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

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

In message <004801bec4ac$8fc51730$05bae6d0@cardinalventures.com> "Brandon Hull" writes:

> If I understand Michael's original point, he is saying that the merits of a
> small, light and efficient engine like the 2.2L 20vt find (shall we say)
> "fuller expression" in a light, nimble car than a large luxury sedan.  The
> engine comprises a higher proportion of the weight in the smaller car, so
> heroic power-to-weight ratios are more meaningful.  His position (as I
> interpret) is that all that wonderful engineering content of the 20vt is if
> not wasted, then somewhat academic in the larger car.

We have a completely different perspective over here, of course, and
that _may_ account in part for Audi's attitude.

0-60 times are no longer used in advertisements.  Partly because the
Government frowns on them for safety reasons [make any comments about
our Government in this regard, and I'll respond with "air bags"] and
partly because it's irrelevant to how we drive.

Over here, handling, safety and economy are top of the agenda.  The
size of your engine gives you know bragging rights whatever.  Indeed,
in those flagships that use huge engines (big Mercedes, Rolls-Royces)
I only know the actual engine capacity from US sources - in Europe, it's
almost never mentioned.

Now look at Audi's position.  They're obviously European, selling
quintessentially European products.  If they built them to imitate
Detroit monsters, they'd lose their essential differentiator.

Damnit - they've put friggin' _CUPHOLDERS_ in!  What more do you want?

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