Why doesn't Audi produce a Coupe or 2 door car.....
10-19-2003, 12:37 PM
#16
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,953
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, that's a pretty cool engine- BUT, unless they change the TT chassis, then it will still be the same thing- the handling probs have nothing to do w/the engine...
I till get pissed sometimes when I think of VW- 3.2L VR6- it's almost insulting- I mean HELL- they get 192HP out of the Corrado in 1992 w/2.9L- then, the whole aftermarket world spends THOUSANDS tricking them out- major mods being 3.0L & 3.1L via custom cranks- Christian Abt was supposedly running around w/a 3.6L for awhile- 5 or 6yrs ago...
Anyway, they make 192HP in 1992, the US Jetta & GTi only get 172HP- then get rid of Corrado altogether- it WAS a hair overpriced- the first one I saw tested was by C&D or R&T vs Eagle AWD Turbo- Corrado ran a 15.0 @ 94.x @ 1/4 & was only 1/10 sec ahead of the Talon to 60 & 1/4- 0-120 was the clincher- Corrado was 29.x & Talon was 41.x(!)- the Corrado was faster b/t 110 & 120 than b/t 100 & 110(!)- it has SHORT-*** gearing- later Corrados never did as well either- mostly 15.3 - 15.4- there was also a Jetta VR6 that got Shrick cams & manifold w/susp & wheels that went up against 4 or 5 other tuner cars w/a ~$5k limit- they said the Jetta was MUCH improved- it didn't even break into the 14's- it just didn't add up.
The Jetta, BTW, had 6 less HP 4 less TQ, weighed ~50lbs more & had TALLER gearing (FD only) than Corrado- A friend of mine went through 3 VR6 Corrados (2-late '93's & 1 '94- all distributorless) & then a VR6 Jetta- they ALL had, at least, chips, TB, conical filter along w/similar susp mods & wheels, etc- that Jetta would have whipped the Corrado's asses! We had it to ALMOST 150 one night- we were SOOOO CLOSE- just didn't quite make it- it was strong- no doubt would have broken into the 14's- I drove an S2 during that time frame & think the Jetta was faster(!). Goes to show the variation b/t production examples.
ANYWAY- VW TEASED us w/a few HP here & there w/the VR6's. THEN, the hot new thing becomes the 1.8L Turbos- they SAY that it is so much better b/c it's so much lighter- well, I thought that was a primary REASON for the VR6 in the first place(!?)- a light, small 6 to fit in the space of a 4(!?). Cast iron bottom end didn't help. Well, they come out w/W8's & W'12's- the W8 is like 419lbs- that's incredible- the 951 engine is 404lbs w/HALF the cylinders. VW finally comes out w/a 24v VR6 w/>200HP- was it 210? Even so, that's less than 20HP (from 2.9L VR6) w/TWICE the valves in 10 YEARS! I just don't get it- I like a lot of VW's, but it just irritates me- I don't see why the factory didn't do a 3.3L or even larger VR6 or at LEAST a 3.1L back then- tuners were getting well OVER 260 WAY back then w/3.1L- EIP gets >300HP/TQ...
NOW, the 3.2L comes out w/~240. WHY? Why can't they do a little more to begin with? I mean, the amount of $ it costs to upgrade those engines is high- 3.1L Crank is >$5K! A well optimized 3.1L stroked VR6 would put out ~305HP/TQ & cost $12k- $15K w/labor. Then you add susp mods, LSD, brakes, wheels, taller FD, etc- Corrado was ~$22k at first & went to almost $25K in the end- it ends up being ~$50K! You could mod a new E36M3 for that!
But, NOW they come out w/this barnstormer 3.2L w/AWD, 18" wheels, tight susp, 13" rotors, 4-piston calipers, etc, all for ~$25K(?)- I doubt it will be quite that cheap, but... Even STILL, they should easily be able to get 300 out of it at the factory- I read that it's supposed to run 1/4 in high 14's (~14.8)- seems slow considering a 15.0 Corrado...
Not meaning to rant- sorry for the long one- just doesn;t make sense to me- I STILL can't wait to see it though & I'll be glad to drive it if everyone here wants to pitch in & buy it for me...
I till get pissed sometimes when I think of VW- 3.2L VR6- it's almost insulting- I mean HELL- they get 192HP out of the Corrado in 1992 w/2.9L- then, the whole aftermarket world spends THOUSANDS tricking them out- major mods being 3.0L & 3.1L via custom cranks- Christian Abt was supposedly running around w/a 3.6L for awhile- 5 or 6yrs ago...
Anyway, they make 192HP in 1992, the US Jetta & GTi only get 172HP- then get rid of Corrado altogether- it WAS a hair overpriced- the first one I saw tested was by C&D or R&T vs Eagle AWD Turbo- Corrado ran a 15.0 @ 94.x @ 1/4 & was only 1/10 sec ahead of the Talon to 60 & 1/4- 0-120 was the clincher- Corrado was 29.x & Talon was 41.x(!)- the Corrado was faster b/t 110 & 120 than b/t 100 & 110(!)- it has SHORT-*** gearing- later Corrados never did as well either- mostly 15.3 - 15.4- there was also a Jetta VR6 that got Shrick cams & manifold w/susp & wheels that went up against 4 or 5 other tuner cars w/a ~$5k limit- they said the Jetta was MUCH improved- it didn't even break into the 14's- it just didn't add up.
The Jetta, BTW, had 6 less HP 4 less TQ, weighed ~50lbs more & had TALLER gearing (FD only) than Corrado- A friend of mine went through 3 VR6 Corrados (2-late '93's & 1 '94- all distributorless) & then a VR6 Jetta- they ALL had, at least, chips, TB, conical filter along w/similar susp mods & wheels, etc- that Jetta would have whipped the Corrado's asses! We had it to ALMOST 150 one night- we were SOOOO CLOSE- just didn't quite make it- it was strong- no doubt would have broken into the 14's- I drove an S2 during that time frame & think the Jetta was faster(!). Goes to show the variation b/t production examples.
ANYWAY- VW TEASED us w/a few HP here & there w/the VR6's. THEN, the hot new thing becomes the 1.8L Turbos- they SAY that it is so much better b/c it's so much lighter- well, I thought that was a primary REASON for the VR6 in the first place(!?)- a light, small 6 to fit in the space of a 4(!?). Cast iron bottom end didn't help. Well, they come out w/W8's & W'12's- the W8 is like 419lbs- that's incredible- the 951 engine is 404lbs w/HALF the cylinders. VW finally comes out w/a 24v VR6 w/>200HP- was it 210? Even so, that's less than 20HP (from 2.9L VR6) w/TWICE the valves in 10 YEARS! I just don't get it- I like a lot of VW's, but it just irritates me- I don't see why the factory didn't do a 3.3L or even larger VR6 or at LEAST a 3.1L back then- tuners were getting well OVER 260 WAY back then w/3.1L- EIP gets >300HP/TQ...
NOW, the 3.2L comes out w/~240. WHY? Why can't they do a little more to begin with? I mean, the amount of $ it costs to upgrade those engines is high- 3.1L Crank is >$5K! A well optimized 3.1L stroked VR6 would put out ~305HP/TQ & cost $12k- $15K w/labor. Then you add susp mods, LSD, brakes, wheels, taller FD, etc- Corrado was ~$22k at first & went to almost $25K in the end- it ends up being ~$50K! You could mod a new E36M3 for that!
But, NOW they come out w/this barnstormer 3.2L w/AWD, 18" wheels, tight susp, 13" rotors, 4-piston calipers, etc, all for ~$25K(?)- I doubt it will be quite that cheap, but... Even STILL, they should easily be able to get 300 out of it at the factory- I read that it's supposed to run 1/4 in high 14's (~14.8)- seems slow considering a 15.0 Corrado...
Not meaning to rant- sorry for the long one- just doesn;t make sense to me- I STILL can't wait to see it though & I'll be glad to drive it if everyone here wants to pitch in & buy it for me...
10-19-2003, 05:46 PM
#18
Rennlist Member
Originally posted by Robby
The A3 is really a hatch, so a three-door(?)- a coupe would TECHNICALLY not be a coupe, I don't think- no big deal though...
The A3 is really a hatch, so a three-door(?)- a coupe would TECHNICALLY not be a coupe, I don't think- no big deal though...
10-19-2003, 06:13 PM
#20
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,953
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Luis- I didn't know that- cool...
Alex- I didn't realize they were that common- oh well- as for their acceleration, I've seen one thing that said they'd be in hte high 14's- that definately faster than the 1.8T's- even 1.8T w/chips souldn't drop into 14's, but would be really close- maybe the 3.2's are slower than expected- In any event, they aren't NEAR as fast as one would think- kind fo sucks IMO- that's exactly my point about VW letting us down...
Kgain- nice pics- I STILL think I'd take YOUR 968 over it ANY DAY- your
s looks AWESOME- I've got a bunch of pics still saved from our discussion about speakers & door panels, etc...
I don't like the look of hte A/S3 vs the A/S4 as much- I just don't think it looks as good in a hatch- it IS nice for a hatch though- I don't plan to ever buy a hatch again- I like my 951, but, hatches just bug me to drive- they have so many little creaks & noises, etc that coupes (well, non-hatches) have- it get's annoying- they're doing better nowdays & definately serve a great prupose though....
Alex- I didn't realize they were that common- oh well- as for their acceleration, I've seen one thing that said they'd be in hte high 14's- that definately faster than the 1.8T's- even 1.8T w/chips souldn't drop into 14's, but would be really close- maybe the 3.2's are slower than expected- In any event, they aren't NEAR as fast as one would think- kind fo sucks IMO- that's exactly my point about VW letting us down...
Kgain- nice pics- I STILL think I'd take YOUR 968 over it ANY DAY- your
s looks AWESOME- I've got a bunch of pics still saved from our discussion about speakers & door panels, etc...
I don't like the look of hte A/S3 vs the A/S4 as much- I just don't think it looks as good in a hatch- it IS nice for a hatch though- I don't plan to ever buy a hatch again- I like my 951, but, hatches just bug me to drive- they have so many little creaks & noises, etc that coupes (well, non-hatches) have- it get's annoying- they're doing better nowdays & definately serve a great prupose though....
10-19-2003, 11:06 PM
#21
Administrator - "Tyson"
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
So you mean an updated version of this car?
