[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Your mail could not be delivered because of the following reason:
----- Transcript of session follows -----
Executing: /usr/bin/uux - -gI ncrhub4!rmail (columbiasc.attgis.com!david.moxley)
uux failed ( -1 )
server "/usr/bin/uux" failed - unknown mailer error 1
----- Unsent message follows -----
>From quattro Tue Jan 31 11:43:34 0800 1995 remote from swiss.ans.net
Received: by swiss.ans.net id AA12552
(5.67b/IDA-1.4.4 for quattro-outgoing); Tue, 31 Jan 1995 14:43:44 -0500
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 11:43:34 -0800 (PST)
From: u.washington.edu!eliot (Eliot Lim)
Subject: Re: RE: 1993 90CS
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Tue, 31 Jan 1995 PDQSHIP@aol.com wrote:
> The 325i might be a more formidable foe, C&D road test got the coupe to 60 in
> 6.7 sec, I believe the 90cq was at 8.0.
Crap and Drivel (tm) also got 6.4 seconds out of the Integra. go
drive that car sometime and see how bogus the number is. i won't get
into why i think it is so far off. i have driven the 325i quite a bit
and i can say with quite a bit of certainty that the corrado vr6 will
blow it into the weeds, whatever number that C&D says it will do from
0-60. in short, don't bet your house on Crap and Drivel(tm).
> Weather wise, your q has the advantage, but the well balanced 325, with its
> limited slip and proper tires will put your q to the test in all but the
> slippery of conditions... Then there's that sleepy M3, ouch!
the 325i will be faster than the 90, i agree. if the 90Q has an
advantage in slick conditions some of that is nullified by the
servotronic steering. i would put my money on the 325i.