Audi S5 Cabriolet anyone?

L-M

4car wrote:

This 328bhp S5 is the performance model of the Audi A5 Cabriolet range and comes with a price tag to match. Considering you can get a perfectly acceptable 261bhp 3.2-litre FSI SE for around £36,000, what exactly do you get for the £6,000 premium?

Well, the S5 is supercharged and significantly faster - the FSI completes the 0-60mph sprint in 6.9s, but the S5 gets there in just 5.9s - a whole second faster.

Then there's also the uprated sports suspension that promises a more engaging drive. If that's not enough, the S5 gains special 19" alloys, painted brake callipers with S5 logo, twin chrome exhaust pipes and some extra detailing to set it apart from the rest of the A5 Cabriolet range.

So there's clearly more grunt in the S5 and stands a good chance of humiliating the odd sportscar on an alpine pass, but how important is this when you're more likely to put the top down, get some wind in your hair and do a bit of posing?

The major catch, though, is the timing. If you want an S5 you'll have to wait until September, but you can get your hands on the 3.2 in April. Is the S5 worth the wait? Read on to find out.

Ferris

Better looking hood up than the e92 BMW, worse looking hood down imo.

I do like the way Audi are shunning metal roofs.

L-M

A lot more reading to be had here: Source

Eoin

Ferris wrote: »

I do like the way Audi are shunning metal roofs.

What do cloth roofs offer over folding ones? Is it more boot space?

stealthyspeeder

eoin wrote: »

What do cloth roofs offer over folding ones? Is it more boot space?

Less weight, so they are lighter and faster

knuth

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

Less weight, so they are lighter and faster

and noisier, more prone to leaks, vandals etc

Eoin

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

Less weight, so they are lighter and faster

Is that always the case though - do they not have heavy frames? Do they give more/less stability than a metal folding roof when they're up?

Lex Luthor

whats the difference between this and the S4 tin can?

Manic Moran

In fairness, my S4 ragtop is only marginally noisier than the hardtop version. They've put a lot of effort into the roof.

I am not convinced by the hard-top convertibles, primarily over the issue of boot space. After folding down my roof, I still have ample room for a full-sized suitcase, a sports bag, and one or two other things. Looking at the amount of room taken up by hardtops, I'm less convinced about their utility on a road trip.

What surprises me, though, are the stats. I had thought the S5 was the modern replacement to the old S4 two-doors (Leaving S4 to be a four/five-door only) yet it has less horsepower and a slower 0-60 time than my four-year-old S4, which has a normally aspirated V8.

Maybe I simply misunderstand the product placement of the S5.

NTM

Matt Simis

On those lines, am I the only one that thinks its confusing that they have a 4.2L FSI in the S5 coupe and a 3.0L SC in the S5 Cab? It really makes it look like they wished they didnt go down the V8 route on the S5 at all.

RedorDead

Matt Simis wrote: »

On those lines, am I the only one that thinks its confusing that they have a 4.2L FSI in the S5 coupe and a 3.0L SC in the S5 Cab? It really makes it look like they wished they didnt go down the V8 route on the S5 at all.

The S5 Coupe will be going the V6 route as well next year.

unkel

Matt Simis wrote: »

On those lines, am I the only one that thinks its confusing that they have a 4.2L FSI in the S5 coupe and a 3.0L SC in the S5 Cab? It really makes it look like they wished they didnt go down the V8 route on the S5 at all.

You quoted an article here yourself recently that showed that the new turbocharged 3l V6 is the successor to the 4.2l V8. I remember because I was impressed with the power / torque from such a small engine!