Vs Audi e-Tron vs BMW VED

[SKY]

Audi:
V6 Diesel 3.0 Twin-Turbo: 300 hp and 650 NM of torque.
Electric engine: 86 hp and 350 NM of torque.
Combined power: 386 hp and 1000 NM of torque.
0-100km/h: 4.4 sec.
Fuel consumption: 2.2 l/100 km.
C02: 59 g/km.
Weight: 1.450 kg.

BMW:
1.5 3-cyl diesel engine with 163 hp + two electric engines.
Combined power: 356 hp and 800 NM of torque.
0-100km/h: 4.8 sec.
Fuel consumption: 3.9 l/100 km.
C02: 99 g/km.
Weight: 1.395 kg.

Design apart, it seems Audi numbers are better.

 

[south]

The e-Tron's consumption figures are unbelievably good, aren't they? Right now, I'd say both used different norms, but give me some more time to check.


Best regards,
south

PS: I can't see the e-Tron pictures.

 

[Deleted member 25]

As much as i like the Audi, the BMW is just in a league of its own.

 

[footie]

The really amazing difference between these two isn't the technology used but in how finish they appear, the BMW looks like a concept that many years from production but the Audi looks like something which could be ready in six months.

But both are really exciting examples of what the future might be and with so many believing that hybrid cars would mean a boring future for the enthusiast these two are the silver lining.

 

[south]

Any word on the e-Tron's 'amazing' consumption figures, Footie?


Best regards,
south

 

[footie]

I have to admit that when I read this I went 'you've got to be kidding', I don't doubt they are correct, just I can't understand how though.

 

[Dave1984]

Am I getting this right? A 1.450 kg car with 300hp V6 Diesel 3.0 Twin-Turbo + electric engine with 86 hp uses only 2.2l/100 km, and emits only 59 g/km of CO2,
while the one weighting 1.395 kg, featuring 1.5 3-cyl diesel engine with 163 hp + two electric engines with total 193hp consumes 3.9 l/100 km, and emits 99 g/km of CO2. No way a heavier car with much larger and powerful engine consumes so much less fuel, and emits so much less CO2. They must use different norms.

 

[south]

I think I understand it now: The e-Tron Spyder is able to drive in electric-mode for 50 km. They use this mode as much as possible and only switch to the diesel engine when necessary, i.e. when it needs to drive faster than 60kph or when the battery load is low. This makes for a too optimistic consumption figure and for a wrong CO2 figure. The average CO2 consumption to generate the power needed to charge the batteries needs to be added (assuming the battery energy gets fully used and using the VED's numbers you'd have to add 52g). Even then it's a mix-up of different standards.

BMW chose the more correct way of an even battery load when comparing the loads before and after the emission runs. It's a bit unfortunate that Audi chose that way because this move makes the comparison with the figures stated for the VED harder. Porsche did a better job with the figures for the 918 Spyder.


Best regards,
south

 

[footie]

I think I understand it now: The e-Tron Spyder is able to drive in electric-mode for 50 km. They use this mode as much as possible and only switch to the diesel engine when necessary, i.e. when it needs to drive faster than 60kph or when the battery load is low. This makes for a too optimistic consumption figure and for a wrong CO2 figure. The average CO2 consumption to generate the power needed to charge the batteries needs to be added (assuming the battery energy gets fully used and using the VED's numbers you'd have to add 52g). Even then it's a mix-up of different standards.

BMW chose the more correct way of an even battery load when comparing the loads before and after the emission runs. It's a bit unfortunate that Audi chose that way because this move makes the comparison with the figures stated for the VED harder. Porsche did a better job with the figures for the 918 Spyder.


Best regards,
south

But the Porsche will cost close on 7 times as much. Either way I am pleased that the future of motoring doesn't have to be boring, even when emissions and economy takes the lead.

 

[Sunny]

Yea here are the figures for 918:
3.4l 500HP V8
3 electric motors making 218HP.
0-100: 3.2 secs
Fuel consumption: 3l/km
CO2: 70g/km
Weight: 1490kg

So the BMW is the lightest, with the smallest engine and yet worst consumption/CO2. Now it is possible BMW does have the worst tech, but more likely explanation, there is no one standard to measure these figures for hybrids and everyone is using their own or maybe even all these numbers are just targets/speculation of what they think is possible since none of the cars are really complete. Anyway, I really wonder how all these cars will do in real world.

 

[Zafiro]

I want the one with a engine sound

 

[south]

Yea here are the figures for 918:
3.4l 500HP V8
3 electric motors making 218HP.
0-100: 3.2 secs
Fuel consumption: 3l/km
CO2: 70g/km
Weight: 1490kg

So the BMW is the lightest, with the smallest engine and yet worst consumption/CO2. Now it is possible BMW does have the worst tech, but more likely explanation, there is no one standard to measure these figures for hybrids and everyone is using their own or maybe even all these numbers are just targets/speculation of what they think is possible since none of the cars are really complete. Anyway, I really wonder how all these cars will do in real world.

I need to correct my earlier comment of Porsche having done a better job. Actually, both Porsche and Audi did the same trick of using battery energy that is not getting regenerated during the runs. I tried to explain these driving cycle tricks some time back here: http://www.germancarforum.com/new-b...-concept-efficient-dynamics-8.html#post473878


Best regards,
south

 

[Giannis]

I want the one with a engine sound

All of them have (diesel) engines. I take it that you mean the one with a proper engine sound