The A4 wasn't that of a mystery to me :-). I picked the A4 based on the
numbers and the suspension goodies. Both cars have good low end torque.
Lets see.
TT, 2900/170 = 17.059 for torque to weight.
A4, 3300/207 = 15.94
It's not the weight, but what the car can do with it. The TT has worse
specs than a MX-6. Now put the same suspension in the TT and a LSD, and you
might stand a chance.
---JCG
----- Original Message -----
From: Kevin McCormick <ktm@unify.com>
To: 'Joe Goeke' <buttheat@hotmail.com>; <autox@autox.team.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 02, 1999 12:54 PM
Subject: RE: Type R: G Stock in 2000? "Dreaming...."
> Of course that's what they thought of the A4, and DSM cars... :-) And, as
> we know, German cars seem to be faster than the sum of their parts.
>
> The Toyota is supposed to weight 24xx lbs (Autoweek article) with a
6-speed.
> No LSD probably though.
>
> Kevin McCormick
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Joe Goeke [mailto:buttheat@hotmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, September 02, 1999 12:35 PM
> > To: Kevin McCormick; autox@autox.team.net
> > Subject: Re: Type R: G Stock in 2000? "Dreaming...."
> >
> >
> > The Audi TT would be at best competitive with the "regular"
> > GS cars. I
> > doesn't have the A4 multilink suspension, it's only FWD with
> > no limited
> > slip, and it weighs 2900 (ask Curtis Ames who weighed his at
> > the Boise Div).
> > I'd love to try one, but if it could keep up with and A4 sport, I'd be
> > surprised. Don't know much about the new Celica, but if I
> > know Toyota, it
> > will be heavy.
> > ---JCG
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Kevin McCormick <ktm@unify.com>
> > To: <autox@autox.team.net>
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 1999 8:14 AM
> > Subject: RE: Type R: G Stock in 2000? "Dreaming...."
> >
> >
> > > And don't forget the 2000 Audi TT w/180hp and WAY more
> > torque than a Type
> > R.
> > > Oh, and the new Toyota Celica with 180 hp as well. Seems like GS is
> > getting
> > > redefined with tons of competitive cars.
> > >
> > > Heck, I think my 3.0l Mercury Villager can pull a Type R at
> > low revs!
> > >
> > > Kevin McCormick
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: David Fauth [mailto:dfauth@net-mgmt.com]
> > > > Sent: Monday, August 30, 1999 11:04 PM
> > > > To: autox@autox.team.net
> > > > Subject: Re: Type R: G Stock in 2000? "Dreaming...."
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Actually, the Type R has 15x6" wheels, as compared to the
> > > > 14x6" of the Neon.
> > > > Both cars can only fit 225 width tires. True, the Type R has
> > > > 2 ft-lbs less
> > > > torque(130 vs 132), but the peak comes at 7500rpm(195hp @
> > > > 8000). Since I
> > > > own both a 98 Neon ACR and a 98 Type R, I can tell you that
> > > > the Neon WILL
> > > > pull the Integra in the low rpm range with its fatter
> > torque curve.
> > > >
> > > > David
> > > > Dfauth@net-mgmt.com
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 20:48:36 -0400
> > > > From: "Phillip S. Osborne" <psosborn@gte.net>
> > > > Subject: Re: Type R: G Stock in 2000? "Dreaming...."
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yep, they sure do. They also have wider 15" wheels,
> > > > (compared to the Neon's
> > > > 14.") And at 195hp(?), about 45 more hp than the ACR coupe,
> > > > and nearly 60
> > > > hp more than an ACR sedan. Torque numbers are about the same...
> > > >
> > > > Phil O.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
|