A4 2wd vs Quattro
#23
![Default](https://www.audiworld.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I had a 98.5 2.8 FWD tip sport that I swapped for a 99.5 1.8TQMS...after driving both in the wet, I'll say this:
I felt safer and more confident in the 2.8 FWD with ASR (traction control). I could take a corner in the wet as hard as I wanted and ASR would back off the throttle and ease on the brakes to make the corner. You could do no wrong.
My new quattro will understeer and oversteer depending on throttle...so I could probably go as fast through the corner and accelerate out FASTER than before, BUUUUUUT...if you don't get it just right: NO TRACTION...wreck. I was reintroduced to oversteer in this car...if you're coming into even a low speed corner and lift off the throttle, the back end will come out.
steve
I felt safer and more confident in the 2.8 FWD with ASR (traction control). I could take a corner in the wet as hard as I wanted and ASR would back off the throttle and ease on the brakes to make the corner. You could do no wrong.
My new quattro will understeer and oversteer depending on throttle...so I could probably go as fast through the corner and accelerate out FASTER than before, BUUUUUUT...if you don't get it just right: NO TRACTION...wreck. I was reintroduced to oversteer in this car...if you're coming into even a low speed corner and lift off the throttle, the back end will come out.
steve
#24
![Default](https://www.audiworld.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
quattro, so I am having a hard time selling ,mine. I added Kumho's and can't break it loose in the rain at all!!
#26
![Default](https://www.audiworld.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I have driven '97 1.8T both FWD and Quattro.
The FWD seemed zippier, meaning it weighed at least 250-350 lbs. lighter (which is noticable). Just a driver versus fully loaded 5 passengers is noticable too (in a 1.8T at least).
I forgot the weight penalty to HP "loss" formula, but the 1.8T FWD is quicker off the line (assuming it is a straight dry line)
The sheer physics of the power coming from a front mounted engine and being transferred to the rear adds a slight delay in power transmission, inherent power loss due to friction of gears and driveshaft/axels... and all this hardware adds weight too (as mentioned before).
If you live in some place like Denver or Seattle, or you love going Alpine trekking/skiiing... don't settle for anything but Quattro.
To be honest, do you think anyone who drives a Quattro would complain about it and tell you to save the $1700 and get a FWD??? I doubt it. Just as everyone who has Xenon would tell you it was well worth it.
Who wants to feel like they wasted their money??? Not me.
A $400 chip to increase horsepower by 30-40%... now that's a deal!
The FWD seemed zippier, meaning it weighed at least 250-350 lbs. lighter (which is noticable). Just a driver versus fully loaded 5 passengers is noticable too (in a 1.8T at least).
I forgot the weight penalty to HP "loss" formula, but the 1.8T FWD is quicker off the line (assuming it is a straight dry line)
The sheer physics of the power coming from a front mounted engine and being transferred to the rear adds a slight delay in power transmission, inherent power loss due to friction of gears and driveshaft/axels... and all this hardware adds weight too (as mentioned before).
If you live in some place like Denver or Seattle, or you love going Alpine trekking/skiiing... don't settle for anything but Quattro.
To be honest, do you think anyone who drives a Quattro would complain about it and tell you to save the $1700 and get a FWD??? I doubt it. Just as everyone who has Xenon would tell you it was well worth it.
Who wants to feel like they wasted their money??? Not me.
A $400 chip to increase horsepower by 30-40%... now that's a deal!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Rodney
Audi A3 / S3 / RS 3
11
06-14-2005 09:35 PM