Well, very well said, I liked the RWD part. BMWs are still RWD. Seems there is good reason. Love em ;-). And try to put some efforts to make your VW handbrake work perfectly the way you like, and in winter you will keep up with RWDs at every corner.
But, how long that "Sledgehammer" had its engine running? Long enough? Mr. Callaway is high-tech dude. And I dont believe not a minute that Mr. mentioned above did not modified cam, valves and pushrods, and who knows what else, not just added FI and turbos. Of course its impressive to take stock and slow engine and overboost it, and then compare what it was. But we speak stock engines dont we? Just big displacement is always been an easy way to get power by adding big turbos and get big numbers. Simple, is there a simpler solution at all? To contradict, for example, in late 60-ties in italy, Lancia was doing _stock_ narrow angle V4cylinder 1.3liter DOHC engines with single head design (like VR6), with valves inclined with respect to combustion chamber. They put close to 100bhp! Later for racing they built 1.6 V4 with 145bhp at 7000rpms, no turbos. These engines were running 24-hour events. That was in 1969. Yes, "old tech", but definitelly this is "high tech". How far would they go by also increasing displacement and adding turbos? I'm not against big displacements, I love em, but my opinion is that we can quite simple measure the effectiveness, "tech" level of engine- how many bhp or kW it makes per 1liter. And power-to-weight ratio also. You like German cars, I think, say E30 M3 would never be M3 with iron block with pushrods and turbos. Why they did not built one? Someone said, "everything depends on application"... -Nils > 2) I agree with the statement "old tech, but NOT low-tech". Those motors > are not only indestructible, they can put out insane amounts of HP. Back in > 1988, Reeves Callaway took a 350 block from the BowTie catalog, bolted on a > couple turbos, chopped up a Holley tunnel ram intake and inserted his own > FI system and got 920HP and ~800 lb-ft. Stuffed into a Vette (later dubbed > Sledgehammer), it went 255mph and was driven to the test track (TRC?) while > getting 17mpg. I'll take that kind of "low-tech" pushrod any day. > > 3) Solid rear axle? BFD. Looked under your VW's rear end lately? The SS's > brakes are awesome, btw. My gripe with the SS is the poor front/rear weight > distribution and lack of bucket seats (yuk!). > > 4) The story about the editor plowing cones is funny- to the point where > the observer thought the car sucked. Get real. It's the driver that makes > the difference. Thanks for the rebuttal where a *real* driver took 6 people > through at near the best time for the day. I race motorcycles as a hobby > (road course, not dragstrip), and it's fun watching posers on late-model > high-tech superbikes get smoked by some dude on a 5-year old duct-tape > special with half the horsepower. I've been on both sides of that scenario. > It's 90% rider/driver talent, 10& machinery. > > 5) The FWD vs. RWD thing always gets me. I grew up in upstate NY, learned > to drive in the snow. I can't believe people STILL think FWD is better. I > can't remember how many times I plowed my VW into a snowbank because you > can't make it oversteer under power. In trouble? Can't brake, it'll make > the front slide. Can't gas it, same reason. E-brake? Lame band-aid for the > real problem. I like to be able to do something with my rear wheels other > than put air in them. Give me RWD at the track anyday. I find it > interesting that most (if not all) of Mercedes, BMW, and Porsche's lineup > are RWD. And everything Japanese is FWD. Yeah, I knew there was a reason I > like German cars... ;-) > > Dave M. > Sacramento, CA > > 1990.5 GLI (for sale) > 1991 GLI (needs HP) > 1981 Dasher (150 miles/qt) > 1970 Impala (wish it was '96 SS) > _____________ List Sponsor: http://www.netsville.com To remove yourself from this list, send mail to [email protected] with 'unsubscribe a2_16v' in the body of your message See us on the web at http://www.a2-16v.com Visit the 16V Homepage at http://www.gti16v.org
