I live in Colorado and am in the mountains quite often and am wondering if the A4 1.8 performs well up here in Colorado and especially on the hills up in the ski areas. (ie: winter park/breck.) I'm considering purchasing one, but don't want to end up with a car which is slugish when it gets up in the mountains.

All cars suffer at altitude, but the forced induction of the turbo charged A4 helps to compensate beautifully. I have driven my 1.8t a number of times as high as Mt. Evans and Pike's Peak and I've found it to be exceptional at altitude. When other cars are heavy breathing, you will keep going strong. Any other Colorado owners want to comment?

-Todd

nt

A turbo is not dependent on outside pressure as much as a naturally aspired car does. Therefore, it can produce what it needs using the turbo boost. I went to school up in the mountains of the Blue Ridge Parkway in Virginia. No comparison to the heights in Colorado, but nonetheless there is a pressure change. I drove a Mustang 5.0 up there for about 2 months and most of the time the rest of my years were spent in a Volvo 740GL Wagon and an 84 Mercedes 300 Turbo Diesel . Of the 3 cars above, the Mercedes could very easily demolish each one! I would pass all kinds of cars that would bog down.... and with a diesel car that has about 120 hp. I could tell the turbo kept on giving me what I asked for with my foot. I found myself doing 80-85mpg a few times and I didn' t know it. Since then, I have taken my A4 1.8TQM up there and it just like the Mercedes did, had no problems.

I hope this helps!
Dimitri

===
99.5 1.8TQMS (APRless until my 10k service)

it takes a few more revs to build up a head of steam so acceleration is a little slower, but once boost is up the altitude makes little difference.

there is a huge difference coming from sea level up to Denver, you have already lost something like 10% on a non-forced induction engine.

We know the turbo in a 1.8T can, if allowed by the ECU, produce very high boosts. The question (and I don't know the answer, maybe someone does) is whether the ECU allows a certain amount of boost over ambient pressure, or if it allows boost to a certain manifold absolute pressure. My guess is the latter.

If it allows "x" psi over ambient, then as soon an you increase elevation, the engine capabilities will reduce. Just like in a normally aspirated car.

But if it allows "x" psi manifold absolute pressure, then performance will be unchanged until you reach some extreme elevation where the turbo can't keep up do to extremely thin ambient air. This is how turbo and supercharged airplane engines work....the 'charger maintains a constant MAP until you reach a critical altitude, then MAP falls as altitude increases further.

Note "altitude" is for airplanes, not cars. "Elevation" is the height above sea level of the ground.

so the turbo can comensate for a fair amount of ambient air pressure loss. The turbo will have its limits, however. It would be interesting to know the altitude at which the 1.8t begins producing more power than the 2.8.

I also live in CO and I opted for the 1.8t. Only 4 more weeks 'till it gets in...

We bought my wifes 93 Jeep GC 4.0l in the Bay Area. We elected not to get the V8 because we did not feel we needed the extra torque. It was the right decision. Three years later we moved here to Colorado and I really wish we had gotten the V8. The car down shifts way too much because the altitude is just too much. Even here in the plains the hills are rolling from Denver to Kansas City and the altidtue gain is termendous over that stretch of I-70 and I could tell the differece. I also run some and running in KC is much easier than here in CO. So my seat of the pants guess is that some where over 2500ft is where turbos start really making a difference.

I would expect a chipped 1.8T could beat my car easily at the mile high we are at in CO Denver area.

Reggie

98.5 30vQMS

Good thing I didn't have to run it in the Georgetown/Idaho Springs 1/2 Marathon...we went east from the grade...down into Idaho Springs...

Steve S.
97 2.8QM
ex-Coloradan

Just kidding! 8^) Even before I chipped my 1.8T, I could make it up Floyd Hill and the climb out of Georgetown in 5th gear easy. Anyone concerned about the power of a stock 1.8T in the CO mtns, has nothing to fear.

CraigB

I don't have an A4 but...

My stock-ECU 1.8T Passat does very well up here in Colorado. Even with a full load, it's easy to maintain illicit speeds up in the mountains. Definitely a hill-compatible engine.

There is a noticeable increase in turbo lag at high elevations, however. But I'm guessing most A4 owners don't get into stoplight races in Dillon or Vail... :)

AJL
98 Passat

Altitude IS the same. Altitude is a measurement above sea level. When you fly at 35,000ft, you are at the same "Elevation" regardless if you are over a mountain or over the Pacific Ocean. But I do agree, when talking about mountains you refer to your elevation, not your altitude.

nt

I'm not an A4 owner (yet) but used to have a Saab 900 turbo 4 cylinder. I went up along the Blue Ridge parkway in North Carolina and then up Mount Mitchell (highest point east of the Mississippi) at about 5500 feet or so. With a 5 speed it ran GREAT and I didn't notice any lack of power. Going up the mountains with 3 people aboard, I was in 4th or 5th gear most of time!

Mark

On the ground, you measure elevation. That's why all the maps and highway signs refer to elevation, not altitude. In aviation, you speak of "airport elevation" but the "altitude" of the aircraft. Never the reverse.