New 18" Pirellis on TTS
#21
The 7th gear was more likely a matter of meeting various stringent mileage requirements. One of the TT RS trip reports noted that it attained significantly better highway fuel economy than the TTS.
#22
AudiWorld Super User
#23
#24
AudiWorld Member
Thread Starter
I put the 19" Hankooks back on after the rear shock mounts were replaced. Not bad, until I drove up into Wisconsin and onto Kenosha's messed up streets. At any rate, I think I can put up with the 19" ride now that the mounts have been replaced.
I may be getting a little schizo changing tires so many times, but I'm sure that the Hankook summer tires are quieter on some stretches of hiway than the new Pirelli AS tires. Also, Tire Rack finally did a snow test on the Pirellis. Not great. Probably should have gone with DWS06. Good thing I wear out tires so fast
I may be getting a little schizo changing tires so many times, but I'm sure that the Hankook summer tires are quieter on some stretches of hiway than the new Pirelli AS tires. Also, Tire Rack finally did a snow test on the Pirellis. Not great. Probably should have gone with DWS06. Good thing I wear out tires so fast
#25
Still waiting for my car (though I now have a vin... yeah!) so I cant comment with any authority on ride quality. Very personal thing anyway. I find the discussion interesting though as I'm beginning to wonder about the value of an adjustable mag setup as opposed to a good old fashion 2 way adjustable shock. I guess I'll find out soon enough. OTOH, in my testing I didn't find the S rode all that hard even in dynamic on 20s, though it did at times seem annoyingly nervous. Then again, my sensibilities have been calibrated by some pretty stern stuff over the years.
Thinking out loud, so to speak, I do wonder about the physics of significant front weight bias coupled with a really stiff short wheelbase chassis. Given the 60/40 split with the engine mass at the extreme forward, I could imagine that any upward deflection of the front end results in more leverage rearward than with some other designs. If so, that would mean xfering load to the rear springs. The lighter, lower inertia rear (thus more easily accelerated) winds up and then unloads that energy at just about the same time the trailing wheel hits the bump. Might that amplify things at the *** end of the car? Dunno, likely all silly talk as, for the record, I'm not remotely a suspension designer. Still it is interesting that smoothing things out a bit comes via replacing the rear mounts.
Thinking out loud, so to speak, I do wonder about the physics of significant front weight bias coupled with a really stiff short wheelbase chassis. Given the 60/40 split with the engine mass at the extreme forward, I could imagine that any upward deflection of the front end results in more leverage rearward than with some other designs. If so, that would mean xfering load to the rear springs. The lighter, lower inertia rear (thus more easily accelerated) winds up and then unloads that energy at just about the same time the trailing wheel hits the bump. Might that amplify things at the *** end of the car? Dunno, likely all silly talk as, for the record, I'm not remotely a suspension designer. Still it is interesting that smoothing things out a bit comes via replacing the rear mounts.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Junito1027
Parts For Sale - Archive (NO NEW POSTS HERE)
0
02-02-2018 11:26 PM