i know all u "manly" snobs insist on RWD;its purer,better handling,blah blah. to a certain extent i agree,but for 24/7 mile-munching,nothing TOUCHES a quattro. audi's handling "demise" is well documented in all motoring publications.souless,dull,blah blah.c'mon! let's be completely honest;u do not pay top dollar for a mishandling luxury car. remember those gala dinners and parties that run late til the morning?a sleepy drive home is the LAST thing u need in a RWD car. i happen to own many RWD performance cars.some have led to "interesting" excursions due to lack of sleep(i travel a lot). my daily driver is a 1997 A6 2.8q and i have to admit,"boring" as it is,i have nothing but praise for the damn thing.in the wet it eats M3s and 360 modenas. even bentley and lamborghini have woken up to this fact.to all those still sceptical,go out and drive ur m3/merc quickly in pouring rain/snow. then drive an audi quattro.dull?no.just darn competent. magic handling indeed.wake up and get a quattro! p.s-original is best;audis only.or u can look like a complete **** in an evo/imprezza/skyline.fine as they are,they make lambos look gentlemanly. i happen to actually love RWD;and own an aston vantage,lambo lp400 and a maserati ghibli cup....it's just that i believe a rear biased quattro system is the future...did someone say 2006 RS4? Image Unavailable, Please Login
I'm happier being a 'Impreza driving ****' than have the limp-wristed feel of a new Audi... I drove my friend's A4 3.0 and the steering was distant and disappointing. Even as a manual, the drive was less than thrilling.
ryalex,i do understand ur comments on the a4 3.0v6q... but that's kinda the point i posted this topic anyways. audis are regularly lambasted by the press(amusingly even american journalists...who claim that the mustang is a revelation whilst every other journo thinks its utter tosh...i mean,c'mon!live axle?!?) and even i have some reservations on the "audi" syndrome:- harsh(ish) ride,dead steering and "boring" handling. the engineers at audi actually made the cars like this,and are now(grudgingly) adding some "directness" and "fun" into their cars. try the 2006 b7 a4 2.0tq and u'll see my point. the thing is,audi engineers cater for BOTH enthusiasts and ppl who prefer stability and comfort. say what u want about the evo/imprezza/skyline,but they still have audi quattro '84 styling cues and dodgy images.if u want to look at least like u dont live with ur parents and read "asian hosewive's confessions",then buy a sober(craply styled) legacy. what audi quattros offer are a REAL WORLD mix:- potent ability,stability and comfort as well as a RESPECTABLE image. go drive an evo or imprezza to a country club.u'll see what i mean.
First, don't diss stuff you haven't driven. Second, we have an 06 W12, I really like the car, I'm on the list for an RS4, and I am a longterm BMW owner now disenchanted with that company. Audi needs to get their marketing **** together here. Most paying customers don't give a damn about heritage in their sedans. Rally or otherwise. If they did, QP and Audi would be selling better than they are. Heritage sells sportscars somewhat, but price, build quality and dealer network sells cars. URQuattro was great car, as was Sports Q, but too fringe for most. Electronic aids have obviated need for 4wd for most people, despite your protestations. It is a status item, mostly, and people don't need to drag around an extra set of driven wheels/diffs for market runs. Scoobies and Evos are fun, but they are playing in Miata/350Z class, Audi is in big dog class. They need to get lease deals in line too, as most people buy on price/payment in A4/A6 ranges, and AoA is NOT competitive on deal or residuals. Until that changes, sales stagnate. That, and remove the godd*m governor off our W12.
Quattro please follow the following http://www.blackhawkcollection.com/index.cfm?key=873&action=details&tab=inventory Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
if im not mistaken the original quattros used a fixed diff distributing 50:50 of power.locking the diffs were a rally/snow/supermarket carpark trick! audi religously did the 50:50 torque split up til today's rs4,which has a 40:60 torque bias.this improves "enthusiatability";the car is now more "sports-car" in feel instead of just being the competent all-rounder that it already was. just look at these stats!(2006 RS4) 4.2l v8 420bhp/317lb ft torque 6-spd manual Quattro;40:60 split(but up to 90:10 depending on conditions) 1640kg 0-62 4.7s,0-125 16.5s ,Vmax 192mph Image Unavailable, Please Login
I love my Audi Quattro S4 twin Turbo.. Nothing like it in the snow!!!! Great fun racing light to light... Advantage of the all wheels drive to the rear wheel drive makes the rear wheel drive car (more often then not) appear as if they are going backwards.... LOL
I've owned several Audis and a couple of UrQ's, my daily driver for several years being one of the 73 '85's (last year for US sales) sold in the US: After tweaking the engine (IA chip, more boost, and hotter cam) and the suspension I ended up with one of the best cars I've ever driven. Equally comfortable on the track, on the ice, or on the highway. Comfortable and stable. But it also broke a lot and was the most difficult car to work on I've owned (308GTB is cakewalk compared to this). Stock the UrQ was a decent car, but by no means earthshattering. Considering they cost more than a 911 (and almost the same as a 308) I'm surprised Audi sold as many as they did. Audi's cars are very competant but lack the "edge" BMW has. While driving an Audi quattro may be very comfortable, it's simply more "fun" to drive the equivalant BMW. One of my Audi buddies has faithfully bought just about every new A4, TT, and A6 models... the only one I've driven that I liked as much as my UrQ was the newer V8 S4... and even there I'd be hard pressed to spend my $50k on that over an M3. EDIT: Oh yeah, that new Audi "nose" is doing to Audi what Bangle did to BMW.... Bill Image Unavailable, Please Login
That's only because it's FUGLY! As soon as I saw the new ones, I went out and bought a low mile 2004 S4 so I wouldn't have to look at the nose on the new ones!
Thanks, but I'd rather have the Ford RS200 http://www.blackhawkcollection.com/index.cfm?key=803&action=details&tab=inventory Image Unavailable, Please Login
wouldnt it be nice if WRC developed in parallel to F1? i understand group b rallye was incredibly dangerous;but so was f1. imagine what kind of rallye weapons would be around today... probably 1000bhp 4wd supercars that can be driven on ANY terrain yet post times of about 6min around the nurburgring! c'mon manufacturers,WRC is probably the only real-world stage for ur cars!
no,i dont think they do run parellel! f1 has improved by leaps and bounds in terms of vehicle safety,dynamics,speed as well as driveability and technology. WRC,on the other hand;has moved at a snail's pace in comparison. today's drivers are shocked by how quick the 572bhp 1985 audi sport quattro is compared to TODAY's 300bhp wrc cars.
I think that WRC has improved tremendously in the safety areas - AFAIK there hasn't been a multiple death season like Group B in 1986 since that time. Still, there are limitations to how fast you can go on gravel and rough roads - it is not a controlled-surface environment like F1.
Unfortunately, the esimated price of the RS4 is $80,000! My all time favorite is the Quattro Sport available in '84 or '85, the one they built to satisfy homogulation requirements for Group B rallying.
The surface is not as well controlled, but the cars are run individually - surely that eliminates a lot variables and aids driver safety. I would love to see something like group B return to motorsport. Sadly (for the fans) that probably won't happen. Image Unavailable, Please Login
