Exciting rumour

[tailpipe]

Let me just preface this post by saying that this is only a rumour from two other Audi sites - but let me also say that it was confirmed by an Audi dealer visited in Central London this afternoon.

The revised Audi A4 due this Autumn will be much more than a facelift. Stung by criticism that the car is dynamically inferior to the BMW 3-Series Audi will substantial revise quite a few under-the-skin components.

According to what has been reported, one of the key areas for improvement is the front end and I believe that the engine - especially the V8s of the S4 and new RS4 will now be able to be mounted further back. While this should certainly improve weight distribution, it will not be anything like as well balanced as a 3-Series. That said the dynamics should be much improved. Add the new 60:40 (rear: front) torque split of the 4WD and the extra power of the RS4 and Audi should finally have an A-4 model that will demolish the M3.

Audi dealer confirmed that facelift would be substantial.

Let's hope all this is true.

[Audihead]

This is very encouraging news if it is true, Audi needs to start losing some weight as well then they will have a true BMW fighter on their hands.

:s4addict:-Bimmerhead

[Erik]

This 60:40, or rather 40:60, has been seen on the concept cars so I hope it will make it into production.

[Nordschleife]

You can't get 40/60 weight diistribution with the engine ahead of the front wheels.
You can't do anything about the layout before the next platform. Ask yourself is there room to fit an engine into the space behind the front axle and ahead of the firewall, and if so, where is the space for the rear-mounted transaxle?
So, significantly improved weight distribution, I think not, this time. Next platform, there is good reason to be hopeful.

R+C

[Klint]

eh?

I think the "weight distribution" is actually the distribution of power from the 4WD system.

60% to the rear, 40% to the front.

Either way, this news sounds promising, I'm looking forward to the next RS4, can't wait for it to arrive.

I'm just hoping that the grill wont look to big on the small (ish) A4 size-scale.

[Audihead]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Klint
[B]eh?

I think the "weight distribution" is actually the distribution of power from the 4WD system.

60% to the rear, 40% to the front.

Either way, this news sounds promising, I'm looking forward to the next RS4, can't wait for it to arrive.

You are right, he is talking about the power distribution to the front and rear of the car. Also if we look at the post, for better weight distribution they will move the engine further back towards the center of the car.

:s4addict: -Bimmerhead

[Nordschleife]

Bimmerhead
You cannot move the engine back behind the front wheels with the Torsen AWD differential. The front drive shafts come out of each side of the front of the gearbox. You cannot angle this shafts significantly, otherwise they shear under real world driving conditions.

To move the engine inside the wheelbase you have to change the entire drive line, in fact give up the layout that has been the Audi hallmark for the last 22 years.

Martin Winterkorn has committed to ditch this layout, but it will require complete new models. Audi is committed to cars with the same layout as the Maserati Quattroporte, in fact Audi engineers went down to Modena to show Maserati how to build it.

The Quattroporte has a front mid-engine layout with a rear transaxle and a 40/60 front/rear weight distribution. Winterkorn has publicly stated that this balance is the ideal and has committed the company to this format.

VAG has committed to take at least 10,000 Maserati Quattroporte platforms from Maserati per year. This platform is very flexible, you can alter it considerably.

So in future expect Audis to be mid engined - four seaters will be front-mid engined, two seaters will be rear-mid engined.

If anybody thinks this is all a bit odd, the new CEO of Fiat, parent of Alfa Romeo, Lancia, Ferrari and Maserati is Demel, a long time member of the Austrian gang at VAG. These companies are very close indeed.

R+C

[Erik]

Why would anyone want 40/60 weight distribution?

I was talking about 40/60 power distribution to the wheels - and of course trying to get as close as 50/50 weight distribution as possible.

[Nordschleife]

Originally posted by Erik
Why would anyone want 40/60 weight distribution?

I was talking about 40/60 power distribution to the wheels - and of course trying to get as close as 50/50 weight distribution as possible.

Erik

Anybody who wants a car that is nice to drive under all conditions wants a 40/60 weight distribution.

Because the wheels on the front axle steer the car as well as carry weight and, in a All Wheel Drive, propel the car, its better, in practice, to have more weight over the rear axle.

More weight over the rear axle allows you to transmit more power throught the rear wheels without loss of traction, so its easier to deal with any understeer at the front axle. Also remember that the transfer of weight under braking (rear to front) is much greater than it is under acceleration (front to rear), up to three times as much in practice, so its better to start of with a car which has a 40/60 weight distribution under static conditions.

Lots of people think that 50/50 is ideal, empirical testing has revealed otherwise.

R+C

[Erik]

I understand. I guess the 50/50 has been marketed hard as the ideal setup by companies like BMW. And the M3 and the CSL sure are nice to drive. But better get a Porsche then.
But, what happens when you throw a hammer? Which part will go first...? Well, there's nothing stuff like ESP can't help.

[Nordschleife]

Originally posted by Erik

But, what happens when you throw a hammer?

Damn funny hammer with a 40/60 weight distribution!

Is that why so many Swedes have swollen thumbs?

R+C

[Klint]

Originally posted by Nordschleife
Damn funny hammer with a 40/60 weight distribution!

Is that why so many Swedes have swollen thumbs?

R+C

Funny...

[tailpipe]

Yes. When I mentioned a 60:40 split I was referring to power not weight. 60% of the torque goes to the rear wheels, which makes the car feel like it has RWD. But please not that I did say the revised A4's weight distribution may also be improved because its front end has apparently been significantly redesigned, allowing the engines to sit further back in the chassis reducing the load over the front wheels. Yes, it will still have the same fundamental disadvantages versus a BMW 3-Series, but it should handle a whole lot better. Sorry for not making this clearer.

What is interesting about this rumour, if it is indeed true, is that Audi feels it is necessary at this stage of the model cycle to make such major changes. The A4 is still selling well and Audi accounts for a significant % of the VW Group's profits, so there doesn't seem to be a real necessity to change just yet.

(Nordschliefe, I remember that you mentioned one way to improve weight distribution in a 4WD car was to attach a device that looks like a chainsaw to the front axle, i.e. enable the front axle to sit ahead of the engine. They may have listened to you. )

[TheBrit]

Interesting. A 40:60 torque split would indicate use of a T3 centre differential, assuming Audi is sticking with Torsen diffs. The Torsen web site says;
"The new generation TORSEN T-3 Traction Differential provides efficient torque splitting, biasing, and differentiation for improved vehicle performance. It is specifically engineered for hard to package all-wheel drive trains and is compatible with all automatic transmission fluids. The unique (patent pending) Twin Differential configuration makes the TORSEN T-3 especially well suited for front wheel drive based applications that relied on external-mounted torque-on-demand couplings to drive the rear axle."

A differential designed for easy conversion of an FWD layout to AWD layout might just give Audi a bit more flexibility without a complete platform change. Even if the block and transmission could sit a little more over the front axle instead of in front of it, it would help weight distribution - not in the order of 40:60, but an improvement on where it sits now, surely? Do you think it's even possible Audi would consider a transverse layout with a Torsen-based quattro systems if such a thing were possible?

On a related note, I know the Torsen is integrated into the auto gearboxes by ZF, but are the manual boxes a separare transfer box bolted on? Anyone know?

[Nordschleife]

If you read between the lines, you will see that the T3 centre differential is targetted at those applications presently catered to by the Haldex system and new applications.
When Audi starts putting the engine behind the front wheels and the gearbox at the rear axle, to get a 40/60 weight distribution, then I expect the company to use a different centre differential, who makes it, is another matter.
In the mean time, the present Torsen centre differential may be modified to give whatever torque bias Audi requires, within reason.
Remember, all Audis start off life as front wheel drive cars, even the A8 although I don't think they have ever marketed one, maybe in one of those funny markets.

R+C

[TheBrit]

Oh, I appreciate Audi has no real need to stick with Torsen, after all the quattro name was transferred out to a Haldex unit without any backlash. So, changing to a transverse engine layout wouldn't happen on the current platforms?

Yes, a transaxle box would be a different matter altogether, but wouldn't that preclude the use of AWD?

Only a very odd nation could possibly be interested in buying FWD A8s...

[Nordschleife]

Originally posted by TheBrit
So, changing to a transverse engine layout wouldn't happen on the current platforms?

Yes, a transaxle box would be a different matter altogether, but wouldn't that preclude the use of AWD?

It is announced, but not widely publicised, the official policy is that new models (not facelifts) from 200X, will be 'front mid-engined, with a rear transaxle'. This does sound like dual prop shafts. Oh, the sports cars will be 'rear mid-engined', like the LMQ.
If you want to know what future Audis will be like - look at the Maserati Quattroporte.

This does mean that they will be great to drive.

As cars get bigger, the benefits of transverse mounted engines diminuish, a big car with a tiny bonnet looks odd.

R+C

[tailpipe]

Nordschleife,

I like what you say about new Audi's being great to drive. Hallelulah!

But have you driven the Maserati Quattroporte and is it any good? Or does the chassis/ differential system it need work before it fulfills its potential?

While I welcome Audi's commitment to Rear Wheel Drive and better handling, I want future models not only to be a more ultimate driving machine than a BMW, but also a safer one. (I have had some horrific moments in an M3 - always when the road conditions were less than ideal - but not always at breakneck speeds.) Therefore I hope that 4WD will still be available. Can you engineer a 4WD system for the Maserati's transaxle?

Many years ago, I used to drive an original Audi Quattro. What a fabulous car that was. They never really replaced it, at least not until the RS2 came along.