Just talked to someone, and got the scoop on the RS5 motor...

[AndyBG]

I still really don't see the point of talking about economy in cars with 450+ hp...

[RXBG]

I still really don't see the point of talking about economy in cars with 450+ hp...

b/c in an emissions/environment sensitive world efficiency is the newest thing to brag about, in addition to power, when you spend cashola on cars like these. to a lesser extent it also adds to a manufacturer's CO2 fleet emissions total requirements.


witness the newest bentley, karma, tesla, F1 and le mans going diesel and hybrid.... ironically all of this at a time when the theory of global warming is losing ground by the year. now many sources are saying we are actually going into a 200 year COLD spell!!!!

that's why it matters. it is a question of quality engineeering also. you have more credibility and bragging rights when you say your car is faster, better handling, and gets better gas mileage.... it gives the whole car improved cachet. i.e. more went into it, more refinement, more tech.

..............put another way. don't you like your women thin AND smart?

[AndyBG]

...put another way. don't you like your women thin AND smart?

Not to smart...

[tailpipe]

b/c in an emissions/environment sensitive world efficiency is the newest thing to brag about, in addition to power, when you spend cashola on cars like these. to a lesser extent it also adds to a manufacturer's CO2 fleet emissions total requirements.


witness the newest bentley, karma, tesla, F1 and le mans going diesel and hybrid.... ironically all of this at a time when the theory of global warming is losing ground by the year. now many sources are saying we are actually going into a 200 year COLD spell!!!!

that's why it matters. it is a question of quality engineeering also. you have more credibility and bragging rights when you say your car is faster, better handling, and gets better gas mileage.... it gives the whole car improved cachet. i.e. more went into it, more refinement, more tech.

..............put another way. don't you like your women thin AND smart?

Nice post.

[Leadfoot]

I don't believe this. Whatever Quattro Gmbh people are saying, Audi's Central marketing people are saying something different.

Compared to the B7 RS4, the RS6 has been relatively disappointing because of its weight, thirst and cost. Audi needs a B8 RS4 to counter the negative RS criticism. Moreover, with only a V6 S4 it needs a V8 RS4 unless it wishes to lose sales to the C63, M3 and IS-F which are all doing remarkably well.

I stand by my Audi marketing conversation at Christmas and say RS4 with 4.0-litre TFSI. I didn't specifically discuss RS5, so can only predict based on what I do know. Based on engine tech developments, 4.2 N/A seems very unlikely to me.

The RS5 is a 4.2FSi and not 4.0TFSi, as for the RS4 when it comes and it is coming, I don't know the engine specs for it because it's not be finalised yet.

Oh, and no the RS6 hasn't been a disappointment, the RS6 is like Ronsel wood stain it does exactly what it says on the tin and that is beat the competition into a pulp all the while providing an comfortable and luxurious enviorment to transport you and your family. Given the car that quattroGmbH had to work with I think they did an amazingly great job.

[Bogdan]

My thoughts exactly regarding the RS6, excellent car, just bad timing. At this point with the economy, whatever engine would they have put into the RS6, the sells numbers would have been the same. Just a bit too expensive for these days.
If they want to keep the same road as before ( B7 RS4 beat the crap out of the M3 E46 when it arrived), then the next RS4 must be trully something special in order the embarase the M3 V8, and I don't see that happening with nothing else but forced induction, FSI , light materials, smaller engine. I think 4.0 TFSI is the best hope, just I pray that the TFSI will stand for bi-turbo NOT supercharged.

[RXBG]

i suspect the RS4 will have the exact same engine as the RS5- NA 460 hp V8. with DSG. and better fuel economy than the old engine. torque won't change much, though.

[tailpipe]

Oh, and no the RS6 hasn't been a disappointment, the RS6 is like Ronsel wood stain it does exactly what it says on the tin and that is beat the competition into a pulp all the while providing an comfortable and luxurious enviorment to transport you and your family. Given the car that quattroGmbH had to work with I think they did an amazingly great job.

Let's try and keep the discussion as objective as possible. RS6 has been slated by most UK motoring journalists for being too heavy and ponderous. They accuse it of lacking the sharpness of its predecessor and that of the RS4. Some said its V10 engine was overkill. Others attacked the price tag, which takes it out of mainstream contention. Net result is a still a very accomplished car, but one with only limited appeal to those with deep pockets. Sales numbers appear to support this view. Sorry, but that's the truth.

So Audi needs an RS car with more mainstream appeal. That is the job of the RS5 and RS4. The last RS4 was superb. The only real issue is that real world consumption of 14-18 mpg and a small fuel tank meant frequent stops on trans-European trips. I couldn't believe it. This was a practical issue not an environmental one.

As RXBG has also noted, since the last RS4 was conceived, times have changed. The environment has become a serious problem. We're all under pressure to do our bit. In addition to recycling supermarket bags and energy efficient light bulbs, I also feel a need to drive a car that delivers at least 30 mpg and outputs less than 200g of CO2 per km. I am not alone.

For this reason, a naturally aspirated 4.2 V8 in the RS5 doesn't make sense. Smaller capacity engines with turbos does. This is why the new 3.0-litre engine S4 is so clever. It is supposed to deliver 30% less fuel consumption than previous version.

True enthusiasts still want a V8. So the new 4.0 litre TFSI would be an ideal solution for both the RS5 and the RS4. It ticks all the boxes. Whatever Audi delivers, the RS5 will be a great car. But without giving it the eco-credentials it needs its appeal will be narrower.

[AndyBG]

... They accuse it of lacking the sharpness of its predecessor ...

Little bit of topic, but I don't remember that anyone ever said for C5 RS 6 to be ''sharp'', and for that matter C6 RS 6 is far ahead off its predecessor.

[artur777]

Let's try and keep the discussion as objective as possible. RS6 has been slated by most UK motoring journalists for being too heavy and ponderous. They accuse it of lacking the sharpness of its predecessor and that of the RS4. Some said its V10 engine was overkill. Others attacked the price tag, which takes it out of mainstream contention. Net result is a still a very accomplished car, but one with only limited appeal to those with deep pockets. Sales numbers appear to support this view. Sorry, but that's the truth.

So Audi needs an RS car with more mainstream appeal. That is the job of the RS5 and RS4. The last RS4 was superb. The only real issue is that real world consumption of 14-18 mpg and a small fuel tank meant frequent stops on trans-European trips. I couldn't believe it. This was a practical issue not an environmental one.

As RXBG has also noted, since the last RS4 was conceived, times have changed. The environment has become a serious problem. We're all under pressure to do our bit. In addition to recycling supermarket bags and energy efficient light bulbs, I also feel a need to drive a car that delivers at least 30 mpg and outputs less than 200g of CO2 per km. I am not alone.

For this reason, a naturally aspirated 4.2 V8 in the RS5 doesn't make sense. Smaller capacity engines with turbos does. This is why the new 3.0-litre engine S4 is so clever. It is supposed to deliver 30% less fuel consumption than previous version.

True enthusiasts still want a V8. So the new 4.0 litre TFSI would be an ideal solution for both the RS5 and the RS4. It ticks all the boxes. Whatever Audi delivers, the RS5 will be a great car. But without giving it the eco-credentials it needs its appeal will be narrower.

I agree with you.
You all will see that NA 4.2 engine is obsolete and RS5 sales will be low...
Look at 911 Turbo - 3.6L only and what performance and fuel consumption figures! They are excellent! I am not with Audi here...

[tailpipe]

I am an Audi fan. I admire the brand's integrity and value. But I refuse to be blind to its faults. Some of the things it does are blatantly led by marketing priorities - the need to shift more cars at a higher premium - than to genuinely engineer the best car in a given category.

Apple did not return to form until it stopped producing computers priced to sell and started producing superior technology. Superior tech is how Audi has eclipsed BMW. I just don't want Audi to lose sight of what made it successful in its quest for global domination.

The original FSI V8 remains a fantastic engine. But it is plain common sense that reducing the bore and turbocharging it is the only way to deliver better fuel economy and performance.

[Leadfoot]

Let's try and keep the discussion as objective as possible. RS6 has been slated by most UK motoring journalists for being too heavy and ponderous. They accuse it of lacking the sharpness of its predecessor and that of the RS4. Some said its V10 engine was overkill. Others attacked the price tag, which takes it out of mainstream contention. Net result is a still a very accomplished car, but one with only limited appeal to those with deep pockets. Sales numbers appear to support this view. Sorry, but that's the truth.

So Audi needs an RS car with more mainstream appeal. That is the job of the RS5 and RS4. The last RS4 was superb. The only real issue is that real world consumption of 14-18 mpg and a small fuel tank meant frequent stops on trans-European trips. I couldn't believe it. This was a practical issue not an environmental one.

The only thing wrong with the RS6 is that things have changed dramatically both environmentally and financially from when it designers put pen to paper, the motoring press have always picked fault with the RS6 be it this model or the last and for the exact same reasons, it's always classed as heavy and excessive in output. Remember the last RS6 had 450hp when the M5 had 400hp and it still carried a lot more weight accordingly, nothing has changed and yet the big RS6 still beats them all in everything from acceleration to lap times to emissions to economy.

The only thing I think that can be leveled at the RS6 is it's pricing, it is definitely way more expensive than the others.

As RXBG has also noted, since the last RS4 was conceived, times have changed. The environment has become a serious problem. We're all under pressure to do our bit. In addition to recycling supermarket bags and energy efficient light bulbs, I also feel a need to drive a car that delivers at least 30 mpg and outputs less than 200g of CO2 per km. I am not alone.

For this reason, a naturally aspirated 4.2 V8 in the RS5 doesn't make sense. Smaller capacity engines with turbos does. This is why the new 3.0-litre engine S4 is so clever. It is supposed to deliver 30% less fuel consumption than previous version.

I have said for long enough that evironment situations are changing the way people think when buying a car and how car manufacturers are views certain products though the performance versions are less affected than the mainstream versions.

I am one example of this, I would normally buy the fast versions of any car that I can comfortably afford but now I am considering either the quickest diesel versions or downsizing. Heaven forbid I'm getting a XF 3.0dS out of loan to compare it to the likes of the S4 and see whether I can live with this class of car or whether I am the kind of guy that just needs a petrol engine car in his life.

True enthusiasts still want a V8. So the new 4.0 litre TFSI would be an ideal solution for both the RS5 and the RS4. It ticks all the boxes. Whatever Audi delivers, the RS5 will be a great car. But without giving it the eco-credentials it needs its appeal will be narrower.

Here is something I am in total disagreement with you. I do not think a true enthusiast looks for or needs a V8 engine, the only thing a true enthusiast looks for is performance and driving enjoyment from how it handles, steers and rides. I think people will see a new direction with the TT/RS and will see that a big heavy V8 engine is not necessary to enjoy a car and proves that less weight with less power can match previous expectations.

Given the choice I would much prefer an RS5 with a 380hp inline 5cyl with a lot of character and less overall weight (especially at the nose) than any V8 engine kicking out 450hp. But maybe that's just me.

[artur777]

Leadfoot,

next-gen M5 will have:
- 4.4L V8 with output about 550hp
- weight about 1800-1850kg
- weight distribution - around 50/50
- M-differential at rear axle

it will wip out the floow with current RS6 and will be more economical and better handler...
Nothing against Audi, but its impoissible to win everywhere.
Audi has progressed greatly, but next M5 will be one hell of a car...

And RS5 will not be the same killer for M3 as it is the same NA engine with S-Tronic... No revolutionary changes and high fuel consuption as M3 has...

Look at Porsche - GT3 with 3.8l NA and 435 hp, Turbo with 3.6l TT and 480 hp - this is the technology Audi should compete with... And Porsche is so much higher...

[Leadfoot]

Artur777,

Not sure if you are aware but this 4.4tt engine from BMW isn't as durable as BMW would make you think. So far in the X6 it has had overheating issues and that is from an only modest amount of boost, up that to the level needed for 550hp and well let's just see.

[audi_ch]

Artur777,

Not sure if you are aware but this 4.4tt engine from BMW isn't as durable as BMW would make you think. So far in the X6 it has had overheating issues and that is from an only modest amount of boost, up that to the level needed for 550hp and well let's just see.

lets be realisty, neighter BMW nor Audi would put en engine out witch wouldnt be durable.

Remember the rs4 b5, some one of theme had new turbos at 40 tkm, some at 60tkm, mine was still fine with 80tkm.

of course bmw will put the next m5 on top of the rs6. thats just logical, as the x5m will be over the cayenne turbo s, with handling and peformance.
this will go on and on, but from an inside man of audi, i heard someting interesting:

They think about changing direction, because neither q7v12, rs6 c6 and new r8 v10, wont all be not big sale cars, (doesnt mean they are bad, but timing is really bad) and they are not sure if the really need in the future that many high performing cars. We will see

[Leadfoot]

I think the RS5 motor is set in stone and will be a improved version of the existing 4.2v8 from the RS4. But there is a new 4.0L version coming which will probably be first seen in the next A8.

I reckon this is the engine that will appear in the next RS4, unless Audi are forced to rethink thing and the need for more radical technologies is called for, maybe this engine could be the basis for the future RS4 as was the case with the 4.4L unit in the X5 and was later tweaked to become the X5M.

One thing I think is perfectly clear, we are seeing the death of the normally aspirated engine in hi-performance cars from major manufacturers. With probably the RS5 will be the last of it's kind.

[G@Fourtitude]

I don't necessarily agree. 4.0T is coming and will most certainly go in A8 (maybe as S8), A7 and probably S6. However, RS cars are a different ilk and thus a different strategy. Wolfgang Hatz (head of engine for VAG and Audi) developed these high-rev engines and really loves them.

Further, bigger displacement in an RS car is less of an issue. For CAFE standards, corporate averages and the like, RS cars are very low volume. RS owners aren't as concerned about the cost of operation and have a higher tolerance for the price of the car itself.

In S-cars I agree with you as S-cars represent more volume. RS cars are the exotics in the Audi lineup so they won't follow the traditional efficiency pressures weighing on the rest of the lineup.

For instance, a high-rev 4.0 in the next RS4/5 might be an option (though to be clear I have no indication that this is the direction for B9). Michael Dick has already said in the press that the S5 and S4 will go lighter with small displacement and forced induction.

[tailpipe]

George,

I don't agree with you about RS models being able to do whatever they like because they only sell in very small volumes. When former London Mayor, Ken Livingstone, announced a new potential congestion tax of £25 per day for cars emitting more than 225 g/km of CO2, sales of Porsches in the Capital dropped off a cliff. With excessively high oil prices for most of 2007 year and the onset of the recession last year, suddenly we're all being very careful about what we drive. It isn't just about cutting back financially either. No one wants to be SEEN driving a high performance car in times like these. If such issues affect Porsche in a price bracket above that of Audi, you can bet your last buck that both firms are thinking about how to combine performance with economy.

This is exactly what Porsche has done with the latest incarnations of the Boxter and Cayman. So i fully expect future Audi RS models to do the same and have very clever tech in them. If the RS5 has simply a better breathing version of the existing 4.2 block mated to a manual box, then it is likely to have a very short shelf life indeed.

Enter the 4.0L. This is Audi's performance with economy silver bullet.

The whole point of the the 4.0L is that it can be tuned to deliver different levels of performance like the 2.0L EA888 unit. It's much more tunable than the existing 4.2 engine. Given that 2.0L units are good for over 300 bhp, then the 4.0L could develop well over 500 bhp.

The other important thing is that the new 4.0L is SIGNIFICANTLY smaller and lighter than the existing 4.2L engine, which means it can be positioned further back in the MLP chassis for all models and, with a lower mass, overall weight distribution is improved. As you note, Michael Dick has said that Audi will go for a lighter engine with a smaller displacement. This is exactly what the 4.0L is. No wonder that Porsche wants to use this engine in both the Panamera and 928 replacement.

So like, Leadfoot, I wholeheartedly hope Audi will listen to those of us who know and love its RS line-up and give us this engine in the next RS4. I don't want a V6. I want a V8. I think Audi has to have a V8. With the brilliant new M3, equally good C63 and not bad IS-F, the segment demands it. In giving us a V8, Audi has to do something a bit different and something very advanced. Otherwise we'll have no reason to sell our M3s. I owned an E46 M3 and sold it to buy a B8 RS4. Brilliant as the RS4 was, the economy was lamentable. When pushing on, the small fuel tank meant that total range wasn't much over 200 miles. (I replaced it with a Lexus - but that was utter foolishness on my part and that went too.)

Back to the RS5. Is Audi just playing a numbers game and rushing out a car to compete with BMW and Mercedes? I hope not.