Jump to content
Create New...
  • 💬 Join the Conversation

    CnG Logo SQ 2023 RedBlue FavIcon300w.png
    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has been the go-to hub for automotive enthusiasts. Join today to access our vibrant forums, upload your vehicle to the Garage, and connect with fellow gearheads around the world.

     

  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Rumorpile: Next-Gen RS4 To Say Goodbye To V8, U.S. Still In Question

      A big change for the next-generation Audi RS4

    Car and Driver is reporting that the next-generation Audi RS4 will retire the naturally-aspirated 4.2L V8 engine and use a turbocharged V6 engine. This is due to the upcoming emission regulations coming soon to Europe which are very stringent. Now the decision to go with a turbocharged V6 engine strikes us as odd since Audi currently has supercharged V6 that is being used in a number of their models. However Car and Driver says Quattro GmbH, the folks behind RS, is looking towards turbo power for future models.

    Car and Driver also reports that a decision on whether or not the next-generation RS4 will come to the U.S. hasn't been made.

    Source: Car and Driver

    William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at [email protected] or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    That's because Audi doesn't make a fuel efficient V8 engine because they are either unwilling or unable to adopt a pushrod 2-valve design! Think about it...

    • For the port injected generation, the Audi 40-valve 4.2 V8 made 340 hp / 302 lb-ft, weighed 195 kg and got 14 / 21 mpg.
    • Moving to Direct Injection, their 4.2 32-valve 4.2 FSI V8 engine made 414 hp / 317 lb-ft, weighed 212 kg and got 13 / 20 mpg

    That's horrible! And the only way they know how to deal with it is to go to a V6 and bolt on a blower or pair of turbos. For comparison:-

    • For the port injected generation, the GM 16-valve 6.2 Pushrod V8 made 426 hp / 420 lb-ft, weighed 183 kg and got 16 / 24 mpg (Camaro SS).
    • Moving to Direct Injection, the GM 16-valve 6.2 Pushrod V8 made 455 hp / 460 lb-ft, weighed 211 kg and got 17 / 29 mpg (Corvette Stingray - albeit not weight comparable to the S4/RS4)

    Pushrods + Displacement = lighter, more powerful, much more torque and significantly better economy

    And, that's despite 48% greater displacement. If that doesn't call into question the "superiority" of low displacement, high complexity and high specific output designs, well... it should.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It will be a twin turbo V6 because they have that available from the Porsche Macan. With Bentley getting more and more turbo V8s, and the Audi's big gun the S8 has a turbo V8, it makes sense that the smaller vehicles in the VW stable get turbo V6 power. If this is a Europe only car, maybe they'll go with a 3.0 liter to try to beat displacement taxes, not sure why they wouldn't sell it in the USA, unless they just figure no one will buy it over an M3 or C63.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Anyway... with the 460 bhp LT1 and the 630 bhp LT4, GM has plenty of firepower to throw onto a super sedan. The Europeans can try to get 600+ hp out of a turbo V6 or turbo V8 (of a smaller displacement). It's doable. But it'll be neither lighter, nor smaller, nor more fuel efficient, nor offer better drivability. And, it'll certainly cost a lot more and be a lot more complex. But, hey, it looks like they are committed to the path.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    VW has a twin turbo V6 on the shelf they can use, they aren't going to make up a new V8 for a car with tiny sales volume. And Audi's have grip, let's remember a 420 hp S6 is quicker 0-60 than a 556 hp CTS-V. It is all about low end torque and grip. If the Porsche Macan turbo can do 0-60 in 4.4 seconds, I imagine the same engine in an RS4 that weighs less will be near the 4.0 second mark, that is pretty quick I bet the Audi S6 goes V6 also, saving the V8 for the RS6 with an insane price.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    We

    VW has a twin turbo V6 on the shelf they can use, they aren't going to make up a new V8 for a car with tiny sales volume. And Audi's have grip, let's remember a 420 hp S6 is quicker 0-60 than a 556 hp CTS-V. It is all about low end torque and grip. If the Porsche Macan turbo can do 0-60 in 4.4 seconds, I imagine the same engine in an RS4 that weighs less will be near the 4.0 second mark, that is pretty quick I bet the Audi S6 goes V6 also, saving the V8 for the RS6 with an insane price.

    Well, that has everything to do with AWD and nothing to do with the engine.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I don't really like how Audi prefers V engines in their vehicles. I personally prefer the sound of a straight six and why Audi never uses that configuration is interesting to me. I'm sure there is a reason.

    Despite this the old V8 was not a very fuel efficient engine but it sure did sound good.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I don't really like how Audi prefers V engines in their vehicles. I personally prefer the sound of a straight six and why Audi never uses that configuration is interesting to me. I'm sure there is a reason.

    Despite this the old V8 was not a very fuel efficient engine but it sure did sound good.

    Far be it for Germans to admit that the Americans build a superior V8 engine.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    I don't really like how Audi prefers V engines in their vehicles. I personally prefer the sound of a straight six and why Audi never uses that configuration is interesting to me. I'm sure there is a reason.

    Despite this the old V8 was not a very fuel efficient engine but it sure did sound good.

    Far be it for Germans to admit that the Americans build a superior V8 engine.

     

    The only European V8 engine that I really like would be the V8 in the E39 M5. Not a huge fan of the others to be honest.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Support Real Automotive Journalism

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has delivered real content and honest opinions — not emotionless AI output or manufacturer-filtered fluff.

    If you value independent voices and authentic reviews, consider subscribing. Plans start at just $2.25/month, and paid members enjoy an ad-light experience.*

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Rivian has opened a new 8 stall 350kW fast charger station at Lynnwood mall plus a 9th Handicap fast charge stall. Seems when remote service is being done they are tagged red as two of the units are. They take credit or debit cards on top of if you setup a Rivian app account.  There are now over 100 fast charge stations within a 5 mile radius of where I live.
    • Happy Birthday!!! Cheers!!!  
    • Yes. Ferrari was always a company selling towards the top tier rich.  I am not sure about Porsche's marketing after 1945, but I do know that Porsche wanted to go up market, really up market,  to sell to the rich in the late 1990s.    Rolex watches were always expensive.  But not always being a  chic jewellery accessory.  Rolex watches were expensive time pieces because they were highly precise time pieces meant for professions that required time pieces that were precise in time telling. Also, Rolexes were also engineered to be tough and not break in those job environments. Therefore the high price tags of them were because the high standard of engineering that went into them.  The value of the brand went up because of the people that bought them praised them. It was after the quartz movement of the 1960s and 1970s that Rolex needed to re-invent themselves as battery powered watches were MORE precise ate their lunch. So...like many other "swiss" automatic watch makers launched their new image as luxury time pieces. It was easy for Rolex to do as Rolex was coveted as a great engineered watch to begin with.   Like I said...its a boys club that they want to be known as and bought by (rich) people that have bought into that boys club mentality.  It aint for you or for @ccap41.   Even if you or @ccap41 had the money, its obvious that you guys have not fallen for this marketing gimmick.  Its barely for me either.  1. I cant afford Ferraris, Porsches or Rolexes. 2. I do not want to be in a Porsche Boys club.  I like Porsches and all, but Im not in their camp.  Not because of the boys club marketing schemes. Its just that I am not a rabid Porsche guy fanatic.  3. If I had 1% money, I am not sure Id be a Ferrari guy either.  After deep thought, I am more of a Ferrari guy than I am a Porsche guy.  But maybe not enough for me to fall for this kind of sales scheme either. 4.  Rolex...   I do like a Rolex.  But I am not one to boast about what kind of time piece Im wearing. So...nix me on that club as well. 5. It looks like I am aligned with you and @ccap41's take on this, but with me, I shrug it off.  I see why the companies want to go down this road. And I see why there are some people...rich people...that do not mind giving their monies away to these companies. And at the end of the day, its what makes them happy and superior to the rest of us as we do not have the time or money or will to buy into any of this. And kudos for them for buying into that lifestyle.    At the end of the day, whether we are talking about Ferrari or Porsche or Rolex, some of their product, past and present, have been REALLY REALLY EXCELLENT product. Whether we are talking about looks and style or engineering and technology, all 3 have styled and engineered awesomeness.  We could talk about their products that were failures, but wouldnt that signal some sort of sour grapes analogy on our part? Its a company's right to mold their brand image as they wish.   Whether we agree to it as individuals is irrelevant. What is relevant though is how collectively we ALL feel about it.  In Ferraris case its a huge success. Porsche and Rolex have to work on it just a tad more. But I feels its successful.  If there is a downfall for Porsche, I think it has more to do with their decisions to being a sports car maker ALONGSIDE being a (rich) family grocery getter/soccer mom SUV maker.  The failure of having two opposing identities is killing Porsche.  And it is a double edged sword.  On the one hand, if not for the SUVs, Porsche would have been gone by the early 2000s.  The inevitable was prolonged?  Rolex... Too many boutique time piece makers have propped up in the last 15 years that took their place in some areas of the really expensive realm.  Quartz time pieces keep on being a nuisance to them. This time around its the fashion watch trend. The name brand watch sellers like Michael Korrs and Hugo Boss and even Porsche that have taken some of Rolexes market share.  The advent of smart watches also hurts them.  So they decided to change it up in the sales realm.  Are there enough Rolex worshippers out there that will buy cheaper Rolexes or older models just to get that one highly anticipated limited edition time piece? Well...although watches are strictly fashion devices today, there are more than enough fashionable time pieces around for people to by-pass Rolex fandom.  Some have their own unique look to them and are sought after and some just emulate Rolex but watch brand snobs are too few today so Rolex has a steep hill to climb because most people that wear watches dont give a shyte what kind of watch you wear.  Unlike cars, car snobbery actually still exits...  Hence why Ferrari is still king of the douchiness and going on strong. Stronger than ever Id say.    
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search