20V UR Quattro.
11 February 2003, 05:31 AM
#31
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am still waiting for someone to compare a 20v UrQ to a modern Impreza or Evo. Many say that the Q may actually have a few advantages of its own over the new gen cars- such as a more progresive and stable platform which actually might be safer to drive fast than all others.
I know Autocar did such a comparison last year, but although they did say it was neck and neck with a Sti, autocar really is not to be believed. It would be great if some other mag could.
How do you feel the two would compare on UK roads? (if the Q had alcon 4 pots and a chip, installed)
I know Autocar did such a comparison last year, but although they did say it was neck and neck with a Sti, autocar really is not to be believed. It would be great if some other mag could.
How do you feel the two would compare on UK roads? (if the Q had alcon 4 pots and a chip, installed)
11 February 2003, 09:13 AM
#32
Scooby Regular
Guy who tunes both Audi's and grales(sp?) in Sussex (not Quattro Sports) said the Audi was the much better car. Build quality, electrics, reliability......
Goes without saying really.
He also had two Ferari Dino's in his garage !!! (those front engine ones?). Supposed to be worth a small fortune.
Probably take a trip to AM Cars at the backend of this year if a quattro is the route I decide to take. However, if I do get one, chances are it will end up at RS2 spec rather quickly
Whatever I choose to do, the ur Quattro was and still is a much better car than my Scooby, which is pretty sad when one was designed over 20 years ago. If thats progress......
Goes without saying really.
He also had two Ferari Dino's in his garage !!! (those front engine ones?). Supposed to be worth a small fortune.
Probably take a trip to AM Cars at the backend of this year if a quattro is the route I decide to take. However, if I do get one, chances are it will end up at RS2 spec rather quickly
Whatever I choose to do, the ur Quattro was and still is a much better car than my Scooby, which is pretty sad when one was designed over 20 years ago. If thats progress......
11 February 2003, 10:27 AM
#36
Scooby Regular
The guy has a scary amount of knowledge. Also has some rather nice obvious connections to the motorsport industry. When I was in his garage, he had two RS2 engines on pallets. He then proceeded to produce a fuel injection system of one of the early quattro rally cars.
The standard fuel system on the WR and MB limit the car to 280ish bhp according to him, which was why he had this other one. Although he did say "it's not for sale".
Having said all that, somebody I know has taken his car to him, and not seen it for over a year. When it did come back, it used to throw out smoke (turbo) from burning oil. His latest mod ended up with a piston stuck out the side of the engine block by all accounts, but I've not seen it personally. But if you go for silly amounts of BHP, you can expect problems like that.
I don't doubt he knows what he's doing, just a bit scary that he's a "one man band".
The standard fuel system on the WR and MB limit the car to 280ish bhp according to him, which was why he had this other one. Although he did say "it's not for sale".
Having said all that, somebody I know has taken his car to him, and not seen it for over a year. When it did come back, it used to throw out smoke (turbo) from burning oil. His latest mod ended up with a piston stuck out the side of the engine block by all accounts, but I've not seen it personally. But if you go for silly amounts of BHP, you can expect problems like that.
I don't doubt he knows what he's doing, just a bit scary that he's a "one man band".
11 February 2003, 10:35 AM
#37
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He had his own business as a quattro specialist a few years ago apparently. Sold up as he was fed up with working silly hours and being in charge of people.
I think he does it to keep himself amused.
Does a fantastic job - he's a real old skool mechanic, which is a real compliment. Plus he knows what he's doing when it comes to the old Jetronic mechanical fuel injection systems - which few people do these days.
As for tuning engines - I won't comment as I don't use him for that. But, with any tuned lump you leave yourself open for all sorts of trouble. I've seen £10,000 Sierra Cosworth engines built by reputable WRC tuners go bang after ten minutes due to silly stuff. Nobody grumbles - its just the way of the world I'm afraid!
I think he does it to keep himself amused.
Does a fantastic job - he's a real old skool mechanic, which is a real compliment. Plus he knows what he's doing when it comes to the old Jetronic mechanical fuel injection systems - which few people do these days.
As for tuning engines - I won't comment as I don't use him for that. But, with any tuned lump you leave yourself open for all sorts of trouble. I've seen £10,000 Sierra Cosworth engines built by reputable WRC tuners go bang after ten minutes due to silly stuff. Nobody grumbles - its just the way of the world I'm afraid!
11 February 2003, 10:38 AM
#38
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AMD have an S4 engine for sale - £3500
could do and engine swap + RS4 turbos and have a quattro that does 0-60 in 2.45
checkout the video of it at www.vwvids.co.uk , under the audi section scroll down to 3rd from the bottom
could do and engine swap + RS4 turbos and have a quattro that does 0-60 in 2.45
checkout the video of it at www.vwvids.co.uk , under the audi section scroll down to 3rd from the bottom
11 February 2003, 11:16 AM
#39
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jeremy,
I am in the fortunate postion of having previously owned 2 Evo's, a 10V ur quattro and I currently own a MY95 WRX STI RA and the 20V ur quattro.
IMO the quattros do not get near the scooby or Evo's, the 20v quattro is more of a GT than a rally derived car! I believe that the 20V quattros cost about 40 grand new, 12 years ago this was about the same as a 993 Carrera 4 which is what we should compare the audi against, not Integrales, Evo's or Scooby's!!!!
I have driven the Scooby and the 20V quattro back to back and the scooby is a lot quicker, more agile, better brakes, better handling and more rewarding to drive. The quattro is more refined, less frantic and smoother all round.
I could not live with my Scooby every day, but I could live with the quattro, remember my Scoob is a type RA!
They are very differant animals!!
Dom.
I am in the fortunate postion of having previously owned 2 Evo's, a 10V ur quattro and I currently own a MY95 WRX STI RA and the 20V ur quattro.
IMO the quattros do not get near the scooby or Evo's, the 20v quattro is more of a GT than a rally derived car! I believe that the 20V quattros cost about 40 grand new, 12 years ago this was about the same as a 993 Carrera 4 which is what we should compare the audi against, not Integrales, Evo's or Scooby's!!!!
I have driven the Scooby and the 20V quattro back to back and the scooby is a lot quicker, more agile, better brakes, better handling and more rewarding to drive. The quattro is more refined, less frantic and smoother all round.
I could not live with my Scooby every day, but I could live with the quattro, remember my Scoob is a type RA!
They are very differant animals!!
Dom.
11 February 2003, 11:33 AM
#40
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In reply to the scoob and 20v ur note, it is my opinion after having driven the STi and 20v back to back that with a few mods
(remember the Audi is at least 10 years older in design than the scoob) the UR is every bit as rewarding to drive...... and the torque.........oh the torque............
(remember the Audi is at least 10 years older in design than the scoob) the UR is every bit as rewarding to drive...... and the torque.........oh the torque............
11 February 2003, 12:05 PM
#41
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dom - Its horses for courses though isn't it?
I've driven the Merc back to back with its current equivalent, the C43 AMG. The AMG is safer, quieter (just), faster - ferociously so, etc etc.
But somehow, despite how much cars have evolved since 1986, the AMG doesn't quite have that je'n sais quoi. It is immensely fast and fun to drive, but the 2.3-16v just hits the sweet spot at every apex. Why?
Well IMHO, the 2.3-16v needs to be 'Driven'. I have to think about what I'm doing in it, otherwise it'll give me a red card and I'm off into the scenery - I push it to its limits and it communicates whats happening, but its always in the back of my mind that if I **** it up then its game over. I have to respect the fact that it has limits
The AMG (as with most modern cars) doesn't have the same feeling of risk, and therefore, reward with it. Its loaded to the gunwhales with electronic gizmos and I never really felt respect for it, because in a way I felt semi invicible in it.
Everytime I drive the 2.3 flat out I get out with a smile on my face, after driving the C43 flat out I just walked away from it.
The AMG is a better car in every respect. But the 2.3 is one that gets my pulse racing.
The Scoob and UR quattro are the same. Driven both of them. The Scoob is far better in every respect - but the Audi is just so sublime that it'd always be my choice to drive.
But then thats just me.
Personally I'd give my right arm to be stuck between the choice of a Scoob and a 20v quattro.
Just have to slum it with my two current choices; 200sx Touring, and 2.3-16v Mercedes....
Sod it, I'm off to Autotrader for a quattro
I've driven the Merc back to back with its current equivalent, the C43 AMG. The AMG is safer, quieter (just), faster - ferociously so, etc etc.
But somehow, despite how much cars have evolved since 1986, the AMG doesn't quite have that je'n sais quoi. It is immensely fast and fun to drive, but the 2.3-16v just hits the sweet spot at every apex. Why?
Well IMHO, the 2.3-16v needs to be 'Driven'. I have to think about what I'm doing in it, otherwise it'll give me a red card and I'm off into the scenery - I push it to its limits and it communicates whats happening, but its always in the back of my mind that if I **** it up then its game over. I have to respect the fact that it has limits
The AMG (as with most modern cars) doesn't have the same feeling of risk, and therefore, reward with it. Its loaded to the gunwhales with electronic gizmos and I never really felt respect for it, because in a way I felt semi invicible in it.
Everytime I drive the 2.3 flat out I get out with a smile on my face, after driving the C43 flat out I just walked away from it.
The AMG is a better car in every respect. But the 2.3 is one that gets my pulse racing.
The Scoob and UR quattro are the same. Driven both of them. The Scoob is far better in every respect - but the Audi is just so sublime that it'd always be my choice to drive.
But then thats just me.
Personally I'd give my right arm to be stuck between the choice of a Scoob and a 20v quattro.
Just have to slum it with my two current choices; 200sx Touring, and 2.3-16v Mercedes....
Sod it, I'm off to Autotrader for a quattro
11 February 2003, 04:35 PM
#42
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys,
Actually I was referring to the Performance Car article of a few years ago, (4 wheel drive greats) where Barker and Meaden thought that the Q was actually the most reassuring car to drive fast on the very challenging (wet) wales roads. (I know it did not win) I think maybe the Q is less likely to suidenly lose grip, and when it does it does so in a slower motion and then self-center's itself better- at least thats what I found when I owned one and what many other owners have told me over the years. In other respects I am sure indeed that the scooby/evo's are more agile and adjustable etc. I'd bet that on a really challenging wet road, the scooby driver might be be right there with the 20v, but that the sweaty palms would belong to the Impreza driver.
Actually I was referring to the Performance Car article of a few years ago, (4 wheel drive greats) where Barker and Meaden thought that the Q was actually the most reassuring car to drive fast on the very challenging (wet) wales roads. (I know it did not win) I think maybe the Q is less likely to suidenly lose grip, and when it does it does so in a slower motion and then self-center's itself better- at least thats what I found when I owned one and what many other owners have told me over the years. In other respects I am sure indeed that the scooby/evo's are more agile and adjustable etc. I'd bet that on a really challenging wet road, the scooby driver might be be right there with the 20v, but that the sweaty palms would belong to the Impreza driver.
12 February 2003, 01:19 AM
#47
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well after reading all this quattro stuff i think ill keep my A3 Tdi quattro and get myself another ur quattro!
i also had a 90 quattro 20v which was a very nice saloon with 170bhp and wouuld top 150mph on the clock mind!
like the agressive look of the lancia, saw a couple going through the lakes the other day. But when i see and here the rasp of that 5 cylinder...
Lee
when do we get the quattro forum!
i also had a 90 quattro 20v which was a very nice saloon with 170bhp and wouuld top 150mph on the clock mind!
like the agressive look of the lancia, saw a couple going through the lakes the other day. But when i see and here the rasp of that 5 cylinder...
Lee
when do we get the quattro forum!
12 February 2003, 07:47 AM
#48
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Morning All,
I'll get a few pictures of my quattro tomorrow and post them so you can all see her and get jealous!!!
The one thing that the quattro has is great road presence, the 5 pot does make a very distingtive roar, mine is slighly muffled because it has the full cat. standard exhaust. I wouldn't dare put anything after market on her......she will stay totally standard!!
Dom.
I'll get a few pictures of my quattro tomorrow and post them so you can all see her and get jealous!!!
The one thing that the quattro has is great road presence, the 5 pot does make a very distingtive roar, mine is slighly muffled because it has the full cat. standard exhaust. I wouldn't dare put anything after market on her......she will stay totally standard!!
Dom.
12 February 2003, 09:21 AM
#49
Scooby Regular
Sorry for being thick, but whats a WR quattro ?
I've heard of UR's coming with MB or WR engines. 2226cc 10v and the 2144cc 10v HUGE KKK turbo thing engine coded WR.
I also know there was THE one to have the 2226cc 20v, but can't remember the engine coding for that !
I've heard of UR's coming with MB or WR engines. 2226cc 10v and the 2144cc 10v HUGE KKK turbo thing engine coded WR.
I also know there was THE one to have the 2226cc 20v, but can't remember the engine coding for that !
Read this if you want the full history
Quattro History
12 February 2003, 11:06 AM
#51
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just found the board. Very interesting.
As someone who has driven scoobies, looked after an Integrale for 6 months and owned a Ur Q for 4 years the comparisons are inevitable.
Scooby - Great fun, a bit commonplace.
Lancia - Great presence and handling - reliability a bitscary, wouldnt want to own one.
Quattro - Great all rounder, reliable, zero depreciation.
I now have a more compromised but still fun car, the forgotten Audi S2. The engine is further improved over the 20V in the Ur with 230 bhp and 259lb ft at 1950rpm. With the overboost facility you get a temporary 280lb ft.
The Ur is certainly a more desirable car but a mint 1996 S2 is yours for 10 grand, is easier to own, doesnt rust, and gets that fantastic 5 pot engine with a 6 speed box.
As someone who has driven scoobies, looked after an Integrale for 6 months and owned a Ur Q for 4 years the comparisons are inevitable.
Scooby - Great fun, a bit commonplace.
Lancia - Great presence and handling - reliability a bitscary, wouldnt want to own one.
Quattro - Great all rounder, reliable, zero depreciation.
I now have a more compromised but still fun car, the forgotten Audi S2. The engine is further improved over the 20V in the Ur with 230 bhp and 259lb ft at 1950rpm. With the overboost facility you get a temporary 280lb ft.
The Ur is certainly a more desirable car but a mint 1996 S2 is yours for 10 grand, is easier to own, doesnt rust, and gets that fantastic 5 pot engine with a 6 speed box.
12 February 2003, 08:18 PM
#52
i missed the chance to buy an ur quattro, last year some back street garage had it for sale for £850 on an E reg but some bast**d got there before me, he told me he was getting another one in for the same price in a couple of days but it turned out to be the non turbo one
13 February 2003, 07:48 AM
#54
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought I'd cut and paste a letter I got awhile ago from another scoobynet member who owned both an UrQ and a Impreza. (Granted I think it was a 95' sti RA) I would be very interested to know if any others who have also driven the UrQ and Impreza back to back agree, or think this guy is merely wishfully thinking?
Here it is:
The steering on the impreza gives a better feel for how much grip there is at the front tyres - e.g. the feel of the steering changes when the tyres start to run out of grip. The quattro steering didn't really relay that info. particularily well. I found that with the quattro i tended to notice the front end of the car yawing wide rather than picking the signals up through the steering. This is less effective in that the cars already out of shape whereas with the impreza you can take corrective action before it actually happens.Your theory about it happening more often is an interesting one but i don't think it does - the impreza is more prone to oversteer whereas the quattro was more of an understeerer, due to that lovely 5 pot sitting right out in the nose.
What happens to the quattro when it runs out of grip? This is perhaps one of its best aspects as its enormously docile - if its understeering you just lift a bit and the nose comes back into line - if you snap it shut then sometimes the tail will move out slightly but responds to reducing the lock on the steering - it's all very gentle, pleasant and enjoyable. Alternatively, if its really slippy e.g. snow you can boot the tail out but will respond to a lift or flick of the steering - it doesn't really seem to like being out of shape, it always comes back to straight very easily - it seems to have a large amount of natural centring/stability - perhaps it's the nose heavy 5 pot that assist this? I think that's the crux of the difference between the quattro and the impreza - the impreza doesn't have the willingess to snap back into shape, it's quite happy to travel up the road completely sideways and you have to be far more accurate with the corrective action to keep it together. Depends what you look for in a car, i guess. The impreza's more satsifying when you get it right - it's a greater challenge / test of your skill. However, i would definitely prefer the quattro in really bad conditions as its less likely to end up on its roof in the ditch.
A good example of its poor weather ability was a couple of years ago when i was down in england visting my in-laws. One evening they had the heaviest rain they'd had in 30 years, about an inch and half in 30 minutes. We were out driving at the time, the dual carriageway was literally like driving down a river. We saw about two dozen cars broken down at the side of the road, nearly all fords and GM strangely enough, everyone else was crawling along at about 15 mph in the inside lane - the quattro was quite happy at 60 - 70 mph in the outside lane, kicking up a rooster trail of spray about 15 foot high.................vorsprung durch technik.
This is quite a declaration of the abilities of the UrQuattro. Maybe in some ways, such as for foul weather public road driving, it is still king.
Here it is:
The steering on the impreza gives a better feel for how much grip there is at the front tyres - e.g. the feel of the steering changes when the tyres start to run out of grip. The quattro steering didn't really relay that info. particularily well. I found that with the quattro i tended to notice the front end of the car yawing wide rather than picking the signals up through the steering. This is less effective in that the cars already out of shape whereas with the impreza you can take corrective action before it actually happens.Your theory about it happening more often is an interesting one but i don't think it does - the impreza is more prone to oversteer whereas the quattro was more of an understeerer, due to that lovely 5 pot sitting right out in the nose.
What happens to the quattro when it runs out of grip? This is perhaps one of its best aspects as its enormously docile - if its understeering you just lift a bit and the nose comes back into line - if you snap it shut then sometimes the tail will move out slightly but responds to reducing the lock on the steering - it's all very gentle, pleasant and enjoyable. Alternatively, if its really slippy e.g. snow you can boot the tail out but will respond to a lift or flick of the steering - it doesn't really seem to like being out of shape, it always comes back to straight very easily - it seems to have a large amount of natural centring/stability - perhaps it's the nose heavy 5 pot that assist this? I think that's the crux of the difference between the quattro and the impreza - the impreza doesn't have the willingess to snap back into shape, it's quite happy to travel up the road completely sideways and you have to be far more accurate with the corrective action to keep it together. Depends what you look for in a car, i guess. The impreza's more satsifying when you get it right - it's a greater challenge / test of your skill. However, i would definitely prefer the quattro in really bad conditions as its less likely to end up on its roof in the ditch.
A good example of its poor weather ability was a couple of years ago when i was down in england visting my in-laws. One evening they had the heaviest rain they'd had in 30 years, about an inch and half in 30 minutes. We were out driving at the time, the dual carriageway was literally like driving down a river. We saw about two dozen cars broken down at the side of the road, nearly all fords and GM strangely enough, everyone else was crawling along at about 15 mph in the inside lane - the quattro was quite happy at 60 - 70 mph in the outside lane, kicking up a rooster trail of spray about 15 foot high.................vorsprung durch technik.
This is quite a declaration of the abilities of the UrQuattro. Maybe in some ways, such as for foul weather public road driving, it is still king.
13 February 2003, 03:30 PM
#56
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know exactly what Jeremy means. I've had my quattro for 2 1/2 years now and previously I had a 205 GTi 1.9. The 205 was probably more involving but it could catch you out, fine if you're in the mood but not on a wet night heading home from work.
The quattro on the other hand can be hustled along with no effort, even at 6 tenths you still cover ground amazingly quickly. You can grab it by the scruff of the neck though and really fly but you have to be brave. The rewards are worth it though.
I was going to sell my quattro but i might keep it now...
The quattro on the other hand can be hustled along with no effort, even at 6 tenths you still cover ground amazingly quickly. You can grab it by the scruff of the neck though and really fly but you have to be brave. The rewards are worth it though.
I was going to sell my quattro but i might keep it now...
13 February 2003, 03:54 PM
#57
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that a quattro would feel more secure cover ground at speed than a pug 205, but I wouldn't agree that it does it better than a scoob or Evo!!!
The quattro would not be able to keep up with a STI scooby or any EVO in a straight line or around bends. The more modern cars are lighter, faster, more powerful and have better brakes..the only bit I do agree with is that a type R or RA Scoob would be more unpredictable with the diff. lock off as they are quite tail happy......but so much more fun!!!!!!!
The quattro is a great car, but IMO it does show it's age when compared to the new breed of rally derived cars.
Dom.
PS - Piccies should be uploaded over the weekend as the car is a bit dusty!!
The quattro would not be able to keep up with a STI scooby or any EVO in a straight line or around bends. The more modern cars are lighter, faster, more powerful and have better brakes..the only bit I do agree with is that a type R or RA Scoob would be more unpredictable with the diff. lock off as they are quite tail happy......but so much more fun!!!!!!!
The quattro is a great car, but IMO it does show it's age when compared to the new breed of rally derived cars.
Dom.
PS - Piccies should be uploaded over the weekend as the car is a bit dusty!!
13 February 2003, 04:12 PM
#58
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Settle, Cheshire, Istanbul
Posts: 1,429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I only have one beef about my ex UR-q (2144cc WR engine) Hot starting. It just wouldn't hot start. Suffered really badly from fuel evaporation I think. I eventually wired the "injector fan" thingy into a switch on the dash which cured the most of the problems.
13 February 2003, 05:34 PM
#59
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dom,
I agree with you that the UrQ would be lass agile, and have worse brakes, and bite into corners less incisivly than the Impreza/evo brigade. But I wonder if that bit about the Q possesing the great ability to self-center itself after getting out of shape on slimy roads is true. I too had it happen to me.
Maybe this party trick is worth more than one might think. That is, it is one thing for a car to be actively steered/throttled by its driver back into shape, but if a Impreza/evo driver were to do this on a narrow road with other drivers and no run off space, then such a driver might not have the space to get their car back. Where as with the Q, anytime you overstep its also very high limits, a slight lift off the trottle snaps the car right back on line.
Now I could be wrong about this. But my own experience and that of several UK mags over the years seems to indicate that at least in this one way, the Quattro might be the most sure-footed out there.
I think at least it would be worth a back to back test in such conditions with competent drivers aboard. No?
I agree with you that the UrQ would be lass agile, and have worse brakes, and bite into corners less incisivly than the Impreza/evo brigade. But I wonder if that bit about the Q possesing the great ability to self-center itself after getting out of shape on slimy roads is true. I too had it happen to me.
Maybe this party trick is worth more than one might think. That is, it is one thing for a car to be actively steered/throttled by its driver back into shape, but if a Impreza/evo driver were to do this on a narrow road with other drivers and no run off space, then such a driver might not have the space to get their car back. Where as with the Q, anytime you overstep its also very high limits, a slight lift off the trottle snaps the car right back on line.
Now I could be wrong about this. But my own experience and that of several UK mags over the years seems to indicate that at least in this one way, the Quattro might be the most sure-footed out there.
I think at least it would be worth a back to back test in such conditions with competent drivers aboard. No?
