RE: FS: '87 4kq Turbo

["TM" <mizutanit@mindspring.com>]

When Pat started talking about 400hp 4ktqs, I'd say that
a used Evo IV (since you mention Evo IV, not VI), will easily
blow a 4ktq into the weeds and is comparable in price. You can
get an Evo IV for around $25-30k, some modded to over 350 bhp.
Are you telling me that a prepped 4ktq with 400hp is going to
cost less than that?

Anyway, we all should know that it's the driver that counts a
lot more than the car. I'll wager that someone with Michael
Schumacher's skills or the late Ayrton Senna's skills would easily
give any of these people you mention a run for their money on
the track, even with a significantly lesser powered car.

>From what I've heard and seen, most of the 993 turbos you see are
not driven by the most competent drivers. After all, not that many
people can afford such a car, so the pool of competent drivers who
are also economically qualified to own such a car becomes very slim.

And stop talking about an old Evo IV being $80k. A true $80k Evo IV
would be a real track monster and I doubt that any Audi short of the
full-on race cars could keep up. There's good reason why the Brit
car mags are so hot on the Mitsubishi Lancers and Subaru Imprezas.
They're fast all around- straight line and corners. There's not much
that can keep up with these cars that is still production-based. 

This whole discussion is getting silly. As you said, apples to pumpkins.
A 4k and a 5k are totally different cars, comparing them is rather
silly. I wouldn't compare a Chevy Tahoe with a Corvette, although they
are both Chevys. I would rather have a 4ktq for a track car, yes. However,
as a daily driver, I need a car with interior space and luggage capacity,
and the 4k just doesn't work for me. To each his own.

Taka Mizutani
'86 5kcstq
'99.5 A4 Avant 1.8TQ