pantg at otenet.gr
Thu Jun 13 16:57:01 EDT 2002
I can too attest to the RS2 (as a car) being lythargic below 3000 rpm when
compared to what happens about 3000 (or better still 3500) rpm.
On the other hand AUDI DRIVER magazine had posted some time measurements
some time ago where it was apparent that the main problem is that most
people compare the on boost surge of the RS2 with its somewhat lazy ways
below the on boost rpm.
But what I can say from experience my 2.800 Kgr heavy Camel Discos (land
rover Discovery 200Tdi) feel more spirited when compared to the RS2 at 2000
rpm. (not discussing about speed, just the way they pull from tickover to on
boost rpm levels. But then again those are diesel, four cylinder inline, two
valve per cylinder engines. Very much like comparing a jet airfighter with a
Cessna for low speed low level ease of flight)
----- Original Message -----
From: Dave Eaton <Dave.Eaton at clear.net.nz>
To: <quattro at audifans.com>
Cc: <urq at audifans.com>; <torsen at audifans.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 3:35 AM
Subject: RE: RS2 turbocharger
> we have a number of people posting with direct experience of the rs2 in
> differing applications (only 1 of which is an rs2 avant) who all say the
> same thing, i.e. forget it below 3,000.
> that's a bunch of stopwatches who would take btdt over a chart any day.
> '95 rs2
> '90 ur-q
> -----Original Message-----
> From: QSHIPQ at aol.com
> Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 20:03:55 EDT
> Subject: RE: RS2 turbocharger
> To: rpastore at animalfeeds.com, quattro at audifans.com
> Cc: urq at audifans.com, torsen at audifans.com
> I encourage you to look hard at the basics of turbo theory, airflow, and
> compare the two turbo MAPS. Porsche/kkk did a fantastic job on the RS2
> turbocharging unit, something else is kicking the car in the gut.
More information about the quattro