxv4 compared to the Eagle, why exactly did
they choose that tire for the A8?  Could it be cuz it didn't really matter?
For the argument, just as plausible as their and your surmises.  I look at a
4260lb bimmer that managed to spread that girth within 8lbs of 50/50 weight
distribution on a 121in wheelbase and think "wow".  I look at the lightest of
the group, 3980lb audi that manages to only get within 500lbs of 50/50 on a
113in wheelbase, all that hanging on the front wheels.  "Blame the tires"?
Naw, I think it's more basic than that.  Sorry the numbers are there.  Also
the worst.  

>Hmm...17's are standard equipment on the M3, and will be optional on the
>new 3 -series.  My Mustang did great with 17" rubber...on the US interstate
>and off.  Didn't the Jag have 17" rubber??  17" can and does work on large
>sedans and sports cars in the US...not just the autobahn.  And the ride
>change that I pointed out on the Mustang between 16" and 17" wheels merely
>shows the impacts of wheel size and tire width.  Not irrelevant...
A 50 series tire on a 4000lb front heavy car doesn't sound like a long term
idea here in the states.  Maybe where you live, but not in IL or MI.  BTDT.

>Not at all.  Just stating what was not mentioned in the test, but came up
>in the reported numbers.  They talked 0-60 times.  As their rating system
>goes...the overall number has does not equal the sum of the individual
>ratings.  And acceleration does not make a car.  But they did mention that
>they though the Audi, with its techno aluminum structure, should've been a
>little quicker than the others....while it was not.  I say, not off the
>line, but moving, yes.  So I think they overlooked one small aspect...a
>quibble I have.
It was also the lightest car of the group, not mentioned either.  Acceleration
doesn't make the car.  It's part of a mix that adds up to a whole.  The whole
came in 3rd compared to the whole of the mix of the others.  Your quibble adds
up to less than .5 seconds.  Got something for you to try to put that in
perspective.  Go to a 1/4 mile track and do a time, ck your slip for your
reaction time.  .500 is good.  So, it's not significant for any real comparo
test either.  So documented.

>And I can easily argue that *most* American buyers do not want to change
>tires as the seasons change.  So with a standard all season tire that has
>decent performance and an H or higher speed rating, the AWD will out-do the
>traction control sedan. 
Not sure I go there with you.  My D40M2's can't do much in the snow, btdt.
D60's same thing.  You better pick your tire comparo very carefully.
Published documentation doesn't back up this claim.
 
>The '93 LS400 I drove in the snow...with traction
>control, was horrible.  I tried to act like a snow ignorant driver to see
>what the system would do.  The system in the Mercedes S500 was much better.
> Lexus has to cut corners somewhere... and both the S500 and LS400 were
>nothing compared to any AWD/4WD vehicle I've driven in snow (Toyota Previa,
>Mazda MPV, Audi 4000Q, 90Q, A8q, A4q, Nissan Pathfinder, Chevy Blazer, Jeep
>Grand Cherokee).
Hmm, what tires did the Lexus have vs your S500 test?  10 grand buys you snows
on some really nice wheels (Lexus).  In the case of the bimmer, 300 bux buys a
decent set of snows without wheels. Or you can look at your investment, and
spend 7 grand on a couple sets of wheels and tires for the bimmer, and still
come out ahead. 

>Pat writes:
>>20ft could be tires and more aggressive abs control without a 
>>problem.
<Monday morning.  Yup, coulda woulda shoulda.  Didn't.

>>Let's get this straight.  You say that tires wouldn't have helped.  Then
>>someone points out that tires would've helped.  Then you say...yes...but
>>the Audi didn't have better tires...so it's a moot point.  No its not a
>>moot point.  The point was...and is...that better tires would've helped.
>>Car & Driver said the same thing.
No, the point is Josh, that all the bread and butter was taken as presented.
Results documented.  C&D blames the tires.  I don't.  They didn't back up that
claim with anything but "seems".  Could be tires AND more aggressive abs
control. Yup.  Coulda been the chassis just wasn't up to the task.  It coulda
been that the Torsen was about ready to bite C&D in the butt.  Moot point, no
reference. Only the other sedans on stock (not stellar) 16in wheels and tires.
The point is moot, cuz as presented 3rd was 3rd.  Second was first with a
lower price (Car and Driver said that too).  I can go to page 120, and say if
you are leasing, BMW is first, and only 1300USD out on a purchase.  

>How about the upcoming S4?  Seems some Euro car rags that have had a chance
>to put the two head to head thought the S4 could be better.  Your point??
>Is the A4 apples to apples with an S4?  I don't think so.  S4 has more
>rubber, bigger brakes, sport suspension, more power, drivetrain tuned
>differently (Torsen), etc.  Big difference.  Hot rod sedan.
Hey Josh, make it simpler.  Compare a 328i to a A4.  The upcoming S4 could be
better.  Mid 200hp isn't gonna knock anyones socks off.  The competition is
already (and has been) beyond that.  Drivetrain tuned differently to lower the
"bite" I presume?  This is flag waving again.  Bottom line is by the time audi
gets it, the competition is playing in a whole 'nother game.  "Given...  We
expected something spectacular" = C&D.  3rd isn't close to that.  

>Audi was priced on the high side as well.  Roughly 10K higher than the
>lexus...right up there with the BMW.  I think, though, had price evened
>out, they would've ranked BMW, Lexus, then Audi.  Why?  Just my impression
>from the article.
Not your impression, it was quoted at the end of the BMW section.  Take a look
at a lease.  Looks like BMW, Lexus, Audi to me.  Damn, third place again.  All
this tells me is that #1 and #2 are really close.  And #3 is closer to 4 & 5
than to 1&2.  Just my impression of the article.  Audi, most expensive AND
subpar to the competition.  Doesn't sound like tires to me, sir.

>Agreed.  A better car.  And in some people's books, 0.2 or even 0.5 seconds
>0-60 doesn't make or brake a car.  Extracting 0.9 g's from a luxury sedan
>doesn't either.  Lots of intangibles.  And lots of preferences.  I prefer
>the Audi, sir.  Interior, exterior, size, AWD, amenities, engine note, etc
>etc etc.  The package suits me better.  Do I have that kinda money??  Hell
>no...but if I were buying a sedan in that range, the Audi would be my 1st
>choice.
Redundant statement, 'just my impression from your posts'.  Drive both before
you go lunching on audis tailgate.  The sum of the parts is hardly any
individual number.  Overall though, audi is playing mid pack with a
technological wonder.  Makes me think the solid record of the whole in the
bimmer deserves consideration.  After driving all but the VDP, I concur with
the C&D article.  Even as an owner of 3 audis.  I WANT audi to win, they
shoulda, coulda, and woulda, if someone was taking the competition seriously.
Is Audi listening?  I'm convinced they are in the old school of "sales" drop
you listen.  Right now BMW is enjoying a run, uncontested.  That is an AUDI
problem, not tires or Lexus' or anyone elses.  

Really want to understand what a few of us are talking about.  Go out and
drive the competition, and hard.  Drive the Audi, and hard.  Contrast and
compare the two.  I do all the time.  Audi needs to get these new S cars out
quickly.  Next year, the rules will change.  Playing catchup to the
competition puts you in 3rd place, consistently.  Betcha see a lot of reprints
of this test in 2 marques showrooms, and not audis.  This kind of press
BMW/Lexus and Audi each don't need, for diametrically opposite reasons.  

More .02
Scott Justusson
'87 5ktqwRS2
'86 5ktqw
'84 Urq