Audi - they arent a proper premium car brand really are they?

Anan1

peasant wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong ...but did any Audi 8 cylinder engine ever make it down the VAG food chain?

Don't think so

Most of the 6 cylinders didn't go that way either

There was a Passat 4.0 W8, although i'm not sure whether it was Audi-based.

Johnboy Mac

I don't accept when either Audi, VW, Seat or Skoda want to launch a 'new' model that it's not run by the VW board first be to signed off.

schoolbag2

unkel wrote: »

I didn't watch top gear and I would take whatever they say with an enormous mountain of salt. What I do know is that there is only one car in the world that anyone can easily drive as their daily driver anywhere and that would have no problem going over 400km/h and accelerating from 0-100km/h in about 2.5s every day. Nothing else comes even remotely close.

spot on, Hamond was not allowed to use the launch control on the Veyron, otherwise it would have won by alot more

Biro

schoolbag2 wrote: »

spot on, Hamond was not allowed to use the launch control on the Veyron, otherwise it would have won by alot more

Yep, which defeats the purpose of racing them both if they're both not at their optimum performance level.

Biro

Johnboy Mac wrote: »

I don't accept when either Audi, VW, Seat or Skoda want to launch a 'new' model that it's not run by the VW board first be to signed off.

That's typically not how corporations work. It's a lot more complicated than simply VW sitting at the top calling the shots.

Johnboy Mac

Biro wrote: »

That's typically not how corporations work. It's a lot more complicated than simply VW sitting at the top calling the shots.

So VW had no say in the launch of the 'new' Seat especially considering it's clearly an old Audi? I can't imagine Seat nipping over to Germany and taking all the old tooling for the Seat and nobody at VW noticing!

conneem-TT

I think that Audi have worked very hard over the last 10 years to get up to BMW and Mercedes, and I think they have done it now. Through the development of not only top end competitive sport models through executive cruisers.

I don't think you can say the A3 & A4 cooking models ect. bring it down, BMW and Mercedes have the 1 series and A & B Class also and we were one of the only countries that BMW sold an E90 316i.

In relation to Mercedes' current reputation, I think it has been dented greatly by the Chrysler period, but I think they are now getting back on track with what they were once good at.

I don't think I can really place the three in order of what I think their premium status deserve. If you go for their middle to top end stuff, there is very little between them, they just offer different things for different people

unkel

schoolbag2 wrote: »

spot on, Hamond was not allowed to use the launch control on the Veyron

Interesting! Did they mention that in the program? Afaik you can use launch control as often as you like in a Veyron and the car is still covered by the warranty. Unlike a car like the GT-R where you invalidate the warranty :rolleyes: Iirc the GT-R is a full second slower to 100km/h without launch control (dropping down out of the supercar league while doing so) - probably at least a similar figure of one second for the Veyron

peasant

samsemtex wrote: »

95% of Audis sold here arent 6 or 8 cylinders

Similarly you'd be hard pressed to find a second hand 1.8 A6 over in Germany. Taxation is different there and people buy these cars complete with the engine(s) that the designers actually had in mind

pburns

Biro wrote: »

I'd take that episode with a pinch of salt (or sand) unless you live in a place where temperatures soar way above 40 degrees centigrade. Read the report about that race in the Top Gear magazine and you'll find out a lot more info.
In reality, and back here in more normal climatic conditions, the fact remains that you can set off a McLaren from rest, give it a 10 second head start, then set a Veyron going and the Veyron will reach 200mph first.
That's a fact. Autocar verify the times. The Veyron was designed with a very different design brief than the McLaren F1 was designed with. Both are fantastic in their respective classes.
It's like the McLaren SLR versus the Carrera GT. Chalk and cheese in the execution of very similar pace.

The Veyron didn't fair very well on the TG test-track did it? In fact it pretty much bombed. Now I know it's a tight-twisty mini-track but still. A lot of much less hyped cars were way faster.

The McLaren F1, the F40, even the 288 GTO which very briefly was worlds fastest production car - all are infinitely more exciting and desireable in my view.

I respect the F1 because Gordon Murray wanted to make sure that it didn't just chase the big numbers but was also a great, raw driving experience (few electronic gubbins for example).

A McLaren employee I was speaking to a couple of years told me Ron Dennis and other insiders were very lukewarm about the SLR. Merc wanted to make it more hyper GT than than McLaren would have wanted. The end result was a compromise no-one was happy with. The Veyron is along similar lines IMO, although better executed.

Johnboy Mac

peasant wrote: »

Similarly you'd be hard pressed to find a second hand 1.8 A6 over in Germany. Taxation is different there and people buy these cars complete with the engine(s) that the designers actually had in mind

Is the OP not in Ireland? Is the OP not discussing a A4 which is most commonly sold with 4cyl engine even in Germany? The designers seem very much to have in mind a 4cyl for the 'new' Seat.

I grant you if I was residing in Germany again and had to buy an Audi it would be one with more than 4 cylinders. But here in the meantime the vast majority will buy the most popular A4's & A6's i.e. 4 cylinder engine models.

samsemtex

pburns wrote: »

The Veyron didn't fair very well on the TG test-track did it? In fact it pretty much bombed. Now I know it's a tight-twisty mini-track but still. A lot of much less hyped cars were way faster.

The McLaren F1, the F40, even the 288 GTO which very briefly was worlds fastest production car - all are infinitely more exciting and desireable in my view.

+1 on that. The Veyron really doesnt do it for me at all despite its very impressive engineering.

Merc wanted to make it more hyper GT than than McLaren would have wanted. The end result was a compromise no-one was happy with. The Veyron is along similar lines IMO, although better executed.

The 722 edition seems to be the car that should have been released originally.

peasant

Johnboy Mac wrote: »

Is the OP not in Ireland? Is the OP not discussing a A4 which is most commonly sold with 4cyl engine even in Germany? The designers seem very much to have in mind a 4cyl for the 'new' Seat.

I grant you if I was residing in Germany again and had to buy an Audi it would be one with more than 4 cylinders. But here in the meantime the vast majority will buy the most popular A4's & A6's i.e. 4 cylinder engine models.

Is Audi based in Ireland?

Is the Irish market in any way relevant to the design team at Audi?

Is it Audi's doing that all the Irish consumers seem to buy is the bottom of the rung paddy-spec ?

Audi is a premium segment car maker, full stop. Not their fault if all we buy here is their floor sweepings, is it?

Johnboy Mac

peasant wrote: »

Is it Audi's doing that all the Irish consumers seem to buy is the bottom of the rung paddy-spec ?

Not their fault if all we buy here is their floor sweepings, is it?

I'm sure many will read these comments with interest.

Big Nasty

VAG as the mother company have done exactly what major companies in the states have been doing for decades, i.e: different variations of the same car rebranded and slightly redesigned. GM for example have their premium brand (Cadillac), their run of the mill brand (Chevrolet) and their economy brand (GM Daewoo). Many of the cars shared the same platforms and similar deigns - even though they're fooked now it was master thinking at the time.

Audi is VAG's premium brand and people will pay more for that staus end of.

In relation to the OP's comment about prestige level in relation to Volvo's I have this to offer: Both brands were seen as being above average but not prestige 20 years ago, however Audi started making decent looking cars in the 90's where Volvo's were mostly ugly up until recently! I think Volvo have come along way in recent years in positioning themselves further up the ladder.

RedorDead

peasant wrote: »

Is Audi based in Ireland?

Is the Irish market in any way relevant to the design team at Audi?

Is it Audi's doing that all the Irish consumers seem to buy is the bottom of the rung paddy-spec ?

Audi is a premium segment car maker, full stop. Not their fault if all we buy here is their floor sweepings, is it?

Good point - i think out of the big 3 - Mercedes are the only brand that have true undiluted luxury status here. They sell more €75,000+ cars in Ireland than BMW and Audi combined. Their owner profile is admittedly maybe 10 years older than Audi or Bmw drivers but a fact of life states that older people have more disposable income.

Audi and BMW sell mostly 6 and 8 cyl outside of Europe but Ireland due to its historic and current taxation regime encourage customers to buy entry level. Case in point being the A6 - there is only €1200 between the 136bhp diesel and 170bhp diesel - but the 136 easily outsells the 170 even though both cost the same to tax. We're a nation of badge snobs, not car lovers.

Lamborghini borrow Audi radios and controls for their cars. Does that dilute their appeal? Think not. I know its not the same with Audi and VW but the truth is the crossover is getting much much smaller.

bazzachazza

but the 136 easily outsells the 170 even though both cost the same to tax

136bhp=€156
170bhp=€302

for the A6.

There both €156 in the A4.

Damien360

I always see Mercedes as premium brand with good engines (whether or not it is true) but it has an image problem. The customer base is old so it is something I might like when I get older. Also, every knacker in Newbridge has a new C-class so that shoots the brand down for me at the lower end.

The BMW range used to do it for me, but once every dipstick with a baseball hat started buying them i felt it was'nt for me. Then BMW made a big mistake and made cars for the masses (not bad for the balance sheet but not good for the image). I see an unbadged 5 series and I think 520d and the owner is embarressed to let other know which engine, could'nt push for the 530d or the mighty 535d. Why release an underpowered engine for a premium brand. Before anyone says it is not underpowered, it is underrpowered for the marque.

Audi, look lovely in every class. New on A4 nose, A6 avant, A8 (although looks like an A6). But like a german customer said to me, they are for people who aspire to own a BMW or Mercedes. Audi will always be down the pecking order as they are seen as a young persons car. To me the driver of the R8 is young but the driver of a CL63 is old. Contrast their ads to those of BMW or Mercedes, always aimed at younger profile. That pushes the marque (at the lower end) towards the masses, and people can compare to the D segment stuff like Mondeo and Insignia. That is why they are at the edge of what can be described as premium brand.

mondeo

Friends father has a new A6 and he claims its better then any of the fleet of mercs he has had in the past, he will stick with the Audi's for the next couple of years at least.

I think the Audi's has style where no other brand has but I wish they were Rwd like the other top dogs. Luxury and front wheel drive no matter how hard I try to like it dont do it for me. If I had a quattro A8 I would be very happy but if I had a 1.6 fwd A4 I would be thinking why the hell did I buy this for?
A3 does nothing for me, I dont know why people buy them... A6 is a very nice car in terms of style and looks like a serious car when you see it coming up behind you.

Some more exotic Bmw's are a nice car to me, m3 or a Z4. Current 5 and 7 series I hate them.

A large S class merc is somthing the whole family can enjoy.

groupb

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Audi's top end cars are certainly premium products. Their "cooking" cars are average and represent what's worst about badge engineering.

You might just have hit the nail on the head. I've yet to read a road test where an A3 beats a focus or an A4 beats a mondeo.

Big Nasty

mondeo wrote: »

Friends father has a new A6 and he claims its better then any of the fleet of mercs he has had in the past, he will stick with the Audi's for the next couple of years at least.

I think the Audi's has style where no other brand has but I wish they were Rwd like the other top dogs. Luxury and front wheel drive no matter how hard I try to like it dont do it for me. If I had a quattro A8 I would be very happy but if I had a 1.6 fwd A4 I would be thinking why the hell did I buy this for?
A3 does nothing for me, I dont know why people buy them... A6 is a very nice car in terms of style and looks like a serious car when you see it coming up behind you.

Some more exotic Bmw's are a nice car to me, m3 or a Z4. Current 5 and 7 series I hate them.

A large S class merc is somthing the whole family can enjoy.

+1 on the RWD gig. I like Audi's myself, but Quattro all the way! As stated in another thread I find the 1.8T's and the likes to give savage feedback under acceleration.

SomeDude

groupb wrote: »

You might just have hit the nail on the head. I've yet to read a road test where an A3 beats a focus or an A4 beats a mondeo.

Well that's not really an insight of any kind. Have you read a review where a focus/mondeo beats an A3/A4??

colm_mcm

SomeDude wrote: »

Well that's not really an insight of any kind. Have you read a review where a focus/mondeo beats an A3/A4??

Does any magazine have the balls to say that an A3 isn't any better than a Golf? not in this country anyway.

If it were anything else being reviewed, TV's for example people would see through this nonsense.

An A3 doesn't really excel in any particular area, apart from the all important cabin plastics. (although most mainstream cars can boast nice plastics these days)

Can you really justify paying so much more for a slightly nicer dash?

remotesensor

peasant wrote: »

Similarly you'd be hard pressed to find a second hand 1.8 A6 over in Germany. Taxation is different there and people buy these cars complete with the engine(s) that the designers actually had in mind

I was over in Germany recently and was actually surprised at the amount of 4 cylinder audi's/bmw's/merc's. While you do see more v6's and v8's over there than over here, the majority seemed to be 4 cylinder engines. There was plenty of 1.8t's, 200's, 520i/d's there.

SomeDude

colm_mcm wrote: »

Does any magazine have the balls to say that an A3 isn't any better than a Golf? not in this country anyway.

The point I am making is that Audis, BMWs and Mercs are generally compared to each other or similarly priced cars in road tests. Therefore it's easy for someone to say they have never read about an A3/A4 "beating" a focus/mondeo.

colm_mcm

A bit silly if they don't as a lot of people looking at 3 series/ Lexus IS/A4 etc are also looking at Mondeo/Avensis/Passat etc.

RedorDead

groupb wrote: »

You might just have hit the nail on the head. I've yet to read a road test where an A3 beats a focus or an A4 beats a mondeo.

One I remember from earlier this year - A4 vs Mondeo

http://www.newcar.ie/2008/09/ford-mondeo-titanium-x-22-tdci-vs-audi-a4-20-tdi/

bazzachazza wrote: »

136bhp=€156
170bhp=€302

for the A6.

There both €156 in the A4.

True - Im confusing it with the A4

pburns

niceirishfella

pburns wrote: »

+1, only an ediot would buy one of these. Talk about being short changed.

Biro

Johnboy Mac wrote: »

So VW had no say in the launch of the 'new' Seat especially considering it's clearly an old Audi? I can't imagine Seat nipping over to Germany and taking all the old tooling for the Seat and nobody at VW noticing!

You're kind of getting confused a little here. VW didn't tell Seat "OK, for your next car you'll be using..."
Seat would have to buy the equipment from VW as well as any design copyright etc. Seat are a seperate company to VW who are just under the VW holdings umbrella, so to speak. There would be sharing of parts to cut costs, but Seat make their own choices. There are lines that VW wouldn't let them cross for sure, but it's not a case of some John Volkswagen who calls the shots for 5 companies. It doesn't work that way.
You kind of need to work for a large multinational with seperate divisions to get an idea of how these things work.

Biro

pburns wrote: »

The Veyron didn't fair very well on the TG test-track did it? In fact it pretty much bombed. Now I know it's a tight-twisty mini-track but still. A lot of much less hyped cars were way faster.

The McLaren F1, the F40, even the 288 GTO which very briefly was worlds fastest production car - all are infinitely more exciting and desireable in my view.

I respect the F1 because Gordon Murray wanted to make sure that it didn't just chase the big numbers but was also a great, raw driving experience (few electronic gubbins for example).

A McLaren employee I was speaking to a couple of years told me Ron Dennis and other insiders were very lukewarm about the SLR. Merc wanted to make it more hyper GT than than McLaren would have wanted. The end result was a compromise no-one was happy with. The Veyron is along similar lines IMO, although better executed.

The GTR is being touted as one of the quickest production cars ever around the Nurburgring. The Veyron was quicker than that around the top gear test track, so I wouldn't say it bombed.
You are missing the point of the Veyron. Completely. The makers don't care that it's not quickest around a track. They never intended it to be. They intended it to be as luxurious as any car on sale today while offering explosive acceleration and a high top speed in complete safety and comfort. That's exactly what they achieved. You can have a car that you'd be very comfortable in driving from Derry to Cork through all kinds of roads in all kinds of weather and get out the other side as fresh as you got in. Try that in an F40. Your spine will bleed. That because Ferrari with the F40 knew that people sometimes want an uncompromised car that is only used for track use. So they produced one of the finest handling cars ever, which only had one focus - ultimate driver experience.
If you don't like the Veyron, fair enough. But you need to see it in the light that it's supposed to be seen in.

-Chris-

colm_mcm wrote: »

a lot of people looking at 3 series/ Lexus IS/A4 etc are also looking at Mondeo/Avensis/Passat etc.

Not in my experience, tbh.

You might get someone asking what's the difference between the Passat & A4, but by and large anyone looking at A4 is comparing it to BMW/Merc/Lexus/Saab.
I wouldn't even get that many customers comparing the A4 to a Volvo, nevermind Fords & Toyotas.

colm_mcm

Chris, my point was/is that a lot of people looking at regular brand cars also consider (and sometimes purchase) premium brand cars. we get a good few going from Avensis to IS220d for example.

Not everybody spending 40k says "I have 40k to spend, I must get a premium brand car", not everyone looking at 30k cars is limited to spending 30k


we're talking the level of difference between an A3 and a Golf here, not an A6 and a Lupo.

-Chris-

colm_mcm wrote: »

Chris, my point was/is that a lot of people looking at regular brand cars also consider (and sometimes purchase) premium brand cars. we get a good few going from Avensis to IS220d for example.

Not everybody spending 40k says "I have 40k to spend, I must get a premium brand car", not everyone looking at 30k cars is limited to spending 30k


we're talking the level of difference between an A3 and a Golf here, not an A6 and a Lupo.

I'd say it works one way more than the other - plenty of Avensis drivers wonder if they could stretch to an IS, but once people are in the IS bracket, they'd rarely "trade down" to an Avensis (unless there were extenuating circumstances).

I don't find people compare the A4 to a Mondeo when they come in to me.
You may get people choosing a Golf over an A3, but choosing a Passat over an A4 happens far less often and I'd say that's more a reflection on the Golf's strengths (or A3's weaknesses) than anything else.

bazz26

I think the Golf is a case in it's own rather than the norm though. The Golf always had a perception of being a premium car without having a premium badge. Things from soft touch plastics to the clunk of closing the doors always gave the impression of a superior product. This preception has built up over the years and means in most average Joe's eyes that the Golf is much closer to an A3 than a Passat is to a A4.

pburns

bazz26 wrote: »

I think the Golf is a case in it's own rather than the norm though. The Golf always had a perception of being a premium car without having a premium badge. Things from soft touch plastics to the clunk of closing the doors always gave the impression of a superior product. This preception has built up over the years and means in most average Joe's eyes that the Golf is much closer to an A3 than a Passat is to a A4.

The Golf is quite a classless car and is attractive to a broader spectrum of people.

I think the A3 has the stigma of being a re-hashed VW more than other cars in the range. It's kind of a girls/metrosexuals car.

unkel

Just (at last!) saw the McLaren vs Veyron topgear feature now. I'm quite surprised so many people here took the top gear results (the Veyron only just beating the McLaren) at face value

Do you people not get how superb the Veyron really is?

pburns

unkel wrote: »

Just (at last!) saw the McLaren vs Veyron topgear feature now. I'm quite surprised so many people here took the top gear results (the Veyron only just beating the McLaren) at face value

Do you people not get how superb the Veyron really is?

Mmmm...yeah, sort of. If the 'race' had gone on longer the Veyron would have pulled away, no doubt. I just don't care. I'm ambivilant about hypercars these days anyway. They seem pointless to me - the kind of exilaration they provide can really be only enjoyed and exploited on a race track. I've been up close to an F1 car and that rocked my world but a Veyron? Meh...

As a kid I would have wet myself over the Ferrari 288GTO (just about grew up with that), the F40, 959 and later the F1. It is the purity of the latter car I admire and i'm REALLY looking forward to the road cars Ron Dennis and co. are allegedly planning at the moment because I'm pretty sure it won't be just abot power-for-powers sake and chasing big numbers.

unkel

pburns wrote: »

If the 'race' had gone on longer the Veyron would have pulled away, no doubt.

It was at the start! Using the launch control on the Veyron would have made the F1 look like a joke. But I suppose that wouldn't have gone down too well with a lot of Top Gear fans.

pburns wrote: »

I'm pretty sure it won't be just abot power-for-powers sake and chasing big numbers.

If you want purity, get a Lotus or better, a Caterham. If you want to compete with the supercars (as I'm sure Dennis c.s. are after), you will need power and speed and electronics to control them. The greatness of the Veyron is that it has more of those than any other supercar, it will win races, and it still can be used everyday by an ordinary man / woman to go to the shops.

Damien360

I was wondering if you would keep this up. Face it, the veyron is overpriced and not that much ahead of 15 year old technology. Not that great a leap after all.:D

unkel

Damien360 wrote: »

I was wondering if you would keep this up. Face it, the veyron is overpriced and not that much ahead of 15 year old technology. Not that great a leap after all.:D

Yeah, not that great a leap after all, was it? :rolleyes:

Have you any idea about modern technology?

Really I'm starting to think that a program like top gear is bringing more ignorance to the gullible masses than experience.

samsemtex

Damien360 wrote: »

I was wondering if you would keep this up. Face it, the veyron is overpriced and not that much ahead of 15 year old technology. Not that great a leap after all.:D

I hate the Veyron but im with unkel here. How is it not that great a leap forward from the McLaren F1? Its way faster than it and way way way more luxurious and therefore heavier. I would imagine the F1 would be slower around the track than the Veyron as well.

Given the choice between the two i would take the McLaren but the Veyron is unbelievable.