Nov '12 Prelim Minutes & Tech Bulletin

[JeffYoung]

So why are they allowed to hold up unsubstantiated information, or not have to explain/justify why their number is valid, and one that shows up in a lot more official places isn't?

That's the real issue Jeff. And reading Kirk's last post is pretty disconcerting.

Because there is some value -- and I fully agree with this -- in not making changes willy nilly without a reason for them.

Look, it's a fact that some guys on the CRB would attribute more weight to on track performance than the ITAC, or the Process, would allow. That just "is." It isn't morally wrong or something, it's just a different view on classing. I don't agree with it, but I do so respectfully because that position doesn't come from some desire to fark up the class, or to protect a self interest. As far as I can tell, it comes from a desire to keep ITB as competitive as possible.

So with the Audi, you had a mathematical process that would have resulted in a huge weight drop on a car that already appeared to be competitive at its "old formula" weight.

I voted for and advocated the new weight.

However, it is the CRB's job to ask us why we are doing what we are doing, and to point out information about the car (the EKTA microfiche) that we didn't have. WE on the ITAC couldn't satisfy them that the 110 was right because we had no explanation for the 120 which didn't come from a Car & Driver article, or a printed shop manual but from an internal Audi document that looked pretty damn official.

[JeffYoung]

STephen B -- I think this supports what you were saying about the 120 hp for the Audi Coupe coming from the Quattro:

http://www.cars-data.com/en/audi-cou...264/specs.html

[StephenB]

STephen B -- I think this supports what you were saying about the 120 hp for the Audi Coupe coming from the Quattro:

http://www.cars-data.com/en/audi-cou...264/specs.html

Yes, this is the car (coupe QUATTRO) John should be looking at to compare differences. It also has all the same engine components of a 4000 quattro in the same year.

Stephen

[Rabbit05]

I don't think this Audi Coupe was ever available to the US market. The only Audi Coupe Quattro available in the states came with a MC1 engine (turbo) .

The link you have there , looks to be , from the numbers, to be Euro motors only.

Jeff ,
Since you have an Audi Manual , and I considered non biased in this issue ,do you mind if I ask you to check or reaffirm some references to the Audi manual ?

If yes thank you in advance.

There is exhaust header difference. The illustration begins on page 26.4 of the Audi Manual. The first illustration being used on Quattro models. The second illustration is on page 26.6 ,this shows the Coupe GT exhaust manifold .

[JeffYoung]

That is correct. The illustration for the Quattro shows a 4-2-1 with the "2" being a downpipe before the cat.

On page 26.6, the illustration shows a 4 into 1 for the Coupe GT with "1" being the downpipe.

Clearly different pieces. Cat appears very different too.

[Flyinglizard]

Does anyones book show 40mm intake valves?

[Rabbit05]

Mine book does not show a 40 mm intake valve.

The KX is as such : Intake 38 mm and Exhaust is 33 mm.


Iirc...the 40 mm intake valve is on the NG motor. But that is going by memory.

[Bill Miller]

That is correct. The illustration for the Quattro shows a 4-2-1 with the "2" being a downpipe before the cat.

On page 26.6, the illustration shows a 4 into 1 for the Coupe GT with "1" being the downpipe.

Clearly different pieces. Cat appears very different too.

How do you get a 4-2-1 out of a 5-cyl motor?

Just busting your chops Jeff.

[JeffYoung]

No, that's a damn good point and I looked at it too quickly.

The Quattro downpipe is actually THREE tubes, not two. The Coupe GT is just one. So the Quattro exhaust manifold's five ports go 1/1/1/1/1 to 2/2/1 to 1.

The Coupe GT goes 1/1/1/1/1 to 1. Very different design.

I did not see valve sizes on a quick search.