I hear this time and time again and just thought of the comparison. I used to have a Corrado SLC and constantly there would be battles between the SLC and G60 owners as to what was better, a V-6 or a Supercharged 4 Banger. It never ended, it seems that this is the same way. I always used to hear about how the G60's could get all this HP out of their car and the SLC owners just didn't seem to care. Just an observation...

My ex girlfriend used to drive a G60 Corrado. I'm a big VW fan but I was very unimpressed with the G60 powerplant. It was noisy, buzzy, unrefined, underpowered and unreliable. The VR6 and plus suspension totally transformed the Corrado. It's the car Corrado should have been from day one. I remember we went to test drive an SLC and I wanted one for myself.

The 1.8t engine in the A4/passat is worlds apart from the G60. It's everything the G60 isn't. I test drove the 1.8t before I bought my 2.8 and I really liked it. I didn't however, like it quite as much as the 2.8. It wasn't even the power--just the way it felt.

I think they're both great engines but everytime I hear a comment on the forum about the 1.8 being for the "enthusiast" and 2.8 being for people who are interested in leather & wood and automatic transmissions, I snort in disgust.

Jeff 1999 2.8 30V QMS WETT

My favorite misnomer is that 2.8 owners are stupid americans who always have believed that bigger was better when it came to engines.
I think a well refined engine is much better than a brute displacement engine anytime. How else could 2 and a half liter Porsche's keep embarassing 5, 6, and 7 liter engines made by US manufacturers? Answer: by building a highly refined engine!
To people that think my selection of Audi's is based soley on displacement:I've owned a highly modified Porsche 928 (ok, it DID have a big engine) that got all its power out of the sophisticated mods I did, and a Datsun Z that was fast for the same reason. I love mods, but the 2.8 Audi was more reasonable and practical for the use I was planning it for. (my fiance's car, mostly freeway driving where the 2.8 feels faster then the 1.8T did)

nt

> 1.8 being for the "enthusiast" and 2.8 being
> for people who are interested in leather & wood
> and automatic transmissions

What is your definition of "enthusiast".?
I have owned 4 prior Audi's (including a UrQ),
6 VW's (4wc and 2ac) inc. VR6 Corrado. Raced MK1 GTi's, built
a VW based kit car, and been part of many other VAG related things.

I currently drive a 99 2.8QMS.
Why? because I am an VW/Audi enthusiast and the
1.8T didn't suit my current needs from a car engine.

Anyway my point in all the above crap is your analogy
is plane and simply worthless.
A better analogy is selecting Tip over Manual, but again
that is stupid as some people have partners that can't/won't
drive a "stick" as you say.

BTW I despise wood, but the engine was worth it.

Teach me for not reading the email correctly.

Sorry about that....I Agree with you 100%..;>