Official Pics: Audi A5/S5

[McLaren]

Then you need to know what sarcasm is. You're not very good at it at all.

Besides that, that still doesn't answer my question. Do you know how long the new 3 was in development? If the A5 was in development for 2 years, that means the new 3 was only developed one year before at the least because it's already been seen in final and near final stages for a year now.

And that CTS looks nothing like the Audi. The fact that it gets narrower as it goes down means nothing since that characteristic has been done for years.

 

[Poverty]

Then you need to know what sarcasm is. You're not very good at it at all.

Besides that, that still doesn't answer my question. Do you know how long the new 3 was in development? If the A5 was in development for 2 years, that means the new 3 was only developed one year before at the least because it's already been seen in final and near final stages for a year now.

And that CTS looks nothing like the Audi. The fact that it gets narrower as it goes down means nothing since that characteristic has been done for years.

No the audi has been in much longer development than 2 years. Is what im writing so hard to understand?

And so the CTS with its prominent audi like grille looks nothing like the audi?

I never said that it did, but it sure had more similiarities with audi than the mitsubishi. Remember, I said that they ARENT copies of audi.

 

[JCE]

I had a LONG reply typed up before my stupid Opera browser closed for no reason. Anyway I'll just sum it up in a few words.

Elegant
Brilliant
German

Yup, that's definately an Audi. And if the RS model has the V10 it will walk the BMW M3 around any track. I don't see why so many people think this is ugly...they must be blind. Oh and whoever posted that pic of that old ass ugly Seville--that car is on my top 10 list of the UGLIEST cars ever--in the history--of the world--ever.

 

[Scaff]

1. The audi A5 design was signed off two years ago according to my sources. Infact going by my sources thecar was ready about two years ago, but audi delayed the launch for reasons I cant be bothered to get into. It involves the next gen A4.

The design may have been signed off two years ago, but do you honestly believe that Audi would have sat on it for that long and not bothered to look at changes in the market place and reacted accordingly, tweaking and changing the design to meet the demands of these changes.

Two years is a huge amount of time in automotive design terms and I seriously doubt that this car has existed unchanged for that period of time. I do also have to ask exactly who these 'sources' are?

Also if you can't be bothered to 'get into' the reason why you believe this to be the case, then don't mention it. If your going to use it as a reason then at least give us the courtesy of an explanation.

Regards

Scaff

 

[YSSMAN]

But then you might say "if Pointiac advertises right, the customer will be informed enough to give it a chance." Hell, that's relying on GM making a superior car in every aspect and somehow also erasing brand-shopping. Many people looking in that price range need to have the right logo on the bonnet, sometimes more than anything.

I highly doubt Pontiac would suggest to shop them over BMW or Audi, but the press certainly will. Car and Driver has already been talking about cross-shopping cars like the G8 GT and the 3-series, so it doesn't leave a Monaro/GTO and A5 comparison out of the question.

I think we all agree that most people won't compare them, but like I said, it largely depends on what part of the country you are in. Call me crazy, but I would. But thats just me...

 

[harrytuttle]

Okay, I'll finally play ball because the BMW love has become absurd. It was bad enough when you were the only one but now Duke's got one and it's become scary. According to you, these are the two characteristics of Chris Bangle's rear end design:

Instead blending the trunk into the rear of the car, the decklid has its a very strong character line that parallels the car's shoulder line.

The finishing touch of course, is the visual isolation of the trunk, giving the rear end of the car a very slab-sided look.

You know, it's kind of odd - I sort of remember that from somewhere:

http://www.auto-motor.at/Auto/Autos...olvo-News/Volvo-S60/Volvo-S60-hinten_high.jpg

According to you, that has every single aspect of the Bangle Butt. The trunk has a very strong character line that parallels the car's shoulder line, and the trunk is visually isolated from the taillights, albeit not in ths disgusting manner that Chris Bangle in which managed to **** it up. And the Volvo S60 shown came out in ... 2001. That happens to predate all of Bangle's incredibly crappy designs.

There's a very big difference between the Volvo and 7-series: the Volvo's trunk curves are blended in with the rest of the car; the 7-series is not. In fact, the "Bangle Butt" is not the isolation or offset, but the lack of cohesion, the jarring break in lines.

So, yes, the Volvo does have those two qualifiers you noted, but that's not what makes it a "Bangle Butt".

I think the argument about the Bangle Butt left one important detail out;

The other characteristic of all of them is the shutline of the trunk is purposely drawn to be seen from profile.

...which is a characteristic that NO ONE is copying, further proving my contention that Volvo started this whole trend.

Except that I'm sure few have caught on to that subtle fact. When companies copy a design, they copy what they see, not what it's based on (which is why the copy rarely looks as good).

Wow, I can see there was absolutely no design effort on this car, obviously.

Well, when you coupe-ify a car that so badly wants to be the 3-series....



In the end, I don't really care why or exactly how these cars were designed. I like the A5; I really do. And I hate Bangle-ized BMW's. I really do.

 

[1X83Z]

There's a very big difference between the Volvo and 7-series: the Volvo's trunk curves are blended in with the rest of the car; the 7-series is not. In fact, the "Bangle Butt" is not the isolation or offset, but the lack of cohesion, the jarring break in lines.

Yeah - but the thing you're mentioning isn't what's being copied. Perhaps by the new Camry, but it's the only vehicle - and you'll note the Camry has been raked over the coals for its rear styling, too.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

I too find it incredibly hard to believe that the A5's design has been signed off for 2+ years, because having a model sit for that long awaiting production means it'll be further off the class. Oh, but there's "sources", as is always the case in Poverty-land.

Though, I will agree with everyone's favourite Audi fanboy in one respect; out of those three grilles, the Caddy does look most similar to the Audi's. It doesn't look like an Audi copy, but the vertical and horizontal bars are more comparable than either of the other cars' (the Evo's is a vertical mirroring shape-wise, there's a huge intercooler, and the gray bar, while the Malibu has an even more prominent body-coloured seperator).

Anywho, if we're still going on about the Bangle issue... can we not take it to the other thread?

 

[Tornado]

And the Volvo S60 shown came out in ... 2001. That happens to predate all of Bangle's incredibly crappy designs.

The 7 series came out that same year.

 

[1X83Z]

The 7 series came out that same year.

I'd check that statement.

 

[TopHat]

The 7 came out in 02.

 

[Tornado]

I'd check that statement.

I did.

 

[1X83Z]

I did.

Um.

Where in that article does it say the vehicle debuted in 2001?

As was stated, the 7-series debuted in 2002, the year following the S60.

 

[Tornado]

Where in that article does it say the vehicle debuted in 2001?

Read the "Last Updated" date at the end of the first article.

 

[skip0110]

Yeah, the 7-series debuted in Germany in "fall 2001".

The new 7 Series was displayed at the Frankfurt Motor Show in September 2001. It was launched in Europe on November 17th 2001, and it first appeared in the USA and in other markets in the spring of 2002.

http://www.bmwworld.com/models/e65.htm

 

[Poverty]

I too find it incredibly hard to believe that the A5's design has been signed off for 2+ years, because having a model sit for that long awaiting production means it'll be further off the class. Oh, but there's "sources", as is always the case in Poverty-land.

Though, I will agree with everyone's favourite Audi fanboy in one respect; out of those three grilles, the Caddy does look most similar to the Audi's. It doesn't look like an Audi copy, but the vertical and horizontal bars are more comparable than either of the other cars' (the Evo's is a vertical mirroring shape-wise, there's a huge intercooler, and the gray bar, while the Malibu has an even more prominent body-coloured seperator).

Anywho, if we're still going on about the Bangle issue... can we not take it to the other thread?

Audi had to have the A5 sitting about, because they couldnt have the brand new model, which audi also hope to become a bit of a halo car to be running old engines. Seeing as they are releasing it closer to the time the new A4 comes, both cars will get newer engines, to go with their all new platform.

 

[Scaff]

Audi had to have the A5 sitting about, because they couldnt have the brand new model, which audi also hope to become a bit of a halo car to be running old engines. Seeing as they are releasing it closer to the time the new A4 comes, both cars will get newer engines, to go with their all new platform.

Now that's a little different to this...

1. The audi A5 design was signed off two years ago according to my sources. Infact going by my sources thecar was ready about two years ago, but audi delayed the launch for reasons I cant be bothered to get into. It involves the next gen A4.

..in which you clearly claim that the car was ready for launch two years ago. I have no doubt that the A5 was signed off two years ago, but I seriously doubt it was ready two years ago and Audi simply sat on it.

In fact in your most recent post you say (correctly) that the A5 has newer engines and platform, if thats the case then its not the same car as two years ago. Either that or you are saying that Audi had the technology two years ago and deliberately did not release it in any model, if that is what you are claiming I have to ask why?

I'm also going to ask (again) exactly who these 'sources' are.

Regards

Scaff

 

[Poverty]

Now that's a little different to this...



..in which you clearly claim that the car was ready for launch two years ago. I have no doubt that the A5 was signed off two years ago, but I seriously doubt it was ready two years ago and Audi simply sat on it.

In fact in your most recent post you say (correctly) that the A5 has newer engines and platform, if thats the case then its not the same car as two years ago. Either that or you are saying that Audi had the technology two years ago and deliberately did not release it in any model, if that is what you are claiming I have to ask why?

I'm also going to ask (again) exactly who these 'sources' are.

Regards

Scaff

Audi has been sitting on its valvelift technology. According to my sources they have several valvelift engines ready, but they couldnt exactly have valvelift engines in the A5 and then the rest of the audi range with inferior engines. Or they couldnt give the A5 inferior engines two years ago, and then all of a sudden release these more powerful, and more economical engines as it would pee previous customers off.

Go on GCZ and search fro Iceman. Hes the audi guy with the best audi insider info. His posts are scarce, but usually bang on the money. Yannis is also good for info, but its usually from iceman or another guy, who iceman also gets some info from.

For the BMW insider info search for Scott27's posts.

 

[Scaff]

Audi has been sitting on its valvelift technology. According to my sources they have several valvelift engines ready, but they couldnt exactly have valvelift engines in the A5 and then the rest of the audi range with inferior engines. Or they couldnt give the A5 inferior engines two years ago, and then all of a sudden release these more powerful, and more economical engines as it would pee previous customers off.

Go on GCZ and search fro Iceman. Hes the audi guy with the best audi insider info. His posts are scarce, but usually bang on the money. Yannis is also good for info, but its usually from iceman or another guy, who iceman also gets some info from.

For the BMW insider info search for Scott27's posts.

Again this is completely different to having the A5 ready for launch two years ago; its also perfectly possible (and quite common) to launch new engine and drivetrain technology in a limited number of models (normally high end or halo products) before filtering it down.

Audi may well have had 'valvelift' technology working two years ago, but again this is evry different from having it production ready.

I also find it a bit disturbing that you have been so unwilling to credit your sources directly in the past, from now on I would like to see actual links when you cite sources. After all its free to register over at GCZ, and I'm sure many of us would like to read the original posts you use as source material.

However you have yet to show anything that would clearly indicate that Audi had the A5, ready in every way for production, two years ago; and that they simply did not launch the car. I find it far more likely that the final sign-off for the A5 was two years ago and the car has been in production development and testing cycles for around that time. These are however very, very different things. So out of interest can you please provide the links that show the car was "thecar was ready about two years ago".

Thanks

Scaff

 

[Poverty]

Just found this

FSI – The high-tech engine with variable valve lift
The top-of-the-range petrol engine in the Audi A5 is a new 3.2-litre FSI with innovative valve gear comprising the Audi valvelift system. This innovation varies the valve lift between two levels. To achieve this, sets of sliding cams are mounted directly on the intake camshafts. These feature two sets of adjacent cam contours for small and large valve lift. Which cam is used to open the intake valves depends on the power demand at any one time.

The effect is an appreciable increase in engine efficiency. The driver benefits from greater power and improved driveability, while enjoying a marked reduction in fuel consumption. At the wheel of an Audi A5 3.2 FSI there is a whole 195 kW (265 bhp) of power output available and a superb torque of 330 Nm in a broad rev band of 3,000 to 5,000 rpm, ensuring blistering acceleration at all times. Within 6.1 seconds the 3.2 FSI quattro with manual six-speed gearbox sprints from 0 to 100 km/h. The top speed is limited to 250 km/h. Despite this thrilling performance potential the car’s fuel consumption is only 8.7 litres per 100 kilometers (3.2 FSI multitronic).

The all-new high-tech four-cylinder unit in the Audi A5 also does full justice to Audi’s reputation for leading engine technology. The 1.8 TFSI, delivering 125 kW (170 bhp), will be available from autumn 2007. It combines turbocharger technology with petrol direct injection and provides a burst of acceleration and pulling power unrivalled in its class from virtually every rev band. Just as it did with its TDI engines, Audi has accomplished a pioneering feat of engineering with its turbocharged petrol units, taking spark-ignition engines to a new dimension in fuel consumption and driveability.

Thanks to a whole raft of technical innovations in the petrol engines, their fuel economy has been significantly improved, thus yielding a marked reduction in CO2 emissions.

The running gear, precise instruments for agile handling
Even when stationary, the Audi A5 makes a dynamic impression: the wide track, large wheels and short overhangs not only characterise its muscular appearance, they also form part of the formula that produces its peerless active driving feel. The Audi A5 coupé defines the new standard in its class for precise steering response, outstanding directional stability and superb agility, while also offering first-class ride comfort.

The Audi engineers have achieved this with a completely new design of running gear: the front wheels are located by a five-link suspension arrangement with upper and lower wishbones. The wishbones are mounted on a subframe, which is firmly bolted to the body for high rigidity. Another completely reengineered component is the rack and pinion steering. It is located in front of the front axle close to the wheel centre line, and enhances the car’s very agile handling by its direct transmission of the steering forces.

Long wheelbase, short overhang
Overall, the front axle is located a long way forward for a longitudinal engine configuration with front- and four-wheel drive. This new vehicle architecture makes it possible to have a long wheelbase with a short front overhang, and to optimise the axle load distribution. These are all additional elements that enhance the supreme handling qualities of the new Audi A5. To accomplish this special design, the engineers used a trick adopted from the Audi A8: the front axle differential is located in front of the clutch.

A key element of the rear running gear is its trapezoidal-link rear suspension with completely new kinematics. It provides a high degree of ride comfort combined with excellent directional stability. At both the front and rear, the main components of the suspension are made of aluminium. The generous dimensions of the brakes are designed to match the car’s high performance ratings. The braking force can be precisely modulated and the kinematics of the new rear suspension significantly reduce the so-called braking dive effect.

The standard electromechanical parking brake, familiar from the A8 and A6, is activated via a button next to the gear lever. The A5 is also available with the option of Audi hold assist: this ensures that the car cannot accidentally roll back after stopping on a hill.

Edit:


Remember when I said the S5 will come along with the A5 at launch. Some proof that my sources were indeed correct.

In a league of its own, the Audi S5
The Audi S5 is a unique competitor among high-performance coupés, thanks to its combination of V8 FSI technology and quattro permanent four-wheel drive. The eight-cylinder engine with its superb power delivery has worthy counterparts in the specially tuned sports suspension and high-performance brakes. Subtle, but clear design elements inside and out serve to distinguish this coupé as a high performance athlete in a league of its own. The Audi S5 goes on sale with the launch of the Audi A5 series.

 

[Poverty]

 

[Scaff]

I hardly think that you were alone is claiming that the S5 would be launched alongside the A5, plenty of magazines and websites were stating the same thing, hardly makes you unique.

I also fail to see anything in the pieces you posted that clearly states the A5 was ready for launch two years ago and Audi held it back, which is what I asked for.

I don't recall asking for info on the A5/S5 that is easily available in the public domain, nor am I happy that you have double posted, you have been here more than long enough to know that is not acceptable.

Provide the links that show the A5 was production ready two years ago, as I asked you to do so.

Scaff

 

[1X83Z]

Read the "Last Updated" date at the end of the first article.

Are you kidding?

 

[Scaff]

Are you kidding?

Would this do for you....

The new 7 Series was displayed at the Frankfurt Motor Show in September 2001. It was launched in Europe on November 17th 2001, and it first appeared in the USA and in other markets in the spring of 2002.

Source - http://www.bmwworld.com/models/e65.htm

7 Series launch at the 2001 Frankfurt motorshow
http://archive.cardesignnews.com/autoshows/2001/frankfurt/highlights/h11-bmw-7series.html

You may wish to argue that the car did not have a full worldwide launch until 2002, but that would be to miss the point, the car was launched in 2001 and went on sale in a number of markets the same year, even the right hand-drive launch for the UK was in early Feb '02.

The entire argument does however strike me as having been created for the sake of it, as both the 7-series and S60 would have been in development at the same time, taking that into account neither pre-dates the other.


Regards

Scaff

 

[McLaren]

Bleh. Hopefully, it's "delay" will show some true horsepower since, like I said, absolutely no time in those 2 years ago was spent designing this car.

 

[Poverty]

I hardly think that you were alone is claiming that the S5 would be launched alongside the A5, plenty of magazines and websites were stating the same thing, hardly makes you unique.

I also fail to see anything in the pieces you posted that clearly states the A5 was ready for launch two years ago and Audi held it back, which is what I asked for.

I don't recall asking for info on the A5/S5 that is easily available in the public domain, nor am I happy that you have double posted, you have been here more than long enough to know that is not acceptable.

Provide the links that show the A5 was production ready two years ago, as I asked you to do so.

Scaff

There are no links to say the A5 has been ready two years ago, but instead a member of GCF saying that da-silva the designer said it was. He also said its the most beautiful car he has ever designed.

 

[Scaff]

There are no links to say the A5 has been ready two years ago, but instead a member of GCF saying that da-silva the designer said it was. He also said its the most beautiful car he has ever designed.

So when you said this....

Infact going by my sources thecar was ready about two years ago

....it wasn't actually true.

So, at best, the design may have been signed-off two years ago, rather than the car being ready two years ago. That's quite a bit different; and you still wonder why we ask for sources?


Scaff

 

[Poverty]

So when you said this....



....it wasn't actually true.

So, at best, the design may have been signed-off two years ago, rather than the car being ready two years ago. That's quite a bit different; and you still wonder why we ask for sources?


Scaff

Did I say that my source was a magazine, or internet publication? My source was Iceman (I think). And the way it was worded was that the car was ready two years ago, but they didnt release it for a good reason.

 

[Scaff]

Did I say that my source was a magazine, or internet publication? My source was Iceman (I think). And the way it was worded was that the car was ready two years ago, but they didnt release it for a good reason.

I didn't ask what the nature of your source was, I asked for a link or some other information that would allow us to verify what was a rather bold statement of yours, namely that the A5 had been ready for two years.

You have still not provided a link for this (even if its just to the original post by Iceman), I simply asked for some form of further information/conformation about a statement you made.

The link to Carlos Kavros's site, I provided in another thread quite clearly (and light-heartedly) shows the problem with presenting internet sources as fact. After all CK is now claiming that the BMW 645Ci cabriolet (E63) was first launched in 1987, and this is one of his less insane claims.

Scaff

 

[Dave A]

He also said its the most beautiful car he has ever designed.

He doesn't have high standards then does he. It's an average looking car at best.