Audi A4 The Audi A4 model offers nimble handling and performance that makes it one of the leading cars in its class. Read more about the Audi A4 in the Audi A4 review.

VISUAL OR PERFORMANCE??

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 27, 2005 | 08:29 PM
  #31  
ZedEx's Avatar
2nd Gear
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 940
From:
Default RE: VISUAL OR PERFORMANCE??

I wouldn't call them pointless, exactly... It's about aesthetic appeal. Although sticking with OEM is the best way to go.
 
Old Dec 27, 2005 | 08:46 PM
  #32  
flyboy's Avatar
4th Gear
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 4,540
From:
Default RE: VISUAL OR PERFORMANCE??

Children, Children, You need to calm down and go sit in the timeout seat. If you were to do any body mods right now I wouldn't take it past the painted lowers, grill, light. sort of thing. You can make great astetice leeps with something as simple as lowering the car + you get more than just a look. Wheels could be next. again, looks great, but also gives you an edge over people without them. changing the light housings. While this is one to be argued about the proformace of it, I personaly cant go back to driving with Halogens, I just cant see with them + they look killer, (so long as they are the right temp).
 
Old Dec 27, 2005 | 09:27 PM
  #33  
GraffixWB's Avatar
1st Gear
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 361
From:
Default RE: VISUAL OR PERFORMANCE??

So you have a fast shopping cart, big deal. If Audi had the kind of backing in street tuning, they would be a close match. I never said they were slow, or badly made cars. All I said is that they were shopping cars and that I thought they were ugly. i know a few people with 400whp honda that will spank my car. That's not what it's all about.
If it makes you feel better, you are right, i did say changing the a4 away from OEM is bad. I guess I should have said *4 series. My point was I think changing the body around on an A4 OR S4, most likely will end up looking worse. If you've got the $$$$ to spend to make everything fit right and match, cool, but chances are it's not gonna be very appealing. I've seen some good, but PLENTY bad.
If you wanna be like everyone else, go build a honda. You are guaranteed to be able to find the parts and software to get it done. If you wanna try to stand out a bit, Don't be flashy with big wings and full body kits. Just have a clean car with a few subtle mods that only people who really care about the car are going to notice. oh, and have fun with engine management on Audi's and VW's, if you wanna BT car

OH, about the REAL V-tec comment. you should know what I'm talking about,,,,,, DOHC V-tec ,, not the silly SOHC.. Remember, i did drive honda for a few years before I got sick of em...
 
Old Dec 27, 2005 | 10:28 PM
  #34  
ZedEx's Avatar
2nd Gear
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 940
From:
Default RE: VISUAL OR PERFORMANCE??

... Silly SOHC VTEC? Jesus Christ, now I've lost all respect for you. VTEC is VTEC, whether it's on a DOHC or a SOHC, it does that same thing, it stands for the same thing (Variable Valve Timing and Electrical Lift Control). One of my most respectable Hondas I know of is, that's right, a D16Z6, just a little sinlge cam.

The point is, Audi DOES NOT have the backing that Honda has, for a good reason. That's like saying if Honda motors had the same research put into them as Ferrari engines do, Honda would be just as good. In all honesty, I think my little Civic is just as sexy as my Audi, and just to let you know, I've never had a body kit, never had a wing, my Hondas have always been stock body, so that little cliche doesn't apply in this arguement, good try though. About your statement pertaining to changing body parts around... Like anything else, spend time and money to do it CORRECTLY, and it will not look like Hell. If you take short cuts and half *** the project, of course, your results will be indicitive of that. And I sure will have fun with Engine Management for my Audi, just like any other car, it's going to take time to learn.

And let me explain something to you. I do not build Hondas to try and fit in (I am the exact opposite of that), I build Hondas because they are economy cars, that are easily trasformed into performance machines that can be built to take on ANYTHING. Last time I was up at VIR, guess what was destroying the Vipers, Lamborghinis, Ferraris, Porsches... Just a little '02 EP3 Civic Type-R with STOCK POWERTRAIN. But that's completely cast aside, because it's just a Honda, right? Pfff...

The last few cars I've built, have been built for a few grand, and have been able to knock heads with almost anything I've come across... From my 11 Second DSM, to my Auto Cross monster '94 Civic. The Laser was ugly as Hell, but it has destroyed some pretty impressive machines. But now, with the Audi, I'm not trying to be the man. I want a car that is more fun to drive (i.e more power, better handling, improved braking... Make a respectable performing machine), and make it aesthetically appealing as well. I see NO problem in that at all, I am not saying:

"yo dawgs i is tyrin to find a ractive mufflers for my audi a9........or it mite be a4 i cant rememmebr,,,,,,, anywayz i wanan get a mad greddy or veelside (sp?) body kit and a alunuminum wing n i cant find any clear tailights for it...........ebay dont relly have much stuff like it had for my hyndai tiberon or nething like dat..but i dont want a exhast i just want some lowd mufflers for a dual. i also want a some carbon fibber tint n dats geting installled now........i think my car is a 2006 but i not sure can any of u help me????/ i just want my outtie to be MAD REALA AND HAVE MAD VTAK!!!1!!!!1!1"

... Ahem...

See there difference? I'm not a ricer, I'm an enthusiast, and I want to improve the lines of my Audi A4 by giving it some extra styling... Is there really a problem with that? I agree, the lines of the Audi A4 are beautiful as is, but it's not a F360 Modena, Koenigsegg CC, Ferrari Enzo, or an F430 or anything like that... The car's not Exotic, it's lines can use some improvement. And that's what I'm setting out to do.

Get me now?
 
Old Dec 27, 2005 | 11:25 PM
  #35  
ZedEx's Avatar
2nd Gear
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 940
From:
Old Dec 27, 2005 | 11:28 PM
  #36  
GraffixWB's Avatar
1st Gear
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 361
From:
Default RE: VISUAL OR PERFORMANCE??

HAHAHA, Chill out DOOD!!! There is nothin to get your panties in a bunch about... I gave my opinion. You just didn't like it. I don't care! You can tell me you have no respect for me all you want. Makes no diff to me. I understood what you were sayin the first time, you just don't like what I have to say. I never liked SOHC vtec cuz i never noticed power gains, Prolly cuz I never turboed my hondas.
Honda is supported because they make more horsepower.. they are designed for high revs and to make more power without alot of piston speed. Audis are designed to make torque. It's a ton easier to make more power when the revs are available and valves have more lift and duration in the higher revs. Audis don't like those revs cuz piston speed is through the roof and reliability goes out the window. ALTHOUGH you should read the article on the new RS4.. 4.2l V8 with redline of 8250.
I never called you a ricer. I don't know why you thought all of my comments were directed straight at you, nor am I worried. There was no personal attack. And if you havent noticed weve been saying damn near the same thing other than I don't like Hondas and you do....
 
Old Dec 27, 2005 | 11:40 PM
  #37  
ZedEx's Avatar
2nd Gear
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 940
From:
Default RE: VISUAL OR PERFORMANCE??

My panties aren't in a bunch at all... Boosting Hondas aren't the only way to get power out of them, I've got friends making 350whp Naturally Aspirated. And what do you mean "...to make more power without a lot of piston speed"? I'm confused by your statement.

High revs don't effect your pistons, it's the rods that take the force, not to mention a hand full of other aspects that allow Honda engines to rev so deep. The 1.8T doesn't provide much in it's stock form, however, modified is a different story. As for the new RS4, I'd take one over any Honda, any day... If I had the money, which I do not, so I will stick to my high revving, power loving piece of crap.

And you called my car a shopping cart... You basically said I'm running with the group, that insults me.

We could argue over this for days, but the bottom line is this:

I'm into Hondas because their performance can be greatly improved, for the cost of 60,000 Maintenance on my Audi. I'm into Hondas because at this point in life, it's the cheapest, easiest way to go fast... When I have tens of thousands of dollars to throw around someday, hey, why not build an S4. But for now, cheapest performance, is the best performance... As for the Audi, she'll be well rounded. A colmination of performance and aestetics. The Hondas and DSMs of mine are just there for performance.
 
Old Dec 27, 2005 | 11:41 PM
  #38  
GraffixWB's Avatar
1st Gear
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 361
From:
Default RE: VISUAL OR PERFORMANCE??

Dude,, I really Don't care what power they make,,,,,, THAT WAS NEVER MY POINT!!! I know they are fast. I still don't like the look!!! Great,, they are cheap to make fast. If you do your own work, it's never really that expensive to make any car fast. oh, high piston speed tears motors apart.
I call them shopping carts cuz they have that feel to them. mechanically they are strong , but most of the other parts like the fenders and interior, feel like you could dent them by sneezing. I DON'T LIKE THAT. I bet your car is great. I bet you put alot of time into that shopping cart of yours . I repects that. Just relax!!!
 
Old Dec 27, 2005 | 11:42 PM
  #39  
ZedEx's Avatar
2nd Gear
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 940
From:
Default RE: VISUAL OR PERFORMANCE??

... Is that all you saw in my post?
 
Old Dec 27, 2005 | 11:45 PM
  #40  
Karl's Avatar
Administrator
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 8,981
From: Seattle, WA
Default RE: VISUAL OR PERFORMANCE??

those cars are freaking nice!!
 



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:47 PM.