Re: ?

[Michael Williams <daserde@ucla.edu>]

QSHIPQ decided to speak these words:

><< he compromises to the 540 are that it is heavy and is not the best 
> performer.  It just isnt.  You make compromises when you buy a sedan, it 
> is just simple physics.  And for a 1.8 liter engine, yeah, it has a lot 
> of potential.  Im not talking about stressing the hell out of it.  for 
> relatively cheap you can chip it and a couple other things and get a nice 
> performer, not the ultimate performer, but a decent one at least.
> > 
>Ask audi about that.  And your warrantee too.  There are a lot of concerns
>with 1.8tweeks, from the boys that built them.  You may want to compare the
>540 to a whole plethora of perfomance machines.  You might be surprised.
>Drive one, you aren't.

Fine, but i never said anything about aything but performance potential 
did i?  We dont seem to be comparing anything but performance here, that 
is my whole freakin point.


>
>> outperforms....so the hell what?  Most people do not buy these cars for 
>> ultimate performance.  When you get the cheapest car outperforming the 
>> more expensive car in a difference that is only significant on the race 
>> track, what is the point?  Come on, they all perform approximately the 
>> same, and therefore, luxury cars should be judged on LUXURY. I dont 
>> understnand why that is so hard to accept.
>Apples to Apples sir.  Expectation level is high in the "luxury" market.  
>They
>all perform NOT the same.  Someone is serious that 50/50 is a good thing,
>right up to the creme.  And someone isn't.  So documented.  Tires?  Righteo.
>Nope, tires just make for a feel.  Subjectively, you don't give that buyer as
>much credit as I do.
> 

Does 50/50 always equal better performance?  NO.  Just flat out NO.  
Yeah, it is a big factor, but come on, weight distribution is only one 
part of handling.  You still argue that tires dont make a difference 
except subjectively, is that correct?  How can you POSSIBLY make that 
argument?  I put AVS Intermediates on my old coupe, an upgrade from BF 
Goodrich HR4's and yeah, there was a huge objective handling increase.  
It would corner harder, respond quicker, brake better.  Those arent 
subjective measurements.  That is the difference a tire can make.

>> You cant compare it to pure performance cars, you just cant.  pure 
> >performance cars designed for performance and performance only will beat 
>> these luxocruisers.
>Drive the 540, then drive the M3.  Case in my point.  Drive a 944TS, drive a
>911, case in my point.  Seat time Mike, you are not correct.
>
What exactly is your point here?  The 540 is a much more powerful car in 
a body that is not that much heavier than the M3, has a completely 
different everything.  I still dont see what the point is with that 
comparison.  And what in the hell are you tlaking about with the 951 and 
the 911?  i dont understand that.  They are both built for pure 
performance, both are pure sports cars.  They are just very different 
layouts, what is the point?



> >you got performance out of the S class?  What? Im interested to know, are 
>> you just alking acceleration?  If so, that is only one part of 
>> performance.  I have NEVER heard anyone before you right now say that the 
> >S500 can perform.  It doesnt corner, it doesnt handle, it just 
> >accelerates and cruises, which an argument can be made to include that in 
> >luxury, not necessarily performance.
>Coupe does pretty well, performance and handling.  

Just so i can read it, do you by chance have the test dates so that i can 
check them out?  Im just curious
> 
> 
>> The neon from my last read, in the sport version, handles pretty damn 
> >well.  The 0-60 is not performance in the terms of what im talking about. 
> > And even then, there will always be a car that can outaccelerate any 
>> sedan. Come on...everything is a compromise, and when you buy a sedan, 
>> you compromise performance....
>  >>
>Hmm, get a read of the next M5.  You are right tho, may not be number 1.  My
>last drive of the neon was fun, but please, so was my first drive of a 
>fiesta.

There is still the factor of aerodynamics.  Inherently, the aerodynamics 
of a sedan arent going to be as good for high speed as those of a sports 
car.  There is a reason why sports cars look like they do, it isnt justa 
coincedence.  Look at the McLaren, Daur 962, Avus...notice a trend?  Not 
one of the fastest cars on the road are sedans...


later...


Michael Sheridan Williams

My new one: 1985 4000 S Quattro
175,000+ miles, and going like a new car
Well, went like a new car.....right into a guard rail :o(

http://members.aol.com/daserde2