Automobiles Forum banner
21 - 27 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,680 Posts
...I think all these odd ball results point toward it having more to do with car weight, driver and tires than X being better than Y. I myself own an underdog (323 GTX) and have driven a lot of cars in my days.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
123quattro said:
Friend of mine owns a local tuning shop that does a lot of Toyota/Lotus work. He has a RAV4 with a turbo AWD powertrain from pieced together JDM Toyota parts. No one can touch him in rally cross or ice racing. It's about 300awhp. The Subaroo guys get so angry when their caged cars get beat by his daily driver.

Now that is cool!

Rally cross and especially gravel performance rally is very much about driver and tire vs. car...I've seen guys take class wins in 100hp cars and beat 300hp Subarus...But...rally is also about endurance...and I've never seen an Audi retire from a rally because of broken gearbox...whereas I've seen more Subarus do it than I can count on my hands and toes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,646 Posts
123quattro said:
Friend of mine owns a local tuning shop that does a lot of Toyota/Lotus work. He has a RAV4 with a turbo AWD powertrain from pieced together JDM Toyota parts. No one can touch him in rally cross or ice racing. It's about 300awhp. The Subaroo guys get so angry when their caged cars get beat by his daily driver.
I remember going up to I-96 last winter with a friend of mine (who'd never been to a Detroit event) and we happened to be working the same corner. I deliciously waited for him to go by our corner. First pass, he goes through the hairpin of absolute suck and accelerates out and you hear the turbo come up and my friend just says "Whaaaat?" I be all cool-guy and just say something like "Yeah."

The combo of tiny wheelbase and high CG suits Detroit events' smooth, tight, slow courses well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
81 Posts
I can't speak to how these two systems differ in every condition. But if you think about it..ok, that was long enough..the only comparisons worth discussing are how they compare on snow and ice. I say this because to claim a difference on pavement means you must be driving/cornering so incredibly fast and have enough power to break things loose such that one system will grip better under this max/max condition. And to claim a difference on gravel means that while the surface grip is lower than pavement, the speeds and risk involved where one or the other system could be said to perform "better" are still pretty crazy and generally beyond the ability of a casual enthusiast driver.

No, I think simple snow and ice suffice and the differences are something the average mouth breather can appreciate without risking loss of license or eating curbs. Since I have the latest Subaru system, and the 2nd best Quattro system (heh, I know - debatable but I loved the full lockered system that went away in 87 or so) in the garage, and I live in snow country, here's my take. No contest. My Subaru rides on the latest Michelin ice tires, the Audi on year old studs by way of full disclosure and the Michelins are way better. The winner? My Quattro - even without locking the rear diff. It freakin' scoots away and is a quarter car length ahead by the time the Subaru's system decides what to do. And the Subaru never catches up but continues to lose ground. I am way to old for this behavior, but I run errands in the Quattro whenever we get a dump just so I can humiliate other cars on the slick stuff. I purposely inch forward as if I thought the light was gonna change, getting the Jeeps, 4Matics, Subarus, 4Motions, "AWD"s and newer Quattros to focus on their best departure on the snow. Fun stuff. Turns out 2nd gear departures are best. I think the Subaru system is very, very good and does react quickly. Just the Quattro doesn't have to react - it pulls right away. And its dash doesn't blink at me when I'm having fun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Not totally correct:

I used to be a Subaru mechanic at an independent shop in PDX and got to mess with Subaru's sub-standard drive trains on a daily basis.

I'll give you the basic rundown:

Most EA series cars had part time 4wd, either single ratio or dual range. Even the 3AT auto cars had the same part time system as the manuals.

Some of those came AWD, using basically the same system as the later EJ cars...in fact the 4EAT trans used in the EA cars is the same as the EJ with a different bell housing. This trans uses a clutch type center diff that is controlled by a solenoid (specifically the duty C solenoid...the one that causes torque bind) that also allows the AWD to be disabled by use of a fuse in the engine compartment.

The RX (both 3 door and rare sedan) used a dual range, awd trans with a switchable locking center diff...which is probably the closest thing to an 016 Audi trans with a 2 range transfer case. I've never seen the center locker in a non dual range car.

None of these are particularly strong...basically can handle EJ22 power but not much more

The early EJ series manual trans are similar to an 016 without any lockers. Just straight differentials.

Around about the OBDII time the manuals "gained" a viscous center diff...which likes to fail.

Autos were still the 4EAT...a generally boring unit that actually holds a decent amount of power.

Some STi models had AP Suretrac front diffs...which is a quasi-helical (torsen) unit...most others were straight torsen.

The DCCD in the 5 and 6 speed STi trannies are a planetary unit that uses a clutch pack to vary the power distribution between front and rear.

STi had a torsen rear...all the other LSDs were viscous with the exception of the 3.70 unit used in the EA cars (clutch type)

My opinion after looking at Audi and Subaru drivetrain components was that Subaru recognized the good ideas Audi had and decided to use their technology and just make it shittier. (my theory)

is there any chance of putting a tdi with a 5speed or 6 speed vw or audi tranny in a out back would save on adapting motor to tranny ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
So if the RX Sedan only came with a FWD/4WD, then why did we have a dual range, full time awd, center diff lock car at the shop? Explain that to me...and no it was not swapped.

I can understand why the 20kg center diff sucked on the road...it's usually the choice for gravel rally cars.

I always thought the 2.5RS drove like a bag of dicks...not a well balanced car and the power band sucks. My Legacy Turbo felt far more balanced and easy to control...but the noodle-ish nature of the Subaru chassis ruins it all. I think my 4kq is easier to drive in corners...when it lets go I just have to lift throttle and it generally comes back into shape.

I spun my Legacy out a number of times but haven't ever spun an Audi (without trying to :D )
is there any chance of putting a tdi with a 5speed or 6 speed vw or audi tranny in a out back would save on adapting motor to tranny ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
The advantage of Audi is the torsen diff rather than a viscous coupling. They both have their advantages and disadvantages but it's hard to beat the torsen in drivetrain lossses and reaction time to changing conditions.

Plus as mentioned the Audi stuff tends to be much more reliable at higher output. But an sti 6 speed is pretty strong also.

So yes, layout is similar but the mechanicals are not.
is there any chance of putting a tdi with a 5speed or 6 speed vw or audi tranny in a out back would save on adapting motor to tranny ?
 
21 - 27 of 27 Posts
Top