Going to keep this short and simple.
A5 should have been 2.0T, 3.0TDI
S5 should have been what is in the current RS5
RS5 should have been 4.0TT (/w manual option!)
/vote
RS5 4.0T w/manual should exist. There’s no question. Nice thought.
However staggered the way you have them here…there would seemingly be too large a gap in price points. I wouldn’t have been able to get in this soon if the one above the A5 was a $90,000 car. So on that basis I must note no lol
The high revving motor is way too expensive for a $52,000 car so that fantasy world eup wouldn’t work unless you cranked up pricing… Which is the opposite of what they wanted to do.
Further the 4.0tt would never and will never be out in such a small chassis because
A) it’s wouldn’t fit efficiently
B) it’s too hot
C) it is mega overkill to bother with.
D) it’s in the $130,000 s8,rs6, rs4 and the $90,000 s6/s7/a8
What is the rs5 competition? M3 and it’s high revving v8 (sound familiar?) and the c63and it’s v8
So it even if it could, which it couldn’t, it wouldn’t make sense to anyone but the third owners who are all tune happy and want it for $35,000 with 60,000 miles.
I think they got it perfect frankly, although I wish we would get the economical options engine wise here for the A models
That’s fine with me. Up the price and monopolize the market setting a new standard with their RS! S5 would compete with the M3 with almost identical starting price.
With that said, The engines they are making are so impressive that this technology would be for the now in these heavy boats. I really think they should invest in weight reduction as the primary performance gain for the future. All these new supercharged and turbo engines will really shine on lightweight titanium, carbon fiber, aluminum chassis’!
Im afraid the way the market is going the manuals will be a thing of the past even in proper sports cars, left behind for more “fuel efficient” autos 
A5 $90k???
That’s the point…if you up the price and put the high revving motor in the S5, you eliminate the RS5. As noted, the 4.0TT was not an option in the RS5 due to size, heat and efficiency. So you now have the high revving 4.2 as an option…which is already in the S5…which makes no sense.
[quote=“bigserve134,post:4,topic:4323”]
He said if you make the S5 into an RS5, you end up going from A5 to a $80,000 (90 up here) S5 4.2 FSI high revving. That is too big of a gap.
The S5 3.0T and S4 3.0T are basically a V6 upgraded A4. They start in the 40s, only a few grand above the 2.0T A4 and A5.
I think the problem is that it used to be S vs M vs AMG
then Audi fucked everything up with the original RS4 (2.7T). It was ludicrous. Mental. So suddenly, the M3 and C class also got mental. It created a huge gap.
With the next generation the RS4 was again retarded. It made 80 more hp than the M3.
You ended up with a 335i that was basically M3 like performance wise…and then BMW brought out their 414 hp high revving V8 M3…and Mercedes launched a nuke with the C63 at 451 hp.
The whole thing got muddled, nomenclature wise with the ‘RS’ cars. I think it should be
A5 2.0T etc
A5 3.0T (the current S5)
S5 4.2 FSI high revving 450 hp (the current RS5)
RS is cool and all but it’s just confusing. I guess it makes an S4 owner feel cool that he has an ‘S’ model…but when there’s an RS model above every ‘S’ model, the ‘S’ loses some of its lustre…especially when Audi recently said ‘the S models are not Sport, that is the RS models…the S models are merely the pinnacle engine option of an A model’
Strange stuff from Audi.
You will see they won’t be making 80 hp jumps anymore. It’s too absurd.
A5 with a 3.0tdi sounds fun
Ok Saki. I concede and agree to your no room for 4.0TT argument. I also agree with
[quote=“sakimano,post:6,topic:4323”]
Except there should bel anRS5 with the addition of the TVS1740 (and manual option) from the factory! ;D
Isn’t an OEM planning on using the TVS1740? MB? Thought there was some discussion of that when APR broke the news.
Not sure Clochner. It was lots of guessing as APR signed a confidentiality agreement.
99.9% of these cars are bought stock and stay stock during the term of ownership by the first buyer (the people Audi actually sell to). This whole theory of ‘tunability’ being a key factor is entirely worthless in the eyes of the auto companies. They don’t give a flying fuck about tuning potential and don’t want to deal with customers who want to tune the cars into warranty oblivion. See TD1 if confused.
It would be cool if Audi offered something like Polestar in Volvo land.
[quote=“sakimano,post:6,topic:4323”]
Your argument might hold more water if there actually was an RS option for each model, sold in the U.S.
lol sorry to ruin your day notarmed, but the US is a profit challenged pimple on the ass of Audi sales. Audi frankly doesn’t give more than half a fuck what does or doesn’t sell there.
Not even 10% of Audis sales come from America (they sell more cars in the UK, population 60 million), and the US is the most expensive market to be in (auto safety standards and business risk/liability) and is the lowest price market practically on earth to sell cars in. It’s a burden to sell the high end product in America…and even when they do your country just doesn’t understand the cars (B5 RS4, B8 RS4, RS3 etc were never considered because Americans are so terrified of buying a ‘wagon’). So my argument holds a sea of water…as the product development cycle barely even recognizes America.
But I do appreciate your egocentric thinking. You are after all the centre of the universe.