[JeepJeep]

Originally Posted by Draman

I think some of you guys are misinterpreting what a lot of the detractors are saying in this thread. It's great that they're looking to reduce weight, weight is the ultimate performance killer. The problem is they most likely reduced weight by stripping the car of it's luxury (leather, sound deadening materials, weight inducing features such as seat heaters, etc) and then dropped a 4 cylinder in there. The difference between an Audi and an Evo is the luxury. As soon as that luxury is gone there is absolutely no reason to spend $60k on an S5 when you can get an Evo for $35k other than to be a badge whore.

Also, a 4 cylinder engine has no place whatsoever in a $60k car. I have never driven a 4 cylinder that had anywhere near enough refinement or a wide enough power band. Sure you can drop some turbos into any 4 banger and end up with 300 hp or more but you essentially have to drive those 4 bangers at high rpms to have any of it. If you like being the jerk driving through city streets at 6k+ rpm then more power to you, but I personally enjoy having reasonable power at low rpms for my city driving.

If Audi wants to drop weight, power AND price then more power to them. But unless the price is coming down significantly they better do SOMETHING to justify the big price premium over the champion of the extreme performance economy car (Evo).

It hasnt been stated anywhere that any luxurious options were stripped, simply that the body was changed and attached to a spaceframe. Since the article failed to mention anything else, that is why most people are amazed; because thats like eating a cake with nothing bad in it, and a couple vitamins added in and it tastes better than anything you've ever had before.

The article also failed to mention anything about pricing, and I sort of do agree with you on that point as Audi already have a history of taking stuff out of cars and adding more price (think Lamborghini Gallardo Superleggera) as well as other car makers, like Porsche and Ferrari. This is probably because the materials used were more expensive and costly to make than a normal body and framework.

If Audi used easy to get materials that were cheap, then potentially this could be a recipe for a better future: The next A4 weighing less than its predecessor (gasp, amazing I know) while having more gadgets and luxury and hopefully not costing any more.

Hopefully this can pass on to BMW, which can finally make a real e9x M3 CSL (although I suspect there are different reasons for why they aren't making it).

Originally Posted by footie

Still struggling to understand what I meant by this. Please let me try and explain again.

If you took a normal S5 that laps the ring in 8:25 and reduced the power it had from the 354hp down to 230hp what do you think would happen to it's lap time?

Simple, it would slow by approximately 8 seconds maybe even more than that but for this argument we will stick with just 8.

So with the reduction in weight and the repositioning of where the weight is they regained the 8 seconds and gained another 8 seconds on top of this. The original goal was to match the performance while improving emissions and economy but they exceed all expectations.

I'm simply surprised at your lack of understanding here for what has been achieved.

Holy huge

[iPodAddict]

Originally Posted by footie

Still struggling to understand what I meant by this. Please let me try and explain again.

If you took a normal S5 that laps the ring in 8:25 and reduced the power it had from the 354hp down to 230hp what do you think would happen to it's lap time?

Simple, it would slow by approximately 8 seconds maybe even more than that but for this argument we will stick with just 8.

So with the reduction in weight and the repositioning of where the weight is they regained the 8 seconds and gained another 8 seconds on top of this. The original goal was to match the performance while improving emissions and economy but they exceed all expectations.

I'm simply surprised at your lack of understanding here for what has been achieved.

I can't believe no one has brought it up yet.

Power to Weight ratio is what really matters. You could have a 500hp monster motor, but if it's in the chasis of a Hummer (5000+ pounds) it's as useless as a stock honda civic... but at least the civic is farrrr more economical.

[951's 330i]

Originally Posted by lyndon_h

The fake enthusiasts will never buy this because it doesnt have heater seats and extra plush leather.

[footie]

Originally Posted by iPodAddict

I can't believe no one has brought it up yet.

Power to Weight ratio is what really matters. You could have a 500hp monster motor, but if it's in the chasis of a Hummer (5000+ pounds) it's as useless as a stock honda civic... but at least the civic is farrrr more economical.

PTW isn't always the key factor in acceleration and usually as speed increases aerodynamics play as much on a role. Just look at the Capari F1 vs Veyron, both acceleration at roughly the same speed but the Caparo has almost twice the PTW.

Weight help in so many more ways then just acceleration and it's those that are improving it's lap time.

[Draman]

Originally Posted by JeepJeep

It hasnt been stated anywhere that any luxurious options were stripped, simply that the body was changed and attached to a spaceframe. Since the article failed to mention anything else, that is why most people are amazed; because thats like eating a cake with nothing bad in it, and a couple vitamins added in and it tastes better than anything you've ever had before.

The article also failed to mention anything about pricing, and I sort of do agree with you on that point as Audi already have a history of taking stuff out of cars and adding more price (think Lamborghini Gallardo Superleggera) as well as other car makers, like Porsche and Ferrari. This is probably because the materials used were more expensive and costly to make than a normal body and framework.

If Audi used easy to get materials that were cheap, then potentially this could be a recipe for a better future: The next A4 weighing less than its predecessor (gasp, amazing I know) while having more gadgets and luxury and hopefully not costing any more.

Hopefully this can pass on to BMW, which can finally make a real e9x M3 CSL (although I suspect there are different reasons for why they aren't making it).



Holy huge

I get what you're saying, but face reality here. As far as I know Audi hasn't suddenly transformed from an auto company to a chemical/materials engineering company overnight, thus they have access to the same materials the rest of the automotive world has. Lightweight, easy to acquire and cheap materials suitable for the automotive industry do not exist; if they did, everyone would be using them. This means to achieve their weight reduction Audi has to have done 1 of the following:

1) They kept the car identical/similar to how it is now, but substituted lightweight, exotic materials into the construction process wherever possible.
-The price has to increase significantly to accommodate the increase in material prices (and the biggest argument against the S5 is that it's ALREADY too expensive)
-Higher price makes a 4 cylinder engine even more unmarketable/unjustifiable (very few people are going to buy a car with a 4 cylinder engine that has a price starting likely $60k+).

2) They stripped the car of its luxury components and kept the materials used the same.
-The price has to be significantly reduced (no one is going to buy an econo box for $55k+)

3) They stripped the car of it's luxury components and also substituted lightweight, exotic materials into the construction process.
-The price would likely stay around where it is (and sales would plummet). I'm sure there are people out there that get off on knowing their car has some crazy composite brakes and magnesium/titanium/composite frame and engine, but how many of these people exist? The vast majority of car buyers looking for luxury GTs are not going to give a damn whether the suspension is made of aluminum or some wild exotic composite if the seats are made of vinyl and the dash is plastic.

So everyone in this thread saying how great it is that Audi is reducing weight etc are right in theory, but in the real world none of it matters. Unless Audi has some magical lightweight, cheap materials that no one else knows about, they are making some serious concessions in their design process to achieve their weight reduction; concessions that are likely to make the car either too expensive or ill equipped to compete in it's market.

[hks786]

Originally Posted by footie

You haven't a clue have you, 8 seconds when all else is equal is exceptional. We aren't talking about the difference between bald tyres and brand new ones or tuning a car, we are talking about reducing the weight AND REDUCING THE OUTPUT. A drop of over 100hp in a car like the S5 and weighing the same would increase it ring time by a minimum of 8+ seconds, so basically the difference is the weight reduction is accounting for approximately 16 seconds and truth me that is HUGE.

+1,000,000

Imagine that lightweight S5 with the new 350bhp 2.5T from the TT-RS.

[warmtoes]

So everyone in this thread saying how great it is that Audi is reducing weight etc are right in theory, but in the real world none of it matters. Unless Audi has some magical lightweight, cheap materials that no one else knows about, they are making some serious concessions in their design process to achieve their weight reduction; concessions that are likely to make the car either too expensive or ill equipped to compete in it's market.

How do you know what they'll do? At least they're thinking in the right direction. Lighten up the cars instead of putting in bigger, heavier and more powerful engines.

If they homologate the technology with the VW group the volume will be there to make it affordable. But, we're just going to have to wait and see. The concept itself is right on though.

[JeepJeep]

Originally Posted by Draman

I get what you're saying, but face reality here. As far as I know Audi hasn't suddenly transformed from an auto company to a chemical/materials engineering company overnight, thus they have access to the same materials the rest of the automotive world has. Lightweight, easy to acquire and cheap materials suitable for the automotive industry do not exist; if they did, everyone would be using them. This means to achieve their weight reduction Audi has to have done 1 of the following:

1) They kept the car identical/similar to how it is now, but substituted lightweight, exotic materials into the construction process wherever possible.
-The price has to increase significantly to accommodate the increase in material prices (and the biggest argument against the S5 is that it's ALREADY too expensive)
-Higher price makes a 4 cylinder engine even more unmarketable/unjustifiable (very few people are going to buy a car with a 4 cylinder engine that has a price starting likely $60k+).

2) They stripped the car of its luxury components and kept the materials used the same.
-The price has to be significantly reduced (no one is going to buy an econo box for $55k+)

3) They stripped the car of it's luxury components and also substituted lightweight, exotic materials into the construction process.
-The price would likely stay around where it is (and sales would plummet). I'm sure there are people out there that get off on knowing their car has some crazy composite brakes and magnesium/titanium/composite frame and engine, but how many of these people exist? The vast majority of car buyers looking for luxury GTs are not going to give a damn whether the suspension is made of aluminum or some wild exotic composite if the seats are made of vinyl and the dash is plastic.

So everyone in this thread saying how great it is that Audi is reducing weight etc are right in theory, but in the real world none of it matters. Unless Audi has some magical lightweight, cheap materials that no one else knows about, they are making some serious concessions in their design process to achieve their weight reduction; concessions that are likely to make the car either too expensive or ill equipped to compete in it's market.

Thank you for explaining that to me, I completely agree with you now. Perhaps then thats the basis of a more expensive RS5.

Originally Posted by warmtoes

How do you know what they'll do? At least they're thinking in the right direction. Lighten up the cars instead of putting in bigger, heavier and more powerful engines.

If they homologate the technology with the VW group the volume will be there to make it affordable. But, we're just going to have to wait and see. The concept itself is right on though.

You didn't really read his post did you, let alone most of this thread.