RE: The Brave Pill | Audi S5 V8
Discussion
PRND said:
Can't help but think you'd be better off with the 3.0 TDI Quattro.
Stopped laughing? The S5 0-60 is 5.1 the 3.0 TDI is 5.9. (If such a thing really matters) and the economy is an extra 20 odd mpg.
I understand the appeal of a NA V8 but in something like this you're hardly buying it for the driving experience and throttle response, so it's only really the noise. Which I don't think is worth the extra expense maintenance/tax/insurance etc etc.
Having had experience with a 3.0 TDI (SE) it has the most jarring of rides which is another thing it doesn't do very well.
Have experience driving both. The 3.0tdi on the upgraded 19s tramlined very badly, the S5 on its 19s didn't. The tdi with a map would be an understated car but when given its head not that economical. The S5 I drove had the tiptronic box and really didn't feel that quick. I have always liked the styling of these but in my experience the interiors don't wear well around certain trim pieces and the seat bolsters.Stopped laughing? The S5 0-60 is 5.1 the 3.0 TDI is 5.9. (If such a thing really matters) and the economy is an extra 20 odd mpg.
I understand the appeal of a NA V8 but in something like this you're hardly buying it for the driving experience and throttle response, so it's only really the noise. Which I don't think is worth the extra expense maintenance/tax/insurance etc etc.
Having had experience with a 3.0 TDI (SE) it has the most jarring of rides which is another thing it doesn't do very well.
PRND said:
Can't help but think you'd be better off with the 3.0 TDI Quattro.
Stopped laughing? The S5 0-60 is 5.1 the 3.0 TDI is 5.9. (If such a thing really matters) and the economy is an extra 20 odd mpg.
I understand the appeal of a NA V8 but in something like this you're hardly buying it for the driving experience and throttle response, so it's only really the noise. Which I don't think is worth the extra expense maintenance/tax/insurance etc etc.
Having had experience with a 3.0 TDI (SE) it has the most jarring of rides which is another thing it doesn't do very well.
I got a 3.0 TDI S tronic a few months ago, great car, plenty fast enough for the clogged roads of the se, gets nearly 30 MPG around town and significantly higher on longer journies, the ride is very hard on 19s, but overall I’m really impressed with it.Stopped laughing? The S5 0-60 is 5.1 the 3.0 TDI is 5.9. (If such a thing really matters) and the economy is an extra 20 odd mpg.
I understand the appeal of a NA V8 but in something like this you're hardly buying it for the driving experience and throttle response, so it's only really the noise. Which I don't think is worth the extra expense maintenance/tax/insurance etc etc.
Having had experience with a 3.0 TDI (SE) it has the most jarring of rides which is another thing it doesn't do very well.
The S5 will undoubtedly sound a lot nicer though.
"but while the BMW would almost certainly be a more rewarding steer it doesn't have a V8."
No, it has a straight 6. Two cilinders less, but to me at least, a superior layout to anything V barring the 12.
Balancing shafts and counterweights can make an engine run smooth, but are still a compromise to an engine.
No, it has a straight 6. Two cilinders less, but to me at least, a superior layout to anything V barring the 12.
Balancing shafts and counterweights can make an engine run smooth, but are still a compromise to an engine.
PRND said:
Can't help but think you'd be better off with the 3.0 TDI Quattro.
Stopped laughing? The S5 0-60 is 5.1 the 3.0 TDI is 5.9. (If such a thing really matters) and the economy is an extra 20 odd mpg.
I understand the appeal of a NA V8 but in something like this you're hardly buying it for the driving experience and throttle response, so it's only really the noise. Which I don't think is worth the extra expense maintenance/tax/insurance etc etc.
Having had experience with a 3.0 TDI (SE) it has the most jarring of rides which is another thing it doesn't do very well.
well argued retort for this particular columnStopped laughing? The S5 0-60 is 5.1 the 3.0 TDI is 5.9. (If such a thing really matters) and the economy is an extra 20 odd mpg.
I understand the appeal of a NA V8 but in something like this you're hardly buying it for the driving experience and throttle response, so it's only really the noise. Which I don't think is worth the extra expense maintenance/tax/insurance etc etc.
Having had experience with a 3.0 TDI (SE) it has the most jarring of rides which is another thing it doesn't do very well.
I mean... I like the idea of rowing your own behind a petrol V8, but that counter-offer is not unattractive, particularly given the maths
off-idle torque will not be a disappointment, either, I imagine
unsprung said:
well argued retort for this particular column
I mean... I like the idea of rowing your own behind a petrol V8, but that counter-offer is not unattractive, particularly given the maths
off-idle torque will not be a disappointment, either, I imagine
The V6 TDI engine in these is great, won’t pretend it sounds as good as a petrol V8-it doesn’t and never will but it doesn’t sound like a rattley diesel either and it’s very torquey, the Merc V6 diesel is equally nice imo.I mean... I like the idea of rowing your own behind a petrol V8, but that counter-offer is not unattractive, particularly given the maths
off-idle torque will not be a disappointment, either, I imagine
))Welshbeef said:
ZX10R NIN said:
As I understand it the timing chain issue affects the B6 & some of the 3.0TT engines but the S5 isn't affected.
That’s really disappointing. You do not see such issues on the BMW 3ltr TT or the Merc 5.5v8’s
http://www.autolatest.com/news-cars/mercedes-m272-...
323ti said:
"but while the BMW would almost certainly be a more rewarding steer it doesn't have a V8."
No, it has a straight 6. Two cilinders less, but to me at least, a superior layout to anything V barring the 12.
Balancing shafts and counterweights can make an engine run smooth, but are still a compromise to an engine.
But I would have thought an E91/E92 M3/M4 would be more of a rival to the V8 S5, and then you do get a V8! No, it has a straight 6. Two cilinders less, but to me at least, a superior layout to anything V barring the 12.
Balancing shafts and counterweights can make an engine run smooth, but are still a compromise to an engine.
Still I think it's great that cars like this were made - it means that some years on we get the chance to have one.
TLDR!!
Id take the bmw and any petrol head would do this too, if they had half a brain.
It needs more power, with all the weight, its going to be a slouch with about 354 bhp and less torque. For me people that drove white tdi's ruined an ok looking marque for me. Still i keep bleating about audis and their dullness so this definitely a no from me.
Edited by PorkRind on Sunday 16th June 03:08
Nerdherder said:
Exactly, can’t see a brave pill needed for this. Don’t think its looks are ageing particularly well, but that’s a thing I have with nearly all Audi’s. Looks great when released, becomes dull very quickly. Would still happily drive one with a nice engine like the referenced V8.
Its a car from VAG... that would get me running on its own...PRND said:
Well, the 4.2 does have documented timing chain/sprocket and coking issues.
There are different 4.2 engines. The BBK or BHF engine was built for the B6 S4 and suffers from eventual timing failure. Same engines in the B7 S4 (as well as a couple of other models; Allroad and such), albeit with revised material for the timing guides. They're still prone to failure though.The 4.2 they built for the B7 RS4 is completely different. It had metal-backed guides (which I used when I did the timing service on my B6 S4) so has no timing issue. It did suffer from carbon build-up (coking) because of the direct injection system which didn't allow the fuel to keep the usual pathways clean. This can be solved by spending a few hundred pounds on a clean every so often.
I believe the engine in the S5 has the same carbon build-up problem.
hole whenever I see him.A good car, and one I bought for exactly the same logic as in the article, but I'm not sure how this qualifies as a Brave Pill, as the bork potential is fairly limited.
The V8 is a doozy; at 350hp it's not particularly stressed, but it's more powerful than the supercharged V6 offered in the cabriolet or slightly later coupes. It sounds lush, and the torque is pretty good too. And while it's thirsty around town, on a good motorway run you can see 30-32mpg.
The gearbox could be better, tbh - it's a bit notchy and rubbery at times, but replacing the standard shifter with a short shifter is fairly easy and removes some of the slop in the gearchange.
But for bork factor there's really very little. I've had a fuel pump/ fuel pump sensor go, at a cost of about £1k all in to replace, but that's it beyond consumables. And because the V8 seems pretty unstressed (unlike the one in the M3 of the same era), there's not much to go wrong beyond the expected carbon build up. It's hardly in the same realm as a 1980s Bentley or a 996!
The V8 is a doozy; at 350hp it's not particularly stressed, but it's more powerful than the supercharged V6 offered in the cabriolet or slightly later coupes. It sounds lush, and the torque is pretty good too. And while it's thirsty around town, on a good motorway run you can see 30-32mpg.
The gearbox could be better, tbh - it's a bit notchy and rubbery at times, but replacing the standard shifter with a short shifter is fairly easy and removes some of the slop in the gearchange.
But for bork factor there's really very little. I've had a fuel pump/ fuel pump sensor go, at a cost of about £1k all in to replace, but that's it beyond consumables. And because the V8 seems pretty unstressed (unlike the one in the M3 of the same era), there's not much to go wrong beyond the expected carbon build up. It's hardly in the same realm as a 1980s Bentley or a 996!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff