1992 Audi 90CS Quattro Sport: The Beefy Baby Audi

From the September 1992 issue of Car and Driver.

You’re looking at another stout German hitting our shores and making the case for full­-time four-wheel-drive machines. The latest Audi 90 marks the fourth generation of baby Audis. Baby, maybe, but not infan­tile. Over the years they’ve become ever more accomplished.

Yet like many adults, even the lighter front-drive versions have put on a few pounds. In this all-wheel-drive 90CS Quattro Sport, it’s a few hundred pounds over last year’s 90 Quattro. So it is a ques­tion of stoutness: If a little goes a long way, how much does it take before the added load cuts down speed and fuel economy? And if you live in a fair-weather climate, is it worth lugging around a four-wheeled, full-time foul-weather kit to handle a few rainy, snowy, or icy days?

On the other hand, if you live upstate in Alaska or high in the rainy Pacific North­west, boy, has Audi got a baby buggy for you!

Don’t buy the hefty and pricey Quattro­ drive layout purely because you feel you must have more than two-wheel drive to put the power to the ground. The 90’s 172-hp 2.0-liter V-6 delivers less than an over­dose of performance, so traction on dry pavement poses little problem. Audi sends us three 90 models—a base S, a fancier CS, and the CS in Quattro trim—each with the V-6 developed for the bigger 100 sedan (C/D, December 1991). Although this engine is a fresh design, it lacks the technical tweaks that make you feel the difference between simply traveling well or truly thrilling to the journey. Audi’s chunky V-6 wears an electronic engine-­control system and port fuel injection but keeps a lid on the combustion process due to the single-overhead-cam layout that limits each cylinder bank to two valves per cylinder. That’s where it falls behind in today’s power parade.

Audi itself pinpoints the 90’s prime competitors: Japan’s Acura Vigor, Infiniti J30, and Lexus ES300, plus Germany’s own BMW 325i and Mercedes-Benz 190E 2.6. The Quattro offers features these oth­ers don’t, but its power-to-weight ratio works against it. Compared with, say, BMW’s 325i—the very definition of a pocket-rocket sedan—the Audi lags. It produces 172 horsepower from 2.8 liters, whereas the BMW’s 24-valve six-cylinder whips up 189 horsepower from only 2.5 liters. And at 3404 pounds, the stolid Audi outweighs the BMW by 366 pounds.

To be fair, the Audi, despite a wheel­base about four inches shorter, measures about six inches longer overall than the BMW. The 90’s wheelbase has actually been increased 2.3 inches in comparison with the previous 80’s. But wait—the Quattro’s wheelbase is six-tenths of an inch shorter than the regular 90’s because the four-wheel-drive model bears a differ­ent five-speed gearbox (no automatic available), plus a new independent rear suspension to cope with the power fed through the new rear half-shafts. The added hardware makes the Quattro weigh 200 pounds more than the front-drive version of the 90CS.

The Audi’s slim cabin offers good comfort for four occupants and can carry five. But whoever gets wedged in the middle of the rear seat will feel as if he/she has been taken to the cleaners to have a few wrinkles pressed in. The Japanese competitors targeted by Audi offer slightly roomier accommoda­tions, yet, like the small BMW, they don’t provide four-wheel drive. And unlike the German entries, they generate less feed­back for the driver, especially under the duress of hard driving.

In answer to the duress Audi faces in the market, Richard Mugg, vice president in charge of the company in America, says it will deliver “German engineering value at Japanese price points.” Mugg contends that the “90 offers the luxury of the Lexus ES300 and the sports flair of the BMW 325i, but is comparably priced with the Acura Vigor.” He adds: “Our prices will match those of our Japanese competitors and they will beat BMW and Mercedes.” The strategy is meeting with some success. Audi’s 1992 sales in the first five months are up more than 18 percent over the same period last year.

As long as we’re talking numbers, the revised 90 gains 23 percent in torsional rigidity (notable in a car structurally “opened up” for new folding rear seats with no bulkhead to back them up). A stretched deck helps provide 37 percent more trunk space in front-drive 90s, and 73 percent more room in the boot of the revised Quattro (though in comparison it still gives up some luggage space to its drive mechanism beneath).

One thing you won’t find among the numbers is a two-door 90. Maybe the pre­vious version looked too much like a Ford Escort at three times the price. However, lots of people seem to like the new model’s taut look, beefcake stance, and striking wheels. The Quattro’s 205/60VR-15 performance tires replace the regular CS’s 195/65HR-15 all-weather tires (which are a “reverse” option on the Quattro for anybody who really needs them). Audi mounts the Quattro’s fatter tires on seven-inch aluminum rims instead of six-inchers. Fortunately, their simple spokes are easy to clean, because Audi’s four-wheel discs still puff out scads of clinging brake dust.

Every car in this category showcases solid fit and finish. If there’s anything that’s too solid about the 90CS Quattro Sport, it’s the sport in its slightly lowered suspension. It jounces over sharp bumps. Yet the firm shocks, springs, and bushings don’t jell well enough with the big-boy tires to put the baby Audi quite on equal terms with the handling provided by more mature designs. The Quattro’s wheels pro­vide a wider track but also increase the 90’s tendency to follow truck ruts and the like. Although the overall stability of the Audi plays well, our track testing shows, for example, that it only matches the BMW 325i’s cornering grip at 0.80 g and leans harder on its front tires. And though both cars are equipped with ABS, Audi’s brakes take longer to stop and, as their load suggests, fade faster from higher speeds.

This Audi has a smoothed nose copied from its big brothers, headlight washers, and aero headlights (among the better Audi lights in memory, others often falling, shall we say, short in the dark). The grille’s “quattro” badge reflects the only model message. There are also new front fender flares and a rear winglet. Inside, leather that should be grippier wraps a fine four-spoke wheel. Its hub houses an airbag, and beyond it are large tachometer and speedometer dials and smaller secondary gauges. The slim cabin leaves no place for more gauges except disconcertingly low on the console. A cli­mate-control system is sandwiched between those dials and an ill-marked but decent-sounding AM/FM/cassette stereo. A graphic row of controls above it switches fog lights, rear defroster, hazard flashers, and heated seats on or off.

The 90’s headliner hangs low to clear the power sunroof, the pedals are spaced close, and the huge headrests—despite donut-hole centers—block the view to the rear. The narrow interior has a cozy immediacy, but the seats offer less imme­diacy than we’d like. They’re flatter, slicker, less grippy than needed in a car that grips the road more impressively.

When it comes to breaking that grip just for fun, the all-wheel-drive Audi falls behind the rear-drive BMW. The Quattro eats up 8.2 seconds going from a standstill to 60 mph; the 325i eats it alive in 6.9 seconds. In short, the Audi weighs hundreds of pounds more, sells for thousands of dollars more, and offers less power to boot (it around). The lower weight of Audi’s “lesser” front-drive 90CS promises more performance than the Quattro and higher fuel economy than the 20 mpg we aver­aged. So the regular CS won’t fall quite as far behind BMW’s wolverine in the days, weeks, and months between those pesky thunderstorms and snowfalls where the Quattro thrives.

All of which make us appreciate Audi’s bigger, sweeter 100CS all the more. It’s much roomier, weighs a few pounds less than the baby Quattro, feels much longer-legged despite having the same engine, covers an extra hundred miles or more on bigger tankfuls, and costs little more. That’s stout.