Re: More on Spools (kinda long)

[MSV96@aol.com]

In a message dated 98-08-22 02:47:37 EDT, you write:

<< Be careful on this Mike.  <snip> The "quattro" advantage wanes with it's
weight penalty in a big way.  Some exerpts for you: >>

All points well taken and the information passed along is much appreceated and
very interesting. As one who is more of a "race fan" and less of a "techie" I
can only make my observations on results and what others say...again, qoutes
well taken.

Results are as I see them...in all forms of ST Audi is getting the crap kicked
out of them and is "mid pack" (tm QSHIPQ) at best...EXCEPT in Australia (and
???) where they still run with quattro and are totaly dominant--in races.
(Read: they are NOT the fastest cars...ovlov S-40's seem to be.)
 
<< King - "Off the start line the Quattro was phenomenal. >>

In a series that is essentially comprised of sprint races with very equal cars
and a standing start, this is a key advantage. From what I have observed this
season in the Australian series, the races are won on the start. The two
A4quattros would launch away from the rest of the field and then "block" their
way to the win.

<<  "At Donnington you had the best of the quattros with Frank Biela driving
and the fwd a4s with Yvan Muller driving and they ran nose to tail for much of
the race.  Uup to about 2/3 of the race distance the cars were well matched,
then the fwd car fell back as its tyres deteriorated." >>

Again, a "quattro advantage" first described in pavement racing by Hurley
Haywood right after Long Beach in '88. This is the classic "qualifying car"
vs. "race car" thing where even though a given car is capable of a few very
fast laps...putting them together for an entire stint is key. Of course even
in this day and age the driver has much to do with that. Look at any major
series and they drivers who are dominant are always the ones who can remain
focused and put down lap after lap mistake free and consistently fast. (Of
course you know all that Scott ;-)...)
 
 >I do think this season clearly illustrates the "unfair advantage" of quattro
 >when one compares results in the various TC series around the world.
 
<< The unfair advantage, it appears, is a stacked deck to the rest of us.  No
VC's were ever offered to the rest of us, so a conditional "quattro advantage"
can be claimed at best with what is offered to the rest of us...<snip> >>

Point well taken.

<< I'm fascinated by what King, Biela and Bintcliffe gave away in these
articles.  I think the cat is very much out of the bag, down under so noted.
>>

I am too and thank you for digging them up and sharing them with us!

<< Those street A4 drivers that saved the 1500USD quattro option, certainly
can stand proud that the "quattro advantage" as defined in ST, is hardly a
trump on the street, or the track. >>

Maybe so...personally I think that as a percentage of the cost of the new A4
that $1500.00 is a pretty insignificant amount. We are talking high end stereo
upgrade the like. The amount is less than CA State sales tax on a new A4. Of
course then again for me in this day and age 1500 bucks is a siginificant
chunk of change and represents no less than 50% of what I paid for my 5ktq!
 
<< Since Audi is committed to fwd racing the A4, it should be interesting to
see a) what tire developments happen, and b) whether the traditional north-
south motor orientation changes. The competition in fwd, it seems, is the
Honda Accord (blasphemy!!), it has the E/W fwd advantage, due to it's lower
and reward engine orientation.  The thought of the competition being an Accord
is revolting...  I personally liked the M3 vs A4q idea better. >>

I agree that the idea of an Accord as competition is revolting. Keep in mind
that down under the primary competition is ovlov and then wmb (not really an
M3 per say...but they do run with M-toys for sure). I would imagine that if we
do see a change to an east-west motor that the car run would be an A3 would it
not?
 
<< Stay tuned, and don't count those A4 fwd cars out yet.  They are so close
in lap times to the A4q's (with the A4q's having the advantage of 'quattro'
specific tyres), that some tweeking could regain Audis reign in ST.  King
seems to know exactly what the comparison is between the two (data logged
even), so the "quattro" advantage, could just help make a better A4 all-
together. >>

I guess then my real question is why aren't they doing well without quattro
when in the remaining series which still allows it they clean up in a dominant
fashion given the closeness of the competition. Are the two Audi team drivers
in the Australian series that much better than the competition compared to
Biela and Bintcliffe vs. the rest in the UK series? I doubt it. There seems to
be only factor that I can see that is the difference down under between front
and mid pack for Audi and that clearly (to me) is awd (point well taken that
it is NOT what we understand as "quattro" on the street).

>From what I am guessing, Audi won't be as serious about ST in the future maybe
as they have been in recent years. If they start to focus on Le Mans, and GT
racing (and who knows what all else) I would imagine that ST Audis will become
privateer efforts with limited factory support. I don't think they are willing
to slog around in "mid pack" with factory colors for long.

But what do I know...I'm just a "fan" ;-)

Mike Veglia
87 5kcstq (purchased for "quattro option" price times 2)