[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: urQ vs 944T

but which 951 (944 t) did they test?  the '86-88 951 sold in the US and RoW
had about 200hp--comparable to an ur-q sold in the RoW.  but the '88 turbo S
and '89 turbo (same as '88 turbo S) put out about 250hp.  and the last 944s,
the S2 ('89-91), put out about that much from a NA 3.0L 4.  don't know that
I'd muck with these guys too much.

At 10:41 AM 6/28/96 -0800, Richard Funnell wrote:
>A recent thread compared the urQ to the 944T, and it was claimed that the
>944T was much faster.  I feel obliged to defend the honor of the urQ (not
>that I'm at all biased, of course).
>What Car did a comparison test a few years ago, and it is reprinted in the
>Brooklands "Audi Quattro Gold Portfolio" (pg 116).  The Audi tested faster
>in acceleration from 0 to the lower speeds, with the Porshe edging it out
>starting at about 0 to 60.  In the overall choice, What Car gave the nod to
>the Quattro, which at that time (9/86) was an older model.
>Any urQ fans should get this book.  Whenever your car is urQing you with
>its repair bills, glance at a few articles in this book to remind yourself
>what kind of machine you have.
>Richard Funnell,
>San Jose, California
>'83 urQ
>'87 560 SL
* linus toy           email:  linust@interramp.com                   *