modifications for split folding rear seats?
Hi
We have a 1994 Audio 80 with rear seats that don't fold down. Has anyone tried putting in the split folding seats? It seems like it's possible -- but would love to hear of others' experiences on what is involved. Thanks, g |
Re: modifications for split folding rear seats?
> We have a 1994 Audio 80 with rear seats that don't fold down. Has > anyone tried putting in the split folding seats? It seems like it's > possible -- but would love to hear of others' experiences on what is > involved. Hi Gina I haven't tried it myself and nor has anybody else here it seems. If you can remove the existing seat back and there's no permanent looking bodywork or a big upright fuel tank sitting between the boot space and cabin, I would say you have a fair chance of making split/folding seats fit. You really need to get a good look at an 80 with the split seats, to make some comparisons with yours for bracketry, fixing points, trim differences etc. I have a '94 80 with folding rear seats, but I'm a long way from Dublin, sorry. Good luck Rachael |
Re: modifications for split folding rear seats?
gina.joue@ucd.ie (g) wrote in message news:<c40b4026.0309210614.19ed0d65@posting.google. com>...
> Hi > > We have a 1994 Audio 80 with rear seats that don't fold down. Has > anyone tried putting in the split folding seats? It seems like it's > possible -- but would love to hear of others' experiences on what is > involved. My understanding is that the sheetmetal structure behind the seat is necessary structural stuff. My sis-in-law has a 1990 80q - and I don't see how it would be possible to get all the mounting stuff in there without some major surgery. Maybe the 1994 is different. Good luck, Spider |
Re: modifications for split folding rear seats?
"Spider" <beelzebubba@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:73da2590.0310041646.3d3d1e88@posting.google.c om... > gina.joue@ucd.ie (g) wrote in message news:<c40b4026.0309210614.19ed0d65@posting.google. com>... > My understanding is that the sheetmetal structure behind the seat is > necessary structural stuff. My sis-in-law has a 1990 80q - and I > don't see how it would be possible to get all the mounting stuff in > there without some major surgery. Maybe the 1994 is different. > > Good luck, > > Spider Indeed Spidey Man Whilst both cars look pretty much identical externally, my old ('87) 90E has fixed rear seats, a bulkhead and the fuel tank in the way. Our '94 80 TDI has folding rear seats - the fuel tank is sort of wrapped around the spare wheel well, under the floor, and I guess the bodyshell is designed for the opening. I have seen the later 80's with and without split folding seats. It may be that all the later 80 shells are constructed to allow the folding rear seats, it would make sense from a production line point of view. I suspect the quattro versions, with the diff, wishbones and subframe wouldn't have the room to allow the fuel tank to sit under the floor, but I've never looked underneath one to be certain. As you say, if there is a bulkhead and tank in the way, it would be a right old rigmarole to modify it for folding rear seats. Gina would be better off buying a car with them already in. Cheers Rachael |
Re: modifications for split folding rear seats?
"Rachael" <rfearnhead@mybra.btinternet.com> wrote in message news:<blpk8u$fc5$1@hercules.btinternet.com>...
> "Spider" <beelzebubba@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:73da2590.0310041646.3d3d1e88@posting.google.c om... > > gina.joue@ucd.ie (g) wrote in message > news:<c40b4026.0309210614.19ed0d65@posting.google. com>... > > > My understanding is that the sheetmetal structure behind the seat is > > necessary structural stuff. My sis-in-law has a 1990 80q - and I > > don't see how it would be possible to get all the mounting stuff in > > there without some major surgery. Maybe the 1994 is different. > > > > Good luck, > > > > Spider > > Indeed Spidey Man > > Whilst both cars look pretty much identical externally, my old ('87) 90E has > fixed rear seats, a bulkhead and the fuel tank in the way. Our '94 80 TDI > has folding rear seats - the fuel tank is sort of wrapped around the spare > wheel well, under the floor, and I guess the bodyshell is designed for the > opening. I have seen the later 80's with and without split folding seats. It > may be that all the later 80 shells are constructed to allow the folding > rear seats, it would make sense from a production line point of view. I > suspect the quattro versions, with the diff, wishbones and subframe wouldn't > have the room to allow the fuel tank to sit under the floor, but I've never > looked underneath one to be certain. > > As you say, if there is a bulkhead and tank in the way, it would be a right > old rigmarole to modify it for folding rear seats. Gina would be better off > buying a car with them already in. Considering what those cars might resell for, I suspect that the cost of modification for a fixed-bulkhead car to be about the price of a used example with that already in place! Now, over here, prior to 1989 (IIRC), the 80 was called the 4000. We got the redesign in '89, but I owned a couple of 4000 models previous to that release. In both cases, they did not have folding rear seats. The sheetmetal behind the seatback was perforated for a ski pass-through, but it was stamped and triangulated in a manner that screamed "I'm a structural member! Don't cut me out!" Both cars were quattro, however. The fuel tank was under the boot floor, IIRC. It has been a while since I was last under that car, so I don't remember exactly what the configuration was. I have seen several early '90s Audi 80/90 cars around, and so next time I walk by one, I'll check to see if they have the split seat stuff. Since there are a few FWD examples, I'll see if that makes a difference. I completely agree that the body shell would be alike for both drive configurations - trying to keep that straight down a single line would suck. One would think the bits of the right type would screw right in. Spider |
Re: modifications for split folding rear seats?
beelzebubba@hotmail.com (Spider) wrote in message news:<73da2590.0310060843.50456ab3@posting.google. com>...
> > Now, over here, prior to 1989 (IIRC), the 80 was called the 4000. We > got the redesign in '89, but I owned a couple of 4000 models previous > to that release. In both cases, they did not have folding rear seats. > The sheetmetal behind the seatback was perforated for a ski > pass-through, but it was stamped and triangulated in a manner that > screamed "I'm a structural member! Don't cut me out!" Both cars were > quattro, however. The fuel tank was under the boot floor, IIRC. Sorry to tell you, but you do *not* RC. As I had a few encounters with the 'Bowling Ball in the Trunk' Syndrome over the years in our '84 and '86 4KQs, I remember these cars vividly. The 4KQ had the fuel tank mounted right behind the rear seatback (and in front of a cover in the boot/trunk), so you couldn't even get a ski sack to work (much less folding seatbacks) unless you poked a hole right through the center of the tank. Now, that didn't stop BMW from putting a front driveshaft through the oil pan for the 325ix ... > I have seen several early '90s Audi 80/90 cars around, and so next > time I walk by one, I'll check to see if they have the split seat > stuff. I've got a '90 90 20V sitting beside the house. Gotta clear out the trunk (selling it), so I'll look tonight. As small as that trunk is, I won't be surprised to find a fuel tank impinging on the front half of it. There was a mid-series redesign because, although Audi claimed it had the same amount of trunk space as the old 4K, nobody (including yours truly) really believed that. So they stretched the butt a couple years later ('93?). > Since there are a few FWD examples, I'll see if that makes a > difference. I completely agree that the body shell would be alike for > both drive configurations - trying to keep that straight down a single > line would suck. Oddly, at least in the 4000, that was *not* the case. According to the Bentley manual (VW/Audi's official factory manuals), the 4K Quattro shared a platform with the FWD *Coupe*, but *not* with the FWD 4K. -- C.R. Krieger (Been there; redlined that) |
Re: modifications for split folding rear seats?
warp2_shadow@yahoo.com (C.R. Krieger) wrote in message news:<a8a578a8.0310070623.43185080@posting.google. com>...
> beelzebubba@hotmail.com (Spider) wrote in message news:<73da2590.0310060843.50456ab3@posting.google. com>... > > > > Now, over here, prior to 1989 (IIRC), the 80 was called the 4000. We > > got the redesign in '89, but I owned a couple of 4000 models previous > > to that release. In both cases, they did not have folding rear seats. > > The sheetmetal behind the seatback was perforated for a ski > > pass-through, but it was stamped and triangulated in a manner that > > screamed "I'm a structural member! Don't cut me out!" Both cars were > > quattro, however. The fuel tank was under the boot floor, IIRC. > > Sorry to tell you, but you do *not* RC. I read this and racked my brain to figure out where in the heck I remembered this from. After having thought about it some more, I remembered a camping trip with my '85 4kq, and the trunk was completely lined in molded plastic - no pass-thru. The bulkhead I am thinking about was some mid-'80's Jetta. My apologies. > > > I have seen several early '90s Audi 80/90 cars around, and so next > > time I walk by one, I'll check to see if they have the split seat > > stuff. > > I've got a '90 90 20V sitting beside the house. Gotta clear out the > trunk (selling it), so I'll look tonight. I wish I could find a good example of a 90 20V. Every one I've ever looked at has some problem with the climate control system. They drive really nicely, but I'll be damned if I'm going to try and troubleshoot that overly-complicated system. > As small as that trunk is, > I won't be surprised to find a fuel tank impinging on the front half > of it. There was a mid-series redesign because, although Audi claimed > it had the same amount of trunk space as the old 4K, nobody (including > yours truly) really believed that. So they stretched the butt a > couple years later ('93?). The 80/90 series does not have much trunk room. It seems like it had more than the 4kq, but because of the different shape, it's hard to tell. > > Since there are a few FWD examples, I'll see if that makes a > > difference. I completely agree that the body shell would be alike for > > both drive configurations - trying to keep that straight down a single > > line would suck. > > Oddly, at least in the 4000, that was *not* the case. According to > the Bentley manual (VW/Audi's official factory manuals), the 4K > Quattro shared a platform with the FWD *Coupe*, but *not* with the FWD > 4K. That sounds like it's quite inefficient. The Germans have a weird way of doing things, to be sure. Thanks for the info, and the corrections. Spider |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:20 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands