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

Re: spinning flags

Hey Josh:
A8 missed the mark, you miss the point.  Your Mustang experiences aside
(insert turned head and cough), not all cars can put 17in wheels on them and
claim improvements.

You may want to look at page 120.  Projected resale is used in EVERY single
lease, it's called residual value.  Historically (last 5 years for projecting
residual), BMW hits a higher mark, historically audi doesn't.  Been that way
for some time, sir.

>Could've been that they drove it wrong.  Could've been a lot of things.  Do
>you really know??  No way!!  They said it was the tires!!!  The tires the
>tires the tires the tires.  You disagree.  Fine.  Anyone can disagree with
>any part of that article.  You obviously don't disagree with the #3
>ranking.  Big deal
They blame the tires, Josh.  That's an opinion that has no reference.  So,
then, is yours.  There is also the fact that a 64/40 weight distribution
exists on the car.  I disagree cuz I drove one with different tires.  So I'm
thinking maybe the tires wasn't to blame.  It's an opinion in print, it must
be true.  Me, I'm just a goofball that drove the 'reference'.  So documented. 

Reread the article Josh.  From a money value standpoint, not your pref to
audis.  New cars, btw, are rated based on past history of residual value.
Betcha that number is pretty accurate.  Maybe an A8 leasee can post up.

>the US.  Ever driven a Pirelli P7000 Supersport?  That was developed for
>american roads and american tastes.  An all season high performance tire.
>Dunlop SP 9000?  Same trend.  You may change your tires when the nasty
>season (winter) hits.  I don't need to.  Quattro does just fine without a
>tire change.  My former Mustang, even with P7000SS tires did not...even
>with 600 lbs of sandbags in the trunk.  Traction control?  Threw 240 lbs of
>sand bags in the trunk of an LS400 - w/ traction control I still had sub
>par traction.  The tail was nearly as twitchy as the Mustang.  I'm not
>arguing brands of tires.  I'm arguing same brand of all-season tires, 2WD
>traction control vs. AWD.  With 2WD, I'd be stuck at the bottom of the
>driveway.  BTDT.  AWD has no problem when its unplowed!  But you probably
>knew that.
Your Mustang experiences makes me smile.  Do you really want to use that car
for any argument?  You are arguing brand of tires.  Before you make the awd
claim, you may want to go back in your C&D library.  You might be somewhat
surprised.  You are claiming experience (n=3, well actually 2.5 given the
above).  Tires and skill make the awd advantage moot, sir.  In experience, and
steamboat lap times.  Be really careful making the above claims, your 'n'
isn't high enough, and documentation doesn't back you.

>Please...I guess I need to spell it out for you.  Techo-aluminum structure
>implies lighter weight.  It wasn't directly mentioned, but implied.  That's
>why they thought it should've been quicker.  0.5 seconds is a big gap when
>mags compare cars.  Is it really that much?  No.  But magazines take it
It's just a single number.  One that combined with the others adds up to a
whole.  That sum, came up short.  They "thought it should've been quicker?"
Well they also "thought it was the tires".  A part of the sum total...

>Well how about a 45 series tire on a 3400 lb car.  That's the Mustang GT
>Convertible for you.  How about the tire on a '94 Porsche 928 GTS.  That's
>roughly a 4000 lb car (I think more, actually) with 40 series tires and 17"
>rims.  That car's ride is supple and it pulls in the 0.9 g area...depending
>on the brand of tire, of course. ;D
Maybe I can skip the first reference, since audi prolly would take a pass on
the benchmark of that ride.  Regarding the second, yup, can be done.  Can it
be done as a bolt on mod?  You seem to think so.  Given the weight
distribution and suspension of the audi, I just don't go there with you.  The
928 was designed to run 17in wheels.  

This is flag waving Josh.  YOU go drive the A8 and the 740 and pick apart the
C&D article, I have.  My goofy opinion is that they are dead nuts on.  You
want to look at the test...  Well that's one way to do it (coulda, woulda,
shoulda). I want Audi to win, I wouldn't buy the Lexus either.  However, you
drive one of these on a more open and objective rating, you may look at things
differently.  Did I run out and buy any bimmer?  Nope.  Instead, this audi fan
takes a finger and points it at Igolstat and says, hey, look what they gots.
What's with that?  What are you guys doing?  My own opinion of the A8, is that
the comparo should be to the 540 given the rear interior space.  I don't put
the A8 and the 740 in the same league except on price.  

>The A4 was released after the E36 BMWs.  And it has been judged better by
>some.  The E46 will likely be judged better than the current A4.  It should
>be...it's a reaction to the A4. 
No, the E46 is the replacement chassis.  It will be compared to the "new" A4.
And given history, Audi will scramble again, however, they are behind a few
years in the product cycle already.

> And the challenges will continue as we get
>better and better Audis.  In the C&D review, the A8 wasn't too far off the
>mark.  It was Audi's first stab at the big boys.  So they didn't win this
>battlein C&D's review...but now they've got something to work with at least.

The first stab at the big boys, should hit the mark, they had all the aces.
What happened?  Why isn't audi concerned with weight distribution?  Why would
audi even think of putting subpar tires on a 70k sedan?  (and I ask that of
the others as well, 'cept obviously not as key to their success equation).
These are all design questions.  Why use aluminum, for weight, when 'all' the
savings still puts 500 more pounds at the front than the rear?  For 320lb
savings vs a bigger, older, steel 740 makes me think someone needs to make the
engineers do more work.  For 320lbs, how bout ditching the mediocre awd, and
go rwd.  Why use fwd at all?  All the moves made on that audi, what were they
for?  To make them compete?  With what would be my question?  When rwd beats
awd in the test reports and historically a winner, what the heck is up with
fwd in the same mediocre sedan?  Hello?  I expect that from Saab, not from

You center a lot of your argument around awd.  I smile at that.  I've had many
a discussion with folks that think the same way.  A set of wheels and tires on
the right chassis, can moot the awd 'advantage', in traction, handling,
braking and control.  You want to argue that 'mericans are lazy and not that
smart.  Well you price a mediocre awd sedan high enough, and get a low enough
ranking, there are going to be some really dumb folk calling Tire Rack.  As a
whole, awd is a compromise.  Why, cuz there are other parts of the mix that
audi gives up to make the one claim.  In the meantime, the field stretches,
and audi plays catchup.  Leading beats following, IMO.  Right now, confidence
in that leadership is waning some.  

Waving the flag, doesn't change history.  Someone has to be focused on it
first.  The rest is nationalism.  At some point, my posts stop.  I'm thinking
when I see ***tang references in a quattro list post 4 times.  Appreciate your
thoughts Josh.