Future S and RS models.

[tvrfan]

Before that the S-Modells was something special to me. however as i read that AUDI give the B8 S4 less power like the predecessor i was shocked that audi now aimed the BMW stanard topmodels (BMW 335i). The S-models should somewhat special be and ever more were power to have like the BMW standard topmodels. it before it was allways special because the S models haid more power and now they are going adapt on BMW topmodel power. its okay for the price but destroys the speciallity what the S models stand for. (more power than the standard BMW topmodels). does that mean that the next RS models (RS4, RS5) also have less power? I mean the fact that the B8 RS4 or RS5 approximately only 450ps will have around no more like the E92 M3 to have. or will audi give the next RS4 and RS5 so much power (much more power than the M3 E92) that the B8 RS4 and RS5 will be always comparable to the next gen M3 what power belongs? like B7 RS4 was. or the new RS6 does.


what do you think?

[IhateRWD]

S4 will have less power but much much more torque than the S4 B7 and less weight so it will be much faster, 5.2s to 0-100km/h vs 5.6s to 0-100km/t from the last S4 B7 so don't say it will not be special cause it will...and audi is working on a lot of new turbo engines because are the best in the world on turbo's and you will see that new S are closer to the old RS's!And RS range will have much more power and way more faster than the old cars. RS4 450-470HP, RS5 480-520HP, RS6 allready have 580HP and future S8 and maybe RS8 will have minimum 500HP and 600HP for the RS8!So don't ask about the future because the future is bright on Audi:)

[The Pretender]

I have never seen the use of S/RS-models.
Why have S-models in almost the whole range and just a few RS-models.
Audi need to sort out that first, make either the "S" or the "RS" the top of the range model.
Take for example the TTS, what a waste of time to develop that car.
Make it just a TT 2.0TFSI Quattro with 272 hp and save the historical TTS badge for a non R4 real performing light weight TT.
A nother example is the new RS6 also a waste of time to develop.
What is the use of developing a high performance V10 TT engine and put it in a 2025 Kg car.
It's not sporty at all, ok it will move if you put the pedal down, but all the time you feel the big mass of it move with you.
It's like moving a fast truck around with your whole famely in it.
Even the new BMW M3 and Nissan GT-R are much to heavy.
Audi just have to make RS models light weight high performance cars and get rid of a lot of weight.
They go the wrong way by adding more weight and power to it.
I have also my doubs about the new S4, it will have a nice engine but it will probably also weigh 1630+ Kg.
It's time to reduce overall weight to get better performance instead of putting more power to the problem.

Jarod.

[IhateRWD]

are you for real? where did this ideas came from? you know S/RS are selling very very well and are much sportier and faster than the biggest cars until M and AMG cars...S5 kicks 335i and CLK 500, etc. RS6 is a waste of time like TT-S?Well...so why are people ordering the new "waste of time" named RS6,TT-S, RS5 and future RS?Because those people are idiots?man you shall look what you are saying... RS cars are more expensive than any AMG or M and also are much faster than both so be real...

[Phage]

The only thing that would get a weight loss would be a special 'diet' model for the hardcore track fans. Cause the safety precautions that are compulsory and luxury equipment that the people want are adding most of the weight.

So its either less safe, less luxurious or unbelievably expensive cause of light weight materials.

[IhateRWD]

you are very right mr phage!if you want an extreme audi you will buy an RS and convert almost every element to be made of carbon fiber and raise the power and torque and than you'll have your lovely high performance car with less weight!but RS range are known for world's best safer sporstscars because of the Quattro and ASF technology, so...

[tvrfan]

lol no RS model is lightweight my friend! it use probably lightweight materials but its not light!!! its heavy like a pig. ok audi can build maybe sometimes the cars lighter than BMW M. but thats not the point people buys audi or RS models

[The Pretender]

MTM did the same with the RS4 K550, made it a lot lighter by stripping the interior out and putting in Carbon Fibre race buckets.

http://www.mtm-france.com/news/RS4V8MTM-Hockenheim.jpg

Jarod.

[Lateknight]

Agree with Pretender regards the RS6. I think Audi have missed the mark with this car. this car appears to be more GT than RS.
Quote from latest TopGear mag probably sums it up pretty well on the RS6;

"There is no sense of loss when getting out, no sense of being emotionally attached to the car. In some ways it's the perfect Audi, but not the perfect Audi RS.

What makes it worse is that Audi isn't boring. The RS4 is magic. The R8 a revelation. But the RS6 is a demonstration of engineering skill, of manufacturing excellence, rather than of passion. And a car this berserk needs to be able to connect to your soul to really switch it on."

Can't agree with the TTS being a waste of development. (very little development - largely another raid on the group parts bin). Bet they didn't spend a huge amount of time putting that car together. S3 running gear under a TT bodyshell, tweak the engine and suspension a little, unique trim......Tah! Dah!, new model.
I've made that a little simplistic, obviously, but you see what I mean.

[Leadfoot]

Agree with Pretender regards the RS6. I think Audi have missed the mark with this car. this car appears to be more GT than RS.
Quote from latest TopGear mag probably sums it up pretty well on the RS6;

"There is no sense of loss when getting out, no sense of being emotionally attached to the car. In some ways it's the perfect Audi, but not the perfect Audi RS.

What makes it worse is that Audi isn't boring. The RS4 is magic. The R8 a revelation. But the RS6 is a demonstration of engineering skill, of manufacturing excellence, rather than of passion. And a car this berserk needs to be able to connect to your soul to really switch it on."

For those of you who didn't read what I wrote regarding the Telegraph review I think it works well with this one too.



The problem the RS6 will face from quite a few reviews, not only this one is that when you imagine nearly 600hp in a car your mind set is one of 'this bloody thing will be both amazing and scary in the same instance', so already you are expecting something truly terrifying. But because it's got Quattro the RS6 manages all of that power into a package which is neither frightening or dramatic, put the throttle down and the thing just goes without so much as a wiggle from it's bottom or a screech from the tyres.

In this occasion, Quattro is just too good for it's own good, especially if reviewed on it's own without anything to compare it with as was the case with the Autocar review, the original one where they just tested the car on it's own was good but not outstanding, but when they compared it to the M5 they realised just how good a package the RS6 really is.
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

I have a problem with a car that is primarily design to ferry a family to be anything other than totally safe and predictable, it isn't a sportscar, it's a big five seater estate car design to be the ultimate super executive. If your opinion is this shouldn't be an RS model then maybe Audi should rethink which models they use the RS branding on in future. As for me, I think this is the very thing that RS was originally designed for, to turn a saloon/estate into the ultimate Q car.

If Audi's future is the R8 then we maybe need a range of R branded cars to carry the torch instead of RS.


Can't agree with the TTS being a waste of development. (very little development - largely another raid on the group parts bin). Bet they didn't spend a huge amount of time putting that car together. S3 running gear under a TT bodyshell, tweak the engine and suspension a little, unique trim......Tah! Dah!, new model.
I've made that a little simplistic, obviously, but you see what I mean.

I think this little car will restore a lot of faith in not only Audi's performance future but the fact that Audi can still deliver on the things which are important. :thumb:

[IhateRWD]

i don't care about the weight when so much power is on the ground and the torque figures of the RS6 are a straight line (never before was a turbo like that), if you want "fun" or something else buy another car, but if you want power, stability,safety,best performance car and humiliate M's and AMG's buy RS6 or RS4. So who cares what somebody says when RS6 is selling like hot bread!

[tvrfan]

"i hate rwd" your getting on my nerves. how old are you? the RS6 WONT humiliate the M5! i think at higher speed the M5 is faster. and iam a audi fan. so dont make these M cars and AMG cars bad !

[The Pretender]

the RS6 WONT humiliate the M5!
No it will not, the M5 weigh 1730 Kg the new RS6 weigh 2025 Kg.
M5 = 3.41 Kg/hp and the new RS6 = 3.49 Kg/hp.
And on a track the RS6 probably will loose.
btw, the next M5 will wibe the floor with the new RS6.
Like i said before it's much to heavy and putting more power to the problem is not the solution.

Jarod.

[blue_r]

guys... what M5 are you comaring to the RS6 Avant....??? is it an M5 Saloon or an M5 Estate??

[IhateRWD]

we are comparing RS6 Avant vs M5 Touring so 2025kg (RS6) vs 1955kg (M5) so who's faster? You were wrong because you compared SALOON M5 vs RS6 ESTATE AND THAT'S WRONG! Estate vs Estate, saloon vs saloon and RS6 always WINS! And RS6 Avant has 3.49HP/kg vs. 3.85HP/kg and Audi has all the torque at any speed and any shift from 1500-6250rpm, does the M5 Touring do that and have more torque than RS6 Avant?!You are so wrong...
And by the way mister M5 Saloon has 1855kg NOT 1730kg!And future RS6 Saloon will have 1940-1950kg so again Audi wins at any speed and any corner!

[Leadfoot]

Sorry to say it but on this occasion IhateRWD is correct, when comparing the RS6Avant with it's proper rival the M5Touring the weight advantage is greatly reduced, to a point where I still believe the RS6 holds all the cards. If things pan out the same way for the RS6 saloon then we should expect a similar result.

[pampas]

indeed, crazy or not, "IHateRWD" is right this time, "The Pretender" got his numbers all messed up :)

clearly, from the last reviews, the RS6 is much faster than M5 on the straights and in turns also, if compared apples to apples of course.

[IhateRWD]

glad that had been lighted the thread about this, because i needed to see that he was wrong about the weight difference. And i remember that Leadfoot said about the fact that RS6 Avant is quite better built because the difference is about 195kg between Touring and Avant and we are talking about 2 turbo's, intercoolers,quattro,sport differential,new tiptronic s gearbox and with all this together if BMW would put all this to an M5 will have a lot more weight than it does RS6 Avant right now. I think BMW will never put turbo's to their engines for sure because they don't know how to play with the weight! And comparing the right cars RS6 Avant vs M5 Touring , the RS6 is killing him at any speeds and in any corners, the same that the RS6 Saloon with do with the M5 Saloon. And for that kind of money to pay for the RS6 Avant you if someone is obssesed to have less weight he can order a lot of components in carbon fiber from Audi Exclusive because i know for sure that you can order anything on this program but with a lot of cash of course. My eyes are for the new RS6 Saloon because it will be so bad ass fast car:)

[tvrfan]

glad that had been lighted the thread about this, because i needed to see that he was wrong about the weight difference. And i remember that Leadfoot said about the fact that RS6 Avant is quite better built because the difference is about 195kg between Touring and Avant and we are talking about 2 turbo's, intercoolers,quattro,sport differential,new tiptronic s gearbox and with all this together if BMW would put all this to an M5 will have a lot more weight than it does RS6 Avant right now. I think BMW will never put turbo's to their engines for sure because they don't know how to play with the weight! And comparing the right cars RS6 Avant vs M5 Touring , the RS6 is killing him at any speeds and in any corners, the same that the RS6 Saloon with do with the M5 Saloon. And for that kind of money to pay for the RS6 Avant you if someone is obssesed to have less weight he can order a lot of components in carbon fiber from Audi Exclusive because i know for sure that you can order anything on this program but with a lot of cash of course. My eyes are for the new RS6 Saloon because it will be so bad ass fast car:)

at first, RS6 has no sport diff. (torque vect.) and BMW is working on alot turbo and biturbo engines which are coming in next 5er series and 7er series. also a biturbo variant is testing and will be build by M-GmbH based on the 5.0 V10 M5 engine. this is confirmed from autozeitung which talks with the M ghmbH chef. ;) BMW would have more turbo engines in future than audi. (when audi takes the way to supercharger and put it on more future cars).

[IhateRWD]

if so i bet the new M5 with that kind of weight will not be able to beat RS6 Saloon or Avant and the weight will be very very close to the RS6 and Quattro will put more power down and will kick M5 TT. And i know for sure that it will be an RS6 Plus, so we are talking about much much more power and torque to beat M5 TT. Audi cleary knows what is doing!

[tvrfan]

"i hate RWD" i think you have no plan about what you saying. Quattro is just good for bad weather conditions and from stand still acceleration. on higher speed. (let me say above 100 mph or 80 mph) the quattro still eats power himself on higher speed and a will never kick a 580ps M5 TT in his ass. The M5 will eat the RS6 alive with same power. the M5 has RWD and is unbeatable for RS6 on higher speed. the RS6 needs i think 650PS+ to beat or be even with a 580 PS M5 TT.

AND iam saying this as an Audi fan.

[chewym]

I see you guys have done all the calculations already, and know exactly how fast the RS6 will be above a certain speed. Let's wait and see what the RS6 does compared to its proper competition. I think some have gone as far as saying that the new RS6 is slower than old one or something else silly like that.

Will the next generation be quicker than the second generation RS6? Most likely just as the new RS6 will likely outperform the M5.

[IhateRWD]

you don't know what you are saying, after 3 years of testing you think that Audi officials don't know what were doing?RS6 is faster than you think, it accelerates like a rocket at higher speeds and an M5 wouldn't have a chance to keep up with him (Avant vs Touring) because we are talking about new chassis caracteristics, modified Quattro like RS4 40/60 split, the engine has NO TURBOLAG and it just pushes and pushes like a crazy car, the gearbox is amazing vs SMG and is a little bit slower than the gearbox from Ferrari F430 Scuderia, so we are talking about a hell new numbers man and please wait to see the real test and then comment.

[tvrfan]

maybe it will be faster than M5 touring but not that much, because quattro ! ! ! search at google, why quattro is slower at high speed than RWD. i know it but cant translate it (to bad english). your talked before about the RS6 is killing a 580 PS M5 TT. no chance. the drivetrain loss of the quattro is higher and the rubb. so i think after 124mph the M5 would take the RS6. (because weight and quattro).

[Leadfoot]

maybe it will be faster than M5 touring but not that much, because quattro ! ! ! search at google, why quattro is slower at high speed than RWD. i know it but cant translate it (to bad english). your talked before about the RS6 is killing a 580 PS M5 TT. no chance. the drivetrain loss of the quattro is higher and the rubb. so i think after 124mph the M5 would take the RS6. (because weight and quattro).

I'm not 100% sure that you will be correct in saying the M5 will have the better of the RS6 after 200Km/h, I reckon their performance from this point on will be even but prior to this point the RS6 would have pulled out a 5 car lengths (maybe wishful thinking, but one can only dream :D ). I look forward to a magazine review to prove which is the quicker.

[KresoF1]

M5 Touring faster then RS6 Avant... Next issue of German Sport Auto full comparison test... RS6 Avant fast but, way too heavy...

Many of you will blame Sport Auto and its editor Horst von Saurma next month...

[IhateRWD]

M5 Touring vs RS6 Avant and M5 faster? faster doing donutz?or what?if sportauto says that and 90% of other magazines like Autocar,Autobild,AMS,etc then we all believe what those magazine are saying not sportauto. And RS6 fans don't need a review to know how fast and good is an RS vs rivals!

[tailpipe]

While it is easy to debate the merits of the RS6 versus the M5 - I'll take the Rs anytime because it has Quattro, thank you very much - The Pretender is right. The RS6 is just way too heavy - it verges on being a truck. The Avant isn't agile, neither will be the Saloon.

Perhaps the likes of Jeremy Clarkson have been a little harsh towards the RS6, not because it fails to significantly build on the RS4's mind-blowing experience, but because Twin-turbo V-10s are rapidly becoming irrelevant in a world where Formula 1 has abandoned them and environmental/ climate change concerns have brought emissions so sharply into focus.

We need a next-generation RS4 with a 450 bhp engine, but more important it must emit less than 225 g/ km of CO2 and deliver at least 30 mpg in the combined cycle.

For all these reasons a V6 may be more attractive than a V8. And shedding weight may also be paramount. If Audi can deliver tyre-shredding performance and low emissions and fuel consumptions, it will retain its edge. if not it won't.

The new B8 A4 is significantly larger than the B6/ B7 version, creating much greater overlap with the A6. So while it is clear that the S4/ RS4 models can easily retain their appeal, I just don't know about the S6/ RS6.

[Leadfoot]

We need a next-generation RS4 with a 450 bhp engine, but more important it must emit less than 225 g/ km of CO2 and deliver at least 30 mpg in the combined cycle.

Welcome back, long time no see.

Now Tailpipe, are you going to come clean and tell everyone your real handle.

RED KEN :lovl:

For those not familiar with British politics, Ken Livingstone is London's major and the reason for the £25 per day charge on vehicles with more than 225g/km of Co2 to enter our fair capitol.

[The Pretender]

New RS5. ?
I still think the new RS5 will not have the power we want it to have.
Most likely is a 448 hp 4.2 V8 FSI high rev N/A engine.
In that case i prefer the new Nissan GT-R Amuse tuned.

Jarod.

[Rage]

New RS5. ?
I still think the new RS5 will not have the power we want it to have.
Most likely is a 448 hp 4.2 V8 FSI high rev N/A engine.
In that case i prefer the new Nissan GT-R Amuse tuned.

Jarod.

448?

lol, how can you be so specific?

[Leadfoot]

448?

lol, how can you be so specific?

I wish I could be that specific but I can't. I neither know that exact engine or it's specs.

Maybe Jarod knows something we don't.

[The Pretender]

448? lol, how can you be so specific?

I think:vhmmm: it's 448 hp @ 7925 rpm and 466 Nm @ 6500 rpm.
The red line is @ 8500 rpm and no Valve-lift.
A prototyp engine that can end-up with 452 hp by 8000 rpm.

Jarod.

[HKS786]

I think:vhmmm: it's 448 hp @ 7925 rpm and 466 Nm @ 6500 rpm.
The red line is @ 8500 rpm and no Valve-lift.
A prototyp engine that can end-up with 452 hp by 8000 rpm.

Jarod.

I think Hans def knows something we dont :hahahehe:

[chewym]

That engine won't get it done. A 480+ hp 4.0 TFSI will be better.

[absent]

Welcome back, long time no see.

Now Tailpipe, are you going to come clean and tell everyone your real handle.

RED KEN :lovl:

For those not familiar with British politics, Ken Livingstone is London's major and the reason for the £25 per day charge on vehicles with more than 225g/km of Co2 to enter our fair capitol.

Wouldn't it be much easier and cheaper to get rid of that assh*le?

[The Pretender]

That engine won't get it done. A 480+ hp 4.0 TFSI will be better.
Why not, if the RS5 will be lighter then the S5 i think it's enough.

Jarod.

[chewym]

Why not, if the RS5 will be lighter then the S5 i think it's enough.

Jarod.

A few aluminum panels will be offset by bigger brakes and wheels. Certainly you won't get all too much weight reduction. A NA 4.2 corners Audi with about 450 hp, Mercedes Benz has an easy option to give the C63 50-60 more horsepower. The Cadillac CT-S has 500 or so. And the 4.2 gives too little torque, hence why cars such as the IS-F with about the same horsepower are a bit quicker. A turbo 4.0 V8 will give you extra horsepower with no fuel economy penalty, possibly a benefit.

[Leadfoot]

Jarod,

Please enlighten us as to how you come about your figures.

Like the rest I am very interested.

P.S.
I too have been told that the RS5 will make amends for the excessive weight of the RS6. I hope that this means we will have something that is lighter than the S5.

[The Pretender]

I don't see why a N/A V8 RS5 have to weigh more then a S5.
The high rev V8 engine will be lighter due to lightweight parts then the S5 one, RS(4) style Recaro front seats will also have less weight and aluminium parts like hood, frontfenders and doors also save weight.
Bigger brakes add weight but only if they are of steel, bigger ceramic's don't.
But like i sait: it start to look like that the new RS5 will get the "High Rev" version 4.2 litre V8 FSI engine of the RS4/R8 with 420+ hp.
I have not sait it will 100% for sure.
Audi is also still testing other engine in the A5/S5 body.

Jarod.

[The Pretender]

A few aluminum panels will be offset by bigger brakes and wheels. Certainly you won't get all too much weight reduction. A NA 4.2 corners Audi with about 450 hp, Mercedes Benz has an easy option to give the C63 50-60 more horsepower. The Cadillac CT-S has 500 or so. And the 4.2 gives too little torque, hence why cars such as the IS-F with about the same horsepower are a bit quicker. A turbo 4.0 V8 will give you extra horsepower with no fuel economy penalty, possibly a benefit.
BMW have also the option putting the M5 engine in the M3.

Jarod.

[chewym]

The difference in weight between the RS4 and S4 engines is probably insignificant. The lighter components are measured in grams.

[HKS786]

I don't see why a N/A V8 RS5 have to weigh more then a S5.
The high rev V8 engine will be lighter due to lightweight parts then the S5 one, RS(4) style Recaro front seats will also have less weight and aluminium parts like hood, frontfenders and doors also save weight.
Bigger brakes add weight but only if they are of steel, bigger ceramic's don't.
But like i sait: it start to look like that the new RS5 will get the "High Rev" version 4.2 litre V8 FSI engine of the RS4/R8 with 420+ hp.
I have not sait it will 100% for sure.
Audi is also still testing other engine in the A5/S5 body.

Jarod.

What other engine? :D

[The Pretender]

What other engine? :D
With different amout of cylinders. ;)

Jarod.

[HKS786]

With different amout of cylinders. ;)

Jarod.

Honestly? That can only mean one thing. How reliable is this info? Is it up to date? :hahahehe:

[The Pretender]

Honestly? That can only mean one thing. How reliable is this info? Is it up to date? :hahahehe:
No it's 10 years old. ;)

Jarod.

[Leadfoot]

Honestly? That can only mean one thing. How reliable is this info? Is it up to date? :hahahehe:

HKS,

I said ages ago that Audi were testing the V10 in the A5 chassis and that a few engines were in the running, but whether it will end up being a V10 5.0L is anyone's guess. As long as the weight of the nose is controlled and the car's price doesn't climb much over the RS4 I would be a happy chap.

I still reckon that it's one of the front runners, especially as it will have the right amount of power and torque and is in line with the policy that Audi currently have in mind for the RS5.

P.S.
There may be a split between the policies for the RS4 and RS5, remember to keep that in mind. ;)

[Rage]

As long as the weight of the nose is controlled and the car's price doesn't climb much over the RS4 I would be a happy chap.

P.S.
There may be a split between the policies for the RS4 and RS5, remember to keep that in mind. ;)

As someone posted before...a V10 commands a premium. The old RS4 sold at a premium over the M3 for ~£50k. The new M3 now costs that much now. What will be the price of the new RS4/RS5??

I would only support a V10 if the nose was controllable and the price was in the M3/C63 ballpark. Technically and perhaps econimically difficult.