Not a slug at all!

[Mike Arman <armanmik@n-jcenter.com>]

>
>I hate to burst this bubble of hope and optimism, and I apologize in
advance to
>those Audi owners who will surely take umbrage, but the non-turbo 44 type is
>a slug's slug. This type of car will also fail to meet, IMHO, your
requirements
>of inexpensive operation and maintenance. (As a 200 owner, you must know
>that.) Quattro is a wonderful thing, but get a grip, man.  She'll hate it.
>
>DeWitt Harrison
>Boulder, CO
>88 5kcstq
>

No, my non-turbo type 44 is NOT a slug. Remember that Boulder CO is at
what, 5,000 feet above sea level? Any N.A. car's performance will be
decreased at that altitude.

As an example of the effect of altitude on performance, the first time I
flew out of Denver on a 727 (certainly NO shortage of raw horsepower
there!), I was astonished at the leisurely rate of climb - (Heck, my Cessna
150 could out-climb this turkey!) - compared to the spectacular departure
rates a 727 can normally achieve at sea level.

While I certainly would not characterize my 108 hp type 44 (fortunately
standard transmission) as a SLUG (That's reserved for K-cars and Yugos), I
will readily agree that it is not exactly a rocket ship either. We'll leave
that category for motorcycles, Cobra replicas and such.

The appeal of the N.A. type 44 is BALANCE - the right amount of brakes, the
right amount of go-power, the right combination of size and handling. It
ain't "FAST!" - it just works well as a package. I just hope the 5kqt CD
I'm getting into shape will be as satisfying to me (jury still out) - of
course, everyone wants more HP.  ;-)

I do readily agree that it will NOT meet your low-cost-low-maintenance
requirement. By no stretch of anyone's imagination can these 10 to 17 year
old cars be considered particularly reliable - or particularly easy  - or
particularly inexpensive - to work on. My overall satisfaction level with
the car lets me overlook the excessive maintenance needed - but I do almost
ALL my own work AND I have plenty of alternate transportation.

I agree that a N.A. type 44 Audi is the wrong choice in this situation, but
not because it is "slow" - the maintenance and reliablility issues here
rule out ANY type 44 in this situation. This is a hobbyist car, not a daily
driver for someone who may not wish to be quite so INVOLVED with their car.

Best Regards,

Mike Arman