3.2 liter V6 (250HP) coming to A4 ?

Page 1 of 2  
Anyone else heard this rumor? Will it be for 2005? It seems to make sense, considering the A4 is only at 220 HP, and it weighs more than most of it's
competitors. The BMW 330i is ranked at 225 HP, but it's nearly 2 seconds faster to 60 MPH, by some accounts, and then there's the G35 at 260HP....and the G35 will be offering AWD this winter...
Randy
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Japanese numbers are always overinflated !
--
Alexandre
2001 Audi A4 2.8QM
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
There's no new engine slated for the A4 at this point in time. There *should* be, but there isn't. The A4 is a fantastic machine, but it gets stomped on by the 3 series and G35 in terms of performance. Audi seems not to care. VW doesn't seem to care much either, they're taking their sweet time getting the next gen. Passat togethor despite the new Accord and Altima/Maxima 3.5s giving it hell in the performance arena. VW sells the W8 Passat for around $40k, to much for a VW. But I'm fairly sure that the W8 would fit into the B6 A4. An A4 for $41-42k with Quattro and a 285 Hp version of the W8 (the current version already makes 270 Hp) would rock the sports-sedan world.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add 10 grand, and you have a 340hp B6 S4. How's that for a sports sedan? ;-)
Pete
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I'd rather the 2.7T came back with DSG to prevent lag between gear shifts :) Well, how about adaptive air suspension, some aluminum framing and the old chip to get it to 300HP? It'd perform so much better than the new S4 that it can't be possible. However, it will come as a big disappointment to me if Audi drops turbos except for in their RS's, which have consistently been clearly overpriced - except maybe for the RS6, which is supposed to be a hell of a car. I mean the RS4's brakes apparently suck for that price range.
If they were only clever enough to fit the DSG into say the 1.8T 190 HP, it would only take a chip to nearly match a manual 330i's acceleration.
By the way, the DSG can apparently change in 2/10ths of a second. How much faster is SMG? I seem to remember about half as much in its fastest mode, though it's way more rough?
JP

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
SMG-II is around 90ms and DSG around 7-8ms if I remember correctly
--
Alexandre
2001 Audi A4 2.8QM
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Gotta agree about the 280-ish HP. But that would have been enough n the S4. Of course, if the goal was to beat the M3, then I can see the desire for 340 HP in the S4.
Actually, I thought/expected that the natural progression of the S4 would be to take the new 3.0 litre engine and add twin-turbo. The B5 30v had 190 HP, and the twin turbo version (i.e., S4) had 250. By same logic, starting with the 220 HP in the B6 30v, the addition of twin turbos would bring it to 280-290 HP. I'd bet many of the tuner-types would rather have the twin turbo rather than the V8.
I think there's too much compression across the Audi model line: one can get esssentially the same 40v V8 in the S8, A8, S6, A6 and now S4. (I know the more mechanically inclined will argue). The range of HP is 300 to 360, if memory serves.
I have trouble with an entry-level sports car (I mean entry level inasmuch as it is the A4 model line, not the A6 or A8) having a gas guzzler tax. ..... There was some talk on vortex, I believe, about a sport A6 Turbo with 265 vs 250 HP for the final year of the C5 A6 in north america. At least they are now offering a 6-speed in the A4 1.8T.... too bad for $35k you still can't get a power passenger seat though....

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<< Gotta agree about the 280-ish HP. But that would have been enough n the S4.

The plain and simple fact of the matter is that the RS6 seems to be the only model in Audi's lineup with enough power and composure to be competitive. It stomps on the M5, but is that really a fair comparison? The M5 was designed to compete with the S6, which would get it's ass handed to it. The A4 1.8T pales in comparison to the 325I in a number of ways, same goes for the A4 3.0 Vs. 330i. I won't even bring the G35 into this discussion, which has better skidpad numbers, better accleration, and more features for less money than either the Audi or the BMW. The Germans had such a long run of being the best around, they're incapable of competeing aganist real competition from Japan. I'll be an Audi fan no matter what, but it's obvious they'll never be the best, they'll always be second fiddle. Same goes for VW. The people in control just don't give a damn about being competitive. VW/Audi have over-extended themselves, buying into Bugatti, Lamborghini, and Bentley took to much money and to much attention away from the models that really matter. And they're trying to keep Seat and Skoda afloat at the same time. They need to drop the bullshit and the brand engineering. SEAT and Skoda need to go away, as do the other three, and the group needs to focus on worldwide models to sell under the VW and Audi nameplates. There'd be some serious bitchslapping going on if I were in charge. Mitsubishi has been neglectful of their models for years, and now nobody gives a damn, at least here in North America. The only car they make anyone will give a second look is the Lancer EVO. And it's priced out of it's primary market, 20-25 year old men.
<< I think there's too much compression across the Audi model line: one can get esssentially the same 40v V8 in the S8, A8, S6, A6 and now S4. (I know the more mechanically inclined will argue). The range of HP is 300 to 360, if memory serves. >>
VW also yanked it to be used in the Pheaton and the Toureag. They're not pulling in enough revenue to design new engines, and they've blown god knows how many billions on the god for saken Pheaton. A car destined to be ignored by the masses and fade into history as the worst automotive mistake since the DeLorean.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 07 Nov 2003 01:49:01 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (Steve Grauman) wrote: [snipped]

VW would have to wrestle that award away from GM for the Aztek debacle...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<< VW would have to wrestle that award away from GM for the Aztek debacle... >>
LOL, I'll concede to that!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Couldn't agree more. Just another example of this is the Tuareg. Let's just compare the 2.5 TDI with the X5 3.0d and you've got a very sluggish car in the Tuareg. Acceleration is some 12.5 sec vs 8.8 sec for the X5, I mean that's two worlds apart. Same goes for handling and so on. If only X5's weren't so terribly ugly! I must say the Tuareg is a handsome shape - if nothing else at that. The 5l diesel Tuareg is simply a ripoff, and its engine is outdated by modern diesel standards - it doesn't even have "common-rail" and is thirstier than a Mnchener Bierbauch :)
It's also certainly worrying to see a low-end Seat Cupra deliver more HP than your carefully chosen A4. Vag people show shameless disregard for their indigenous customers. Couple that with the worst service you'd ever been capable of imagining and you're just left wishing they made Xdrive available in every BMW line.
JP

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<< Couldn't agree more. Just another example of this is the Tuareg. Let's just compare the 2.5 TDI with the X5 3.0d and you've got a very sluggish car in the Tuareg. Acceleration is some 12.5 sec vs 8.8 sec for the X5, I mean that's two worlds apart. Same goes for handling and so on. If only X5's weren't so terribly ugly! >>
I agree, but the Touraeg still happens to be my favorite VW next to the Anniversary/337 and R32 versions of the GTi. The Passat is a fantastic car, but it's underpowered in 1.8T and V6 trim, and overpriced in W8 trim. The Jetta GLi and Wolfsburg additions are fun though. Despite all this, it's still pretty easy to see the handwriting on the wall. VW is heading backwards in time to the 1980s when no one would buy a damn thing they made.
<< you're just left wishing they made Xdrive available in every BMW line. >>
Not me. The X-Drive system is inferior to Quattro IMHO, and BMW sedans are best driven with RWD.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Apparently, X-drive has only just been launched in the new X5 and is on a par with Quattro. It is not to be confused with the existing x-line to be found in the 3 series. I agree that BMWs are best driven with RWD, except for over half of the year that does not hold true here. :)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<< Apparently, X-drive has only just been launched in the new X5 and is on a par with Quattro. It is not to be confused with the existing x-line to be found in the 3 series. >>
My mistake then, I thought you were referring to the 325Xi and 330Xi. Although, the X5 is really just a 5-series SUV. Much like the RX330/Highlander are based on the Camry platform, and the Murano/FX35/FX45 are built on the Altima platform. In terms of off-road worthiness and all terrain versitility, the Toureag could eat them all alive. But it doesn't have the paved-road "real world" performance of any of the vehicles mentioned above. Truly capable SUVs are taking the wayside to crossover vehicles. And it probably would've been smarter for VW to design an SUV based on the upcoming Passat MKVI platform. But they always go their own way, part of why they're having issues. The Cayenne Turbo (and Cayenne S when equipped with the Turbo's air suspension) have some amazing on-road ability, I've seen video of them lapping race tracks and it's awe inspiring. But now we're talking $90,000 vehicles.
<< I agree that BMWs are best driven with RWD, except for over half of the year that does not hold true here. :) >>
If you live in an area where the snow and/or rain get bad enough on a yearly basis to truly need AWD, than you're probably better off with a real SUV, or at least an AWD crossover than a car with AWD. That way you get the extra ground clearence to help move through streets covered in deep snow or flodded with rain water. Subaru's Forester 2.5XT offers fantastic performance and versitility with "SUV-ish" ground clearance at a great price. But it looks and feels cheap inside and I fear won't hold up over time.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Steve Grauman wrote: ...

The interior, probably - but not the car and engine. Anyway, I have stated for years that VW should offer a (perhaps slightly raised*) AWD Jetta Wagon in the US. It would compete well with the Forester, and as a VW first, could even be offered at a lower price. Think three engines: a beefed up 1.8 or 2l turbo, the new 2l or larger TDI, and the VR6 of the RS32.
- D.
(*) If I recall correctly, the Jetta wagon is already higher (~5") than most VWs. Raise it by just an inch or so, and you are competitive with most SUVs while maintaining great handling.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<< Anyway, I have stated for years that VW should offer a (perhaps slightly raised*) AWD Jetta Wagon in the US. It would compete well with the Forester, >>
Makes sense to me. The Allroad is really an A6 Avant with a beefed up chassis and special suspension. A VW version could be based off the Jetta wagon or even the Passat wagon. The Jetta and Passat are due for replacement, but VW has finalized the MKV platform that the Jetta will be using. A compact SUV based on the MKV Golf platform would be great. Or they could keep the B5 platform alive, probably at a very low price, with a B5 Passat based compact sporting the new 200Hp 2.0T as it's base engine and a 225-230Hp version of the 2.8 litre VR6 as an option.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Steve Grauman wrote:

Sure, how about something derived from the Touran?
-- Mike Smith
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
There's much talk here in the old continent about a new A3 SUV.
JP

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
JP Roberts wrote:

Why use the A3 platform? Isn't the A5 platform even bigger?
-- Mike Smith
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The A3/S3 are built on the Golf platform, the A3 is really just an "Audi-ized" Golf.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.