2008 Scirocco

[Catman]

Coupe Scoop: VW boss pushes return of Scirocco in 2008

GREG KABLE
Posted Date: 10/11/05

A rapid 3.2-liter 247-hp V6-powered all-wheel-drive coupe will spearhead Volkswagen boss Wolfgang Bernhard?s effort to establish the German carmaker as the purveyor of some of Europe?s most desirable yet affordable performance cars.

Described to AutoWeek as the spiritual successor to the once highly regarded Scirocco, the coupe will be built on a modified Jetta chassis. Wolfsburg insiders say the new car may be marketed under the name Rivo.

With styling by VW design boss Murat Gunak, whose credits include the Mercedes-Benz SLR, and VW head of advanced design Peter Schreyer, who oversaw Audi?s recent design renaissance, the resurrected Scirocco is a pure 2+2 designed to complement the Eos folding-hardtop convertible unveiled at Frankfurt.

The car adopts the muscular styling treatment first shown on VW?s Concept R?a car that now appears to be abandoned due to its complex mid-engine layout.

Power comes from two four-cylinders, the new 1.4-liter Twincharger unit, and the turbo charged 2.0-liter FSI mill. At the top of the line is a 3.2-liter V6, paired with all-wheel drive.

Gearboxes include a six-speed manual and optional six-speed DSG unit.

[Secret Chimp]

Looks rad.

[SaltyDog]

I'm all for it  VW need some good cars  

[Raghavan]

I wish this was off of the A4 platform.

[mazda6er]

I'm interested to see just how "affordable" this turns out.

[Raghavan]

Why not just make this into an A4 Coupe?

[BMWDave]

This looks like the Concept C...which unfortunately turned into the bloated Eos.  I hope this turns out very similar to that picture.

[Raghavan]

whatever happened to VW's midengined RWD concept?

[thewizard16]

Like VW's take on the BMW 6.

[TBR]

Looks quite nice, but I really hope we get the twincharger in the USA, 170hp out of 1.4l is amazing.

[Raghavan]

Looks quite nice, but I really hope we get the twincharger in the USA, 170hp out of 1.4l is amazing.

That's some serious boost right there.

[TBR]

Yeah, and I imagine it has an extremely, extremely flat power curve.  

[Raghavan]

Yeah, and I imagine it has an extremely, extremely flat power curve.

Will it be able to last long though?

[Raghavan]

Actually, it's no big deal though. Honda can do it N/A.

[TBR]

Yeah, they can get 120hp/liter out of an I4, but not without a super high power peak, making the engine impractical for day to day use.

[Raghavan]

Yeah, they can get 120hp/liter out of an I4, but not without a super high power peak, making the engine impractical for day to day use.

Have you driven an S2000, or even been in a moving one?

[mazda6er]

Yeah, they can get 120hp/liter out of an I4, but not without a super high power peak, making the engine impractical for day to day use.

Have you driven an S2000, or even been in a moving one?

Actually, the S2000 does have a very high powerband. High redline....

[TBR]

Yeah, they can get 120hp/liter out of an I4, but not without a super high power peak, making the engine impractical for day to day use.

Have you driven an S2000, or even been in a moving one?

No, but when you see the torque number (about 140 IIRC) and then the HP number (240 of course) you know that it has a very high power peak, meaning that you would really have to wringe it out in traffic which is bad on the clutch, transmission, engine, and yourself (the buzzing would get annoying eventually). Don't try to downplay VW's achievement by saying it has been done with N/A, because it hasn't. Never has a N/A engine been made that has both the hp/liter of the twinpulse and its power curve.

[Raghavan]

Yeah, they can get 120hp/liter out of an I4, but not without a super high power peak, making the engine impractical for day to day use.

Have you driven an S2000, or even been in a moving one?

No, but when you see the torque number (about 140 IIRC) and then the HP number (240 of course) you know that it has a very high power peak, meaning that you would really have to wringe it out in traffic which is bad on the clutch, transmission, engine, and yourself (the buzzing would get annoying eventually). Don't try to downplay VW's achievement by saying it has been done with N/A, because it hasn't. Never has a N/A engine been made that has both the hp/liter of the twinpulse and its power curve.

Actually, it has more than enough torque down low to get moving without a hassle.  

[280Z Turbo]

120hp/liter

Don't even use that ratio around here! :o  

Engines are far too complex to dumb it down to hp/L.

[thewizard16]

Yeah, they can get 120hp/liter out of an I4, but not without a super high power peak, making the engine impractical for day to day use.

Have you driven an S2000, or even been in a moving one?

No, but when you see the torque number (about 140 IIRC) and then the HP number (240 of course) you know that it has a very high power peak, meaning that you would really have to wringe it out in traffic which is bad on the clutch, transmission, engine, and yourself (the buzzing would get annoying eventually). Don't try to downplay VW's achievement by saying it has been done with N/A, because it hasn't. Never has a N/A engine been made that has both the hp/liter of the twinpulse and its power curve.

Actually, it has more than enough torque down low to get moving without a hassle.

My 2000 Camry has about the same amount of torque.  <_<

EDIT: More, actually.    

[Raghavan]

Yeah, they can get 120hp/liter out of an I4, but not without a super high power peak, making the engine impractical for day to day use.

Have you driven an S2000, or even been in a moving one?

No, but when you see the torque number (about 140 IIRC) and then the HP number (240 of course) you know that it has a very high power peak, meaning that you would really have to wringe it out in traffic which is bad on the clutch, transmission, engine, and yourself (the buzzing would get annoying eventually). Don't try to downplay VW's achievement by saying it has been done with N/A, because it hasn't. Never has a N/A engine been made that has both the hp/liter of the twinpulse and its power curve.

Actually, it has more than enough torque down low to get moving without a hassle.

My 2000 Camry has about the same amount of torque.  <_<

Do you have to rev the piss outta it?

[TBR]

Probably not, but its torque isn't achieved at over 8000 rpm like the S2000's is.

[thewizard16]

Probably not, but its torque isn't achieved at over 8000 rpm like the S2000's is.

No, I don't have to, but it's not exactly inspiring to drive around town.  

[Raghavan]

Probably not, but its torque isn't achieved at over 8000 rpm like the S2000's is.

Actually, at 1000 rpm, you already have 108 lb/ft of torque, and by 3,000 rpm, you have about 135 lb/ft of torque. Peak torque (159 lb/ft) is acheived at over 8000rpm, yes, but there's more than enough from the bottom end.

[TBR]

Since when has 108lb ft been more than enough!?!?

[MrH]

Seriously, TBR, you're just talking out of your ass.  Have you seen a dyno or an S2000?    The torque curve is incredibly flat.  It makes plenty of power down low too to get around time in a timely fashion.  You don't have to wringe the piss out of the motor to get moving by any means.

"when you see the torque number (about 140 IIRC) and then the HP number (240 of course) you know that it has a very high power peak, meaning that you would really have to wringe it out in traffic which is bad on the clutch, transmission, engine, and yourself"

Traffic doesn't accelerate like an S2000 hitting peak power.  Sorry, just doesn't happpen.  You could keep an S2000 up in the quickest of traffic without ever revving above 4500 RPM I bet.

And it's not bad on the clutch, transmission, or engine if you know how to drive.

[Raghavan]

Since when has 108lb ft been more than enough!?!?

Dude, some cars don't even MAKE 108 lb/ft. This thing makes it a 1000 rpm. Besides, the thing revs so fast, you'll be at 3000 at no time. Trust me, the car revs so effortlessly, and there's so much torque down low, you don't need to rev the piss outta thecar.

[MrH]

Since when has 108lb ft been more than enough!?!?

And since when do you need neck breaking acceleration at 1000 RPM?  

No one even really cruises at an engine speed that low, unless you have a boat load of torque, and even then that's still really low.  

[TBR]

Perhaps when you are pulling out onto a busy highway