2.8 performance

[le91688]

Hey so I have a 2000 A4 2.8 5 speed. I upgraded from an automatic eclipse RS (stands for Really Slow). Ive driven alot of cars and am wondering why my 2.8 doesnt feel like its putting out its 190hp. The car jumps at low RPMs but once it gets up past around 4 it just feels like the car gives up. I checked my air filters, oil's good, no check engine lights, runs great. Is it because im skimping out and using mid grade?

By the way, the main reason for my concern is that i raced my buddies stock ass rickety Cavalier (5 spd) expecting an easy win and the thing pulled on me. Dont get me wrong, i didnt buy my 2.8 to race, i just wanted a nice DD so i could buy a cheap DSM or honda project car in the future, but i mean, i think something might be up.


Is it because my car is so heavy or do you guys think maybe there is something not right here.

[big_greasy_taco]

Is it because my car is so heavy or do you guys think maybe there is something not right here.

Just so ya know, B5's are what happens when sexy girls eat one too many twinkies... I would guess your 2.8 is in fine running condition.

[Borden]

LOL what taco said...the 2.8 is a good DD but thats about it..looks damn sexy IMO

[Oricle]

Couple sites are claiming a 0-60 in 8.8 for the A4. Claiming 8.0 0-60 for the Cav.
I thought the 2.8s were a little quicker but who knows.

[bernB5]

2.8 and performance don't belong in the same sentence. at least when talking about the audi 2.8. a 2.8 24v turbo on the other hand, now we're talking.

[audimuse]

2.8 is def faster than a cavalier. i owned a 2.2l i4 before my b5 and it was slower than shit off the line and top end compared the 2.8. plus if the 2.8 can keep up pretty damn well esp on top end. i know for fact that the 1.8 stock is slower than a cavalier (raced one before and lost pretty bad). but yeah they are heavy, and are sex, but not built by any stretch for racing. you got a good dd.

[JaVa]

4k is kinda a low spot on this engine too, once you get above that your good to go...