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

Re: MB vs RR

..>From: Dave Lawson <dlawson@digitalglobe.com>
..>Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 08:51:45 -0700
..>smoother motor, more power, more low down torque and better gearing, revised
..>suspension to further decrease understeer, better brakes and lower miles on the
..>car you purchase.  oh and lower maintenance costs....
..>A few questions here: 
..>better gearing? were the ratios revised for the 20V turbo ur-q? I'm not aware of

yup, the ratios were changed as follows:

1983 ur-q 10v (wr)
gear ratios: 1st 3.60, 2nd 2.125, 3rd 1.360, 4th 0.967, 5th 0.778, final 3.889

1988 ur-q 10v (mb - torsen)
gear ratios: 1st 3.60, 2nd 2.125, 3rd 1.458, 4th 1.071, 5th 0.778, final 3.889

1990 ur-q 20v (rr)
gear ratios: 1st 3.60, 2nd 2.13, 3rd 1.36, 4th 0.97, 5th 0.78, final 3.89

sport quattro
gear ratios: 1st 3.50, 2nd 2.083, 3rd 1.368, 4th 0.962, 5th 0.821, final 3.875

1994 s2 coupe
gear ratios: 1st 3.50, 2nd 1.88, 3rd 1.32, 4th 1.03, 5th 0.85, 6th 0.71, final 4.11

..>revised suspension? I have heard that some 20V turbo ur-qs came with cast 
..>AL a-arms up front. Is this what your car has? Maybe Phil can check his fiche
..>and post up some info on what parts of the suspension was revised.

suspension was tweaked for the 20v.  not precisely sure what was done though.

..>better brakes? The MB ur-qs got the 2 piston front calipers and I'm not aware
..>of the 20V turbo ur-qs getting anything different. What does yours have?

ventilated rears but same size (276mm front, 245mm rear).

'93 s2
'90 ur-q