AUDI’s V12 DIESEL SUPERCAR.

[hawk20]

AUDI’s V12 DIESEL SUPERCAR.
According to AutoExpress, “one of the biggest stars of this year’s Detroit Motor Show is Audi’s mighty new R8 V12 TDI. Powered by a thunderous twin-turbo 6.0-litre V12 powerplant, the oil-burning supercar promises to be even faster than its petrol powered sibling. A huge 493bhp and an earth-shattering 1,000Nm of torque will make this Audi a true thriller. The sprint from 0-62mph takes only 4.2 seconds – 0.4 seconds ahead of the petrol model.
But it’s the diesel engine that’s the star. It’s inspired by the same unit that powered Audi’s R10 to victory in the 2006 and 2007 Le Mans 24 Hours, and although slightly less extreme than the 650bhp race engine, it still delivers epic performance.
Another benefit of diesel power in the R8 is a major reduction in emissions. The car features common-rail fuel injection, plus a special catalytic converter which injects a urea-based solution called AdBlue into the exhaust to cut nitrous oxide output. As a result, the TDI already meets tough Euro VI emissions rules, which aren’t scheduled to come into effect until 2014.”
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/autoexpressnews/214917/audi_r8.html

I am probably alone in this, but to me it looks like a comic car drawn by a ten year old for a superman figure and only needs flames out of the side to complete the picture. Should do well in Essex. But it does show just how far diesel has come in the last few years.

Isn't AdBlue the Audi/VW version of Merc's BlueTec deveolpment which they offered to share with other German carmakers?

 

[BTB 500]

The diesel R8 has been discussed here before:

http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=472655&highlight=audi#post472655

Officially it's still just a show car - from the article you linked

There’s no official word on when the R8 V12 TDI will go on sale, but it’s expected to arrive early in 2009.

 

[jeremytaylor]

I don't care what it looks like with 1,000Nm of torque! It could look like that Tata Nano for all I care.

Well, maybe not!!

 

[Howard]

..... looks like a comic car drawn by a ten year old for a superman figure and only needs flames out of the side to complete the picture.

I thought all supercars looked like that , part of the appeal ...

 

[hawk20]

I thought all supercars looked like that , part of the appeal ...

The various versions of the SL - right up to the AMGs- to me look discreet, classy, elegant, beautiful: all the things the Audi is not. It looks brash, flashy, downmarket bling at its very worst. Other than that it's fine.

 

[Howard]

SL's aren't supercars ...

Think Zonda , Enzo , Carrera GT , Veyron ..... half million quid jobs , and then some

 

[hawk20]

SL's aren't supercars ...

Think Zonda , Enzo , Carrera GT , Veyron ..... half million quid jobs , and then some

I think they are the most super of all.

 

[hawk20]

BTW if you really feel you need a V12 the SL65 AMG offers that and at a modest £150,000.

And if you want 0-62 in 4.2 seconds like the V12 Audi R8, well the SL65 does exactly that too.

 

[seymansey]

bit of a size difference, though...

 

[Howard]

I know .... i've driven a pals CL65 great cars ...

Not a supercar though .... limited to 155 mph ...

SLR is a supercar though .....

A supercar ( in my book ) is a stand alone model , a fire breathing monster , no compromise , not a model that you could have a 3.2 litre in and cloth seats if you wanted ....

 

[Mr E]

SL's aren't supercars ...

Think Zonda , Enzo , Carrera GT , Veyron ..... half million quid jobs , and then some

Modern parlance now calls these hypercars.

I think of supercars as fast (180+), impractical, expensive eyecandy (especially if I'd like one in the garage).

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

The various versions of the SL - right up to the AMGs- to me look discreet, classy, elegant, beautiful: all the things the Audi is not. It looks brash, flashy, downmarket bling at its very worst. Other than that it's fine.

The SL is a roadster - not a supercar IMHO.

I do wonder whether the R8 (in current 4.2 V8 guise) is a supercar to be honest - maybe a junior supercar at a push? It's really a sports car - akin to a 997 Carrera or AM V8.

Supercars really start at Gallardo and F430 level IMHO. Back to the designed by 10 year olds comments!!

And then Hyper cars as Mr E points out...

Modern parlance now calls these hypercars.

I think of supercars as fast (180+), impractical, expensive eyecandy (especially if I'd like one in the garage).

In recent years, performance has moved on so much that the differences between these cars are smaller than ever. Take the C32 as an example - in 2001 Autocar tested it as 0-100mph in 10.8 seconds - and commented that a 550 Marranello was required to travel four-up faster. Just a few years before that was supercar territory. Now the lastest generation of quick C-segment cars (M3 V8 and C63) raise the bar so much higher still.


Whatever they're called, I'm just glad we have them. In the not too distant future we may tell our grand children about the good old days of 200mph supercars and 500bhp saloons!!

 

[hawk20]

Whatever they're called, I'm just glad we have them. In the not too distant future we may tell our grand children about the good old days of 200mph supercars and 500bhp saloons!!

Well, being a spoilsport, I hope we can tell our grandchildren that we were once stupid enough to let rich business people buy such dangerous and impractical cars even though we knew that 65% of company cars are involved in a collision at least once a year. But then we grew up, became more responsible and limited all cars to a speed not far from the maximum speed allowed on our roads by law. This both removed the temptation to drive way over the legal limit and also radically altered the emphasis of car design away from performance (since we already have far more of that than we need) and onto more valuable attributes of the modern car.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

As you know hawk20 I respect your views, although I'm intrigued why your previous car was one of the most luxurious cars of our time, given your comments above.

Some people might argue that two new high-spec A-Classes are excesses that rich people buy, and just as dangerous as any other car on the road if driven irresponsibly. I'm not one of them BTW.

 

[tudu]

I tend to agree with all comments. However, whatever an individual wants to spend their or someone else's cash on is entirely up to them. We all have cars that we chose because they fulfilled our purpose at the time.

If someone wants to spend in excess of £350,000 for the latest car that does 0-60 in 2.5 secs, and returns 5 MPG then that's up to them, which is why i would love to own a C63 AMG or Maclaren, but i wouldn't because i wouldn't be able to enjoy it because of the running costs. Similalry, where does MB/AMG and other manufacturers go from where they are now. Surely there must be a sensible point reached in terms of BHP and attaining the fastest 0-60 times and should that not be left for the racetrack by skilled and professional drivers who get paid vast amounts of money for the pleasure of doing so and not our public roads.

Sorry, just needed to get that off my chest rather than cause offence to any individual.

 

[wallingd]

Bobby is right re the definition of hypercars above supercars.

The Veyron sits above all normal sectors though.

The question of how far performance levels go is an interesting one however! Maybe the next step is 300mph + 30mpg (not at the same time though)...

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

The question of how far performance levels go is an interesting one however! Maybe the next step is 300mph + 30mpg (not at the same time though)...

Drivers are demanding ever improving dynamic ability - handling finesse and ride quality.

Government is demanding reduced CO2 levels (at the moment).

Bill payers are demanding improved fuel economy.

Pub-goers and Top Trumps players are demanding ever increasing power outputs and performance.

Reducing weight will be key moving forwards if these are to be satisfied.

If there was ever a time for Lotus to prosper, it's surely in the very near future??

 

[hawk20]

As you know hawk20 I respect your views, although I'm intrigued why your previous car was one of the most luxurious cars of our time, given your comments above.

Some people might argue that two new high-spec A-Classes are excesses that rich people buy, and just as dangerous as any other car on the road if driven irresponsibly. I'm not one of them BTW.

You have a point. I bought the S class with the heart. Absurd really. MD of a dealer owned it -only 3 months old. I was looking at it. Idly. Honest. No intentions of any kind. He wandered over; we chatted; he threw me the keys and said " Go for a drive. Don't have to buy it. What's the harm in trying. Everyone should at least try an S to know what the best saloon in the world feels like" I drove it and just could not believe how wonderful a car it was. The comfort of the seats. The vast bonnet. The awesome kick in the back when the torque from 3.2 litres of straight six kicked in. Somehow I talked myself into the ludicrous amout of money it cost. And in the next 18 months I did 24,000 miles of purely private motoring, just because I loved driving it so much. And every day I looked forward to finding some reason why I needed to take her out. Magic car. Nothing I have ever owned has ever come near to it.

 

[glojo]

I quite like the looks of that Audi.

Horses for courses

John

 

[jeremytaylor]

If there was ever a time for Lotus to prosper, it's surely in the very near future??

Exactly. How old is the Elise now?, and it gets more relevant by the day. If only I could get in one!!