[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: urQ vs 944T
- To: quattro list <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: urQ vs 944T
- From: Dave Eaton <email@example.com>
- Date: Tue, 02 Jul 1996 11:19:14 +0012
- Autoforwarded: false
- Disclose-Recipients: prohibited
- Hop-Count: 1
- Importance: normal
- Mr-Received: by mta MOEMR0.MUAS; Relayed; Tue, 02 Jul 1996 11:19:14 +0012
- Mr-Received: by mta CSAV10; Relayed; Tue, 02 Jul 1996 11:19:16 +0012
- Priority: normal
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Ua-Content-Id: 11A712D30600
- X400-Mts-Identifier: [;0514191102071996/A58367/CSAV10]
just for the comparison, i drove a friends 944t yesterday and let him loose on my 20v ur-q.
the 944t was an 87 with 85kms, the ur-q is a 90 with the same 85kms...
my thoughts are:
944t plus; brakes, gearbox, build
ur-q plus; performance, handling, build, involvement, sound
the 944t was an 8 valve so had around the same power as the 20v (210 vs 220hp). while it was
diffcult to pick the differece in top-end, the 944t had very little low down (in comparison to the
quattro). for normal driving, no comparison. plus the 944t sounds like a vacuum cleaner
while the quattro makes your spine tingle...
brakes on the 944t are surperb and the gearbox is like a switch.
the porsche had a mutiltude of rattles in the dash, although overall quality was very good
(paint, fit and finish etc). much better than any 10 yo "row" (non german). the quattro has the
same standard of fit and finish with no rattles (oops, there is 1 in the radio).
handling on the 944 is initial understeer (combined with heavy lifeless steering feel) with a
switch to oversteer on the boost. the quattro just sticks with a lovely positive "talkative"
thats about it. the 16v s model might be a different car...
oh and the 944t is worth about 15k less in nz than the 20v quattro.