Re: Extinction of 200 20vt <was economics of...

[quk@isham-research.demon.co.uk (Phil Payne)]

In message <03f401bec3bc$9d6a2600$2aa194d1@stephenb> "Stephen Bigelow" writes:

> >That engine belongs in the UrQ in my opinion, and i guess i share Audi's
> >opinion since they dropped it in the UrQ...

> http://www.sjmautotechnik.com/perform.html#200t

> The stock 20V200 is quicker to 60 (6.8 sec) than your UrQ (7.8 sec when
> stock), and weighs 3650 lbs.

But not quicker than a 20V ur-quattro.

The majority of the delta occurs at low speeds, where the 20V ur-quattro
passes 1950rpm in first gear and the RR's massive torque makes a huge
difference.

One of the major benefits, IMO, is the cross-flow design - the
ur-quattro suffers greatly (more so with the MB engine) from engine bay
congestion and from having the entire fuel delivery system less than a
foot from the exhaust manifold, turbo and downpipe.  That much heat is
just not consistent with the delivery of high-density fuel and air to
the engine.  The MB's design is further complicated by the turbo water
feeds, the external system pressure regulator, the fuel frequency valve,
the wastegate frequency valve, and the electric pump on the other side
of the block.  Working on WRs is a real mechanical pleasure after the
MB.

It would be interesting to get a copy of VAG's "standard times" booklet
and work out how much of the top ten jobs listed for the MB is actually
the removal of unrelated components to access the bits you really want
to get at.  What does removing a CV joint heat shield have to do with
taking the head off?

I've been timed at twelve minutes for removal of the entire fuel
injection system - Roger Galvin and I have done a complete head removal
in less than three hours (standard is ten).

That said - what sort of idiot would design an engine that requires the
inlet manifold to be removed for the distributor to be adjusted?

--
 Phil Payne
 UK Audi quattro Owners Club
 Phone: 0385 302803   Fax: 0870 0883933