[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: any/all ur-q drivers (non-20v)

	... I sent this message as a direct reply earlier ... but since the
thread is continuing I thought I'd post it with a couple additional comments
... as I've reported on the qlist before, I have been able to beat older 5
liter Mustangs fairly easily in my '83 urQ (US spec).  It may not be quite
as quick right off the line, but when the turbo spools up it's gone.  That
was in stock form ... now that I've got an IA "chip" and adjustable WG setup
its even better.  

I would expect a European conversion to be even better ... the Euro cars had
200HP stock as opposed to 160 for the WX ... perhaps the Americanization was
botched.  Another thing that I notice is that many Audi turbos are what I
consider to be "deceptively quick" ... they seem to not be that quick when
you drive them alone, but when you can see how fast you're really going by
comparing against another adjacent car.  

While the boost gauge in the car is probably inaccurate, 1.5 bar is lower
than the max boost spec for the WX engine ... you should be seeing something
more like 1.7 ... perhaps there's a problem with a vacuum leak or the turbo
or wastegate have a problem.  
I guess I would consider it to be cheating in a way to compare a chipped 5k
to a stock QTC ... :-)  I too have a chipped '88 5kCSQ Avant and I am amazed
at how good a job Audi did with the design of the new rear suspension for
the 5k.  I've always felt that the 5k could take the twisties almost as well
as the QTC even though it has a bit softer suspension.  All that said, at
least to me there's a little something different about sitting behind the
wheel of a QTC (yes, even though all I've driven is the sorely lacking WX
equipped US spec version :) than driving the Avant.  The only car that I've
driven that has a similar flavor for me is the '91 v8q/5-speed ... I really
want to try that car out at the autocross track ... jsut to see such a big
car out there ... :-)

Steve Buchholz
San Jose, CA (USA)

> I experienced the same thing with my '82 urq.  Even though it was chipped
> and modified when I got it, the turbo lag of the early K-26 turbo was
> tremendous.  It was very underwhelming.
> When the new k-24 (ala S4) turbo was installed, the car was transformed!
> The entire RPM range was improved.  Now our car could be driven daily and
> in
> traffic like a regular car.  And it can really scoot when needed as well.
> Removing the AC compressor and condenser also transformed the handling of
> the car.  Prior to the modifications our chipped and lowered 5ktqw was the
> faster, "funner" ride.  Now the urq provides more grins, hands down, than
> any other car I have owned.
> Now if it would just start and run immediately when it is very cold
> outside,
> all would be silver lining...
> HTH.
> -----Original Message-----
> Went through the same thing as you when looking for a quick Quattro for
> street/track. Found every Urq I drove to be considerably slower than my
> chipped 5000. Also was very disappointed with the performance of the 20v
> NA
> coupes, particularly at this altitude (5000ft plus) - they have absolutely
> no low-end and very little mid-range torque. 
> My recommendation - get a 5000TQ (preferably 87 or 88) and chip it -- or,
> if
> you like smaller, quicker handling cars, get a 4000Q (85-87) and put a
> turbo
> motor in it.