Jump to content
Server Move In Progress - Read More ×
Create New...
  • 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.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • Community Hive Community Hive

    Community Hive allows you to follow your favorite communities all in one place.

    Follow on Community Hive
  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    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

    • MECHANICAL PHOTOS It's definitely not a N.A. 4 cylinder engine - the V6 with twin turbos takes up a larger part of the engine bay. There is a very clearly marked compartment for the battery.  I didn't open it up to take a look. The symmetrically placed brake fluid compartment needs that much room?  One would think they'd also lay out the fuses here. While the oil dipstick is easy to find, the other lids are sort of ominous and point to something cautionary and under pressure - most likely coolant ... this shows you that the engine bay is fairly maxed out.
    • INTERIOR PHOTOS Sweeping view of the interior - and its sweeps - from the driver's door.  I very much like the curved effects on the dashboard and how they make their way onto the front doors. View of the front of the cabin from the passenger door An overall view of most of the dashboard and Infiniti has an agreeable enough emblem While it may hide some other info when this mode is chosen, the old school chronometer - together with the date spelled out, is a nice feature/option This is straight out of a Nissan Altima ... note that, when assigned to me, it had over 57,000 miles. Here you see the remote trunk release but I also prefer a remote fuel filler door release instead of pushing on them All the windows have the automatic up-down feature and it has become a must-have Even though I wasn't a fan of black bits on interiors in other colors (cream, tan, gray, etc.), it works well here, together with the wood applique and chrome, and is handled in a way to may it look sort of "premium." Here is the rear seating area of the cabin with all the headrests pushed down.  Its craftsmanship appears to be good. The rear visibility with the headrests pushed down garners a "thumbs up" from me. When you have a sunroof, you realize it's sort of nifty, but that you don't exactly want to use it all the time.  I preferred just having the glass sunroof in a closed position with the shade pulled back and open most of the time. This is an overall view of an empty trunk.  I came to learn that the large rear wheel well humps created some restrictions. That is a standard piece of luggage at the right and a rollaboard at the left.  While they are both stuffed (in height), the width remains the same and I couldn't place them side by side and pushed against the back of the trunk space.  That made it harder to put in other luggage or store purchases, the latter of which could go in front of them  or at the sides.
    • EXTERIOR PHOTOS Side view of the Q50 on America's "First Coast" region and Ponce de Leon seems to approve. Actually, the grille is somewhat attractive (not as heavy handed as that of a Lexus).  The pearl effect white exterior with very pale cream/tan interior came together well in this vehicle. These cars in this category seem to converge in terms of styling - I see some Nissan Altima and even some Pontiac G8.  The greenhouse, with all the headrests pushed down, gets a "thumbs up" from me for visibility.
    • I see your rental, and raise you mine..
    • RENTAL!!!!! This will be interesting; since I had a 2016…..
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

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

Change privacy settings