Scott,

I think the car has the c/a braces front and rear that go to the suspension that your referring to.

Here's the front suspension
&lt;p&gt;<img src="http://pictureposter.audiworld.com/38899/front_susp_0006.jpg" border="0">&lt;/p&gt;

And the rear suspension
&lt;p&gt;<img src="http://pictureposter.audiworld.com/38899/rear_susp_0007.jpg" border="0">&lt;/p&gt;

In regards to your lambda circuit and Lehmann O2 sensor comments. I can tell you they're correct cause this car doesn't even have an O2 sensor on the exhaust. Its just a bolt plug. The car might be running a tad rich, because witness saw the car make a small puff of black smoke from the exhaust at the end of the front straight. Interesting the Lehmann chip under the dash indicates that the car is tuned to run on 94 octane and a 40mm restrictor. The guys at the track debated on whether removing the restrictor would effect the tuning in terms of rich/lean but we decided the MAF sensor would correctly make up for the increased air flow and if the injectors had the capacity all is fine. I'll provide a picture of the chip housing later today. It has some writing that you might glean some information.

The 40mm restrictor is out. Adding it back in shouldn't be too hard with a press. I can post a picture of it if you would like to see it. Interestingly, Nicky Grist made a comment during the Australian rally that said the restrictor adds torque but reduces HP. Make any sense to you?

he is referring to the added backpressure developed at lower RPM's with the restrictor, but lower overall flow at the higher rev's.

More airflow moves the powerband up farther in the rev range.

Hi James:
WRT the suspension, a better photo would be from underneath. Specifically looking at the control arms and the attaching (trailing) arms to them. You can send them privately if it's easier.

WRT the Lambda, I'm an advocate of lambda. So much so, that I believe it's the best addition to induction since the carbuerator. The problem with running consitently rich is the washing of the cylinder walls with fuel. A fine thing if you are racing, frequent engine rebuilts (complete) are commonplace. In fact, if you ask Meyer or Lehmann about rebuilds, a "full" season is considered really good. In a non competitive restoration/ownership lambda should be considered a good thing, and doesn't detract from all out performance in any measureable way.

WRT restrictors, they've been commonplace for some time. My own thinking wrt your car (non efi) is that the fuel tables are for the car with the restrictor installed, which means the fuel will be richer at a lower rpm, and leaner at a high rpm vs not having the restrictor installed requiring leaner low rpm, richer hi rpm band. I've got a couple of the Lehmann chipsets from buffum's urq's, all ignore the 02. You can put it back, you need a Mac 01/2 ecu, and make sure that the lambda wire wasn't cut in the harness (I've seen both, the more common was to cut at the chip)

Before I'd remove anything, I'd suggest you visit a 4wd dyno with exhaust analyzer.

IME with restrictors, they are meant to cut HP, which when added to a big turbo, usually adds torque. Think of a restrictor as a velocity stack, that's really what it is and how it functions, especially on turbo inlets.

As far as your car... If you don't run under the rules that require them (if memory serves FIA = 33mm, SCCA = 40mm), I'd tune the car without it. The restrictor came about at the end of the Group B era to limit HP=limit speeds. Considering the comments the factory drivers had wrt the sport quattro in 450hp trim, that really puts in perspective audisports' 700+hp motor plans that eventually found their way into the IMSA cars.

HTH

Scott Justusson
'84 RS2URQ project
'83 Urq
'87 type 44tqw
'86 type 44tq