Re: Magazine rant (was Sorry if I ever defended Detroit, etc.)

[Elliott Potter <epotter@abraxis.com>]

Scott Fisher wrote:
> 
> Quoting Elliott Porter (even if a bit out of context here):
> 
> > and if it had a manual transmission,
> 
> I'm not sure that would even make a difference.  I was reading a review
> of a 6-cylinder Audi from Road & Track some time ago, and was struck by
> two comments.  Neither was particularly objectionable alone, but taken
> together, well...
> 
> One was describing how smooth the shifter was, and what a pleasure it
> was to change gears.
 
OK, OK, everyone's pointing that out.  But what of the new A6?  Or the
new A8?  That's what was on my mind.  The 12v A6's, before the new body
style, did have optional manual transmissions if I'm not mistaken.  I'm
thinking more of the new ones.
And the new automatics are wretched; comparing a '93 90 automatic
transmission to a '97 A4 automatic transmission, both on the same engine
- the 90's automatic "feels" much faster.  I don't know the performance
figures for the A4, so I don't know which one is faster, but I get the
impression that in the A4 they gave up some grunt to get extra smooth
shifts.

> The other comment was about how the power all seemed to come in the
> upper reaches of the powerband, which made passing times overlong.
 
Hmmm...on the 12v V6?  The 12v's 'sweet spot' for passing is around
2800-3400rpm's, hardly the upper reaches.  It's not bad in that area,
but c'mon, that's hardly enough to have any fun.  Especially if you've
got an automatic transmission :)
--
Elliott