Re: Weight a minute

[Josh Pinkert <flush@us.net>]

At 01:29 AM 4/10/98 -0400, you wrote:
> 
> >>They were not that successful during 1997 season.  Cry babies had to 
>>> go and complain to FIA.  Well who's compromising now? >>
>Ah yes, the RACING argument.  Well, when you find a race car on the street
>that compares, you do post me up.  My posts here ON that very FIA ruling was
>6months ahead on the prediction that a) bmw would protest, and b) quattro
>would be banned.  Who's compromising?  FIA.  Frankly, I believe, given the
>325IX, that Audi would be in a lot of trouble if FIA ruled in Audis favor.
>Why?  Cuz BMW builds great chassis, period.  A great chassis with awd, would
>hardly be difficult, since all they need is the awd.  The rest of the design
>is already in the bag.  Not quite so for Audi right now, wouldn't you say?
>

So the reaction when a car manufacturer has something that is advantageous
that you don't have is...get it banned!!  Right on.  I think this is just
the opposite methodology that you're looking for.  BMW does something
better than Audi.  Audi should get their stuff right.  Audi does something
better than BMW.  Audi should be banned.  No...rather BMW should get their
stuff right.  I thought the 325IX was a great car (drove it when we shopped
for a small AWD sedan...bought the 90q).  It had much better power than the
Audi, better brakes too.  But it was lacking in so many areas...fit and
finish/build quality being a big one.  Who wants a fast car that's poorly
built, made of cheap materials, and falls apart.  Not me.  Sounds like
early 80's american cars.  Only now is the 3 series (E46) starting to
figure these things out.  So documented (again, current issue of C&D).

- Josh Pinkert
- Josh@Pinkert.com
- '98 A4q 2.8
- ISO '70-'73 Porsche 911