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

Re: Fastest stickiest Audi? Opinions welcome.

No, stock.  Which is actually probably the better way to measure - WE may
change our tires (heck, on my current car, which is not an Audi (the Audi
has been on order for six weeks), I've replaced the entire suspension and
wheels), but this is NOT normal behavior.  Further, since I'm leasing the
A4Q (all the better to get the 5-valve cylinders with in a few years), I
won't be making any drastic changes to it.

Philosophically, I guess the question would be:

Is AWD theoretically superior in dry conditions?

Practically, the question is:

Does the Audi AWD *package* perform as well as the BMW RWD *package* in dry

There are lots of variables you could fall back on... suspension pressure,
weight, engine, red cars having more propensity to slide sideways than
silver cars, etc., but what the typical person cares about it - will this
car perform better than that car?  Not "can it be souped up or modified to"
but "will it when I drive it off the lot".

I haven't seen any evidence that AWD is superior in dry conditions, but that
may be simply because BMW focuses on sportier driving than Audi.
Extrapolating that dry is just like wet and slick, only less so, I'd
-expect- better performance pressing the limits, but Audi doesn't get it there.


        Fringe (who is eagerly looking forward to his A4Q, and isn't a BMW
fan, really.)

At 04:59 PM 28-09-96 -0500, Alexei M Voloshin wrote:
>Were the skid pad and slalom tests conducted with both BMW and Q having 
>the same model tires?? 
>If not, I would attribute the the better performance of BMW to having  
>superior tires.
>AWD: *more weight, yet faster starts!
>     *top speed should be about the same. 
>     *maybe slower than FWD in mid range speed sprints, but I doubt that 
>the owners of TQ's will complain to much about lack of midrange burst.
>On Sat, 28 Sep 1996, Fringe Ryder wrote:
>> That's been a debate for a long time.  Under dry conditions, the Audi
>> skidpad values are lower than the equivalent BMW and the slalom is slower.
>> However, the Quattro often does better than the non-Quattro of the same Audi
>> for the skidpad.  
>> That doesn't give you a full picture of handling, but it does tell you that
>> perhaps AWD isn't the most important part.
>> Of course, the lack of Quattro gives you something else critical for great
>> handling - less weight.
>> To be honest, I wouldn't be buying a Quattro if I still lived in Los
>> Angeles.  It's a nice car, but the BMWs feel tighter and more tossable.
>> However, I now live in the PNW, where ice and frozen bridges are around much
>> more than I'd anticipated.  The BMWs are apparently better than most cars
>> for that, but not close to Audi Qs or even Subaru.
>> Regards