RE: Audi to rival Tesla with 590hp e-tron GT

RE: Audi to rival Tesla with 590hp e-tron GT

Wednesday 28th November 2018

Audi to rival Tesla with 590hp e-tron GT

250-mile range concept is already said to be very close to forthcoming production reality



Remember the Audi R8 e-tron from Iron Man 3? Oh, how futuristic that seemed in 2013, with proper sports car performance and design, previewing an electric future with boundless torque and silent speed.

Well, it turns out Audi recalls the film very well, and the future is actually about 18 months away. That's because, not only will this e-tron GT make production in 2020 (and be way faster than that R8), but its maker also saw fit to use Robert Downey Jr to reveal the car in Downtown LA, a handful of miles from Hollywood. Make no mistake: the e-tron GT, indeed the whole e-tron programme, is a very, very big deal for Audi.

So what is it? Well, officially it's a "highly dynamic coupe with a low floor", boasting technology developed with Porsche plus design and character "packed full of unmistakable Audi DNA." It's 4.96m long, 1.96m wide and 1.38m tall, with a 2.9m wheelbase. That makes it a tiny bit shorter, 5cm wider and a little lower than an A7. From what can be surmised, it seems like the Porsche-developed technology will be in the platform and powertrain - both Taycan and e-tron GT are going to use the Premium Platform Electric architecture, with the Audi boasting 590hp from its twin electric motor setup, just 10hp behind the Porsche.


Audi reckons the e-tron GT will be capable of 0-62mph in 3.5 seconds, 0-124 in just over 12 and a limited top speed of 149mph. Iron Man's R8 from just five years ago apparently boasted 4.8 seconds to 62mph and 124mph flat out. Range for this car is over 250 miles by WLTP, and the 90kWh battery can be charged wirelessly or plugged in. Thanks to the car's 800-volt system, the latter can provide 200 miles of range in 20 minutes with the right charging infrastructure.

Range is also boosted (by up to 30 per cent, it's suggested) through recuperation, involving both the two electric motors and the electrohydraulically integrated brake system - meaning there's manual coasting recuperation, automatic coasting recuperation and brake recuperation. Only when a braking force of more than 0.3g is required (apparently only 10 per cent of all decelerations) are the ceramic rotors employed, the rest being taken care of by the electric motors. Interestingly it's claimed the e-tron GT's centre of gravity is lower than that of an R8, thanks to the flat design of the batteries.


With Audi keen at the (nearly) Hollywood reveal to stress how close this car is to production, it's understandable that the e-tron GT is perhaps not as dramatic as recent concepts like the PB18. Audi points to the model's sloping roofline, a cabin that tapers towards the rear and wheel arches that are "sculpted emphatically" around 22-inch wheels. The colour, in case you were wondering, is 'kinetic dust' - no joke. It's designed to be "practical without being 'technoid' standoffish" - whatever that mean. Anyway, it's a handsome show car in the flesh, albeit one that could probably be in production already - whether that says more about Audi's current design language or the slightly conservative styling of this concept, we wouldn't like to say.

Inside, the e-tron GT boasts a vegan interior, with synthetic leathers and materials used throughout. As you'd expect it's a lavish cabin, both in the pics and real life, minimalist yet luxurious as well. Furthermore, while it can't be seen here, there's 550 litres of carrying capacity - 100 litres at the front, 450 in the rear.

So there it is, your kinetic dust look at the future. Best get used to it, too: in addition to the e-tron SUV shown in September, the e-tron GT will eventually be joined by an e-tron Sportback as well - indeed Audi says there will be 12 all electric models by 2025, covering "every relevant market segment". This e-tron GT will reach volume production in 2020 - developed by Audi Sport, no less - and first deliveries are expected early in 2021. Wonder what Iron Man will be driving by then.











Author
Discussion

RacerMike

Original Poster:

4,209 posts

212 months

Wednesday 28th November 2018
quotequote all
Hmm. Looks like a lightly reskinned Taycan. That roofline is pretty unmistakeably Porsche esque, but given it’s such an easy diversification, I can see why they’ve done it...

RacerMike

Original Poster:

4,209 posts

212 months

Thursday 29th November 2018
quotequote all
RobDickinson said:
Numeric said:
First it has an extraordinary market cap while not actually making money
Its investing, not a unique thing, at a time when car factories are closing across USA they are investing billions... The share price is because they are a tech first mover, not a car company.

Numeric said:
second it isn't generating net cash though I guess the 3 might get it over the line
They are now generating a lot of free cash, and a profit last quarter, over the next year they will likely make over $2bn profit. And again the year after.

Numeric said:
third it's volumes are tiny and liable to fluctuation as new opposition finally crawls into existence
They double production volumes every year or two, currently they are at a rate of about 1/2 million per year. With a new chinese factory opening in a couple of years, and new production lines in USA for model y, truck, semi and roadster. They are still selling every model S they can make 6 years after launch.

Porsche plan 20,000 of these cars a year (no idea if that includes the Audi version. I bet tesla are scared of that.
VAG? well they might have production of 200,000 EVs by 2020.
If anyone challenges Teslas volumes within the next 2-4 years it will be Koreans and Chinese.
Germany will catch up but not until mid next decade.

Numeric said:
fourth the current buyers are evangelists for new concepts - classic early adopters who accept product limitations to have something clever, I would, but my sister wouldn't. For her there is no buy in to a concept, she demands reliability and tight manufacture - I can not say if Tesla's have problems but low volume manufacture often brings such issues.
Your sister wont buy one, well wohoo. cool story bro.

Numeric said:
When reaching out to tier 1 suppliers, most of the contracts in my day had strict volume requirements, if volume wasn't met costs increased per unit. Equally a factory is an evil beast to run - at optimal efficiency they are OK but the motor industry is almost designed to be inefficient due to model cycles - at peak you pay overtime and as the model ages the line runs slower and the fixed costs sit on your head like an anvil - I've been there and it is terrifying how per unit costs explode!
Tesla are massively vertically integrated, and as Munroe etc shown their cars have a big advantage because of this and a large margin. You are sounding like a dinosaur here.

Tesla in 20 years? Who knows, I would put my money there rather than GM or Ford though.
Rob, I fear you are picking apart the information provided by an economist who has worked in the automotive industry using information form a Tesla press release. The points Numeric raises are all very, very valid and I suspect those doing the books for Tesla are unfortunately very aware of what he says. The fluff they put out about being 'vertically integrated' and 'a tech leader' are ways of trying to pacify investors.

Whilst I genuinely hope that Tesla do survive, I fear that they don't have the staying power (or cash reserves) to make it through. Elon is a very, very interesting guy with a lot of good ideas, but he's unfortunately made the same mistake as many others by assuming that the car industry is old and inefficient and entered it with an attitude of 'I can do it better'.

Unlike the tech business, the automotive industry is incredibly hard to revolutionise due in part to the massive raft of legal and safety requirements that one must abide by. Being vertically integrated is a great idea, but the reality is it's very money inefficient. It's actually far better to let your suppliers take the legal and financial risk of developing stuff than it is yourself. Even just assembling cars is risky enough (as outlined by Numeric), so once you start adding sub component design, approval and manufacture to that, you're opening yourself up to a lot of risk.

RacerMike

Original Poster:

4,209 posts

212 months

Thursday 29th November 2018
quotequote all
964Cup said:
250 mile range. What use is that? I wonder when they'll stop chasing "ludicrous" acceleration numbers and start giving us usable ranges. To come close to replacing our ICE car, we need a 400 mile range with no more than 30 mins refuelling time at the outside. Otherwise a routine 11 hour journey will become some kind of "dog walking on its hind legs" marathon odyssey.
964Cup said:
...we've got an XC90 T8 arriving in January. I wish it had greater electric range - it would be nice to be able to get all the way out of London on electricity only, but I doubt it will manage it, but it's at least a sop to ecological responsibility.
Autocar said:
Volvo XC90 T8 Real-world range: 342 miles
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/our-cars/volvo-...

So you clearly don't 400 mile range then? Either that or you're going to be sending the XC90 back. You'll actually have to stop on the way down! My God!

964Cup said:
I sold it and bought a Range Rover diesel after spending one trip to Italy repeatedly passing the same diesel Shogun. We were cruising at about 100 leptons. They weren't. But they also didn't have to stop every two hours to refuel, and they got there without ever having to watch their rear view mirror for a flic on a BMW 1100. Range matters.
964Cup said:
We've had a succession of Range Rovers and Discoverys, but since JLR singularly failed to see the diesel backlash coming
So again....you bought a petrol electric Volvo because you fell for the ruse about dirty diesel? Seems to me you're not really sure what you want!

In all honesty, if you really wanted to, you could make this Audi or a Porsche Taycan work. I'm assuming you already have a 7kW charge point at home now as you have a PHEV which realistically needs charging to achieve that real world 346 mile range (if not it will be around 300 miles I guess). With Ionity expanding over Europe already you'd be able to charge the Audi probably quicker than you can fuel 70L, go in, pay, use the toilet, buy a croissant and wait for your missus to powder her nose, and I suspect the Audi would actually be a lovely car to own....and a lot more dynamic than the XC90 (which is a lovely car, but it's very much an SUV in the way it drives).

But then....having an EV probably wouldn't suit the 'I don't care' image you like to project. Wouldn't want anyone thinking you were brash enough to be showing off....

RacerMike

Original Poster:

4,209 posts

212 months

Thursday 29th November 2018
quotequote all
Mike1990 said:
Does look fantastic, really it does, but. I Just can’t get even remotely excited for any form of battery powered ‘car’

I do appreciate the instant acceleration but that’s about it.
I think that's probably Tesla's 'fault' for. A lot of the general driven attributes are a bit 'meh' so the acceleration becomes the only thing that stands out. An I-Pace doesn't do the EV bit as well as a Tesla (from an economy point of view) but it's worth driving one as I think it shows that EVs will be fun to drive and have character when the major manufacturers get hold of them. I imagine the Taycan will be genuinely incredible to drive.

RacerMike

Original Poster:

4,209 posts

212 months

Thursday 29th November 2018
quotequote all
Don Colione said:
In an ICE, even if almost empty; I can find gas literally anywhere, fill up in minutes, and be outta there... if necessary.
Which during a natural disaster would be completely brimming with fuel with zero queues to refuel....

RacerMike

Original Poster:

4,209 posts

212 months

Thursday 29th November 2018
quotequote all
bodhi said:
You see I'm reading this and wondering what the hell people get up to at Motorway Service stations so that waiting for your golf buggy to charge takes no longer than filling a car up from empty? For instance as a rule, I don't stop to fill up until the light is on, in fact often I'll leave it until the range counter is showing less than 10 miles then stop off. To fill up 10 gallons, get a drink, pay and use the facilities, usually adds around 5 - 8 minutes to my ETA depending upon queues in there, then I'm on my way again. I really do doubt you'd be able to get any significant amount of charge in that time - in fact from friend's experience of Ecotricity, you'll probably still be on hold wondering why the charger isn't working.

I might re-appraise EV's in 10 years or so, but at the moment, for me, with recharge times and inability to use the performance without compromising the range, they are as much use as a chocolate fireguard. Translate this Audi's name into French and you'll pretty much sum up my view on them.
A UK fuel pump, pumps at about 30L/min, so assuming absolutely no one else is at the forecourt, it would take 2mins just to phyiscally fill the tank and probably about another 2 mins to pay. In a scenario when the only thing you're doing is filling up, and there's no one else waiting to fuel or pay, I can imagine you can feasibly do it in 5mins. In reality on long journeys most normal people will use it as a chance to have a wee and a/or a coffee, which genuinely takes a minimum of 10mins if you're doing both. So that's 15mins straight up.

Even in the 5 min example, a 350kWh Ionity charger would add 30kWh to this Audi (or the Porsche). If we assume absolutely terrible efficiency (which would be 30kWh/100km) that's still 60 miles on top of the maybe real world 220 miles.

If you go for a wee and coffee, it's 90kWh which is another 300km or 180 miles or range.

The Ionity chargers aren't everywhere at the moment, but they will be in the next year (when the e-Tron comes out). As many have said, EVs still aren't appropriate for absolutely everyone, but it is perfectly possible to do long journeys. Even using 50kWh chargers, it's really not much of an inconvenience, and the 350kWh ones the Taycan and e-Tron will charge from will basically match the convenience of Petrol/Diesel.

RacerMike

Original Poster:

4,209 posts

212 months

Thursday 29th November 2018
quotequote all
rxe said:
cookie1600 said:
What about all those signs plastered everywhere, imploring you not to use your mobile phone while refilling?
You do it from inside the car. Pull up, start the app, it unlocks the pump, you get out (leaving phone behind), fill car, get back in, drive off.
And actually the only reason you can't use one in a petrol station forecourt is due to the fact your mobile device isn't tested or approved for use in explosive environments which, allegedly, is what a petrol station forecourt is. The reality is that you've got more chance of causing an explosion by statically discharging yourself against the car, than you have with your phone.

RacerMike

Original Poster:

4,209 posts

212 months

Sunday 2nd December 2018
quotequote all
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
Robert-nszl1 said:
Call me cynical, but isn't that a bit like believing VW emissions data? Manufacturers make all sorts of claims, I'm merely linking it with my phone experience. I struggle to believe that Samsung or iPhone battery tech is that different, yet we all know they degrade much more quickly than that.
The car battery tech - and use / conditioning is totally different.
It’s not so much the battery management and conditioning, but the use case. A long Range battery has a peak current draw capability of 800-1000A at full load. The reality is, most day to day driving will probably see circa 50-100A max, so you’re drawing power out of the pack at a way lower rate than it’s designed for.

Your non brand specific smart phone has a peak load capability which isn’t a great deal higher than the constant power draw. So the EV pack may only run routinely at 5-10% of its peak load capability, vs 50% or more for your phone. Since it’s the discharge and recharge rate that effects life so much, you actually find that degradation on the EV battery is tiny due to the low stress during 99% of its life. If you constantly used the car for circuit racing though, that’s a different story...