[Stratos]

Originally Posted by srgntpepper

This is unexpected. I have never heard of this backstory. Did a quick search, can't find anything to confirm this. Can you cite a reliable source?

Apart from several online reviews saying the same, check out this previous thread (especially the 'Quick Fact' in the first post) when Team-BHP was invited to test the A45 and CLA45 AMG. We were told the same by AMG.

http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/intern...la45-snow.html

[low_rider]

On the contrary, I feel that the re-badging has been done to mask the actual motor rather than showcasing an advanced motor. The earlier scenario was 2.0TDI and 3.0TDI. While the 3.0TDI was recognised as the "better" Audi or "real" Audi, the 2.0 TDI was seen as a Jetta's engine in an Audi body.

A 2.0 TDI owner was even seen as someone buying an Audi just for badge.

Now, after rebadging, only few people will know what is actually under the hood. We can also expect the Vento's motor to do duty in A3 and A4 in near future.

[STORM_REGALION]

I think in the end it doesn't matter what capacity engine it is but how it 'gels' with the chasis, steering, transmission, dynamics and whole lot of other things. The car is suppose to work like a cohesive unit.

A good example of this is also the new Third generation AUDI TT . It has the newer nomenclature.
It might not have a huge capacity engine but it is FREEKIN-QUICK

Google yourself the stats and you'll be blown away. Then think how the old 2.0/3.0 badge won't do justice to this beauty.

[Severus]

Now, now. There's only a small problem with this nomenclature system. Actually, the problem is with the part where the final figure is being rounded off to the nearest multiple of 5. I'll explain how.

Car A - The dynamic rating comes out to be 27.6. Since the nearest multiple of 5 is 30, the car is badged as 30xx.
Car B - The dynamic rating comes out to be 32.4. Again, since the nearest multiple of 5 is 30, the car is badged as 30xx.
Car C - The dynamic rating comes out to be 32.6. This time, the nearest multiple of 5 is 35, so the car is badged as 35xx.

Now, if you notice, the difference in performance of cars A and B is considerable, yet they have the same badge, i.e. 30. But the difference in performance of cars B and C is negligible, yet they have different ratings, 30 and 35.

One would be led to believe that since the dynamic rating of cars A and B is same, they would have similar performance, which is wrong. And one would also be led to believe that since the dynamic rating of cars B and C is different, they differ substantially in terms of performance, which is also wrong. Because in actuality, the performance of cars B and C (which have different ratings) is much closely matched than performance of cars A and B (which have the same rating). There goes down all the logic of having the new system in the first place.

Of course, such close situations may or may not arise, but they probably will. And the system will be fallible, once again.

Bottomline: The final number should not be rounded off to 5, to provide a more accurate performance index. Or it should be rounded off to the nearest whole number only. So, 32.4 would be 32 and 27.6 would be 28, instead of the same 30.

Just my $0.02

Severus

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Severus

Now, now.



Bottomline: The final number should not be rounded off to 5, to provide a more accurate performance index. Or it should be rounded off to the nearest whole number only. So, 32.4 would be 32 and 27.6 would be 28, instead of the same 30.

Sorry, but that wont do at all. Directionally speaking you are correct, but as an engineer I demand much more precision and as a consumer I need to see much more transparency. Less then at lest five decimals wont do, as far as Im concerned.

So the 30 isnt the 30, or even the 27.6. The correct and transparent nomenclature would be the 27.5986473

Nothing less would do. At least the above provides some reasonable resemblance of what we are talking about here. If that means Audi needs to redesign the back of the car to fit the badge, thats ok. Its not called dynamic badging for nothing.

Jeroen

[noopster]

I guess it makes sense when you think of today's engines that are used in multiple states of tune but in typical German style, Audi has failed to take into account the emotional aspect. Auto enthusiasts love their numbers but the units are all important: bhp, Nm, 0-100 in seconds, peak kph (or mph). You can't expect to introduce some random new metric and have people lap it up. I was thoroughly impressed when I spotted the 40TFSI badge on an A3 cabriolet spotted on the road just after launch, even excitedly telling some friends that it has a 4L engine

Maruti's 200 and 320 badging (torque in Nm) for the S-Cross seems much more sensible. They've used the same convention for the diesel Alto as well (125 sounds much more impressive than 47bhp )

[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by noopster

I was thoroughly impressed when I spotted the 40TFSI badge on an A3 cabriolet spotted on the road just after launch, even excitedly telling some friends that it has a 4L engine

Coincidentally 2 days back an excited friend of mine called me up saying he saw a huge Audi A8L with a 6.0L V8 engine. He was quite curious how much horsepower a huge 6.0L engine makes.

Had to spend a lot of time explaining to him that what he saw was a V8 engine but 4.2L not 6.0L. And the badging was 60TDI and not 6.0. He was confused why Audi put 60 when the engine was 4.2L and 385BHP.

His excitement went down a notch on learning the engine was not 6.0L but 4.2L.

[VeyronSuperSprt]

Originally Posted by Vid6639

Had to spend a lot of time explaining to him that what he saw was a V8 engine but 4.2L not 6.0L. And the badging was 60TDI and not 6.0. He was confused why Audi put 60 when the engine was 4.2L and 385BHP.

The 4.2 TDI is 45 TDI. What he saw was in fact the 6.0 TDI, very few of which came into India. The engine isn't available now.

[VeyronSuperSprt]

45TDI mentioned in the above post is applicable for the Q7 with the 4.2 TDI engine. The A8 4.2TDI is 60TDI.

[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by VeyronSuperSprt

The 4.2 TDI is 45 TDI. What he saw was in fact the 6.0 TDI, very few of which came into India. The engine isn't available now.

I don't remember the A8 being available with the 6.0 V12 TDI. I think Q7 was available in that engine though.

On the other hand Audi does sell the A8L 60TDI with a 4.2L V8. I'm pretty sure that's what he saw as it was the new A8 shape as well.

http://www.zigwheels.com/reviews-adv...-review/20793/

http://www.autocarindia.com/auto-rev...ve-392550.aspx

Edit: just saw your post now

[antz.bin]

Just ran into this thread and I am amazed how Audi has taken all the traditional but unnatural metrics of measurement of performance and aggregated it into a simple number which is easily understandable by anyone.

Just imagine explaining your wife why (and how much) a 1.8l Octavia is faster than a 3.0l Fortuner.

Try explaining her why the 1.5l Polo TDI is slower than the 1.2 TSI.

Instead, now badge them all according to the system Audi has implemented and it will all be easy peasy.

I felt that the explanation used in the first post actually made the concept more difficult to understand than it actually is. The number on the badge is nothing but the acceleration produced by the car as a %age compared to the acceleration under gravity.

Maruti 800MPFI acceleration is 10% of gravity.
The 35TDI/TFSI acceleration is 35% of gravity.
The 60TDI/TFSI acceleration is 60% of gravity.
The BMW S1000R accelerates at 100% of gravity.
The Veyron accelerates at 115% of gravity.

With a metric like this, we don't need metrics which a human body and mind can't logically understand and equate to something tangible.

Metrics such as Horsepower, Torque, No. Of turbochargers and other technical specifications will make very little sense to a lay person who doesn't understand them. But the only person who doesn't understand gravity would be the one who has never taken a tumble when learning to walk.

Kudos to Audi for figuring out a difficult method to convey something so simple.

[Hayek]

What a phenomenal badging system! I must say that the general junta (including yours truly to be completely honest) have just not realised what this badging system is about. I first noticed this system when my boss bought an A8L 50TDI, which looked like a 5.0 TDI from a distance. And was completely flummoxed to find that this was the plain old A8 3.0 ( if an A8L can ever be plain old). Next, I was zapped to find the A6 35 TFSI being launched, when the A3 comes with a 40 TFSI. Why would Audi spec an A6 petrol with an inferior engine to the A3?

But this thread sheds light on all of this. The same engine gets a lower rating in the A6 than in the A3 as it delivers lower acceleration in a larger car. I really think all the other manufacturers would have to shift to a similar system, if this were marketed well. Amazingly, this had not registered on Mainstream Media, and even this thread has been inactive for almost a month. Will link to this thread in the A6 35 TFSI thread, so people cribbing about the new A6 realise what it's about.

As an aside, my 2010 Superb 1.8 TSI would also be a 35 TFSI in this nomenclature.

[alpha1]

Originally Posted by noopster

Auto enthusiasts love their numbers but the units are all important: bhp, Nm, 0-100 in seconds, peak kph (or mph).

This baging is not an irrelevant random number, if you see the rationale behind it, the number actually represents the 0-100 figure perfectly.
(acceleration)

Imagine, 100 years ago people would've said the same thing when all they wanted to know was how fast it would go, or how much load it would pull - and here we had marketing gurus of the last century spelling out quite an irrelevant number called the cubic capacity.

Originally Posted by Vid6639

He was confused why Audi put 60 when the engine was 4.2L and 385BHP.

His excitement went down a notch on learning the engine was not 6.0L but 4.2L.

Oh yes, you are right. Human beings love to place more importance and priorities to perhaps irrelevant but big sounding numbers in life.

A good example would be the processor clock speed figure in MHz or GHz.

[noopster]

Originally Posted by alpha1

This baging is not an irrelevant random number, if you see the rationale behind it, the number actually represents the 0-100 figure perfectly.

Yeah...so why selectively quote me when my first sentence actually acknowledged precisely that?

Originally Posted by noopster

I guess it makes sense when you think of today's engines that are used in multiple states of tune but in typical German style, Audi has failed to take into account the emotional aspect.

Nobody's denying it is a useful system. But like Hayek rightly pointed out, it takes time to get used to given the fact that these numbers look similar visually to engine displacement which Audi used till very recently.