Ask the Car People.SM


Audi A4 2004 and earlier

6042 messages,  Last post on Sep 20, 2011 at 4:33 PM

You are in the Audi A4 Forum.

What is this discussion about? Audi A4, Sedan

Messages Page 328 of 605

#3269 of 6042 2.9T and other rumors and notions. . . by markcincinnati

Feb 19, 2002 (4:29 pm)

OK the poop from either Car and Driver or Road and Track or CAR magazine -- heck it may even have been in European Car recently -- on the 2.9T is this: It is very possible to produce a reliable, drivable 2.9T with a rating of over 300HP and of course the early-on high torque that all Audi's turbo engines are famous for (torque coming on south of 2,000 RPM). However, in non-turbo form, the base 4.2 is "only" 300HP and the S8 4.2 is "only" 360.
 
Therefore, producing an agressive 350HP 2.9T powered model (A4 or A6) and marketing it would have to be problematic.
 
Indeed, in some senses it is probably a bit of a "sticky wicket" that the 2002 A6 2.7T is quicker than the S6 and the S8 by .5 and .3 seconds (as reported in Audi brochures). The content of the S6 and S8 and even the A6 4.2 are therefore given more prominence -- which I find only a little odd, since both the S6 and the S8 are offered as THE AUDI PERFORMANCE cars (only to be bettered by a car that is perhaps some $30,000 less money).
 
I am mostly convinced that you are getting a lot more than just a 0-60 time with these higher buck cars, but c'mon, let's have the S6 4.2 that comes to the US be the "king of the [6 series] hill" in ALL aspects (and that includes quickness). The 25mph top speed edge the S6 has over the 2.7T or even the 4.2 (which I own) does nothing for us here in River City (Cincinnati) -- I mean where can you ever go 130mph safely let alone 155mph. I'd forego that 25mph top speed improvement for a full second advantage on the 0-60 times.
 
So, the article reads something like this -- the Cosworth developed 2.9T is rated at an easy 295HP and similar torque -- which is available from under 2000 RPM. All of us who have read these posts and those on AudiWorld, know that the 2.7T can be "stage one" chipped to 295HP +/- a few horses. A 295HP 2.9T would be, one can conclude, very mild indeed. And, also, most of us who have ever driven an S4 or A6 2.7T manual transmissions of course know that the stock 2.7T "ain't no slouch!" Even a mild 2.9T in an A6 or A4 (S4) would have to come equipped with speeding tickets in the glove box for the driver's convenience! Holy Cow Batman!
 
Yet, due to what I believe is purely for positioning (perhaps aka Market Placement), the following makes sense. You can't have your 2.9T have specs "better" than your 4.2 (even if it can out accelerate the 4.2 in certain body and drivetrain applications) -- so you limit the 2.9T to a lazy (considering the potential) 295HP. And, you make absolutely certain that as you crank up the displacement of the engine, you crank up the [mostly] luxury and [somewhat] sporting content of the model that contains the most cubic inches. Got that?
 
Last year, for example, if you test drove an A4 1.8T ( a claimed 170HP) and then immediately drove a similar A4 2.8 ( a claimed 190HP) and looked at the sticker price -- well you saw and felt the following: the A4 1.8T seemed quicker, it cost less, and it handled better if both A4's were quattro's with the sport option; the A4 2.8 had wood inlays, available leather, available power seats and sat nav (and you couldn't get these things on the 1.8T version). The "content" but not the performance was higher on the 2.8. Four of my friends who could have afforded either, chose "fully optioned" 1.8T's -- frankly they only missed the leather availability a little bit and the power seats a little more. Uh oh -- we must not let THAT happen again.
 
So, we will offer three engine/chassis combinations that will -- hopefully -- not cause buyers to "buy down." Here is at least one possibility that might solve such a dilemma:
 
In the A4 body:
 
a 2.0T tuned to 195 or 200HP (the dealers will want 200HP for bragging rights, and I'll wager they'll get it -- and Audi dealers are NOT pleased that VW's 1.8T is rated at 180HP whereas in the A4 it still is marketed as 170HP) -- even if there is no 2.0T next year in the US, you can almost be certain that the 1.8T will put out NO LESS than 180HP in any Audi of America car.
 
a 3.0 or possibly a 2.9T as the step up car -- but if there is a 200HP (minimum) 2.0T car, the current 3.0 will seem like too much money for too little performance, and even premium content will not woo an extra $4 - $8,000 from many buyers -- power seat or no; so my guess is the luxury sport A4 will have to crank up the power and torque somehow, no matter what engine displacement number graces the back end (therefore, my opinion: the logical choice, a 2.9T A4)
 
then for "balls out" eat my rubber, burn my dust performance (and an M3 competitor at thousands less than the Bimmer) a 4.2 S4 with at least a published HP rating of 340 (just like in the current S6 -- and possibly 360HP if the long promised W12 shows up on this side of the Atlantic in any flavor Audi "8" A8, A8L or S8.)
 
The dealers would like this, the aftermarket tuners would probably like this, Audi would like this because it would genuinely differentiate Audi from the constant move upmarket of VW. On that last point, remember that in April 2002 there will be a sub $38,000 8 cylinder leather-lined, AWD, bi-Xenon headlighted, Monsoon sound system equipped, 17 inch tired 275HP Passat for Pete's sake. It will be over $5 or $6,000 less than an A6 3.0 (and by comparison the Audi will look expensive and anemic).
 
Audi needs to "up the performance ante" in a concomitant fashion (like VW, i.e.) to keep the marketplace of both new and current Audi owners firmly able to differentiate their image of Audi from VW. And, then, wham! a short 10 or so months later a 12 cylinder VW Phaeton that in test reports is "only" $5K north of an S6 and performs better -- both in straight line grunt and curvy road stickyness.
 
I think all this stuff will be good for the marketplace, good for the dealers and good for those of us that lust after ever more higher performing Audi cars -- god, I hope we can still afford them.
 
The most expensive Audi I have ever had was over $60K (a Pearl White 1997 A8 with the sport wheel option and all the power doo-dads). And my current all options except Pearl White paint A6 4.2 was "only" $54K. That is still a very far cry from $71K for a VW.
 
Takes your breath away, doesn't it? How much will these new A4's rise in price? And, then what about the A6's and of course what amount of coin will an S8 with a W12 command?
 
Help, I'm getting dizzy.

#3270 of 6042 wow! by jdbtensai

Feb 19, 2002 (6:40 pm)

that's a post.
i want to respond more later.
for now, i would love to see a 350hp s4 with the 2.9t, not the 4.2.
leave the 4.2 for the 6 and 8.
 
top speed in america? who cares, eh? my car goes 142, i think. never even come close to finding out though.
those big v8's (and more) are great in germany, i'd imagine. but no one in america cruises for hours at 100+ mph. though i'd love to if it were safe and legal. but then that gets to the bad drivers in america. which is a whole 'nother story.

#3271 of 6042 Mark by mbnut1

Feb 19, 2002 (7:30 pm)

I am I correct in my understanding the the 2.0 would have balance shafts?

#3272 of 6042 Balance shafts. . . by markcincinnati

Feb 19, 2002 (7:52 pm)

Well, one would think so -- might be a pretty rough dude without them, don't you think?
 
As I said before, spy shots, rumors, probabilities but not 100% certainties abound about the '03 and even '04 Audis. I'm betting the 2.0T will be here if not in model year '03 then at least in calendar '03.
 
But, like a lot of us rabid Audi fans -- there is at this point much rumor mongering and only less than 100% certainty.
 
I will certainly take a wager (for fun) that we will never again see the Audi 1.8T in the US at less than 180HP and that we will very probably see the minimum Audi engine have 200HP -- soon.

#3273 of 6042 Quattro & Multitronic by jaystizo

Feb 19, 2002 (9:25 pm)

Has anyone heard any plans regarding the marriage of these 2 options?

#3274 of 6042 Audi A4 ESP Question by wmquan

Feb 19, 2002 (10:08 pm)

Does anyone know:
 
1) Who makes Audi's ESP system (e.g. Bosch, Continental-Teves)?
 
2) Is the Audi's ESP system "full-range?" That is, does it also fully engage while braking the vehicle (instead of letting ABS take full control)? My understanding is that BMW's and MB's systems are full-range, whereas Toyota's VSC and Acura's VSA are not (under braking, the system is purely ABS).
 
Thanks!

#3275 of 6042 wmquan by nyccarguy

Feb 20, 2002 (7:26 am)

Audi's ESP system is made by none other than Mercedes-Benz (probably developed in part with bosch). If you look an an Audi brochure or maybe even on their website in the fine print that nobody reads on the back page it says: ESP is a registered trademark of Daimler-Chrysler, AG.

#3276 of 6042 ESP is Bosch and it IS full range and now comes with brake assist, standard by markcincinnati

Feb 20, 2002 (7:53 am)

Go here for more information:
 
http://www.abs-education.org/
 
Or here for a demonstration:
 
http://www.bosch.de/k/en/esp/index_flash.htm

#3277 of 6042 Mark From the Audi Web Site by mbnut1

Feb 20, 2002 (4:42 pm)

Mark I was asking if you were refering to the engine described on the Audi Web site below which isn't currently available in NA cars. I asked because in the description below it isn't turbocharged.
 
Note that it says that it has a balancer shaft for "excellent refinement". This is a additional shaft that is increasing being placed in engine configurations that aren't inhernetly balanced such as inline fours and v-6's. The new 3.0 V-6 has one as well as the new generation of Japanese 4 cylinders.
 
The new 2.0-litre engine
 
The other newcomer in the range of petrol engines for the new Audi A4 is the inline four-cylinder engine with a displacement of 1984 cc. This engine, with five valves per cylinder, reaches its peak torque of 195 Nm at 3300 rpm.
 
This unit achieves its maximum power output of 96 kW (130 bhp) at 5700 rpm. It propels the A4 saloon with front-wheel drive and 5-speed manual gearbox to 100 km/h in 9.9 seconds, and on to a top speed of 212 km/h. And in view of the fact that this model only consumes 7.9 litres of fuel per 100 km (1999/100 EC), these figures certainly are impressive.
 
The most important technical innovations:
 
Continual intake camshaft adjustment for optimum engine charging
Mapped cooling improves efficiency
New two-position variable intake manifold for full torque and high performance
Balancer shaft for excellent refinement

#3278 of 6042 Audi ESP by wmquan

Feb 20, 2002 (5:18 pm)

Thanks for the info on Audi's ESP. It does make sense now that it is Bosch's (or Continental Teeves) system since Audi wouldn't be able to use the ESP trademark without proper license.
 
ESP was developed jointly between MB and Bosch. However, Continental-Teeves also provides ESP implementations for some MB vehicles (S-class) while Bosch provides implementations for other MB vehicles (e.g. the S-class).
 
I'd imagine the systems are quite similar, though tuned differently to account for different customer/vehicle targets. Wonder how current the software releases are with what MB has in its vehicles? Probably not noticeable anyway.
 
Anyway, it's an excellent system. Has anyone noticed if it's fairly aggressive (e.g. intervenes in a lot more situations) or seems to hardly go off at all (I realize one needs a baseline to truly answer this)? Some folks think the BMW and MB ones are too aggressively tuned, while some folks think the Subaru VDC system is too timidly tuned. I'd imagine with the A4's target of being a sports sedan, and having quattro and good handling dynamics in the first place, that the ESP would be tuned to be non-aggressive?

Messages Page 328 of 605

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement