[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Opinions wanted: 200tq vs. urq vs ???(long)



Greetings listers,
The last few days, I've been having that gettin' restless
feeling WRT the Coupe on my driveway. I generally keep cars
for a few years (four, in the case of my previous
5kcst)...and I enjoy the CGT very much... but somehow, all
the machinery I'm taking out for brief runs at work is
getting to me. The wheels of change are turning- but in what
direction. Bear with me, I'm just venting on Audi relative
merits, nothing too metaphysical here.
I've driven a fair number of Audis, as well as the
competition. If I buy something else, it will likely be a
BMW 6-series (gotta buy a car based on looks *just once!*)
... living in AZ and venturing generally to the SoCal area
for recreation makes quattro necessary only as an aid to
handling, not inclement weather, in my case.
But keeping within the Audi realm:
I'm considering what my next car oughta be. My sister just
bought a '93 90S... that would be about maximum $ I could
spend- but truthfully, although she's very happy with it
(and I'm happy to see her driving behind the rings!)I don't
find that smoother, quieter Audi style very appealing. I
think my next Audi will still have five cylinders...
That being the case, am I unrealistic to expect that the NA
engines (20v excepted?) can't, stock, be *much* more
responsive than my '85 CGT-  80s, 90s, 100s all are heavier.
Since power is the chief reason I'm feeling ambivalent about
the CGT, I think this is a dead-end road. Am I wrong?
I'm thus moving in the direction of the turbo camp,
obviously. Having had a 5kt- I don't really find that a
worthwhile road to follow- I like variety too much. 5ktq or
200tq? Hmmm. Let's say I go for a hypothetical '89 200tq. Is
the hydraulic situation at all improved on the "second
generation" 44s? The parts look identical but for the o-ring
connectors used- and I've already done several hose
replacements on customer 100s- anecdotally, I figure this
aspect will be as infuriating on a 200tq as it was on my
5kt- am I far off here?
Hmmm. A 200tq, lovely as it is, is still more car than I
need, size/space/complex accesories wise. The Coupe's better
in this regard- PW, sunroof, and CC are all I'm after,
really. But that turbo kick... I get annoyed driving in the
mountains, missing the effortless whoosh of the 5kt.
See where I'm going with this? I am beginning to think that
actually, a ur-Q is *exactly* what I'm after. Granted, the
parts cost is nothing to sneeze at- but I can get a fair
discount through my job, so that's less of an issue than it
once was. Besides that, though: Can one of these beasts
really work well as a daily driver in this day and age- I'm
sure Rocky Mullin or Phil would respond affirmatively here?
(I know the car's engineering is up to hard, frequent use-
I'm more concerned about having it out of service due to
unobtainium at the parts counter)
You know, given the potential bother involved here, it might
be a good idea to have a second car and drive *that* to
work. Perhaps keep the Coupe for that . Or...
Seeing that I'm satisfied with the integrity of my
particular CGT in every area (except, I really should do
something about that tickin' manifold...)-and my only gripe
is that it doesn't have the punch of an MC- should I get
something else to drive (mayhap that customer's FS '84 CGT
in Zermatt silver??) while I take the learning curve and MC
the "Little Bastard"?? I know, as Javad is so frequently
reminding Audi newbies, that a turbomotor swap is nothing to
take lightly, project-wise. But really, if you follow my
above logic regarding my Audi tastes, I'm beginning to think
it's the best idea- I want the no-Pentosin, no-automatic AC
reliability of my CGT with at least the power of my 5kcst,
and really enjoy the character/style of the type 85, what
alternative is there?
Sorry for the ramble. I just know that some of you have
owned all the above and then some, could use some BTDT here:

200tq vs. urq(+ CGT?)vs. CGTt (+CGT?)vs. any other combo
that  might make sense given the above scenario, which for
some reason, I didn't already think of...
Regards,
Rob