Audi: Development and Technology News
 

Audi quits power race - - Source: Autocar


Audi’s S and RS ranges will no longer offer more power than the equivalent models from AMG or BMW M-Power. Stephan Reil, the General Manager of Development at Quattro Gmbh, the company responsible for Audi’s RS models, claimed that, ‘continuing to increase the power outputs is not the way forward. With more power the car normally gets heavier and then you need more power again.’

Taking a sideswipe at AMG, which recently launched the 603bhp S65 AMG, Reil said ‘with a rear-wheel-drive car, all you succeed in doing is lighting up the yellow traction control sign. Our drivetrain allows us to transfer the power to the road.’

Reil said the Quattro Gmbh brand will develop cars that combined high power outputs with ‘outstanding driving dynamics and road handling.’ Audi is planning to adopt a new naming structure (SQ3 to SW8) for its sporting models.

Now that explains why we saw some "S Line" A4s and others having only cosmetic changes as compared to the non-S models.

The above is a little bit of a surpirse to me though I can see their point. Cars are getting way heavy.

And way powerful. But I think that's going forward... even if we're keeping the power to weight ratio the same, it's good to make more power, because sooner or later, some genius in Car Company XYZ will say... "holy shit, bitch! what if we put the SL65 engine inside the Elise? HOLY SHIT, BITCH! LETS DO IT!"

...and another Zonda will be born. :rockstar:

THANK GOD SOMEONE FINALLY GETS THE POINT!!!! :woot: :woot: :woot: :woot:

:D

I dont know. I still think Audis were totally underpowered and currently are marginally powered. Always compared to what's happening out there. I mean since most of them sold here are AWD, right there you need 10-15% more power to offset the extra weight and frictional loses. So a 3.2 liter FSI engine should be making at least 280HP to call the A4 and A6 that would wear it, competitive (or increase the displacement to 3.5 if that's not feasible with 3.2 liters - whatever it takes). At 255 you'd be average if you were sending power to two wheels (preferably the rear). Add AWD and you need 280 or so.

But if Audi finds a way to make cars lighter, then more power to them. I just dont think they can. We saw no weight advantages from their aluminum construction technology whatsoever. All Audis are either on par or heavier than the competition. I only know of one luxury car that actually showed significant and substantial weight benefits from the use of aluminim. The new XJ from Jaguar. So I am sceptical about Audi's ability to shave weight.

Werd. The big Jag weighs under 4000lbs, like 3800 in base form. That is VERY VERY impressive. The A8 is one heavy SOB for an aluminum car.
What happened was when Peich was in charge, he wanted VW to battle Benz and Audi to battle BMW. He always blasted his Audi team for being too conservative in styling. That is why we have the new Audi look today and the awesome S/RS cars.
Piech is gone for sometime now and I think the new dogs are like fuck that 1000hp shit. Not to mention more HP DOES NOT make a sportier car as most car makers would have us believe. BMWs have NEVER been huge on power and are bar-none the sportiest luxury brand.
Cough cough MANUALs cough cough :)
Audi in my eays equals classic styling, great, detailed interiors and AWD.

audi doesnt need to make 280hp out of the 3.2fsi engine. their core customers dont care to have the most hp or fastest 1/4 time. most want quattro, german engineering, luxury nameplate, not a yuppie brand like bmw

I am sure that Audi can build lighter cars, as well as many other manufactures. It all comes down to cost though. Magnessium and Aluminum arent cheap and many body shops cant repair these metals. The content and safety requirements are what cause a car to be heavy. Cars have been getting heavier since the 1960s.

:agree: The handling at a good price is what sold me

I drove the A4 a while back and it handled well, but not like a 3 series. My dads A8 handles like a pig compared to the 745i or even his old 740iL. The new A8 supposedly close the gap. I wouldnt mind taking one for a spin someday.

I agree. I still think the 3series handles better, just cant one new fully loaded for $31k.

dude, there is a place where more power is excessive. a 1.8t needs more power, and the power/weight of putting more power in there is more then worth it. on the other hand, the rs6...

Sounds like Audi is just admiting defeat to me. They know that their AWD platforms are just to heavy to compete with the likes of Benz and BMW. Look at the new S4 it's slower than the M3, CTS-V and the C55.

I am sure all manufacturers can make cars that are lighter if cost was no issue. I am keeping the cost factor constant.

In a way, I agree.

Again, faster doesnt mean better.

Nov. Car & Driver..."Executive Adrenalators"

3rd - Mercedes-Benz C55 AMG
Highs: Understated good looks, abundant power, best Benz manumatic we've encountered.
Lows: Fork-lift steering effort at freeway speeds, harsh ride on lumpy pavement, still needs a manual-gearbox option.
Verdict: An outlaw in a Hugo Boss suit.

2nd - Cadillac CTS-V
Highs: Muscle-car throttle response, sure-footed in agility events, roomy up front.
Lows: Reluctant shifting, noisy at wide-open throttle, relaxed-fit bucket seats, hard-to-love styling.
Verdict: A linebacker among running backs: longer on muscle than on grace.

1st - Audi S4 Quattro
Highs: V-8 audio, V-8 flexibility, world class shifting, unswervingly user-friendly, all day comfort.
Lows: Quirky exterior styling details, heft-to-size ratio needs work, snug back seat, no nav system for $50k price.
Verdict: Just your humble little everyday Olymic gold medalist.

if thats the case, then why quit? :uzi:

Sellouts!!

That's what C&D says. The cars are sold to the market. The market would buy the C55 before any of these. So power matters when we're talking about sport sedans or super sport sedans. It matters to the market which is what the manufacturer cares about prior to what the mags say.

Also, power matters more in the USA more than anywhere else. Because where do you have turns to turn, in order to feel the "great balance" of the car? I am talking in general here because the above three cars are all powerful enough. But in the 3.2 FSI A6/A4's case, it be better to have 30-40 more HP than to turn better. We drive mostly long distances that have very slight curves. So a GT car (or a car with GT characteristics) makes a lot more sense in the USA than a sports car.

That's right!

I still think Americans buy cars by what magazines tell them to.Magazines are BASIC research that people use when buying cars. NO?

Just so people dont think im biased, i wouldnt buy a S4 anyways :chuckle:

I knew you'd start trolling up in this bitch, but I was wrong. Good thing to see an unbiased opinion out of you. Now if only our local Lex troll would do so too :D

(just playing, guys.)

So this Audi thing is... a pretty :lame: excuse. I'll starting paying attention to their brand when they start competing with Benz/BMW cars. Right now, they're being beat in almost every single aspect of the game, whether it be sheer power or overall nimbleness. They do have their AWD all-weather capability, but that's really not what sells a sports car, now is it?

Sounds like they're throwing up their hands in the air but trying to seem fashionable and rebellious while doing so. Whatever they do, I hope they keep making good looking cars.

umm.. I would take an S4 over a C55...

Its really funny the difference in American car magazines and European ones.
We are just infactuated with POWER POWER POWER.
In Europe, its the WHOLE PACKAGE with handling first, power second.

THe E55 amazes people in Europe but hasn't come close to winning shit b/c it's TOO MUCH. There are so many electronic gizmos to just drive the thing safely. They have what, 12 PISTON brakes and the E55 has no braking records let alone do people even like the braking system.

The RS6 came close but weighed too much and the steering feel was off. I mean, the naturally aspirated M5 had 400hp
Audi pases them with the 450hp RS6
Here comes Benz with a 464hp E55
Here comes back BMW with a V-10 500hp M5
And Audi FLIRTED with putting the Gallardo V-10 in the next RS6.

At what point, is it just a stupid contest? The cars barely get any faster at useable speeds, they do get faster at unuseable speeds (over 100mph).
The M5 won over and over for being the best handler and offering a MANUAL! It no longer was the fastst but the best driver.
FUnny but by the time Jag got 390hp from it's XJR/S-type-R, it was too little and those cars are overlooked.

I commend Audi for waking up and hopefully pursuing the complete package and not just power that we just can't use.

It's all so romantic.......

:agree:

Shit i would too. You dont see many C32 our there... but i see plenty of S4 and M3s ;)
Im annoying, i know :O

you see plenty of new S4's? where?? I've only seen like 2. M3's, yeah. everywhere.

parked next to a C6 this morning - the first I've seen. :)

I have to agree, Mercedes is getting a bit ridiculous with its latest high-power offerings.. and I remember hearing that they had reserved the name "S69" as well... so it looks like they haven't reached their limit yet. The problem I have with Mercedes' approach to high-performance vehicles is, they are really only good for straight-line performance (except the SLR), and they are auto. The last M5 was the best combination of performance for a luxury car like that...

I always see M3s. Rare to see a C32. Rarer to see a S4.

:werd:

i see a lot of m3's and s4's around here. very very rare to see a c32/55

I mean i see more B5 S4s than i see C32s. Since those are the two that went head to head, no?

I dont really compare the C32 to the e46 m3 or B6 S4. :dunno:

ok im bored. So lets see......... notice how benz is almost ahead in power ratings even back in 2000 with the C43. Shit i NEVER see those. I just still dont think consumers care that much about HP ratings as we think. If they did then people would have been buying that c-class benz for awhile now. :dunno:



2000 models
C43
Horsepower: 302 hp
Torque: 302 ft-lbs.

S4 (b5)
Horsepower: 250 hp
Torque: 258 ft-lbs.

e36 M3 (1999)
Horsepower: 240 hp
Torque: 236 ft-lbs.



2002 models
C32
Horsepower: 349 hp
Torque: 332 ft-lbs.

S4 (b5)
Horsepower: 250 hp
Torque: 258 ft-lbs.

M3 (e46)
Horsepower: 333 hp
Torque: 262 ft-lbs.



2005 models
C55
Horsepower: 362 hp
Torque: 376 ft-lbs.

S4 (b6)
Horsepower: 340 hp
Torque: 302 ft-lbs.

M3 (e46)
Horsepower: 333 hp
Torque: 262 ft-lbs.


See a trend here :D

More i think of it, Audi really flopped when they mad the B6 into a pig :chuckle:

Lets hope the E90 M3 wont be a heavy porky either

I should have figured. Yeah the older S4's are a dime a dozen...

it may be a pig now, but it is one damn sweet looking pig. :jesuslol:

and hmm, come to think of it, I think I wouldn't mind an SL65... even if its auto and even if it handles like ass.

https://acurazine.com/forums/car-talk-5/mb-sl65-11-7-%40-126-bone-stock-bow-157056/