Decision time

LL - NY larrycleung at
Mon Jan 12 10:48:55 PST 2009

I know you are correct there, but there was an awful lot to be considered in
terms of the predictability on course (since I primarily autocrossed the
thing). The car never had an exess of power (and the 1.8 16V's real power
band was too far up to be useful carving cones, 2.0's OTOH...) but it was
competitve in class right up until the fallen tree took her out, whereas the
1.8 16Vs were classed in a class they weren't competitive in. They
eventually got moved down to the same class as the 8V's, but by then I was
without a decent Autocrosser (damn storm/tree!).


On 1/12/09, Henry A Harper III <hah at> wrote:

 My take on the "8v has
> more torque" issue is that the 8v SEEMS to have more torque because it's
> all
> there (and that's all you get) down low; the 16v builds more power at the
> top end that makes the low end seem weak. Seems like I have seen dyno
> charts
> that show the 16v with same or greater torque everywhere.

More information about the quattro mailing list