Re: Can someone give me some info to refute this?

[Brett Dikeman <brett@pdikeman.ne.mediaone.net>]

(I forward readers; though I clipped many sections of rant, this is still a
large post.)


>(I explained to him that many Audi enthusiasts, such as yours truly, are using
>the cars in ways that Audi probably never imagined -- autocross, open-track
>days, some racing, etc. -- and some of us with Torsen-equipped cars have
>noticed a few handling quirks that we eventually concluded were being caused
>by the Torsen as a result of the way it functions.)
Interesting.  When you use a chain saw for a paper cutter, the result isn't
very clean.  Gee.  Hmm.  When you autocross and race the car, something it
wasn't designed for, it has some quirks.  Weird, eh?  Interesting that
you're not saying "gee, my Audi, which wasn't designed for racing, did
pretty well, considering!"


>Chocholek says it WILL happen in that situation.  I don't care how remote-
>it's a pinto waiting to explode.  Not every Pinto exploded,
You are grossly over-exagerating the problem.  If you push your car, it
screws up.  Huh.  Funny that.  Most, if not all, daily driving, even under
emergency situations, rarely stresses a car more than racing.

>to race with it on occasion, depending upon the event.  [Could the fact that
>one driver didn't use a Torsen be the reason why there is so much
>conflicting evidence about whether Audi ever raced with one or not?])
More like some drivers preferred it, some didn't.  If you have the talent
to make a car perform better without the gizmos, and the gizmos add
complexity, why not take it out?

>Companies like Porsche, Land Rover, etc. rejected torsen.  Guess they just
The Porsche C4(roughly retails for $120k) is equipped with Torsen.  Many
Porsche owners opt for the Torsen rear diff on their cars, and it is far
from "inexpensive" or "cheap."

Frankly, Land Rover's SUV/truck division has NEVER turned a profit; it
survives entirely off LR's other divisions(and I hear it is quite the blood
sucker.)  On top of this, I have NEVER seen a Land Rover car in my life.
There is probably a reason for that(isn't there a export restriction on LR
cars?  Oh well.)

>What a joke.  The all powerful "quattro" isn't even the real system they use.
There are several different "generations" of the Q system.  It is also not
the "all powerful."  It is more difficult to drive in a skid situation,
adds considerable weight to the car, not to mention the added complexity
means more things to fix.

Unless I'm mistaken, the systems used in Audi race cars were at most
modified versions of the production stuff, or were identical to systems in
production cars.  Quattro is Audi's term more for the all wheel drive
concept, than for an exact assembly of parts.

>All those wins, all those supposed victories, was all just BS.  I don't blame
>BMW for getting angry, Audi is using a non-production product on their race
Like half the stuff in a race car is ever "production product"...even
"stock" car racing, the body is completely different, they just have a
kevlar shell that looks sorta like the real thing(ie, escort, etc.)  The
engine is ripped out of something else, and the end result is a car that,
if the shell was removed, looks and is nothing like what drives on the
roads(yet they use the term "stock car" racing.  Go figure.)

>(At this point, he asked me more about how the car behaved during those
>times the Torsen was suspected of being fooled and I explained to him the
>typical "understeer/oversteer/understeer" scenario.  He speculated that it's
Ever heard of a game called "telephone"?  If you had to explain things like
"typical understeer/oversteer/understeer" to him, then something is not
quite right here.


>Everyday driving.  That is the key word.  This system was designed for
<abusive language removed>
>possibility that this dangerous thing happens goes up with performance
>driving!
Gee.  When you do something dangerous, the chances of something wrong
happening go up!  Wow.  Maybe you should talk with those statistics folks,
they'd love to hear your enlightened and original thoughts on the subject.

Swears are used by people who are not intelligent enough to express
themselves properly.  It is also improper to use such language on this
list, as Dan has stated before(feel free to ask Dan on this one, I wouldn't
want to put words in his mouth.)  Please refrain from doing so again.


>to show that they SUUUUUCCCKKKKK.  Only the IV with EDL is getting better.
Well, quit complaining, unsubscribe, and go buy yourself a Volvo AWD or a
Subaru.
Whatever floats yer boat.  I went for a 200q rather than a Subaru because I
know the body type like the back of my hand, I have a wonderful support
group, and it is nicely "appointed", not to mention fun to drive(as many,
many cars are.)


>Segment II.  I think I have destroyed torsen BS as much as I can.
No, you've just thrown around generalizations and rationalizations in a
haphazard way, not to mention made a good portion of the list hit the
"delete" key faster than you can say "0-60" and dismiss anything you say in
the future.

>Now that we have realized that Quattro and Audi race cars don't match, and
>that Audi's race cars are purpose built and have little to do with road cars
>(or nothing at all), we can move on it the last saving grace of Audi- open
umm...I never had a problem realizing that race cars aren't retail
products, and neither to most people.

>diff and FIA Gruppe racing.  The Ur-Q, as I have proven, had a completely
The point of racing is to see how well the drivers can do against each
other; look at stock car racing.  The cars are practically carbon copies of
each other; it's the drivers that are different.  It's the drivers the fans
know by heart and cheer for.

>different racing engine, with different fuel injection, head, intake, turbo,
>etc.  And the fact that they won twice to my knowledge, 82 and 84.  They were
>beaten by Lancia RWD and Peugot RWD in 81, 82 and 85 respectively.  I have no
>stats on anything after that.  And drivers championship, which they did win
>all those years, means very little.  So what- those drivers are so badass like
>Rohrl, Mikkola, Bouton, etc- they were bound to clean up.  Rohrl used to race

>for Renault of Peugot I think, and he beat all of the Audi drivers at the
>time.  The fact is there car was NOT all conquering of anything.  RWD drive
>cars competed and won against them.
Equipment is no substitute for talent, and vise-versa.  The best Ferrari in
the world won't get you anywhere if you put a 1 yr old in the driver's seat.


>The last thing I can honestly respect is Pikes Peak.  They did in fact win
>those years, and did do a great thing there, even though the competion wasn't
>up to standards with ralley.  But they did do it.  And Porsche has five times
>more victories, actively campaigns their STOCK cars their, and has won a
Porsche and Audi(as well as most other car co's) use stuff that looks
NOTHING like what's on the street, throughout the car.  I fail to see the
point.

>And all the statistics- I could be here till doomsday proving they're SLOW ASS
>cars.
Hey, my 5kcst was no barn stormer, but my 200q can give most anything a
serious run for its money. Not bad for a heavy, 7-8 year old(20yr old body
style) full size sedan.

This all traces back to uses and what YOU need and want.  If you want a
serious race car, you should not buy a bloated, galvanized steel,
full-sized luxury sedan.  There is a very good reason why there are many,
many car companies out there; it is because there are different cars for
different people.  You should buy and drive the car that best suits your
lifestyle.  While I would not buy a GM vehicle, they do build very nice
trucks.  While I wouldn't buy a Lotus, they make do make very rare, exotic
cars.

I have no problems with my friend who wants either a Neon or a Saab 900,
because they "look neat".  I have no problems with Paul Royal, who loves a
5 litre Mustang for its insane punch of power.  I have no problems with
another friend who bought a Olds '88 Custom Cruiser estate wagon because
it's a BIG car she can fit 8 people in with room to spare.  I have no
problems with my father, who owns 2 944's because he loves the body style
and great handling(though I do have a problem with the fact that 1 is
sitting in the garage in 10,000 pieces :)

If you bought the wrong car(you obviously feel so strongly against Audis)
then sell your Audi, buy the car you feel you truely want, get off the
list, and stop complaining.  We are here for positive and/or constructive
discussions, not "I'm out to make the world mad and prove them wrong"
emails.  It's interesting, but I have archives going back 3 months in my
mailbox(roughly 6600 messages) and there was only one message from you.
The one you just posted.

I'd have to ask you to contribute in a more meaningful, polite, and
constructive way in the future, or continue lurking.

Brett
PS: This is not an invitation for people to send me messages about stock
car racing, torsen differentials, Subarus, American trucks, reliability of
cars, Porsches, Land Rover's profitability, or other random subjects.  In
fact, I'd rather not see this thread continue; it does not justify more
effort on anyone's part, including mine.

------
Brett Dikeman
brett@pdikeman.ne.mediaone.net
~)-|
Hostes alienigeni me abduxerunt.  Qui annus est?
Te audire non possum.  Musa sapientum fixa est in aure.
Ita, scio hunc 'sig file' veterem fieri.
------