Audi 80 2.8 E Quattro

[andy10v]

Top man Andy!




225nm is 166 ft touqe so 9 more than 7A

You can also really see the V6 peak torque at 3-4k, 7A at 5-6k. Combined with the 7A ramping up a 4k it gives very different feeling powerbands.

[hunker7]

Why would you even compare 150hp V6 to a 280hp turbo engine? Of course second one will be quicker. But 2.6/2.8 are good, reliable, quick for what they are.

700hp V12 is faster than 5 pot, but that doesn't make 5 pot a bad engine.

[alexx230]

Why would you even compare 150hp V6 to a 280hp turbo engine? Of course second one will be quicker. But 2.6/2.8 are good, reliable, quick for what they are.

700hp V12 is faster than 5 pot, but that doesn't make 5 pot a bad engine.

+1 here

[Jolfa]

Why would you even compare 150hp V6 to a 280hp turbo engine? Of course second one will be quicker. But 2.6/2.8 are good, reliable, quick for what they are.

It was you who drew that comparison?!

And for what they are - a 2.8 litre engine that only makes as much power as a lightly tuned 2.0 16v that came in the same model and takes longer to get to 60?! That's not quick by any stretch of the imagination.

[Vorsprung durch Technik]

Your wrong Jolfa again. Over 9 secs for a 80 2.8 quattro?

Read and learn.

[Jolfa]

Your wrong

Just for irony.

But it appears I am, I chose the wrong website to quote. Nevertheless roughly 8 seconds and 170bhp from a 2.8 is pitiful.

[hunker7]

Just for irony.

But it appears I am, I chose the wrong website to quote. Nevertheless roughly 8 seconds and 170bhp from a 2.8 is pitiful.

I guess you're one of them people who likes to always be right

[Jolfa]

Because I just admitted I was wrong?

[hunker7]

Because I just admitted I was wrong?

You said over 9 seconds are bad, then Mark showed you it's actually 7.7 and it still was bad, so what you expect, 4.5s out of V6?

[alexx230]

What a test! :-D Makes me feel nostalgic, all these beasts gathered together! The quattro even the slowest of the four, yet it's not that slow with 7,7 0-60, if you bare in mind the weight.

[hunker7]

S2 Coupe does 0-60mph in 5.8s, so V6 is only 1.9s slower. And 5 pot has much higher torque and is lighter.

[Jolfa]

Why are you still comparing to an S2? They're poles apart! An S2 is only 1.6 seconds slower than an F40, it's not really a very good comparison though

Compare it to a 7a, for the extra half a litre in engine capacity you get sod all performance for it!

[hunker7]

Why are you still comparing to an S2, they're poles apart!

Compare it to a 7a, for the extra half a litre in engine capacity you get sod all performance for it!

I don't know what Audi was thinking when they did V6's, but I would think they're made for 2 different things. One is for munching up motorway other one is for B-roads.

[V6quattro]

Why are you still comparing to an S2? They're poles apart! An S2 is only 1.6 seconds slower than an F40, it's not really a very good comparison though

Compare it to a 7a, for the extra half a litre in engine capacity you get sod all performance for it!

Why not compare it to a Honda 1.6 vtec which also has 172hp

[hunker7]

My mate has 1.6 vtec and it's one quick rocket. as quick as my 260hp S4 yacht