Not a slug at all!

[DeWitt Harrison <de@aztek-eng.com>]

On Fri, 08 Jan 1999 09:12:35, Mike Arman wrote:
>[ ... ]
>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.

I knew I was going to rub somebody the wrong way. Sorry. It is true that
in Boulder (atmospheric pressure roughly 0.8 bar) we are accustomed to
sluggy performance. In my defense, my comments were in the context of the
definitions of slugginess expressed by the gentleman's friend, e.g. a '87 4kq.

>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.
>[ ... ]

It is a good package, but I'm not sure I would agree power and weight are well
balanced, at least not for me. My 1972 2002 (2.0L, NA) has approximately
same sea level power rating you mentioned but weighs 1000 lb. less.
As, you say, though, there is _never_ enough bhp. All is relative.

>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.

Amen, Brother.

DeWitt Harrison
Boulder, CO
88 5kcstq