[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: Sad but true, TQC < TQ
It sounds as if you may have proven that a very hard suspension (urQ)
isn't as well suited to the real world as a more stock suspension
(5KT). You have modified the car which was likely set up stiffer in
the first place, and made fewer changes to the family car. Bad
On a flat track, stiffer springs coupled with rock-hard Konis (set to
max hard you say) and larger (read heavier) tires will be great
because it keeps the car flat and responsive. On a real road,
however, every item listed will reduce the compliance of the
suspension which reduces traction on rough surfaces. It's a relative
thing, but your comment that the urQ is flatter but drifts too much
sure points that way for me.
I'll admit I'm biased, owning an urQ, but frankly I didn't buy it to
race it and the incredible speed, stability and confidence the car
offers under all conditions suits me just fine.
Sad but true, TQC < TQ
Well, guys, the jury is in, at least for me. As you might know, we
'82 urq, a '87 5000CS TQW, and a '90 V8 Quattro. Ever since we got
wagon and upped the boost, I've wondered if it was faster and handled
than my beloved urq. To be brief, it is and does. It's sad to say,
5ktq is the hands down winner.
My urq is very modified with ABT stage 3 computer, 2+ bar of boost,
performance springs (NOT the lowering springs), Koni's set to full
ferrodo street/track brake pads. It has a new K26 turbo, manifold,
(yes, new head) with Schrick cam. The cat is replaced with a straight
and the exhaust is unrestrictive. I have cloth seats and a 4 point
Broken in Sumitomo 225/45/16 on BBS light 3 piece wheels are under it.
SHOULD kick the mostly stock 5ktq's butt. It does not.
The 5ktq has new Boge turbo gas front struts, 1.7 bar of boost with a
wastegate spring, and Dunlop D60 A2 tires on the front a one Uniroyal
one Goodyear VR rated tires on the back. These are on the stock 15x6
wheels. The 5ktq has new slag masters on the front. Both have about
I have to say, the urq FEELS faster, but on the very challenging
roads to our house, it is much slower when timed. It also doesn't
quickly, so I couldn't go that deep into the turns. The urq was
the turns (probably because it is lower), but it drifts a lot more
than the tq.
I am very disappointed. All I could think about was how I would trade
car in a minute for an S4, 5-speed V8, '90 200 wagon or '91 200 (yes I
the '91 is a 20v). Unless I do an engine upgrade to the newer 10v or
and replace the antiquated fuel injection computer, I don't think this
is going to get any quicker. An even if I did, the handling is the
it's going to get. I can solve the stopping problem by installing the
piston calipers I have sitting in my garage, though. And I resigned
definitely do that now before the track days start up again.
Sorry to start this argument up again guys, but I though you might
know. BTW, the 5ktq is much quicker than the V8. I think the V8's
is too "vague"; obviously they were going for luxury here.
I think I'll sell the urq and buy a high mileage 5ktq for a couple of
and turn IT into a full time track car.
Quattro Club (regional & national) member