Audi R4 and R10

Mitch Connor

So, Audi are bringing out an R4, baby bro to the R8. Not sure about it. Would love one but seems very TT to me, maybe a little bit too much TT, especially the higher end ones. Also a snippit on the R10 - the TDI version of the R8, surprised they went with a different model number.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/autoexpressnews/231048/audis-baby-r8-ready-to-roll.html?CMP=NLC-Newsletters

Sports car fans are in for a real treat! Audi is planning a striking new mid-engined machine – the R4. The newcomer will be based on an entirely new platform and sit above the TT in Audi’s range, offering buyers a driver-focused two-seater with a starting price of around £35,000.

It’s the result of a rumoured joint venture with Porsche – so the project will produce a new platform to underpin Coupé and Roadster versions of the R4, and also provide the basis for the next Boxster and Cayman. It’s these core sellers in the Porsche line-up that the R4 will target.

Our exclusive picture shows that the new Audi takes much of its visual inspiration from the R8 supercar, with LED lights, deep air intakes and a sweeping profile. But this similarity is no coincidence. The Porsche joint venture is all part of Audi’s plan to launch a range of R-badged sports cars, which will follow in the wake of the range-topper.

These will include an R6 to rival Jaguar’s new E-Type replacement and the Porsche 911, plus an R10 model based on the V12 TDI R8 diesel concept. Of course, it’s not only Audi which will benefit. Porsche will be able to share Audi’s engines and reduce the costs associated with developing a new platform.

The upmarket sports car firm is keen to ensure it maintains its healthy profitability – a factor that has enabled it to take a majority share in Volkswagen – particularly in the current financial climate. While the two firms will work together to produce the new platform, the R4 and the next-generation Boxster/Cayman will be very different models. Keen to retain the DNA that’s made the TT and R8 so successful, bosses will give the Audi a body made from aluminium panels. It also gets quattro four-wheel drive with torque split 40:60 in favour of the rear wheels.

In addition, the newcomer benefits from adaptive magnetic dampers and Audi’s Drive Select system. The latter allows the driver to switch between several modes which tweak steering and throttle response. Power will come from the firm’s range of TFSI engines, with the entry-level model most likely to get a highly tuned 2.0-litre turbo. The new 335bhp 2.5-litre five-cylinder super and turbocharged unit lined up for the flagship TT RS will be available, too. There’s even the possibility that the R4 will be offered with a high-performance diesel and a petrol V6.

As for gearboxes, a six-speed manual transmission will be standard, with a seven-ratio S tronic twin-clutch semi-auto as an option. The R4 is some way off reaching showrooms, though. There are still plenty of loose ends to tie up with the mooted joint venture, and it remains to be seen which company will launch the new platform first. Considering Porsche’s increasing control of the VW Group, it may be that it gets to call the shots. If that’s the case, the R4 could arrive in around 2011, shortly after the Boxster and Cayman.

R10 is go, too

* Diesel R8 was revealed earlier this year. It will be badged R10 and fitted with a V12 TDI unit offering around 500bhp.

* Returning 25mpg and meeting Euro VI emissions regulations, the 190mph R10 will be an amazing all-rounder.

* Styling cues such as the huge air intakes at the rear and the glass roof could be carried over to its R4 baby brother.

Dolph Starbeam

Ye the r4 does look very TT'ish, i don't like really.

I am suprised to that it is called an r10, i read about it in TG mag a few months ago, it isn't my cup of tea, even though it is a powerful diesel engine i would still choose a r8 over it any day.

kikel

Totally understand Audi filling every possible gap in the market with new models, but is their a gap for the R4. Taught the TT had that covered.

Climate Expert

They called it R10 because Audi reckon diesel is a whole '2' better than petrol. Can't argue with that E92?

Mitch Connor

kikel wrote: »

Totally understand Audi filling every possible gap in the market with new models, but is their a gap for the R4. Taught the TT had that covered.

thats what i thought. Also, it doesn't look very different - the backend looks the same from the pic i have seen (above) though the lights could differentiate it enough i suppose and the front is quite similar too, just the intakes that really set it apart from the look of the TT. I would certainly say it is a lot more TT in looks that R8.

Not a fan of the glass roof either. Could be nice when inside, but i don't like the coulor differences - would prefer a sunroof that slides back within the body of the car (as opposed to up and out like the Hyundai Coupe)

E92

I would have thought that the R4 would be a suitable rival for something like a BMW Z4.

In which case BMW should be worried, especially as the next Z4 will belive it or not have a folding metal roof, in a sports car that's meant to be rivalling the Porsche Boxster:rolleyes:.

I'm beginning to think that the "ultimate driving machine" tag BMW use should be abandoned, BMW has cancelled the Concept CS, but are pressing ahead with the X1, are thinking about an X2 and X4, and have an MPV on the way too.

When are they going to go back and start making more cars with the classical 3 box, rear wheel drive, straight 6 petrol arrangement that was always their bread and butter, and what they always were and still are so brilliant at?

Nowadays they're talking about extending boring old 4 pots to more of the model range, and cutting down on the number of V8s they make:(.

When is this madness going to end?

Why isn't there a small 2.0-2.2 6 pot anymore? What cretin thought that giving the E90 320i exactly the same engine as the E46 318i was a good idea? Who thought that the 320i/520i should only be deserving of 4 rather than 6 cylinder engines? It now means I have to tell people to choose a diesel instead of a charisma free dullard 4 pot petrol instead of the good old days when there was a silky smooth great sounding straight 6 when you hit models than ended with "20i":(.

Why did they cancel the M3 CSL(yes they cancelled that too:mad:)?

Why isn't there are Merc CLS rival? I don't really see the point of a CLS, but it is a sort of coupé, meaing it has FAR more to do with a maker of the "ultimate driving machine" than some of the other rubbish they're thinking of making. No CSL M3 and no super saloon that would represent an 8 series replacement is shameful too, again these type of cars have far more to do with the values or at least supposed values of BMW. Yokes like the X1, X3 etc have SFA to do with what BMWs are meant to be about.

Meanwhile Audi have an RS4 and RS5 coming, have the R8 5.2 V10 twin turbo with no less than 580 bhp in 2010, and are bringing back the nostalgic 5 pot engines, starting with next year's RS-TT with no less than 343 bhp. AND I even hear that VAG are thinking that large cars should drive the back wheels too, so future big Audis *could* be RWD.

But that's not all. Porsche wants to "help" Audi develop fast cars, meaning thatwe'll have Porsche designing BMW M rivals now instead of Audi. So that will presumably mean that future fast Audis will handle as good as the best of them too.

And of course Audi have a supercar too, and one that's been getting rave reviews at that, where's BMW's rival?(there isn't anything even in planning, again making mockery of a car company that makes cars that are supposed to be "sporty")

I think I'll be looking for a different user name if BMW goes even more off course:rolleyes:;):eek:!

Stephen

You'd think they would have called it R12 or something to reflect the fact that its got 12 cylinders.

Biro

Climate Expert wrote: »

They called it R10 because Audi reckon diesel is a whole '2' better than petrol. Can't argue with that E92?

I think it's since Porsche took over that the "confusing" model names took hold! Porsche always liked to have confusing names! 911 Carerra is 2WD, Carerra 4 is 4WD, the 911 Turbo is 4WD, the GT3 is 2WD but no turbo, the GT2 is 2WD but with a Turbo, the GT1 is some LeMans special...
Audi now have the R8 that's a 4.2V8, they're bringing out a V12 Diesel version of the R8 that they'll call the R10, then a 6cyl version of the R8 that they'll call the R6. The R4 is nothing to do with the R6, R8 or R10, and the V10 twin turbo petrol for the R8 will be called what? The R12?

Biro

E92 wrote: »

I think I'll be looking for a different user name if BMW goes even more off course:rolleyes:;):eek:!

Naaa... B8 doesn't have the same ring to it...

pburns

E92 wrote: »

I think I'll be looking for a different user name if BMW goes even more off course:rolleyes:;):eek:!

Shurely not:eek::eek:!!

So what marque would replace BMW in your affections - Audi??
The BMW versions of the 3 box saloons (3 and 5) you crave are still better than the A4/A6 (if uglier). Having said that I think I'd rather have an A8 over a 7-series...

I know what you mean though - BMW seem to be 'selling out' on their core principles and chasing market share. The X3 and X6 are hideous IMO. Also I think it's very worrying that the 3-series outsells the Mondeo in the UK and apparantly it's residuals are now barely better than other mid-market saloon.

Attention-seeking supercars aren't my thing but I really like the R8. To me it mixes the best qualities of the 911 and Italian supercars.

I still rather have a modern interpretation of the original Quattro though (this time with better weight distribution). I crave an AWD Audi that is more Gene Hunt than yuppiemobile. Seeing as that's unlikely to happpen anytime soon I'll stick with Subaru!

Clarkson has strangely described them as cars for cement salesmen - basing this prejudice on someonge he knew in his younger days presumably

E92

pburns wrote: »

Shurely not:eek::eek:!!

So what marque would replace BMW in your affections - Audi??
The BMW versions of the 3 box saloons (3 and 5) you crave are still better than the A4/A6 (if uglier). Having said that I think I'd rather have an A8 over a 7-series...

I know what you mean though - BMW seem to be 'selling out' on their core principles and chasing market share. The X3 and X6 are hideous IMO. Also I think it's very worrying that the 3-series outsells the Mondeo in the UK and apparantly it's residuals are now barely better than other mid-market saloon.

Cars like the 3 series, 5 series, 7 series are what they do best. They still make terriffic cars. I swore I was going to hate the recently retired 7 series, but it's brilliant. I love our E60 520d, even though it's diesel. I always thought the E60 wasn't a great car(the looks put me off the thing, and the first one I ever went in had run flat tyres), but it really is.

I'd love a new 330d too. How can you not like RWD, 245 bhp, straight 6 noise and smoothness(yes I know it's diesel but it revs to 5400 rpm and is meant to be all but impossible to know apart from the rev counter that it fills up at the black pump as opposed to the green pump) and 50 mpg all thrown into one package is beyond me really.

I've never worried about whether the 3 series is too common or not, it is a good car and deserves to do well.

But sh!te like the X3, X6 etc is as you say selling out on the core values.

BMW seems to have more owners clubs, fanboys whatever you want to call them than most makes, and a disproportionally high number of their buyers are people who like cars.

It's hardly a co-incidence that model codes are used with BMWs more than with any other make of car, bar Porsche possibly. Even people who aren't that much into cars ask what is the difference between an E36 and E39 or whatever. You don't see people wondering about the difference between an E90 and E110 series Toyota Corolla do you?

I have come to the conclusion that BMW is being run by accountants and not by people who love cars these days. They don't care what their fans think anymore.

You have to make cars that people who are loyal to you are going to buy.

It's obvious that BMW fans are not very happy, just look at the considerable amount of negative comments towards BMW in any car forum there is, Autocar, WorldCarFans, etc.

If you start alienating your fan base then what good is that going to achieve?

It's not going to achieve more money, as was proven when we saw what GM did to Saab.

Biro

E92 wrote: »

If you start alienating your fan base then what good is that going to achieve?

It's not going to achieve more money, as was proven when we saw what GM did to Saab.

I'd disagree. More money is exactly what it'll achieve. Look at Toyota. Their fan-base was huge. They had petrol head followings in the 80's and 90's, and who could blame them? The AE86 was an excellent car in it's day. (forget todays fanbase for these!). The Mk 1 and 2 MR2, the Celica GT4, Carlos Sainz edition, ST185 and ST205 versions, the Supra twin turbo, even the corolla had the GSI in the UK and the twin cam 20 in Japan, the gen 7 Celica T-sport, the newer corolla had a t-sport and even the Carina E had a GTI! Anyone remember back in 1985 the black hi-lux in Back to the Future?
What have they now? A fridge (avensis), a microwave (yaris), a dishwasher (corolla) and a feeding trough for cattle (hi-lux). Maybe a barn door too (landcrusier). And they're now the biggest car company in the world. QED as far as they're concerned, snore snore as far as the rest of us are concerned. BMW are taking note and following suit, and I bet if you look at the books it's working, cause the X5 (pointless crap) is massively popular, as will the Crap3 and the Crap6. The 1-Crap and the 1-crap coupe is more of this new foulness that sells from them.

Climate Expert

A company is going to chase profit in any way they can. We're not talking about some garden shed, labour of passion business here.

Biro

Climate Expert wrote: »

A company is going to chase profit in any way they can. We're not talking about some garden shed, labour of passion business here.

That's no excuse for the Auris.

pburns

Biro wrote: »

I'd disagree. More money is exactly what it'll achieve. Look at Toyota. Their fan-base was huge. They had petrol head followings in the 80's and 90's, and who could blame them? The AE86 was an excellent car in it's day. (forget todays fanbase for these!). The Mk 1 and 2 MR2, the Celica GT4, Carlos Sainz edition, ST185 and ST205 versions, the Supra twin turbo, even the corolla had the GSI in the UK and the twin cam 20 in Japan, the gen 7 Celica T-sport, the newer corolla had a t-sport and even the Carina E had a GTI! Anyone remember back in 1985 the black hi-lux in Back to the Future?
What have they now? A fridge (avensis), a microwave (yaris), a dishwasher (corolla) and a feeding trough for cattle (hi-lux). Maybe a barn door too (landcrusier). And they're now the biggest car company in the world. QED as far as they're concerned, snore snore as far as the rest of us are concerned. BMW are taking note and following suit, and I bet if you look at the books it's working, cause the X5 (pointless crap) is massively popular, as will the Crap3 and the Crap6. The 1-Crap and the 1-crap coupe is more of this new foulness that sells from them.

Ah you're comparing apples with oranges. Toyota were always a manufacturer of (very reliable) white goods stretching back to the Mk1 Corolla and before. They had a wide product range and some of those happened to be sports cars (the RWD Corolla Coupe, Celica and MR2) which all garnered a following for various reasons. Not at all the same as the 'ultimate driving machine'.

Personally I like more obscure marques. I loved Aston Martin growing up - reading stories in CAR of Rowan Atkinson's various models at a time when the company was producing big V8 dinasours and struggling for survival. The new ones are just for posers - all that Bond-bull****, product placement stuff puts me right off. They're just another high-end label for those insecure enough to need to flaunt bling.

Biro

pburns wrote: »

Ah you're comparing apples with oranges. Toyota were always a manufacturer of (very reliable) white goods stretching back to the Mk1 Corolla and before. They had a wide product range and some of those happened to be sports cars (the RWD Corolla Coupe, Celica and MR2) which all garnered a following for various reasons. Not at all the same as the 'ultimate driving machine'.

Fair point, but all the "normal" manufacturers are trying to become more upmarket, and BMW are trying to become more "mainstream" in ways.

jozi

I think BMW's M1 concept would be a nice competitor for the R8.

Don't understand that the R10 will be a v12 diesel I always taught R'8' was for the V8 in the boot?

Maybe they are reserving the R'12' for a V12 petrol?

I sort of agree with E92's views on current BMW's, it's a shame they are going down this route.

P.C.

E92 wrote: »

But sh!te like the X3, X6 etc

glad you said it, saves me having to.

E92 wrote: »

I have come to the conclusion that BMW is being run by accountants and not by people who love cars these days. .

And I would agree with you.

E92 wrote: »

They don't care what their fans think anymore.

You have to make cars that people who are loyal to you are going to buy..

They are making cars that people buy.

E92 wrote: »

It's not going to achieve more money, as was proven when we saw what GM did to Saab.

I think that BMW have become a victim of their own success. They made good cars that people wanted to buy and drive. Now they make cars that people who have money (or access to credit) want to buy.

The BMW SUV's have become desirable, and BMW will keep suppling this market if it keeps them in the black. They will, unfortunately stop making good cars, as they are not as lucrative.*




* I might have made that all up, so don't qoute me.