German Car Forum

They have taken me by surprise as well. Very tasteful looking rear end on the same level as the facelifted A8.

This car aged so badly.. 3 more years of this..
yaawwwn

n/m

Indeed. I take it as far as it's the best rear on an Audi right now!

And the interior....oh gosh...class!!!

For me, the car always looked good. But no matter how good a car looks, it ages. And nowadays that very nice designs come out every month or so, cars age even faster. So I would expect something more from this facelift. I don't know what it is that i want, but i know that i want more. As many of you said, it is un-imaginative and goes to the boring side. With the new head and rear lights it looks a bit better, but not as much as it should.

The interior is still impressing!



PS. This thing with the taillights, every car - same taillights is very annoying to me!

Nice interior. Only one think is missing - panorama sunroof.

At least it really is a 3.0! What's up with 335i? C63? etc. Those numbers used to tell you something about the engine size!

Whew! Audi's flow is so weak And Audi's current interiors are starting to look colder than BMW's. This includes the new A4 as well.

looks great, they not only changed the headlight unit, the entire front facia is different now.

I really like the rear, but find the front to still look dated. I don't know if it is the grill or headlight design, but to me the front changes don't freshen it up enough.

Ah - with the BMW and Merc examples the badging is really just a model designation. i.e. 335i = more powerful than 330i. Denoting a model's place in a pecking order is perfectly acceptable in my book and this has been done for years now. I have no problem with this.

But when the Audi and VW marketing spin doctors first say that TFSI = Turbocharged Fuel Stratified Injection and TSI stands for Twin-Charged Stratified Injection (they don't inject fuel any longer - just hot air it seems) I can live with that. But to say that the T now stands for Supercharging - even when specifically referring to the engine... Well that's just preposterous. Call it 3.0 V6 SSI technology and be done. The acronym-based naming convention is contrived as it is in any event.

Otherwise they should invent a new word and wikipedia it:

Tsuperbocharger
Noun - used to singurlarly denote the application of either turbo or supercharging in a VW group engine because the engineers couldn't explain the difference to the marketing department in a way they'd understand

I must say now that I just adore "my" new FL-A6.
The crome list on the side makes it looks perfect.

I will always love this car.. A6 for president!
and btw here's for the engine figures for the 3.0T

Audi is going to against the grain with supercharging, but I like that.

M

Very nice. There wasn't anything wrong with the looks of the A6, so it didn't need a heavy facelift.

This is true, all it really needed is this new V6 at least for the U.S. market.

M

It was explained by Audi engineers: they wanted to develop a turbocharged engine, but due space limitations the supercharged one appeared as better solution ... since turbocharger didn't fit between the engine blocks (like in BMW V8 case) yet supercharger did.

So, supercharger was a forced decision ... A not wanted choice.
They were forced to develop a supercharged engine - as good as a turbocharged one.

Imagine how costly the development was! All the other engines within Volkswagen Group are either NA with FSI, turbocharged, or turbo+supercharged. So this engine was developed for Audi only. Costly ... for VAG criteria.

Oh I see.

M

Well of course, it has very little to do with space and much more to do with engineering innovation. The angle and resultant space between the banks of a Vee engine doesn't determine the suitability for mounting the turbochargers in the V. It's the swapping around of the induction and exhaust manifolds that has led to this possibility. BMW pulled another masterstroke with this one. By relocating the exhaust side of the cylinders to the inside of the V and swapping the inlet side to the outer side was the sole and magnificent reason that the turbos could be located in the middle of the V.

A supercharger is an inlet side compressor driven off a belt attached to the crankshaft and a turbocharger is an exhaust side compressor driven by, obviously, the exhaust gases.

For the reasons of packaging - Audi needed a more compact, less complicated and cheaper forced induction solution than was possible from their existing V + 2 turbos + ancilliary plumbing configuration - Audi went with the supercharger option. Not because there isn't enough space in the V.

I don't want to bring this off topic but the BMW's turbo placement between the V8 blank is new but only for petrol engines. MB has this setup for their V6 diesel engines since 2004. I am not sure how the exhausts are arranged for this MB engine.

^GM does the same with their engines now too.

Thanks for explanation.

I remember Audi official saying they opted for supercharger due space reasons. Since it's more compact, and a proposed bi-turbo was too space consuming for the new platform.

I thought it had something to do with the space between the engine blocks ...

Guys who cares about the engine when it looks like this... OMG
Taken from the configurator at www.audi.de

I ADORE IT

Perfect colour combination. I also love the night blue. Looks so much better then a boring black or white.

M

I WANT MORE OF THAAAAT!!!!


Thanks for posting Merc1