Jump to content

Diesel R8 0-60 4.2s, 500bhp & 1,000Nm of torque


AZURES3
 Share

Recommended Posts

[ QUOTE ]

but it'll feel faster than the V8 because of the turbo lag and non-linear power curve. so will probably be more fun.

I find the 3.0tdi more fun than the V8 S4.... the B5 S4 was far more fun!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Compare those cars an i possibly agree with you. Stick a 335d engine and the CSL and I dont think youd get a very good response. Dont get me wrong I totally see your point. Diesel does have fantastic power low down and huge grunt - enough in this car to make the gearing long so it will 'feel' like you are winding it up - but it just wont be the same as you wont be able to make back the fact diesels wind down towards the end of the rev range where a good petrol engine peaks. There is no way of clawing that factor back in to a diesel car.

This engine is a fantastic achievement. The car looks fantastic esp in this diesel body, but that engine, that engine will ruin that car.

As said in an A6/8 im sure it would be fantastic. in this i just dont understand...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 102
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The racing drivers that Audi employed to win back to back Le Mans 24 Hours races in the R10 were initially sceptical that a diesel would be driveable in the way they want it to be. They were well and truly won over. Yes it'll be very different in character to a large displacement petrol engine, but I think the R8 TDi will be a very interesting beast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

The racing drivers that Audi employed to win back to back Le Mans 24 Hours races in the R10 were initially sceptical that a diesel would be driveable in the way they want it to be. They were well and truly won over. Yes it'll be very different in character to a large displacement petrol engine, but I think the R8 TDi will be a very interesting beast.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course they were - similar power, same handling and better fuel consumption (meaning less stops). However, we are back to our rule bending to allow this. Same rules for both (up or down) and I could pretty much guarantee what the vast majority of the racers would pick - ask them would they rather have a petrol or tractor F1 one car (unfettered by rules &regs) and the vote would be more or less 100% - 0%.

It is kinda interesting but not special (given where it sits, price range, competition - e.g NS-X 2 etc, shame it doesn't have the badge). It's a serious loss leader designed to sell more A4 TDi S-lines and if the real serious engine players were to get involved & expend similar effort then it wouldn't be that special.

Still looks FAB (apart from the DRL's) and actually better than the R8 smlove2.gif but in the grand scheme of things, it ain't really a ground breaker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why does it have be to a marketing exercise? Why can't it simply be that they've managed to produce a car that's faster and more frugal than the petrol one. Of course they will market this as it's is a major marketing thing to happen but I don't see that the reason for doing it.

I might to too naive but I think others might be too sceptical wink.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

Surely the whole thing is a marketing exercise by Audi to get people talking about their diesel engines, buoyed by the Le Mans success? It certainly seems to have succeeded in provoking a lot of debate.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. Non-car people laugh at a diesel R8.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

Surely the whole thing is a marketing exercise by Audi to get people talking about their diesel engines, buoyed by the Le Mans success? It certainly seems to have succeeded in provoking a lot of debate.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. Non-car people laugh at a diesel R8.

[/ QUOTE ]

So do a hell of a lot of petrol heads - IMHO it is very much an exercise in Blairesque spin in many ways.

It is interesting, a bit different and of course has the looks - [serena Wiliiams size BUT] there is a reason why no one else has bothered, including those who are better at making engines than Audi.

I wouldn't deny it a place in the world by any means but it is all a bit too much great white hope IMHO.

As an example (and ignoring badge kudos, image etc for a moment as we are looking at engineering purity), if Honda deliver on the supposed aim on NS-X 2 of 500bhp and circa 20 odd mpg (which seems to be a figure being bandied around for the R12d) from an N/A petrol of similar size then that really just leaves the headline torque figure - which is of course a total misnomer generally and more so at the top end since who buys a sports/supercar to simply put foot down in gear X (apart from a few posers).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

It could be big in america if it is pushed to rappers & the like (due to torque figure & bodykit (i can see chrome wheels(!) but I can't see any point in Europe as the mpg is not that impressive and we don't have vmax roads.

[/ QUOTE ]

The supercar equivalent of the Pious - yelrotflmao.gif

[ QUOTE ]

I doubt there will be many on the road..

[/ QUOTE ]

I suspect there will be more than are deserved, a la A4 diesel cabs.

Am I being a bit harsh/blinkered - maybe, maybe not, I just think that from a technical standpoint it would be way, way more impressive if Audi had released a smallish engined petrol engine (say 3.6l V6, FI presumably) that produced ballpark power but weighed, say circa 11-1200kg (but with same interior, fuel consumption etc) and thus from a truly tech standpoint would be much closer to notworthy.gif

However, that seems not to be the German way at the moment and personally I'd spend the cash on an A6 Avant/5 Touring and an Atom, regardless of how much cash I (hopefully) would have. An Atom alone gets more attention in 5 mins than any R8 gets in a much longer time frame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

there is a reason why no one else has bothered, including those who are better at making engines than Audi.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess that's the same for DSG technology as well. They all thought better of it until Audi did it. Funny coz I thought there was a big rush by Audi to be first to market with it.

Strange that Audi were first to do the diesel Le Mans car and then Peugeot went in. Strange how other manufacturers now also race diesel cars.

I'm sure you're right. They've got it so wrong. wink.gif

p.s. I generally hate diesel as it's mucky smelly etc but that's not to say there's no place for it. I'd prefer a diesel R8 to a petrol one just because it's faster and will be so much more usable everyday e.g. overtaking etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

I guess that's the same for DSG technology as well. They all thought better of it until Audi did it. Funny coz I thought there was a big rush by Audi to be first to market with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Was it Porsche who introduced it first? (genuine Q - I just have a thought in my head that they used it for racing).

Various mobs have tried various ideas on this and DSG seems at the moment to be the best answer, if you want that kind of thing (I don't). However, if anyone can get Torotrak's tranny to work properly then it might become old hat pretty quickly. Problem is, they can't (at the moment) and I would imagine that it could make the driving experience a whole lot less soulless, depending on how it is implemented.

[ QUOTE ]

Strange that Audi were first to do the diesel Le Mans car and then Peugeot went in. Strange how other manufacturers now also race diesel cars.

[/ QUOTE ]

AFAIK (but willing to be corrected), the only ones racing diesels at the moment are various bits of VAG, Peugeot and BMW and the only ones at a serious level so far are Audi and Pug. However, when you are spending 10 times the budget of the 'rivals', your competition doesn't include any other major manufacturers, the type of racing is most likely to suit a sooty and the rules are bent in your favour then I suppose the choice is understandable. More so when you are major sellers of diesel cars as well.

Relax the constraints on petrol cars and introduce a few more manufacturers to Le Mans (which would be a damn good thing IMO) and things would be much more interesting. Alternatively, lets see someone having a go at F1 with a diesel - equivalent rules with a N/A 2.4l would be amusing and even a 2.4 TDI would be mullered by anyone who could manage a finish (well if your only aim was not to finish last, the petrol engine could be wound down by quite a way and you would still manage it with ease).

The only way the dark side will ever be truly competitive is if the rules are bent to suit or if the bearded sandal wearers can find a way of making diesels rev to somewhere near the level of petrols. I suspect that's highly unlikely given that any materials advances that might allow it would also have some use on the petrol cars as well.

[ QUOTE ]

I'm sure you're right. They've got it so wrong. wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

In a marketing sense it's damn right and to some degree, good luck to them. There are also arguments from a short term engineering standpoint (and from a much longer one, should the quantity and quality of available oil fall) but from a pure engineering standpoint it is questionable.

[ QUOTE ]

p.s. I generally hate diesel as it's mucky smelly etc but that's not to say there's no place for it. I'd prefer a diesel R8 to a petrol one just because it's faster and will be so much more usable everyday e.g. overtaking etc

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't actually (no matter what the above sounds like). I just think that it has it's uses and does very well in those (the old man has a DSG sooty and it's perfect for what he wants) but there is a lot of misguided crap put forward to defend or promote it.

Should it ever see light then the R 8/12 TDi will be interesting and if people really want one then it is a free world at the end of the day but:

-I still cannot fathom how a true petrolhead can really enjoy one, especially in a coupe/supercar that costs the thick end of £100k when there is so much variety out there engine wise (inc internal competition).

- The R TDi will only be quicker generally than the petrol because it has additional horsepower over and above the weight penalty.

- I never ever will understand the overtaking argument because I'm prepared to use that stick thing and advanced driving tells me that I will always be in the right gear and ready for the overtake (thus negating whatever advantage the diesel supposedly has) and finally I just hate the lazy attitude of blindly putting foot down in 5th/6th gear and relying on the generally misunderstood notion of 'torque' vs power. Unless that is, the tractor boys have found a way of bending Newton's laws of motion ROLLEY~14.GIF

Finally (PHEW), I was reading Autocar earlier in my local supelibrary and they were suggesting that the V12 might not actually be production feasible at this time (as a result of DSG aversion to torque, plus other reasons??) and that the real engine might actually be the 4.2 TDi, wound up a bit - any one any ideas as to whether this is real or bullplop?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I asked the question about high revving diesel engines before, and someone mentioned that someone (Honda) had spent time developing it but due to the nature of diesel vs. rpm it drove like a petrol and had the economy of a petrol, so there was no point.

If enough development goes into diesel like it is doing now, what's to say there won't be a diesel F1 car?

I think you're being very blinkered and you're probably missing the point of the car. Audi have made one because they can and for no other reason. It will be sought after, because everyone likes to be different. White iPod? No thanks, I'll have a black one, because everyone else has white.

I don't see how a true petrolhead can enjoy drive-by-wire throttle, but people do. If I were you, I'd stop worrying about it, because it's going to happen. And it'll be good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Audi make a car that is faster than the competion of that power and has a god engine note they have one half the battle. What they sinply cant win is getting the engine to rev like a petrol verion. I dont get ht efun in having to change up when usually id be changing in to...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

I asked the question about high revving diesel engines before, and someone mentioned that someone (Honda) had spent time developing it but due to the nature of diesel vs. rpm it drove like a petrol and had the economy of a petrol, so there was no point.

[/ QUOTE ]

Half surprised but not - only in so much as Honda have only ever built one diesel and it's nearly competitive but no more. Not their bag generally as the Japanese ain't fond of them and I would imagine that resources are being poured into fuel cells, jets and robots. Could have been a Europe or low intensity/weekend project (but of course, I could be wrong).

[ QUOTE ]

If enough development goes into diesel like it is doing now, what's to say there won't be a diesel F1 car?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nothing really, apart from the big one being that (from a layman's POV) main tech advances needed to make it work and be competitive would be around materials/tolerances and I would imagine that many of those advances could be migrated to petrol engines as well and so negate a large chunk of the closing steps.

[ QUOTE ]

I think you're being very blinkered and you're probably missing the point of the car. Audi have made one because they can and for no other reason. It will be sought after, because everyone likes to be different. White iPod? No thanks, I'll have a black one, because everyone else has white.

I don't see how a true petrolhead can enjoy drive-by-wire throttle, but people do. If I were you, I'd stop worrying about it, because it's going to happen. And it'll be good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not blinkered and if Audi really want to do it then they should (as I'm not in the market, I guess my opinion counts for sweet FA in most ways). For me, it's more a case of how it is being portrayed as a huge tech advance when in all reality it isn't (no different than hybrids, I suppose). Bar possible fuel consumption benefits, I just don't see where the advance is, apart from building the biggest diesel engine put in a production car (and IMO that isn't THAT hard). As said above, I personally would be a barrel load more impressed had they taken a fair chunk of weight out of it, given it a small, efficient petrol (with some new tech) and thus driven a beneficial new direction.

If they can make it happen then this Mille Chile is the future direction at the top end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

If Audi make a car that is faster than the competion of that power and has a god engine note they have one half the battle. What they sinply cant win is getting the engine to rev like a petrol verion. I dont get ht efun in having to change up when usually id be changing in to...

[/ QUOTE ]

You are quite right but if they fit STronic rather than RTronic (great marketing, eh?) then most people will just leave it in drive and it will fly/sort out the lack of revving itself. I was sceptical when I bought my 535d but big power and an auto work great. STronic as well might make it hit 60 in 4s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

Audiworld have an article on the the v12 show car.

It is said to be 220kg heavier than the R8 - so about 1780kg, which seems fairly lardy. 100kg of that is the engine. Still 280hp/ton though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well a DMS 535d has about 200 bhp/tonne and will do 0-60 in 5.5s. That car is going to be flyer. Won't buy one though - I'm waiting for a £55k V8 R8.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

Was it Porsche who introduced it first? (genuine Q - I just have a thought in my head that they used it for racing).

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe that's the case. I should have clarified I was talking about production release.

[ QUOTE ]

It is interesting, a bit different and of course has the looks - [serena Wiliiams size BUT] there is a reason why no one else has bothered, including those who are better at making engines than Audi.

I wouldn't deny it a place in the world by any means but it is all a bit too much great white hope IMHO.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just in todays AutoExpress :

[1] "Sensational diesel Evo Coupe wings in" - Mitsubishi have built a concept car to rival the TT and it's a diesel (oh and it's got a twin-clutch gearbox.

[2] "Cadillac coupe strikes oil" - the CTS coupe was shown in detroit with a diesel. Yep an American car being pushed in America with a diesel engine. That's big news for America.

[3] "Merc's moving to superdiesels" - "POWER to the diesel! That's the mesage from Mercedes, as bosses prepare to follow Audi into the high performance oil-burning market." It seems that they are "closer than ever to launching an AMG badged diesel model" "Powerful V8 diesel engines are likely to be used to create models with more than 700Nm of torque and greater long-distance cruising efficiency"

And that's just news from today wink.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

scotty my friend i don think anyone is slating a desiel or in fact a super desiel. our quarms are due to it being in a car lower to the ground than a 430. The M3 had far more torque than the csl, had a great engine too best i have ever driven. what it didnt have was the same zing in the last 1k of rpm. Its so worth it and i couldnt imagine a sports car without it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like a broad rev range as well. That's why I'm amazed some people buy remaps without trying them : I tried a map on the TT and it ran out of power at 5.5 where as the one I went for went all the way to red line.

At the same time I wouldn't say it rules them out from sports/hyper cars. I know the R10 hit a max of about 5.5k and that's a race car so the road R8 I guess would be lower but I guess it's also the same argument as manual vs smg/r-tronic in sports cars. A diesel engine and (semi)auto gearboxes may take away something from the experience but that's not to say there's not a huge market. In fact I expect this discussion to be running a long time just like the flappy paddle debate. Some people are even convinced that they're better than a manual wink.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...