Car Forums  

Go Back   Car Forums > Vehicle Specific > European Imports
FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11-21-2006, 07:48 PM   #16
ngluvakov(euro)
CF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Mid europe
Posts: 110
History is history, you either know it or you don’t. You are right Cliffy. But still… Don’t take this personally, I don’t have intention to offend you. – After 8000 posts on forum that discusses about cars, you should have some experience. If not about the inventing FWD, then at least researching information you see on CF, to see if it is right or not. Never mind.
I think that very few people here lead constructive discussion, others just say: “You are wrong” without giving the facts why they think so (not referring to your last post here Cliffy). It is no wonder why people here end with no constructive thought about thread they started when we all try to go further from it like this example thread (including this post). You end up with 8000 posts, of which most are defending from someone or attacking someone.
I’m sorry Cliffy if I offended you. I take all my offensive (to you) words and parts in this post, before you even point out which one you don’t agree with, so you don’t need to quote me after this and tell me that I am wrong. Let’s continue discussion which started this thread. O.K.?
__________________
Gluvakov Nikola
ngluvakov(euro) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2006, 07:57 PM   #17
ngluvakov(euro)
CF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Mid europe
Posts: 110
__________________
Gluvakov Nikola
ngluvakov(euro) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2006, 09:11 PM   #18
Cliffy
CF Loafer
 
Cliffy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NE Hampshire, England, UK
Posts: 8,441
Quote:
Originally Posted by ngluvakov(euro)
History is history, you either know it or you donít. You are right Cliffy. But stillÖ Donít take this personally, I donít have intention to offend you. Ė After 8000 posts on forum that discusses about cars, you should have some experience. If not about the inventing FWD, then at least researching information you see on CF, to see if it is right or not. Never mind.
I think that very few people here lead constructive discussion, others just say: ďYou are wrongĒ without giving the facts why they think so (not referring to your last post here Cliffy). It is no wonder why people here end with no constructive thought about thread they started when we all try to go further from it like this example thread (including this post). You end up with 8000 posts, of which most are defending from someone or attacking someone.
Iím sorry Cliffy if I offended you. I take all my offensive (to you) words and parts in this post, before you even point out which one you donít agree with, so you donít need to quote me after this and tell me that I am wrong. Letís continue discussion which started this thread. O.K.?
I know you don't want me to quote you again but I will anyway, lol. I took offence to your original statement that I don't know much about the history surrounding cars. I'm by no means an expert, but history in cars is not just about antique or classic cars, or indeed the operating or mechanical systems surrounding them (such as the FWD system), infact, it's everything concering them that isn't about either the present day, or the future of them. You simply took one example, of which it's actually debatable as to whether I was wrong in the first place!

As for the post count, I have to make alot of posts that maybe I wouldn't make if I was a standard member, it's just how it goes unfortunately. I do suggest you do a search on me though, as your statements about me are false!
__________________


Please click here for the rules prior to posting, and here to introduce yourself!

Artwork courtesy of Gregg, aka Voda48
Cliffy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2006, 11:43 PM   #19
StiMan
CF Retired Post Whore
 
StiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
Posts: 2,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by ngluvakov(euro)
Amongst others Audi was never too loud with their models, but kept in shadow and just concentrating on building really good cars, unlike others who made spectacle out of every single model they put in mass production. Interesting is, how many innovations Audi made. They for example first put FWD, which today is used in 90% of cars made. They innovated 4WD which had (until they innovated it) very bad efficiency level. Wankelís engine was first put in Audi. They almost always came first with new materials for chassis, etc. Last year they won 24h of Le Mans with diesel, even though there is opinion that VW has primate on diesel field. They keep their work quiet and show the results at the end. I like it. Audi certainly is not my favorite make, but still there can be no denying that they are amongst the best of the best. What do you think?
BTW Audi didnt make the first Wankel-powered car, NSU did. Granted a few years later VW bought NSU and merged it with Audi (Auto Union), but the first Wankel was put in an NSU, not an Audi. I did a paper on Wankel last year.

If you dont believe me, heres some linkage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSU_Motorenwerke_AG

Back on topic, I love Audi's. They are certainly great cars. My family has owned two Audi's (1997 A4 1.8T and a 2003 A4 Cab 3.0) and several VW's (I only remember the 1989 Jetta). Gotta love the Quattro too.

__________________
John

StiMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2006, 12:34 AM   #20
True_Brit
Has a new job!
 
True_Brit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Falmouth, Backward County, UK
Posts: 2,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bronxie
I don't think they are horrible cars. I think there are better cars for the money in the same competing classes.

EXAMPLE: 2006 audi tt 1.8 liter comes with fwd standard as a coupe or roadster, costing 33000 and 35000 respectively...180 hp, turboed and all. Pretty damn slow 0-60...estimated at about 7.8 secs.

Compare that to the 2006 bmw z4. It doesn't come as a coupe, but the roadster is the same 35000. Much faster (est. 0-60 is 6.2) and more powerful. RWD. Not to mention, BMWs handle and drive much better than audis IMO.

is it me or are you comparing a faster car in a different class to one another???
clearly, the z4 is in a different class, plus theres one reason the tt is slower, its an 1800 where as the z4 is 2000-3000cc! as for the price, im guessing its dollars???

whereas, here in europe, the bog standard tt has a 2 litre engine, 200bhp, 6 speed box and a 150mph top speed for £23,860.00 and a bmw z4 of similar qualities can be had for the same price! (which also is slower than the tt!!! by 1/2 seconds to 60mph)

http://www.bmw.co.uk/bmwuk/pricesand...-bmwuk,00.html

http://www.audi.co.uk/audi/uk/en2/ne...fications.html
__________________

www.myspace.com/jhn123
Quote:
Originally Posted by BanffAutoSpa_ap
........Greek warrior cant reply because hes probably beating it like it owes him money.

Last edited by True_Brit : 11-22-2006 at 12:41 AM.
True_Brit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2006, 05:32 AM   #21
Bronxie
Dont know crap about cars
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Westchester Co., NY
Posts: 1,386
Quote:
Originally Posted by True_Brit
is it me or are you comparing a faster car in a different class to one another???
clearly, the z4 is in a different class, plus theres one reason the tt is slower, its an 1800 where as the z4 is 2000-3000cc! as for the price, im guessing its dollars???

whereas, here in europe, the bog standard tt has a 2 litre engine, 200bhp, 6 speed box and a 150mph top speed for £23,860.00 and a bmw z4 of similar qualities can be had for the same price! (which also is slower than the tt!!! by 1/2 seconds to 60mph)

http://www.bmw.co.uk/bmwuk/pricesand...-bmwuk,00.html

http://www.audi.co.uk/audi/uk/en2/ne...fications.html


A How are the tt and z4 in a different class? They're both sport luxury roadsters. Clearly they are 100% competing models. I don't even know HOW you could say they are not in the same class. Audi made the tt to compete with the z4 directly.

And I know why it's slower. That's my point. Their prices are exactly the same but the z4 is much faster. Mind you, the z4 has a 3.0l engine 215hp standard. The tt has a 1.8l turbo 180hp standard. Z4 is rwd and tt is crappy ass fwd.


I don't get your point man.

Also the new coupe isn't out here yet so I was comparing 06 models.
__________________


Driving a lotus is more thrilling than sex.

Last edited by Bronxie : 11-22-2006 at 05:34 AM.
Bronxie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2006, 12:20 PM   #22
ngluvakov(euro)
CF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Mid europe
Posts: 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bronxie
A How are the tt and z4 in a different class? They're both sport luxury roadsters. Clearly they are 100% competing models. I don't even know HOW you could say they are not in the same class. Audi made the tt to compete with the z4 directly.

And I know why it's slower. That's my point. Their prices are exactly the same but the z4 is much faster. Mind you, the z4 has a 3.0l engine 215hp standard. The tt has a 1.8l turbo 180hp standard. Z4 is rwd and tt is crappy ass fwd.


I don't get your point man.

Also the new coupe isn't out here yet so I was comparing 06 models.

Well, you can't just look at that from simplest point of view. 180 hp/1800cm^3=100 hp/l and the other one (z4) 215hp/3000cm^3=71.66hp/l , now, if we want to be more specific, then we have to go much further and divide base engine displacement with mass (1000kg) and multiply it with ratio of hp/l and then we get the result (which engine would better pull/push 1000kg), and all the ratios on hand so we can compare and argue forever Then if you want to see which car would go faster, you must divide first ratio with its own mass. Then you get other ratio. You must consider moment of inertia that will tell you how much of that power is actually grip, and so on... You can never be sure if you are right or not. We all have different standards. Maybe you all are right. You choose car you seem to like, not the one that has been stated as "Best buy". Who knows, maybe best car is the car in which you had your first kiss. But, the fact is, I believe no emotion. I take in consideration factors that I need in my every day drive and then divide them with price, so I get personalized ratio that I need to have when I am deciding for a car.
(refernig to my tripping)
__________________
Gluvakov Nikola
ngluvakov(euro) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2006, 01:10 PM   #23
Bronxie
Dont know crap about cars
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Westchester Co., NY
Posts: 1,386
Quote:
Originally Posted by ngluvakov(euro)
Well, you can't just look at that from simplest point of view. 180 hp/1800cm^3=100 hp/l and the other one (z4) 215hp/3000cm^3=71.66hp/l , now, if we want to be more specific, then we have to go much further and divide base engine displacement with mass (1000kg) and multiply it with ratio of hp/l and then we get the result (which engine would better pull/push 1000kg), and all the ratios on hand so we can compare and argue forever Then if you want to see which car would go faster, you must divide first ratio with its own mass. Then you get other ratio. You must consider moment of inertia that will tell you how much of that power is actually grip, and so on... You can never be sure if you are right or not. We all have different standards. Maybe you all are right. You choose car you seem to like, not the one that has been stated as "Best buy". Who knows, maybe best car is the car in which you had your first kiss. But, the fact is, I believe no emotion. I take in consideration factors that I need in my every day drive and then divide them with price, so I get personalized ratio that I need to have when I am deciding for a car.
(refernig to my tripping)

Well, without doing any numbers, the z4 IS faster.

Curb weight for audi is 2987

Curb weight for the z4 is 3020

Clearly the weight gain doesn't make up for the power descrepancy.
__________________


Driving a lotus is more thrilling than sex.
Bronxie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2006, 11:56 PM   #24
True_Brit
Has a new job!
 
True_Brit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Falmouth, Backward County, UK
Posts: 2,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bronxie
A How are the tt and z4 in a different class? They're both sport luxury roadsters. Clearly they are 100% competing models. I don't even know HOW you could say they are not in the same class. Audi made the tt to compete with the z4 directly.

And I know why it's slower. That's my point. Their prices are exactly the same but the z4 is much faster. Mind you, the z4 has a 3.0l engine 215hp standard. The tt has a 1.8l turbo 180hp standard. Z4 is rwd and tt is crappy ass fwd.


I don't get your point man.

Also the new coupe isn't out here yet so I was comparing 06 models.
sorry, i was just babbling on, it was late night and i was knackered!
anyway, saying all that, i dont really like the TT!!!!
__________________

www.myspace.com/jhn123
Quote:
Originally Posted by BanffAutoSpa_ap
........Greek warrior cant reply because hes probably beating it like it owes him money.
True_Brit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2006, 12:28 AM   #25
Cliffy
CF Loafer
 
Cliffy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NE Hampshire, England, UK
Posts: 8,441
Quote:
Originally Posted by True_Brit
sorry, i was just babbling on, it was late night and i was knackered!
anyway, saying all that, i dont really like the TT!!!!
Me niether. I drove a 1.8-litre TT when I worked at the garage and I was very disappointed with it. The styling was ok but the performance was somewhat lacking!
__________________


Please click here for the rules prior to posting, and here to introduce yourself!

Artwork courtesy of Gregg, aka Voda48
Cliffy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2006, 02:16 AM   #26
Bronxie
Dont know crap about cars
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Westchester Co., NY
Posts: 1,386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliffy
Me niether. I drove a 1.8-litre TT when I worked at the garage and I was very disappointed with it. The styling was ok but the performance was somewhat lacking!
The bad part is that even the 3.2l quattro are slower than the z4 si.

The new tts look sweet and I have high hopes for them, but then again, audi would have to make some SERIOUS changes to come close to where BMW is at. They are JUST coming out with the a5 coupe. Shows how behind they are.
__________________


Driving a lotus is more thrilling than sex.
Bronxie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2006, 02:48 AM   #27
True_Brit
Has a new job!
 
True_Brit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Falmouth, Backward County, UK
Posts: 2,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bronxie
The bad part is that even the 3.2l quattro are slower than the z4 si.

The new tts look sweet and I have high hopes for them, but then again, audi would have to make some SERIOUS changes to come close to where BMW is at. They are JUST coming out with the a5 coupe. Shows how behind they are.
they should do a RSTT, with the 4 litre v8
instead of the FSi V6 they have
__________________

www.myspace.com/jhn123
Quote:
Originally Posted by BanffAutoSpa_ap
........Greek warrior cant reply because hes probably beating it like it owes him money.
True_Brit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2006, 07:48 AM   #28
Bronxie
Dont know crap about cars
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Westchester Co., NY
Posts: 1,386
Quote:
Originally Posted by True_Brit
they should do a RSTT, with the 4 litre v8
instead of the FSi V6 they have
They need to do the following:

- Replace stupid (r)s4 with an (r)s5 coupe. There's no m3 sedans are there? For good reason.

- Get rid of the STUPID s4 avant. Nobody in the states wants an UBER SPORTS WAGON. That's a european thing.

- The point in the rs division? Just make your S division better and there will be no need for an RS. I could see if we were talking about porsches here, (which don't even have a second level high performance division) but these are audis. A proper S division will be more than enough for any potential RS buyers.

This is all the shit that drives up the cost of audis.
__________________


Driving a lotus is more thrilling than sex.
Bronxie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2006, 12:23 AM   #29
True_Brit
Has a new job!
 
True_Brit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Falmouth, Backward County, UK
Posts: 2,432
theres this car programme in england called 5th gear, on next monday, theyre going to pitch the Audi TT quatro (new one) against the new
BMW Z4M coupe round a race course!
id like to see the outcome because the advert of it showed the bmw doing a really fast drift round a corner!!!
http://fifthgear.five.tv/
__________________

www.myspace.com/jhn123
Quote:
Originally Posted by BanffAutoSpa_ap
........Greek warrior cant reply because hes probably beating it like it owes him money.
True_Brit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2006, 08:07 AM   #30
Bronxie
Dont know crap about cars
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Westchester Co., NY
Posts: 1,386
Quote:
Originally Posted by True_Brit
theres this car programme in england called 5th gear, on next monday, theyre going to pitch the Audi TT quatro (new one) against the new
BMW Z4M coupe round a race course!
id like to see the outcome because the advert of it showed the bmw doing a really fast drift round a corner!!!
http://fifthgear.five.tv/

Oh please...the M would demolish it!!! That's not even a fair comparison lol. They should compare the z4 si to the tt. That'd be cool to see
__________________


Driving a lotus is more thrilling than sex.
Bronxie is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:51 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2002 - 2011 Car Forums. All rights reserved.