Which Quattro? UR, WR or RR?
Discussion
Flatinfourth said:
I'm afraid I beg to differ, despite the various quattro bits tacked on to the coupe sheel quite poorly in places, these cars are fundamentally better thought out and built than anything Jaguar or Triumph ever built up to and including the same period (speaking as someone who has an E Type prototype in my workshop), and an unmodified ten valve would cheerfully stay ahead of my own XJS V12 Le mans in the dry. Its worth remembering also that when the Impreza, Integrale and Pulsar were spitting gearbox parts all over the place for years, Quattro boxes were so unrequired so as to change hands for £150.00. It's only abuse and neglect that damages a Quattro, the Jags and Triumphs fall apart quite nicely without the owner's assistance!
What I was trying to say is that the Quat feels old in a different way to the way these old British cars feels old. The Brits are from a different era, the way they're put together is different. They're different animals altogether. They're easy to take to bits and put back together. The Quattro isn't. It's quite plasticky, the plastic snaps, and you can't always get a new bit. Or you have to take the front of the car apart to change a bulb. Almost everything about it has some difficulty associated with it. On the upside my toolkit is constantly expanding.But when they're working properly they're simply wonderful cars.
Ahonen said:
Thank you. Yes, that's the bit. Looks like it may cost me a small fortune though...
You sound surprised! 
I spent nearly £20 on a sunvisor clip the other day.
What's the rest of the sun roof like? The one on my RR was basically rusted out, but the one on my MB is rust free.
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff