(http://public.vuquoc.com/audis5002.jpg)
(http://public.vuquoc.com/audis5003.jpg)
(http://public.vuquoc.com/big_audi_s5_pre_01.jpg)
(http://public.vuquoc.com/big_audi_s5_pre_02.jpg)
(http://public.vuquoc.com/big_audi_s5_pre_03.jpg)
Images of the Audi A5 have been traveling around the internet at light speed since they were discovered some time yesterday, but this afternoon five more images of the high performance S5 model showed up to steal the spotlight. According to the Audi experts at Fourtitude.com, the S5 will likely feature a version of the A5's 4.2L V8 with FSI, Audi's Valvelift technology and a corresponding bump in power. Clearly the styling has been tweaked to be more aggressive with a modified front fascia that includes the string of LED daytime running lights that have become trademark ware for these models. A strip of what appears to be polished aluminum now adorns both the center of the front chin spoiler and the bottom of the rear bumper where, out back, it's flanked by a pair of dual tailpipes. The interior also appears to gain additional silver and carbon fiber accent trim. Will this hotted up A5 have the cajones to take on the BMW M3 Coupe? That remains to be seen, but we're left a little underwhelmed by the subtle visual modifcations apparent in these pics.
Autoblog (http://www.autoblog.com/2007/02/20/audi-s5-surfaces-in-wake-of-leaked-a5-images/")
I generally like how the S6 and S8 are relatively laid back in their styling, but in this example it could use a bit more of a "fast" look.
But hell, there are 3 pedals for once!
The front end looks just like the S3.
That shift knob looks awfully familiar! (coughGTIcough).
No power specs? I assume ~350 at a minimum. It probably won't touch 400, since the RS4 only has ~410.
Quote from: SJ_GTI on February 20, 2007, 05:44:25 PM
The front end looks just like the S3.
That shift knob looks awfully familiar! (coughGTIcough).
No power specs? I assume ~350 at a minimum. It probably won't touch 400, since the RS4 only has ~410.
I'm not so sure, the standard A5 has a 4.2 V8 with I am assuming anywhere between 330-350HP (it may say in the other thread), so it would make sense that this had the RS4's version of the 4.2, and if they were to make an RS5, they could use the V10.
Quote from: TheIntrepid on February 20, 2007, 05:25:07 PM
Will this hotted up A5 have the cajones to take on the BMW M3 Coupe? [/I]
No. :zzz:
^^^What he said^^^
That's one of the most beautiful things I've seen this week.
Rather than starting on my rant about how it's probably a pig of a car, I'm just going to say that I love the design, but it will probably be blown away by the BMW M3 for less money.
Why does an Audi sports coupe seem so out of place as compared to a similar BMW?
I think it looks like a G35 coupe with side-styling influenced by BMWs and an Audi grill tacked on.
I suppose it's a'ight. I liked the S4 cabrio better, though.
I never liked the A4/S4 cabrios. I actually like this quite a bit (not more than the E92....duh)
I absolutely adore this car. If I won the lottery, this is in my mind the perfect daily driver.
I give it 4 rock on, dudes :rockon: :rockon: :rockon: :rockon:
OK, it's official. I don't like this at all.
I kinda think the base model should have been styled like this... but then again they probably will sell the base model with the S-Line bodykit
Quote from: Payman on February 21, 2007, 03:23:21 AM
I give it 4 rock on, dudes? :rockon: :rockon: :rockon: :rockon:
:lol:
:rockon: :rockon: :rockon: :rockon: :rockon: from me!
Quote from: Pancor on February 20, 2007, 10:20:47 PM
Why does an Audi sports coupe seem so out of place as compared to a similar BMW?
Doesn't seem out of place to those of us who remember the world dominating Quattro Coupes of the '80s.
(http://www.fourtitude.com/gallery/albums/Audi/Quattro-Sport%20Quattro%20(b2)/Sport%20Quattro/002.jpg)
Wow, that's hot! :ohyeah:
Quote from: Catman on February 21, 2007, 12:29:49 PM
Wow, that's hot! :ohyeah:
That will be $1 million to Ms. Hilton, thankyouverymuch.
In all fairness, this 'pig' of the car is a cousin of a particular sedan that is 2-0 against the M3 in C & D's comparison tests.
I already can see the next comparison test: S5 vs M3 Coupe ... I expect it by year's end.
This is the only one of Audi's designs that I don't like.
Quote from: JYODER240 on February 22, 2007, 09:34:10 AM
This is the only one of Audi's designs that I don't like.
Would you take an A4 Cabrio over this?
Quote from: TheIntrepid on February 22, 2007, 09:39:22 AM
Would you take an A4 Cabrio over this?
No, but my statement wasn't about which one I'd rather have because I wouldn't buy either. I was saying that I don't care for its design.
Quote from: AudiMan2001 on February 21, 2007, 11:41:51 PM
In all fairness, this 'pig' of the car is a cousin of a particular sedan that is 2-0 against the M3 in C & D's comparison tests.
I already can see the next comparison test: S5 vs M3 Coupe ... I expect it by year's end.
To my best knowledge, there have been two comparos. The first involved an S4 and an M3 (plus a third-place-always AMG Merc), and the second an RS4, an M3, and another AMG Merc (in Europe).
About the RS4, I think you are right. I'll admit that the RS4 will be faster and more capable than an E46 M3 in almost any situation. As it should for what it costs. However, it is not necessarily more fun and for my money, I'll take an E46 M3 every time and wait to see the next E90 M3 which will most likely wipe the floor with the RS4 (though it may also become less fun, we'll see).
The S4 is a different matter. I have seen it beat the M3 only on that C/D comparo and on a run on a damp track by Top Gear. Funny how when its a contest in C/D between say, a Ferrari and a Porsche Turbo, the Ferrari always wins because it has more soul and is more fun to drive (while being slower than the Porsche), while a Porsche Turbo has been called by C/D an "appliance for speed" (while being faster). However, when comparing the M3 and the S4 C/D editors seem to turn into old geezers who prefer an "easy to dirve , unflappable" S4 (which is objectively slower) over a "raw boy racer image" M3 (objectively faster). I'll take the Ferrari in the first case and the M3 in the second, thank you.
Evo actually rated an E46 M3 as better than a much more expensive RS4 recently in a comparo won by a Cayman S.
There is a difference between being easy to drive and being an appliance for speed.
I need one of these though:
(http://www.evo.co.uk/images/front_picture_library_UK/dir_38/car_photo_19378_5.jpg)
Quote from: Raza on February 22, 2007, 02:36:16 PM
I need one of these though:
(http://www.evo.co.uk/images/front_picture_library_UK/dir_38/car_photo_19378_5.jpg)
+1
I'd like one in that exact color as well.
Quote from: TBR on February 22, 2007, 02:07:01 PM
There is a difference between being easy to drive and being an appliance for speed.
Are you implying that in *some way* an S4 is better than a 996TT?
Car and Driver's "Ferrari has more soul" is garbage. I remember a comparo where they pitted the 360 against the Z8 and the Z8 was better in almost every way, but the Ferrari won only because it was a Ferrari.
People get badge blind with those cars.
Agreed.
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=7828.msg371059#msg371059 date=1172187587
Car and Driver's "Ferrari has more soul" is garbage.? I remember a comparo where they pitted the 360 against the Z8 and the Z8 was better in almost every way, but the Ferrari won only because it was a Ferrari.
People get badge blind with those cars.
I remember that one too. They said the Z8 cockpit was too windy. :huh:
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on February 22, 2007, 04:34:12 PM
Are you implying that in *some way* an S4 is better than a 996TT?
No I am not, though in fact it is better in "some way" (that being practicality, it also undebatebly triumphs over the M3 in the way). I am sure the M3 is in fact more exciting to drive than the S4, but that doesn't make the S4 an appliance for speed, it is just a result of what it is (a relatively heavy AWD sedan). I think this is excuseable in cars that are meant for daily transportation (a task which the S4 performs better), but once you get into Ferrari territory excitement is more important.
Quote from: TBR on February 22, 2007, 06:35:47 PM
No I am not, though in fact it is better in "some way" (that being practicality, it also undebatebly triumphs over the M3 in the way). I am sure the M3 is in fact more exciting to drive than the S4, but that doesn't make the S4 an appliance for speed, it is just a result of what it is (a relatively heavy AWD sedan). I think this is excuseable in cars that are meant for daily transportation (a task which the S4 performs better), but once you get into Ferrari territory excitement is more important.
I didn't say it was an "appliance for speed", C/D said it and about a 911TT. I think that statement does not apply to an S4 or (even less) to a 911TT.
I'd say the importance of excitement (or looks, speed, reliability, etc.), is an entirely personal preference. That's why I'd take the M3 in this case. That of course doesn't make it "better" than an S4 (or any other car for that matter). I just prefer it in this particular (S4/RS4 vs M3) comparison due to its being more exciting to drive.
The RS 4 is more capable than the E46 M3 when you're talking about lap times, etc. but I'd bet the M3's a lot more fun. At least that's what Tiff Needell said.
Quote from: TheIntrepid on February 22, 2007, 09:39:22 AM
Would you take an A4 Cabrio over this?
Yes. But that's mostly because of my love for convertibles.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on February 22, 2007, 06:17:49 PM
I remember that one too. They said the Z8 cockpit was too windy. :huh:
I'm not even a BMW fanboy, but it's kind of ridiculous. That comparo pissed me off.
I didn't even know there was a S4 convertible until today
Quote from: M_power on February 22, 2007, 09:15:26 PM
I didn't even know there was a S4 convertible until today
Shame! :nono:
I really don't like it. But I do love the S8/A8. I saw a white S8 the other day....looking hot. The A8L is a huge ass car. I love it though!
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on February 22, 2007, 01:42:38 PM
To my best knowledge, there have been two comparos. The first involved an S4 and an M3 (plus a third-place-always AMG Merc), and the second an RS4, an M3, and another AMG Merc (in Europe).
About the RS4, I think you are right. I'll admit that the RS4 will be faster and more capable than an E46 M3 in almost any situation. As it should for what it costs. However, it is not necessarily more fun and for my money, I'll take an E46 M3 every time and wait to see the next E90 M3 which will most likely wipe the floor with the RS4 (though it may also become less fun, we'll see).
The S4 is a different matter. I have seen it beat the M3 only on that C/D comparo and on a run on a damp track by Top Gear. Funny how when its a contest in C/D between say, a Ferrari and a Porsche Turbo, the Ferrari always wins because it has more soul and is more fun to drive (while being slower than the Porsche), while a Porsche Turbo has been called by C/D an "appliance for speed" (while being faster). However, when comparing the M3 and the S4 C/D editors seem to turn into old geezers who prefer an "easy to dirve , unflappable" S4 (which is objectively slower) over a "raw boy racer image" M3 (objectively faster). I'll take the Ferrari in the first case and the M3 in the second, thank you.
Evo actually rated an E46 M3 as better than a much more expensive RS4 recently in a comparo won by a Cayman S.
Actually, after the first generation S4 was introduced (bi-turbo), it was compared to the E36 M3 (this is back in '97 or so), which it won out. The one you refer to was the more recent one done just a few years back. In fact, the S4 has placed 1st in all C & D comparison tests it's been in. You brought up an interesting point regarding the RS4's steep price, but there have been tons of comparison tests where BMW vehicles have won despite their high price tags. Now, we'll see if Audi can do the same.
As for the comment about the S4 being more fun to drive, it's perplexing to see how you describe the fact that the editors liked the S4's "unflappable" "easy to drive" nature as a demerit, when those same superlatives have been used to describe BMW vehicles' dynamics in the past. I also point out that there have been tons of comparison tests where BMWs have won despite not being the fastest (or quickest) vehicle in the lot (for the most recent example of this, see: $35,000 Sports Sedans (http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/9993/35000-sports-sedans.html) in the October 2005 issue of Car & Driver).
Quote from: AudiMan2001 on February 22, 2007, 11:29:54 PM
Actually, after the first generation S4 was introduced (bi-turbo), it was compared to the E36 M3 (this is back in '97 or so), which it won out. The one you refer to was the more recent one done just a few years back. In fact, the S4 has placed 1st in all C & D comparison tests it's been in. You brought up an interesting point regarding the RS4's steep price, but there have been tons of comparison tests where BMW vehicles have won despite their high price tags. Now, we'll see if Audi can do the same.
As for the comment about the S4 being more fun to drive, it's perplexing to see how you describe the fact that the editors liked the S4's "unflappable" "easy to drive" nature as a demerit, when those same superlatives have been used to describe BMW vehicles' dynamics in the past. I also point out that there have been tons of comparison tests where BMWs have won despite not being the fastest (or quickest) vehicle in the lot (for the most recent example of this, see: $35,000 Sports Sedans (http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/9993/35000-sports-sedans.html) in the October 2005 issue of Car & Driver).
I remember well the adjectives used on various 3 series cars that won comparos in C/D. Phrases like "a liquid that never sloshes", "this car makes you a better driver", or "black magic" regarding the suspension tuning were written. However, in those cases, the A4 was never relegated to second place because it was "raw" or a "boy racer". The A4 also never did beat the 3 in the objective tests. So, your comparison does not necessarily applies as is.
I agree that the fastest car is not necessarily the best. That's why I'd take the M3 over the RS4 (the price difference is also important). There was also one comparo where an A4 1.8T Quattro beat an E46 323i even though it was slower (in that case I believe it was well deserved, the A4 was probably more fun than that base 323i with skinny tires).
What I can't fathom is why when comparing the sportier versions of these same cars suddenly "sporty" qualities become a liability for the M3. When picking in this segment, fun and involving are my top criteria. In the old S4 vs. E36 M3 comparo you mention, if I remember well, the S4 won out on practicality. Give me a break, C/D is supposed to be an enthusiast magazine and they pick based on rear seat room? Leave that to Consumer Reports.
That's actually an awful comparison. There are barely five words about the handling of the cars in the whole thing.
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=7828.msg371059#msg371059 date=1172187587
Car and Driver's "Ferrari has more soul" is garbage.? I remember a comparo where they pitted the 360 against the Z8 and the Z8 was better in almost every way, but the Ferrari won only because it was a Ferrari.
People get badge blind with those cars.
Bit of a bold statement when you haven't driven either of the cars for yourself ;)
Quote from: JYODER240 on February 23, 2007, 10:48:20 AM
Bit of a bold statement when you haven't driven either of the cars for yourself ;)
No, that's what they said in the comparison.
Quote from: M_power on February 22, 2007, 09:15:26 PM
I didn't even know there was a S4 convertible until today
:confused: Really? They've been out for quite a while.
Quote from: TheIntrepid on February 23, 2007, 12:01:18 PM
:confused: Really? They've been out for quite a while.
:huh:
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=7828.msg371551#msg371551 date=1172254297
No, that's what they said in the comparison.
They said that the Ferrari having more soul is garbage and the only reason why it won was because of its badge?
Quote from: JYODER240 on February 23, 2007, 07:05:51 PM
They said that the Ferrari having more soul is garbage and the only reason why it won was because of its badge?
That even though the BMW was better it felt more special driving the Ferrari because it was a Ferrari.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on February 23, 2007, 09:10:06 AM
I remember well the adjectives used on various 3 series cars that won comparos in C/D. Phrases like "a liquid that never sloshes", "this car makes you a better driver", or "black magic" regarding the suspension tuning were written. However, in those cases, the A4 was never relegated to second place because it was "raw" or a "boy racer". The A4 also never did beat the 3 in the objective tests. So, your comparison does not necessarily applies as is.
I agree that the fastest car is not necessarily the best. That's why I'd take the M3 over the RS4 (the price difference is also important). There was also one comparo where an A4 1.8T Quattro beat an E46 323i even though it was slower (in that case I believe it was well deserved, the A4 was probably more fun than that base 323i with skinny tires).
What I can't fathom is why when comparing the sportier versions of these same cars suddenly "sporty" qualities become a liability for the M3. When picking in this segment, fun and involving are my top criteria. In the old S4 vs. E36 M3 comparo you mention, if I remember well, the S4 won out on practicality. Give me a break, C/D is supposed to be an enthusiast magazine and they pick based on rear seat room? Leave that to Consumer Reports.
I can't speak for other automobile mags, but with Car and Driver, they're usually looking for the best all-around car, with an emphasis on good performance (particularly handling). Beemers in the past has always been praised for their ideal compromise of handling vs ride. However, if I remember correctly, this was not the case with the M3. I remember them describing the M3's ride as extremely firm to the point of being punishing, not to mention the noise levels. I believe the S4 won because it simply was a better all-around car with fewer compromises while still offering boatloads of fun; while the Beemer may still have the upper hand in steering feel and such, it's no longer enough to overcome the punishing ride, NVH, etc .. That was the dealbreaker for the M3 in my opinion.
Of course, all of this is subjective, and what may seem fine for you won't seem fine for the editors and vice versa.
This is slightly a non sequitur, but I've never found a punishing ride, and I've driven an Elise.
Most journalists are too old and fat and soft if you ask me.
A spanish magazine (www.km77.com (http://www.km77.com)) just came out with official engine info for the A5/S5. The A5 will run a 265hp 3.2L V6 w/FSI and the S5 will run a 354hp 4.2L V8. No info on weight yet.
Those numbers are euro-spec, U.S. cars might vary slightly.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on February 25, 2007, 12:36:30 AM
A spanish magazine (www.km77.com (http://www.km77.com)) just came out with official engine info for the A5/S5. The A5 will run a 265hp 3.2L V6 w/FSI and the S5 will run a 354hp 4.2L V8. No info on weight yet.
Those numbers are euro-spec, U.S. cars might vary slightly.
I hear that there will be a six speed manual version available on both the V6 and the V8; if that's the case, that's excellent news.
I'm still holding out for a DSG option as well ....
If the A5 is essentially an A4 coupe, why doesn't it have a 2.0T option?
Quote from: TheIntrepid on February 25, 2007, 12:06:11 PM
If the A5 is essentially an A4 coupe, why doesn't it have a 2.0T option?
look at the link i p0sted in the other thread...
Quote from: Raza on February 23, 2007, 08:14:46 PM
This is slightly a non sequitur, but I've never found a punishing ride, and I've driven an Elise.
Most journalists are too old and fat and soft if you ask me.
You, uh, want a cookie for being such a hard ass? :confused:
Quote from: r0tor on February 26, 2007, 05:59:11 AM
look at the link i p0sted in the other thread...
Thank you. :praise:
Quote from: MrH on February 26, 2007, 09:18:29 AM
You, uh, want a cookie for being such a hard ass? :confused:
If you're offering...
Quote from: TheIntrepid on February 25, 2007, 12:06:11 PM
If the A5 is essentially an A4 coupe, why doesn't it have a 2.0T option?
Its not an A4 Coupe. If it was an A4 coupe, it would be called the A4 Coupe.
Forgetting the fact that its on an all new platform, its style and interior (and I will assume price) suggest it is more of an A6 coupe, if anything. As its name suggests, however, it will sit somewhere between the A4 and A6.