RE: 2004 Audi TT

Steve Grauman escribió en el mensaje de noticias snipped-for-privacy@mb-m07.aol.com...

This sounds only logical to most of us, but apparently not to Audi.

Reply to
JP Roberts
Loading thread data ...

Everybody except apparently you seems to agree that the M3 is much more fun to drive. .

Believe it or not most people who can afford Euro 60k can also affort 100k here. I'm seeing it all the time. Alternatively, I can't see why people who cannot afford 100k would buy a 60 k car.

But regretting your buy is not.

Reply to
JP Roberts

Hairy One Kenobi escribió en el mensaje de noticias FoLKa.1623$ snipped-for-privacy@newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net...

It is not as much a matter of getting emotionally hurt as it is of getting your wallet hit for an S-badge, so who should go to the shrink?

Reply to
JP Roberts

"Steve Grauman" wrote

Isn't that the same engine block that Audi uses in the R8?

Peter

Reply to
Peter Smith

"JP Roberts" wrote

S4 after fuel delivery and turbo upgrades. And that's at the flywheel.

Peter

Reply to
Peter Smith

Hmm. More misunderstandings (I note that you've failed to answer any of the other points raised)

The "new" 225 engine is, as I'm sure you well know, the 225 engine that first appeared in the TT. A bit of research on your side should show-up the internal VWG market, and the cars due in te next year or two. Try Hoot.

H1K

Reply to
Hairy One Kenobi

Nothing like the old spinning thing, eh?

JP Roberts

Peter Smith escribió en el mensaje de noticias nz%Ka.4320$ snipped-for-privacy@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com...

Reply to
JP Roberts

Doubt it. Purpose made racing engine blocks are as light as possible to last the race distance. They would not be durable enough for road use. Would it use similar piston and sump layout? Probably. Apparently the Gallardo does not use the FSI (Audi acronym for direct injection in German language) that supposedly gives the R8 added power and improved fuel economy. The Pikes Peak and Nuvolari are "supposed" to use FSI though (quotes because you never know whther the engineers designed it in or of the marketers are checking out technology saleability on one off concept cars).

Is the R8 a V10 or V8 engined car?

Aar

Reply to
Aaron Daniel

You call a large sedan with AWD that does 0-60 in 4.3 seconds docile?

Reply to
Steve Grauman

He was not talking about the RS6 when he referred to a docile car - he was talking about 1.8T's.

Steve Grauman escribió en el mensaje de noticias snipped-for-privacy@mb-m17.aol.com...

Reply to
JP Roberts

I was referring to the latest 343PS coupe M3, but I would also add they might possibly be more fun when they work at all - apparently they got a lot of lemon engines.

JP

Steve Grauman escribió en el mensaje de noticias snipped-for-privacy@mb-m17.aol.com...

Reply to
JP Roberts

The 2003 Bentley car was powered by the same engine that's in the R8. The 2004 Bentley car has it's own engine, deisgned by Bentley Racing. But the chassis is still based on the R8's.

Reply to
Steve Grauman

"JP Roberts" wrote

Yeah. I prefer horsepower at the wheels myself, as that's something I have full use of.

Peter

Reply to
Peter Smith

Could you elaborate on the upgrades you have?

JP

Peter Smith escribió en el mensaje de noticias eYHLa.6247$ snipped-for-privacy@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com...

Reply to
JP Roberts

What do looks have to do with it? The WRX and Evo are both "boy racer" cars, and targetted at a different market than the S4. As Steve says, a motorcycle can blow away all the cars under discussion, but I doubt any S4 owner will say "damn, if I had only spent a quarter of the coin in order to get *that* thing..." No, the S4 buyer is likely to be more informed and less status-oriented.

"Further-evolved"? In what technical way?

What would the advantage be? The real advantage that would offset the licensing fees?

Another blowhard claim without support.

Spider

Reply to
Spider

Fine. I miss my good old days as a student, so don't waste any minute of it!

Regards,

JP Roberts

Peter Smith escribió en el mensaje de noticias Dv7Ma.7896$ snipped-for-privacy@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com...

Reply to
JP Roberts

Most magazines state that while the S4 may be safer and easier to drive, and maybe a tiny bit faster on well-paved fast bends - especially when wet, the M3 is sharper, gives you a better rush of adrenaline and provides more direct feel to the wheels. Now, I believe specialized magazine editors are more creditable than just any given one claiming otherwise.

Sure, especially if they've never test driven an RS and compared that to a "plain" S, which I bet is your position.

Do you happen to be my bank manager by any chance? I never said or implied I could or could not afford anything, so this kind of comment can only make anyone suspect you're the one who is struggling.

While I'd love to have and buy an RS6 right now, and I must say I look up to those who have one like Mr Bell, I'm right now thinking of replacing my '98

1.8TQ with a '04 one, namely the stock 190PS and have it tuned to 270-290PS, which in my case should be nearly enough. Also, I can't wait to see the new DSG implemented in the latest A4. With that and these turbo mods, the A4 could easily do the 0-100 in 5.6 s, which is the same as the new 04 S4. I know the S4 will be on the whole a much better car and more fun to drive, but then again it's going to cost a lot more, and consume accordingly more and I'll really enjoy seeing S4's faces when seeing an apparently plain stock A4 is keeping pace with them.

See above on why you might regret a new S4 not having a turbo.

JP Roberts

Reply to
JP Roberts

Sorry, C&D tested the B5 S4 at 0-60 in 5.5 and the B6 S4 at 0-60 in 5.2

Reply to
Steve Grauman

"JP Roberts" wrote

Reply to
Peter Smith

Because that's why the S4 is differentiated from the Evo/WRX. The S4 competes in the same segment as the M3. While I understand that your main focus is on how fast the car goes, others may want more. Thus, a carmaker might target *that* audience. Funny how that works, huh?

Then everyone would buy Civics. But to some folks, bang for the buck is NOT the most important factor. They buy M3s, and Porsches and Audi S- and RS-cars. Or, on a more pedestrian level, the Evo over the regular Lancer, or the WRX over the regular Subaru sedan or wagon. Your contempt for marketing or your ideas about "bang for the buck" are not shared by all.

Or some combination thereof. You forgot luxury, which Audis have, and Evos and WRXs don't.

No, maybe their bank account is smaller. Or they do not need or desire the luxury of an S-car. But suggesting that an Audi purchaser is well-informed DOES NOT suggest that others are buying on a whim. It suggests that S-car buyers probably know already the performance parameters. And thus are not going to be regretting it when a boy-racer type buys a faster car.

LOL. I would also choose it as a rally car, and not the S4. Ground clearance is down the list somewhat!

Now you are getting it. The Evo can carry passengers, but not like what you would get in an Audi. And over long distances? Would you really want to take a long trip in an Evo?

The S4 is a more refined vehicle.

Which might suggest fewer repair bills as the miles pile up. The Evo and the WRX are wound pretty tight.

Sophistication? Then they don't know what sophistication is. The Evo and the WRX are far from sophisticated!

This is not a technical description, but a re-iteration of your original comment. Define the technical ways these drivetrain bits are better, or more suitable to task, than the TORSEN system.

This doesn't explain how that happens. Just saying something doesn't mean it's true. But it is a nice set-up for your strawman...

All I see is you claiming something without a shred of evidence. If you have links to technical explanations, then that's a start.

Spider

Reply to
Spider

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.