RS5?
 

pistonheads.co.uk

Engine bay looks :cool: although car not really to my taste

pistonheads.co.uk

P/Heads article here:

PistonHeads Headlines

TX.

Where is the forced induction and proper torque?

Glad I didn't wait for it. There was rumour of all sorts of turbocharged naughtiness.

First real photos I have seen and it does appeal to me visually (having previously had RS4 and RS6).

However, some weeks back when I mentioned it at Aberdeen Audi, I was stunned to learn that the "demonstrator" they will have in FULLY specc'ed condition is costing just over £80K !!! - A lot more than the base £58K price tag without all the goodies still to add.
That put me off considerably as I would rather buy a one year old RS6 (with rather different power/torque) for 20K less.

Quite like it, akthough the wheels are a bit naff.

This is crap though IMO - "317lb ft of torque between 4000rpm and 6000rpm".

Yeh but BHP is what it's all about. :D

:fight:

But torque is quite handy... ;-)

I like it, I like it a lot. Can see it being quite a seller for Audi.

The Torque issue is the same as the RS4. Which, although doesn't feel that fast due to it being N/A therefore having no low end Turbo whoosh, is anything but slow.

This car will be very fast. It's no GT-R alternative in terms of performance per Pound, but it'll be such a nicer car own/run. It'll hold it's value very well too.

I'd have one.

I do like it but many want more torque - a criticism of both the RS4 (B7) and the E9* M3 is the lack of torque.

Slap a Turbo or 2 on, and people will then complain about it not being pure like a N/A engine is. Too thirsty due to the Turbo's (not that the N.A engine is economical to start with) and has Turbo lag.

Which ever way Audi went, there'd be some complaints.

Some of the most sought after cars on the planet are N/A

All Ferrari's
All Lamborghini's
Audi's R8 (Both V8 & V10)

Having driven Audi's with a N/A V8 (RS4 & R8) I can see the argument for the lack of Torque. My Impreza felt way faster in 1st, 2nd, and 3rd due to the Turbo whoosh. It felt more fun too. However getting them both on the road together, and even with the lack of Torque from the V8, the RS4 wasted me. Get in on a decent A road, and it just pulled away at an alarming rate, and my Impreza was 300bhp.

The V8 needs to be rev'd, just like Ferrari's V8's do. Not many people complain about having to rev a Ferrari.

Was out in my old mans R8 at the weekend over the Pennines, and the harder to rev it, the better is gets, both in terms of how it just pulls and pulls, as the revs rise, but alsothe noise? And what a noise. :norty:

There is a long private road over the pennines ;) that I drove on. It got to 150mph in no time. Rev it and you'll be rewarded.

Don't get me wrong, I like Torque. Makes for effortless driving, but a high reving N/A engine can be just as rewarding, if not more when driven to it's strengths.

The F40 was turbocharged as was the 288GTO... ;)

High revving NA engines are great when you have plenty of space but for short squirts of oomph, torqye helps immensely. That's why I'd choose a 911T over an R8 (V8 or V10) any day of the week. And while many appreciate the noise of a V8 Ferrari at full chat, I used to find the outlaws 355 a bit wearing. Not only did it shout "look at me" it also shouted "listen to me." Like a sexy looking bird who's always up for it but drinks like a bloke and has the manners of a squaddie, it's not always what you want.

I have to admit I laughed when I last saw a 355 used in anger. Sounded incredible revving up at the start line and as it went down the strip, but it was slow. It was lovely to listen to though, most of the other stuff sounded horrible and was slow. An old RS4 (B5 biturbo) annihilated its time with all the charisma of a vacuum cleaner.