new a4 = -150kg

[andreadebi]

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/05/11/2...er-300-pounds/

Over the course of the last 20 years, each new Audi model has weighed around 10 percent more than its predecessor, but that all changed when the all-new 2009 Audi A4 (B8) debuted last year. The mid-size sedan gained less than 100 pounds over the previous model (B7), despite growing in every possible dimension. And when the next A4 arrives in five year's time, Audi claims it will weigh less than the current model.

Heinrich Timm, head of Audi's Lightweight Design Center, told us earlier today that the next generation A4 – likely due out in 2015 – will shed some 150 kg (330 pounds) over the B8. The move to drop the A4's curb weight is part of a larger initiative by Audi to reduce the tonnage of its future vehicles by using more aluminum, innovative structural techniques and composites.

And the benefits of weight reduction aren't just limited to fuel consumption and emissions. As any gearhead knows, weight affects every aspect of the vehicle's dynamics – from handling to braking to acceleration. For every 220 pounds lost, a vehicle can accelerate to 60 mph in 20 fewer feet. Lose 440 pounds and the amount of runway saved nearly doubles.

While other automakers are employing high tensile steel to increase rigidity and reduce weight, the stuff costs nearly three-times more than a normal stamped piece. By limiting the use of tensile steel, the overall cost savings will allow Audi to utilize more exotic materials – carbon fiber in particular – to reduce weight and further enhance the driving experience.

As the father of the spaceframe, Timm knows all too well that weight reduction is the key to the next generation of automobiles. Not only will it decrease fuel consumption, increase safety and pay dividends for the driver, it's the only way automakers can simultaneously meet new emission standards while delivering the content and driving experience customers expect. Timm says, "We want to bring it to a higher volume," and the next generation A4 is sure to be the first in a long line of lightened Audis.

[Benman]

These are the kind of posts I like to read... it just shows it CAN be done when manufactures really try instead of just going through the motions.

A good example is the 2010 vs 2011 Mustang (I know, I know, a Ford). The car is IDENTICAL, save the enginge. But, in 10', the V6 was rated at 215hp and 26mpg, for 2011, the all new V6 is rated at 305hp and 30mpg!!! Everything else is the same but they made the new engine WAY more efficient. It can be done when they try...

[andreadebi]

These are the kind of posts I like to read... it just shows it CAN be done when manufactures really try instead of just going through the motions.

A good example is the 2010 vs 2011 Mustang (I know, I know, a Ford). The car is IDENTICAL, save the enginge. But, in 10', the V6 was rated at 215hp and 26mpg, for 2011, the all new V6 is rated at 305hp and 30mpg!!! Everything else is the same but they made the new engine WAY more efficient. It can be done when they try...

that's the main problem-reason...they wanted to gain in the past more from cars without put inside too much tech...marketing produced a lot of "new" car when in reality the mods were not so heavy

[Benman]

Agreed.

Ben

[ben916]

These are the kind of posts I like to read... it just shows it CAN be done when manufactures really try instead of just going through the motions.

A good example is the 2010 vs 2011 Mustang (I know, I know, a Ford). The car is IDENTICAL, save the enginge. But, in 10', the V6 was rated at 215hp and 26mpg, for 2011, the all new V6 is rated at 305hp and 30mpg!!! Everything else is the same but they made the new engine WAY more efficient. It can be done when they try...

ALL car manufactures do that and some even do it mid year!
It is all driven by sales/money!

How in the hell does FORD go from a 215hp to 305hp in ONE year?!?!?
Hell! The 4.6 V8 was rated at 305-310HP last year!
Sounds suspicious as if they KNEW that their V6 was gonna be trumped in a few years.
I am not saying give us a 1000hp N/A V6.

Squeezing every dollar out of the Mustang they can....

[Benman]

How in the hell does FORD go from a 215hp to 305hp in ONE year?!?!?
Hell! The 4.6 V8 was rated at 305-310HP last year!

Yep, and the 2010/2011 V8 had the same deal: Went from @315hp to 405 AND better fuel economy.

[V8weight]

ALL car manufactures do that and some even do it mid year!
It is all driven by sales/money!

How in the hell does FORD go from a 215hp to 305hp in ONE year?!?!?
Hell! The 4.6 V8 was rated at 305-310HP last year!
Sounds suspicious as if they KNEW that their V6 was gonna be trumped in a few years.
I am not saying give us a 1000hp N/A V6.

Squeezing every dollar out of the Mustang they can....

While I agree that the manufacturers strategically release existing technology over the life span of a model to maximize sales, in my opinion it is also to outwit the EPA? Let's say that Ford puts out V6 that gains 100hp tomorrow all while being 20% more efficient, they have effectively set the bar too high for themselves for future EPA regulations. It seems every time they give 20%, regulation wants another 30% increase in economy.

[ben916]

While I agree that the manufacturers strategically release existing technology over the life span of a model to maximize sales, in my opinion it is also to outwit the EPA? Let's say that Ford puts out V6 that gains 100hp tomorrow all while being 20% more efficient, they have effectively set the bar too high for themselves for future EPA regulations. It seems every time they give 20%, regulation wants another 30% increase in economy.

Ford seems to be an excellent example sooooo, we will run with it.....
Yep, I agree, they set the bar to high for themselves like they did with the COBRA a few years back:
FORD released the Cobra with $hitloads of HP and everyone lost their heads over it!
All the magazines were falling over themselves, etc, etc, etc.
Then the very next year, FORD pulls back the HP on the COBRA and again the mob is up in arms!
IIRC, it also coincided with the terrible handling/frame. EPA calling their bluff(es)???

I bet this huge increase in HP/technology will come to bite FORD in the a$$...

It has been well documented that FORD has detuned it's engines for decades, as I can theorize as others can, to keep the consumer on the hook for always wanting just a little more...

Back on TOPIC - 330lbs is 2 less people in your A4 - big difference!

[Benman]

Back on TOPIC - 330lbs is 2 less people in your A4 - big difference!

correct.

[chewym]

These are the kind of posts I like to read... it just shows it CAN be done when manufactures really try instead of just going through the motions.

A good example is the 2010 vs 2011 Mustang (I know, I know, a Ford). The car is IDENTICAL, save the enginge. But, in 10', the V6 was rated at 215hp and 26mpg, for 2011, the all new V6 is rated at 305hp and 30mpg!!! Everything else is the same but they made the new engine WAY more efficient. It can be done when they try...

The only thing is that some of those fuel economy improvements are just from beating/cheating the EPA test. In real life, you aren't as likely to achieve that much of a fuel economy improvement.

For example Audi is putting the 8 speed auto in the A4s next year. I bet the EPA ratings will jump, but real life improvement is likely to be a little lower.

[Benman]

The only thing is...

I see what you are saying, but actually the EPA recently changed their testing procedure to more closely mimic "real world" driving with portions even calling for an 80mph area since that speed is legal in some States. Again, Ford is quoting HIGHWAY EPA rating of 30.

For the record, I have ALWAYS been able to duplicate the EPA rating on every car I have owned.... WHEN ... I have actually driven at legal speeds

Ben

[Benman]

Back on topic, if Audi can really deliver a REDUCTION of 330lbs and combine that with more efficient trannies and engines, then this is a great trend I would LOVE to see continue!

Imagine if the manufactures, instead of increasing weight by @5% each body style change used effort to decrease @5% every body style change... whithin a few short decades we could get back to cars that actually weighed less than 2500lbs. Hell, what did a Golf weigh back in 79' (@1800lbs, no)? Now compare that to 2009 (@3200lbs).

[RXBG]

back when i was in junior high school and i really got into cars i learned very quickly that there seemed to be a pattern in the way in which their dimensions, engines, and power, and even wheel diameter grew from year to year. it soon dawned upon me that there was no way this was accidental and that it was done on purpose. i was sure car makers could easily jump by 40 hp increments from generation to generation of a particular model, but it became crystal clear to my teenage brain that pace and permanence were the method by which car makers progressively improved cars.

i am a closet expert on hondas since i grew up on them- witness thus:

1987 civic dx 72 hp (Si model 91), 1987 accord dx/lx 97 hp (and i thought that was real power)- the LXi- 120, 1990 accord dx/lx 140, 1994 accord dx/lx 150, 1998 accord dx/lx 170, and so on....

the incremental power gains have levelled off. the typical accord doesn't need over 200 hp. car makers (and the "people in charge"- yes i am a conspiracy theorist) decided to focus the effort not on power anymore, but on materials changes and emissions under the flag of climate change. and in reality it is a fair exchange since less weight does equal more power- so no harm done. progress focuses on efficiency and there is nothing wrong with that. i am sure muscle era 60's car drivers would have looked at the RS4's little 4.2 V8 with amazement back then. who knows what we'll see in the near future with hybrid drives populated with electric motors and triple clutch transmissions or even hybrid trannies that couple servos to gears and clutches or CVT's. who knows. who would have thought that a carburetor would give way to programmed multi point fuel injectors? the 1987 accord LXi was a wonder back then.

my children will see sub 2.0L engines that will probably make 350hp in cars made of plastic and carbon and aluminium that will weigh less than 2000 lbs and that will make today's R8 V10 look like a pansy.


... wait scratch that. such a car will never be a pansy ;p

[Benman]

my children will see sub 2.0L engines that will probably make 350hp in cars made of plastic and carbon and aluminium that will weigh less than 2000 lbs...

Likely it make 500hp+



Ben

[roadrunner]

... wait scratch that. such a car will never be a pansy ;p

that's why we are lucky to experience it at the peak.

As tempting lightweight / downsized future Audis will be - it will be different

[Benman]

that's why we are lucky to experience it at the peak.

As tempting lightweight / downsized future Audis will be - it will be different

Different, yes, worse, no way.

I have tracked a turbo'd 450hp 4000lbs AWD Audi, and a 350hp 2500lbs AWD Audi. For pure "fun", the 2500lbs one wins... easy.


Ben

[ben916]

i am a closet expert on hondas since i grew up on them- witness thus:

1987 civic dx 72 hp (Si model 91), 1987 accord dx/lx 97 hp (and i thought that was real power)- the LXi- 120, 1990 accord dx/lx 140, 1994 accord dx/lx 150, 1998 accord dx/lx 170, and so on....

the incremental power gains have levelled off. the typical accord doesn't need over 200 hp. car makers (and the "people in charge"- yes i am a conspiracy theorist) decided to focus the effort not on power anymore, but on materials changes and emissions under the flag of climate change.

.... i am sure muscle era 60's car drivers would have looked at the RS4's little 4.2 V8 with amazement back then.

my children will see sub 2.0L engines that will probably make 350hp in cars made of plastic and carbon and aluminium that will weigh less than 2000 lbs and ...

But if you compare the gen 1 Accord to the current gen of Accord -> big bloated stretched thing that the only recognizable inherited items from those gens are the name and the 4 doors... and the H

the RS4 motor.... the 60's era had wicked engines -> Ferraris v12/v8 or Porsche (flat 10, flat 8, yeah racing only) putting down nice numbers and were technologically advanced for their day(multi valves, aluminum, small displacement, high revs)... given also that most were at a price point out of reach of the average citizen and/or locked/stored in a garage for sunday drives.

500hp.... pffssttt! The kids will EXPECT nothing less

There is also a fine balance/delta between safety/cost/weight and thereby benefiting one will sacrifice another...

[tailpipe]

In addition to being lighter than the B8 model, I hope that Audi also makes the B9 A4 smaller. The current model is closer to the A6 than the old A4. I want it to have a shorter bonnet and more rear leg room. But more than anything, I want the engine behind the front axle.