Re: 944turbo v. ur-q

[Eaton Dave <dave.eaton@minedu.govt.nz>]

it's a no-brainer in the usa imho.  while the 944t got better, and the
ur-q hardly did, and was all out in '85....

things like cis vs efi would tend to make the early ur-q a more
expensive proposition to maintain as well, imho.  having said that, on a
wet/bumpy road, i'd expect even the usa ur-q to give a 944t a good
run...

in nz, my ur-q is more than a match for a friends 944t (series 2).  fit
and finish about even also.  certainly more room in the ur-q, and the
steering is way better, although the transmission isn't.  drive-ability
depends.  on a track, i'd expect the 944t to be better but, on the open
road, it's easy meat...

in the usa, go for the 944t, if you can handle the "hairdresser" image.

dave
'95 rs2
'90 ur-q

>
>    ok folks.  I need your help... can anyone give me an honest (ok,
>    slightly biased) opinion on what the advantages are of an ur-q
(besides
>    the obvious quattro) over a 944t?  
>