RE: Audi R8 V12 TDI

[jimmyb]

Scuffers said:

JohnLatham said:

It's a £78k car, which is £5k less than an Aston V8 (more badge prestige) and £5k more than a 911 4S (common, slower).

you cleary have never tried to buy one....

whist the list price might be £78K, by the time you have put *any* spec on the car (as in to the equivalent of a Ford Focus/mundano) your getting on for £90K

Audi seem to have gone down the BMW/Merc of old route, screw you on the options...

Much as I like the R8, it's just not enough car for the money, put a V10 550+Bhp engine in it, it might just be worth the price-tag.

Ta DA!! Apparently thats roughly what the V10 version will have power wise. Its been revealed today that the twin turbo V10 from the rs6 is going into the R8. The V10 will also look very much like the Diesel concept for cooling purposes.

[Scuffers]

jimmyb said:

Scuffers said:

JohnLatham said:

It's a £78k car, which is £5k less than an Aston V8 (more badge prestige) and £5k more than a 911 4S (common, slower).

you cleary have never tried to buy one....

whist the list price might be £78K, by the time you have put *any* spec on the car (as in to the equivalent of a Ford Focus/mundano) your getting on for £90K

Audi seem to have gone down the BMW/Merc of old route, screw you on the options...

Much as I like the R8, it's just not enough car for the money, put a V10 550+Bhp engine in it, it might just be worth the price-tag.

Ta DA!! Apparently thats roughly what the V10 version will have power wise. Its been revealed today that the twin turbo V10 from the rs6 is going into the R8. The V10 will also look very much like the Diesel concept for cooling purposes.

That was always on the cards...

the biggest grips I have with Audi as a whole is the way they release cars, remeber the S4? well, imagine buying one only for Audi to release the RS4 withing months and destroy the residuals of the S4, they have done the same to just about every S car out there, the R8 will be no different...

the only upside is that if you can stand the wait, at least you can them pick one up somewhat cheaper...

Edited by Scuffers on Thursday 10th April 07:56

[Ashley1111]

gary11 said:

Mr Whippy said:

gary11 said:

I think the appeal will be the different drive,ie short shifting at 2500rpm,mountainous torque curve,I watched mc nish being interviewed whilst testing diesel R10,he said it was like learning to drive again totally different to the petrol one.

But the Merc SL65 AMG engine achieves more torque, more rpm, and similar power, with a similar sized forced induction engine.

That would be able to short shift at 2500rpm AND be quicker doing it, AND have more revs to go at too.


Yes I get the 'diesel' thing, I just don't think it's important as a point of focus for this car at all.

Give me an RS6 engined stock looking R8 any day of the week.

Dave

fair point not sure how they compare on price,which one would you bet on to win a few laps round the ring,sl handles like a crock of ste Ive heard and is more of a straight line weapon,and cannot get its huge amount of power down,agree with rest of your points though R8 not blindingly quick managed to do one in my old 96tt the other day he wasnt happy!
as i said before watch a lap of diesel R10 at le mans boring it aint!
by the way audi R8 (V8) sounds great at full chat,imagine a v10 with sports exhaust dont know how that would compare with the diesel one? a fairer comparison I feel than the sl
all the best gary.

Correct, the SL65 is a bit of a pig. Anything more than half throttle under 50mph just results in the back trying to kick out and the traction control kicking in and killing all the power. Too much power for the chassis and gearbox to cope with so the computer has to keep stepping in to protect it. Hugely fast in a straight line though, once you learn that you cannot just bury the loud pedal from the lights and expect it to grip and sling you down the road like in say a 911 Turbo. You have to squeeze the throttle and as the speed rises just keep squeezing harder just below the point where the traction would kick in and then it really is comically fast.

Yet to have a go in an R8, but knowing the engine from various RS4's I cant wait to get the opportunity, would love to try this big diesel and applaud Audi for doing something different. But I cant see the logic behind inviting a load of journos to Miami to drive the car with a gear box that is too weak for 1st and 2nd and reducing the power output by 50% and having a chapperone in the car at all times to make sure you dont go above 55mph... What was that ever going to reveal?

[Fire99]

I have two issues:

Even new diesels still smoke when you bury the 'loud pedal' and moving on from the CO2 witch hunt they still throw out some nasty toxins and i really dont fancy living in a world of smelly derv vehicles killing our lungs and making all out buildings go grey...

Secondly, its meant to be a supercar.. the difference in mpg and tax is gonna make diddly all difference in the running cost of one of these.. Unless they are going to give it a Tesco-friendly boot and enough space for the family.. and then its not a supercar anymore.. And if you're buying a supercar, are these really priorities??

No sound on startup and 5k rev limit? This isnt a supercar.. this is a mega quick motorway 'barge' in a supercar drag outfit..

[BJWoods]

ferrisbueller said:

Agoogy said:

ferrisbueller said:

Kevin Hackett said:

As for the bit about third gear acceleration, I'm amazed I got away with as much as I did. Audi weren't wanting anyone to go above 35mph because they hadn't fitted a suitable transmission to it. I selected third at about 15mph and the effect was almost like a supernatural force.

Or about the same as another car with 369lb.ft of torque at low rpm?

ETA.

Autocar also accelerated to the very same 55mph. Funny old game

funny old game indeed, had this been a v12 petrol supercar that looked that good, accelerating with super natural force..we'd all be dribbling into our fantasy garages...

It certainly sounds that what will delivered will surpass that of derv supporters and shut petrol only fanboys right up.

I think you miss my point. "Supernatural force" is clearly over egging things a little, no? In reality that car, admittedly a prototype, is going to be no quicker than a 335d given the power on tap and the weight.

I'm all for the V12 TDi R8 being a great bit of kit. Indeed, I think it will be but let's try and stick with reality. I conceded the obligation to comment on the performance but why not just say it's not production ready and so it can't be assessed. To say "Supernatural force" is to suggest serious performance. This indicates that either the car isn't as limited as Audi said, or that because it looks fast and should be fast then the driver thought it was.

oh no...

not power.

TORQUE

sorry missed the detuned bit

Edited by BJWoods on Thursday 10th April 16:39

[jimmyb]

For all those worried about luggage space there really is no need. Simply stick a towbar on the back and there will be enough torque to pull a motorhome if you really wanted.

[Fire99]

jimmyb said:

For all those worried about luggage space there really is no need. Simply stick a towbar on the back and there will be enough torque to pull a motorhome if you really wanted.

See.. when you start mentioning motorhomes and TOWBARS in the same thread as the car then it sure ain't a supercar..

I cant imagine the same on a Lamborghini Muciealago or Ferrari Enzo thread..

Its probably a great car and an awesomely fast car but to me its not a 'Supercar'

Edited by Fire99 on Thursday 10th April 17:45

[M Blur]

anyne noticed this monster when done wil have the same torque as a Veyron...

I think it could quite keep a Veyron honest in the mid range - that 50-150 barrier.. thereafter checkmate Veyron.. thereafter who cares..

awesome feat.. love my chipped oil burner.. if the residuals come down I'll def fancy one..

[Scuffers]

can somebody explain to be why you all seem to get so excited about how much torque diesels can produce?

just incase you have not noticed, having 800+ lb/ft of torque over a (for example) 3K rev range is significantly worse than having 400lb/ft with a 6K rev range in that all the drive train is going to have to be significantly beefed up to cope with the lower speed/higher torque of the engine.

All this drive train then adds significant weight to the car, not only in kerb weight, but in drive train inertia.

Leaving that aside, to get the efficency out of it, you then will need a gearbox with enough ratio’s to cover the speed range AND be able to keep within the efficient rev-range of the engine, so whereas a high reving petrol engine can do this with 5 or 6 gears, the diesel is going to need 7-8, yet more weight.

If you go back to the Le-Mans argument, the only reason the diesels win is that rules are pitted in their favor, if they allowed a petrol LMP1 car to run turbo’s, then the efficiency of them would rise to the point where the diesels are (look at LMP2 cars, the smaller turbo engines are the way forward for fuel efficiency).

Yes, it’s all very cleaver for Audi to trot out this show-car, but really, what is the point?

(A Volvo truck engine has 2,000+ lb/ft of torque but needs a 12 speed box to use it efficiently)

[kambites]

Fire99 said:

See.. when you start mentioning motorhomes and TOWBARS in the same thread as the car then it sure ain't a supercar..

someone round here has a towbar on his 996tt.

[Mr Whippy]

M Blur said:

anyne noticed this monster when done wil have the same torque as a Veyron...

I think it could quite keep a Veyron honest in the mid range - that 50-150 barrier.. thereafter checkmate Veyron.. thereafter who cares..

awesome feat.. love my chipped oil burner.. if the residuals come down I'll def fancy one..

But the Veyron has another gear, DSG, and another 2000rpm of power band, allowing it to multiply it's torque out another 35% or so...

So in truth, the Veyron has 35% more torque, and about 40% more power, and probably not much more weight.


Still, the R8 V12 TDi should be fairly nice performance wise.

Dave

[gary11]

Mr Whippy said:

M Blur said:

anyne noticed this monster when done wil have the same torque as a Veyron...

I think it could quite keep a Veyron honest in the mid range - that 50-150 barrier.. thereafter checkmate Veyron.. thereafter who cares..

awesome feat.. love my chipped oil burner.. if the residuals come down I'll def fancy one..

But the Veyron has another gear, DSG, and another 2000rpm of power band, allowing it to multiply it's torque out another 35% or so...

So in truth, the Veyron has 35% more torque, and about 40% more power, and probably not much more weight.


Still, the R8 V12 TDi should be fairly nice performance wise.

Dave

no weigh! (he he) veyron is different kettle of fish about 300bhp more I think.

[gary11]

Scuffers said:

can somebody explain to be why you all seem to get so excited about how much torque diesels can produce?

just incase you have not noticed, having 800+ lb/ft of torque over a (for example) 3K rev range is significantly worse than having 400lb/ft with a 6K rev range in that all the drive train is going to have to be significantly beefed up to cope with the lower speed/higher torque of the engine.

All this drive train then adds significant weight to the car, not only in kerb weight, but in drive train inertia.

Leaving that aside, to get the efficency out of it, you then will need a gearbox with enough ratio’s to cover the speed range AND be able to keep within the efficient rev-range of the engine, so whereas a high reving petrol engine can do this with 5 or 6 gears, the diesel is going to need 7-8, yet more weight.

If you go back to the Le-Mans argument, the only reason the diesels win is that rules are pitted in their favor, if they allowed a petrol LMP1 car to run turbo’s, then the efficiency of them would rise to the point where the diesels are (look at LMP2 cars, the smaller turbo engines are the way forward for fuel efficiency).

Yes, it’s all very cleaver for Audi to trot out this show-car, but really, what is the point?

(A Volvo truck engine has 2,000+ lb/ft of torque but needs a 12 speed box to use it efficiently)

the audi is biased to win but Im afraid to say its the outright fasted car at le man check the lap times!

[Scuffers]

gary11 said:

the audi is biased to win but Im afraid to say its the outright fasted car at le man check the lap times!

so? like I said, the rules are rigged in their favour..

the dismal is nowhere neer the outright speed record yet anyway, last year the Audi R10 TDi hit 339 km/h (211 mph), that's some way short of the outright record (with chicanes)

The Nissan R90CK (group C car) achieved the highest straightline speed on the Mulsanne straight (with chicanes), Mark Blundell reached at 366 km/h (226.9 mph) on his pole position lap (1990).

[ferrisbueller]

Scuffers said:

gary11 said:

the audi is biased to win but Im afraid to say its the outright fasted car at le man check the lap times!

so? like I said, the rules are rigged in their favour..

the dismal is nowhere neer the outright speed record yet anyway, last year the Audi R10 TDi hit 339 km/h (211 mph), that's some way short of the outright record (with chicanes)

The Nissan R90CK (group C car) achieved the highest straightline speed on the Mulsanne straight (with chicanes), Mark Blundell reached at 366 km/h (226.9 mph) on his pole position lap (1990).

So no petrol has gone faster than that since 1990 either? What's your point?

[Scuffers]

ferrisbueller said:

Scuffers said:

gary11 said:

the audi is biased to win but Im afraid to say its the outright fasted car at le man check the lap times!

so? like I said, the rules are rigged in their favour..

the dismal is nowhere neer the outright speed record yet anyway, last year the Audi R10 TDi hit 339 km/h (211 mph), that's some way short of the outright record (with chicanes)

The Nissan R90CK (group C car) achieved the highest straightline speed on the Mulsanne straight (with chicanes), Mark Blundell reached at 366 km/h (226.9 mph) on his pole position lap (1990).

So no petrol has gone faster than that since 1990 either? What's your point?

lol!

so reading is not one of your stong points then?

let me repeat myself.. THE RULES ARE RIGGED TO FAVOUR DIESELS

there are no petrol Turbo cars in LMP1

[Beemer-5]

Bentley, Aston Martin and Porsche are among the makers tipped to use the amazing 6.0 V12 derv in the future.
The R8 is just the start.

[Polarbert]

I hope this doesn't turn into another 100 page debate against diesels and petrols. Which jerk started it the last time anyway?

Petrol engines FTW.

[otolith]

The Le Mans thing, I wouldn't go so far as to say that it's "rigged", but when the cars race to different sets of rules specifically intended to equalise the performance you can't really say anything about the relative merits of the technologies. Same thing will happen with hybrids.

[ferrisbueller]

Scuffers said:

ferrisbueller said:

Scuffers said:

gary11 said:

the audi is biased to win but Im afraid to say its the outright fasted car at le man check the lap times!

so? like I said, the rules are rigged in their favour..

the dismal is nowhere neer the outright speed record yet anyway, last year the Audi R10 TDi hit 339 km/h (211 mph), that's some way short of the outright record (with chicanes)

The Nissan R90CK (group C car) achieved the highest straightline speed on the Mulsanne straight (with chicanes), Mark Blundell reached at 366 km/h (226.9 mph) on his pole position lap (1990).

So no petrol has gone faster than that since 1990 either? What's your point?

lol!

so reading is not one of your stong points then?

let me repeat myself.. THE RULES ARE RIGGED TO FAVOUR DIESELS

there are no petrol Turbo cars in LMP1

I still don't see your point - I don't know what comparison you're trying to make by citing Blundell's Vmax, as the rules in all categories have changed numerous times since then. I know the rules are currently biased towards diesel but no turbo petrol cars have gone faster than Blundell's either as the car's power and speed have been reined in.

Just been trying to find a one of lap time comparison but it's not possible due to circuit changes.

Edited by ferrisbueller on Friday 11th April 20:10