You are here: Forums Wagons Audi allroad Audi allroad

Audi allroad

413 messages,  Last post on Oct 08, 2009 at 10:49 AM

You are in the Audi allroad Forum. Your Host is kcram

What is this discussion about? Audi allroad quattro, Wagon

Messages Page 2 of 42 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 42 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#8 of 413 some answers by bollinger Aug 08, 2000 (5:40 am)
1, yes the heavier car cuts down on the speed of the Allroad somewhat. Still quite a bit faster than the 2.8 Avant though. Looking at low to mid 7's versus the 2.7Ts low to mid 6's and the 2.8's high 8's. 2, same interior space as A6 3, I forget, go to Audi's website. I think about $45K. 4, no, not a chance. If you are on the waitlist for the car, you pay MSRP or very slightly less (like $500). 5, it isn't a first year car by a long shot. Only the suspension is new. Engine is 18 months tested, A6 in general 3 years tested.
#9 of 413 Audi allroad looks great by bgkanne Aug 08, 2000 (7:53 pm)
A magazine comparison test with the 6 cylinder version of the X5 is in order! Why can't Audi get power out of their V6's without resulting to using turbos?
#10 of 413 Audi V6 power by bollinger Aug 09, 2000 (2:14 am)
Audi's 2.8L V6 produces 193HP in the A4, 200 in the A6. BMW's 2.8L V6 produces 193HP. Where's the deficit? The new 3.0L BMW engine produces 225HP, although it isn't a very powerful 225HP, it performs significantly worse than the old 240HP M3 engine, despite similar ratings. The new Audi 3.0L engine that comes around next year is expected to produce 225HP. I think your assertion that Audi doesn't get enough power out of their 6-cyls is incorrect.
#11 of 413 air struts are expensive to replace by mr_quag Aug 09, 2000 (4:49 am)
Keep in mind that air struts are expensive to replace if they fail. And failure to air struts are common with the pre 1994 Subarus. Jeff
#12 of 413 hmm, seems that a new all-road thread is started... by beanboy Aug 09, 2000 (5:34 am)
There's another one buried that started when the car first appeared in the mags on the show circuit. Saddened that the latest review states that the low-range option with the manual won't be available in the states, the skid plates are a riot in terms of actually protecting anything, and it weighs too much (over 4000 pounds!). As Jeff mentioned, I'm scared what kinda shape the suspension will be in 10 years down the road. I'm gonna pull an F-Body and say a Soobie with careful mods will be superior in performance on paper, and save you some money to boot. Still, not a bad compromise. Audi not have an SUV in the works? Finally, A4 version would be interesting... Maybe in a performance/rally version perhaps? -Beanboy
#13 of 413 beanboy by bollinger Aug 09, 2000 (5:50 pm)
I'm sure a Subaru could be make to perform better. But most people aren't buying Audi's for the performance, Audi already proved that. A Subaru with all the mods in the world isn't going to have an Audi interior or quietness. Don't get me wrong, I love Subarus. Audi SUV: bite your tongue. VW and Porsche get the VAG SUV's. I say good for them. VW probably could make a go of it, and the Porsche version will tank so fast it won't hurt them too much. As to an A4 version being interesting? Have you been asleep? The S4 Avant has been available in Europe for quite some time. It has the 2.7T engine (but with 265HP) in an A4 Avant (wagon) body with a better suspension. The S4 Avant comes to the US this year, quite soon really. In Europe they have the RS4, which is available as an Avant (wagon) only. It is an S4 Avant with a super-tweaked 2.7T engine producing 380HP. It is the fastest wagon available In Europe. The RS4 is not coming here. Both of these cars seem to fit your description of an "A4 version" of the Allroad, except for the suspension, which you don't seem very hot on anyway. Audi's rally car seems to remain the S3. Rally cars do seem to get a lot of gain from being very small, so that makes sense. The S3 is essentially a VW Golf with a TT drivetrain making "only" 215HP.
#14 of 413 It's results not the ratings by bgkanne Aug 09, 2000 (6:56 pm)
It isn't the power ratings, it's the acceleration numbers and performance feel. For example, a current 328i (or now 330i) will run rings around all of the 4 series Audi's except the S4. Non turbo Audi's are usually mentioned as not performing very well. I suspect it is due to the quattro systems causing additional drag, but the cars are excellent regardless!
#15 of 413 Turbo with heritage by motokichi Aug 10, 2000 (2:43 am)
Audi have a long history with the turbo engine, and they prefer it to larger displacement. The nice thing with their turbo engine is the power delivery, which is smooth and without significant lag or surge. As to why they don't get more out of their NA engines, I guess the five valve configuration makes it more difficult for them to employ a variable valve timing. I think their V6 has a longer stroke and smaller bore than the BMW I6. This may help them keep the engine shorter which allows it to be mounted (oh what's the opposite of transverse) in line with the drive shaft and still keep the engine way up in the nose. So while the engine makes the same amount of hp, it takes them longer to get to the peak hp rpm. Quattro cars have not been so much about acceleration but cornering speed. This is what allowed them to kick BMW butt in the 1995-96 German sports car series and got them eliminated from the series for having an "unfair advantage".
#16 of 413 Five valves and VVT by bollinger Aug 10, 2000 (8:07 am)
The 2.8L engine (and 2.7T) have two-stage valve timing. The 2.8 also has a two-stage variable volume intake plenum, I think only on the A6 though, since it won't fit under the A4 hood. The 4.2 has a three-stage variable volume intake plenum. The 2.7T doesn't seem to have a variable-volume intake plenum. But that's okay, as that kind of tweak does nothing when you have forced induction. I wish Audi would ditch the 5-valve design. My philosophy is that if you can't get it done with 4 valves, maybe you don't need to do it. 4 continuously variable valves seems to work well for Toyota/Lexus and BMW. The opposite of transverse (for engines) is longitudinal. The engine in the A4,A6, and A8 (and Passat) is longitudinally mounted. And I agree, the shortness of the V6 gives them Audi's a better shape and more under hood flexibilty than BMW's straight 6. BMW's straight 6 has to be mounted back so far for weight distribution that it can be difficult to service and is noisy at times. BMWs 2.8L is "square" at 3.31 bore x 3.31 stroke. Audi's 2.8L is 3.24x3.40. Strange that Audi adds a valve and loses bore, but there you go. Note BMW added stroke (and no bore) with the new 3.0L engine. If my math works, the new stroke should be 3.55.
#17 of 413 Allroad does perform by bgkanne Aug 10, 2000 (5:37 pm)
According to the latest Road & Track, the Allroad has, by Audi's account, a 0-60 time of 6.7 seconds, matching the BMW X5 (I assume the V8 version). Considering the estimated price of 45K, the Allroad is an incredible package and a relative bargain.

Messages Page 2 of 42 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 42 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Wagons Audi allroad Audi allroad