Dan, my words were "outhandles any car in it's class", and I am referring to the cars the DeLorean was compared against at introduction in 1981. And 'as well as' many modern cars, I did not say it outhandled them, like you said I did. I have driven both the manual transmission car (belonging to Gus Schlacter) about 1,000 miles and the automatic car (belonging to De Lorean Motor Company) about the same. Both have the new suspension and the engine package. Stephen and I both have a fair amount of time behind the wheel of a 1999 Audi TT (before and after the recall). We both believe the DeLorean handles just as well. It certainly is more FUN to drive - I can promise you that, no 'almost' about it. >Ok... well, I have a big problem with that claim. I can almost promise you (SNIP) >that Audi would spend millions of R&D on a car that would only be outhandled >by a 20 year old design with a $1,300 suspension upgrade? (You decide that Audi spent millions and still ended up with a car that had to be recalled because of it's quirky handling characteristics. In September and October of 1999, 2 fatal high speed crashes happened in Germany and were extensively reported. Another magazine, Stern, even interviewed many TT owners and published their scary experience. As part of the recall, Audi announced to recall all the 40,000-plus TT sold worldwide up to date, fitting thicker anti-roll bars, firmer dampers and a rear spoiler. The front wishbone is also revised. A friend of Stephen's in the UK rolled his TT last year. >what it is. I think that's what James was doing... exaggerating. And if >that's the case James, are you exaggerating the horsepower you're getting Seems like you're trying to smear me with a pretty wide brush, there, Dan. That's not very nice. >out of DMC Houston's upgraded motor? I'd like to see some "objective" >specifications on it. Maybe the car magazine of your choice could do that >test as well... We can show anyone the dyno test results of the engine (it's a solid 197 horsepower on the dyno), and attendees to next weekends AZ meeting (the 20th) or the Open House in June are welcome to drive the car, though the only car we'll have there is the automatic transmission equipped company owned car, the biggest problem of which is that the stock stall converter shifts at 5500 rpm, which is too low to get the max power out of it. The manual transmission car pulls up to and beyond redline, with power behind it, in every gear, given enough road. If you can find a magazine that wants to test it, we'll be MORE than happy to provide them with the cars - the PR would be great for De Lorean Motor Company and the DeLorean in general. >James also said: >snip--->"We were also fortunate to have access to the original >engineers. I told the story earlier on the DML about how after Colin >Chapman drove one of the DeLorean prototypes with a proposed spring >setup, the engineers were instructed to re-do their work as the >DeLorean outhandled the then-current Esprit." >I would like to see this in writing. Not only is the Esprit lighter, it's Geez, in writing? I'm sure that it was documented like this..."Colin thinks the DMC-12 outhandles the Esprit, wants it changed so it's worse. Don't tell JZD." Be realistic. I do solemnly swear that this is the story that was related to us by former engineers involved in the DeLorean project. Steve Rubano gave us this link: http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m0BUX/3_31/59457898/p7/article.jhtml?term=modifying+suspension in which the author says: "Eibach engineers emphasized a recurring theme throughout the discussion the distinction between a "performance spring" and a "lowering spring". Some companies make springs simply to lower a car a certain amount 1.25-, 2-,3 in or evermore? Eibach engineers springs to enhance the performance of a vehicle, with a lowered center of gravity being merely one means of achieving improved performance. To Eibach's way of thinking the change in appearance provided by lowered ride height is a nice but unimportant side effect of improving performance: Eibach's main goal is to improve handling." Sounds remarkably like what I wrote in my original posting, doesn't it? It's not coincidental. I point to the summation by the author as further evidence that a complete, four spring and shock setup is the proper way to do the job: "Even when making a change as basic as performance springs, the right way to do it is with a complete, thoroughly engineered program of one component, as its performance will require other components to operate differently to maintain harmony." A "complete, thoroughly engineered program" is doing ALL the springs on the car, not just half of them. Our new shocks (again, front AND rear) were engineered to work with the previously engineered shocks for the ultimate suspension upgrade. My original posting earlier this week apparently offended some people, people who coincidentally or otherwise happen to praise the products and services of PJ Grady in their DML postings. My intent was not to portray Rob's products or services as shoddy in any way. My choice of the word "cheapie" was a bad judgement on my part. I have the utmost respect for Rob's technical knowledge and abilities. Rob is one of the best customers that De Lorean Motor Company has, and I believe that he, Debbie and their staff provide an excellent and needed service in their region of the country. While I disagree with his assertion that front springs are sufficient to perform an adequate job in upgrading the suspension properly (see above), people will always disagree. It's when people like Steve, Gary, and now, Dan, take it personal and begin to make veiled (and even open) accusations that it denigrates the spirit and intent of the DeLorean Mailing List. James Espey DeLorean Motor Company Houston, Texas 281/568-9573 800/USA-DMC1 http://www.delorean.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]