[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: Torsen ur-q Vs Type 44?

To: quattro@acacianet.com (quattro)
Subject: Re: Torsen ur-q Vs Type 44?
From: Orin Eman <orin@wolfenet.com>
Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 10:47:58 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: QSHIPQ@aol.com, quk@isham-research.demon.co.uk, quattro@coimbra.ans.net
In-Reply-To: <01BD78EB.E6EA3BC0@gpowell.acacianet.com> from "quattro" at May 6, 98 12:38:40 pm
Sender: owner-quattro@coimbra.ans.net


> I am pretty sure that I can detect some differences in chassis dynamics between the two...

> Is it possible that the lower weight, smaller wheelbase, lower polar moment, lower CG and overall stiffer and better suspension of the ur-q Vs the Big Pig (tm) might allow those nasty spider effects to me 100% masked and/or totally corrected for by the ur-q driver? 

Quite likely.  With stock power, if 78% torque to rear is still an
understeering situation, then no problem.

The S1s that were mentioned in a previous post had a lot more power
than a stock UrQ...  and given the quotes, would appear to have had
a problem.

Orin.

References:
- Torsen ur-q Vs Type 44?
  - From: quattro <quattro@acacianet.com>

Prev by Author: Re: Subject: 4k gas mileage
Next by Author: Re: Between a rock & a hard place (long)
Prev by thread: Torsen ur-q Vs Type 44?
Next by thread: Advice needed: 5k diesel
Index(es):
- Author
- Thread