Audi’s Ironic Move Back Towards Diesel Is Ridiculous But Intriguing
Given any real financial freedom, most of us would take a petrol engine over a diesel. Modern turbocharged gasoline engines are better in every conceivable way other than fuel economy and carbon dioxide emissions.
They have oodles of low-down torque that used to be a key turbodiesel USP, as well as being smoother, faster-responding, more flexible, quieter and faster to warm up on an icy winter day. They even have a higher rev ceiling, sound better under load and deliver more driving excitement, more of the time. So why in the name of a tank full of liquidised plankton has Audi decided to switch not just the 2020 S5 to diesel, but the next S6 and S7 as well?
It won’t have escaped your notice that this deeply ironic manoeuvre comes from one of the companies found guilty of manipulating diesel engine emissions as part of the dieselgate scandal; a scandal that permanently changed the automotive landscape and accelerated the development of hybrid and electric cars for Europe and beyond.
I can’t say whether the average car buyer still gives dieselgate a thought when looking at their next new ride, but with Audi itself having acknowledged its wrongs and now working hard on alternatively-fuelled cars even as you read this, it seems a bizarre choice to ‘hobble’ three of its most popular performance saloons/coupes/estates with a dying engine technology. However, it’s not that simple.
Audi hasn’t done this just because it has a surfeit of 3.0-litre TDI diesels lying around (although it probably has). The S models are popular in Europe but they’re not exactly helpful when it comes to lowering Audi’s fleet average emissions; the average CO2 outlay of every car it sells in a defined 12-month period. Like all car makers who sell in Europe, it’s tasked with reaching 95g/km by 2021 at the latest. The 170g/km S5, 214g/km S6 and 225g/km S7, as petrol-burners, are a burden Audi could do without. The S4 will likely join the diesel range soon. Perhaps the next S8, too.
So rather than canning three of its best all-round performance models, the decision has been taken to bump them to the only readily-available solution - diesel power - which will instantly lower all of their CO2 emissions by many tens of grams. We don’t have the final figures for the new cars yet but the difference, with half an eye on the EU’s massive financial penalties for failing to meet the emissions targets, will be huge.
Fortunately there’s a better reason to retain hope for the newly diesel-driven Ss. I can remember the first A5 I ever drove; a high-spec 3.0 TDI that I flung along one of my favourite Lake District test roads. I was staggered at how usable its performance was. That upper middle-management coupe with a slightly lardy body and a heavy engine had no right to cover ground the way it did, wrenching at corner exits and slinging you improbably quickly, via tall, drama-sponge gearing, to the next braking zone. Speaking of which, its stoppers were mighty.
I don’t remember covering that stretch of road any quicker in anything else until I bought a Renault Sport Clio 182. Audi-typical epic levels of grip and a vast well of torque won my respect and admiration. The new S cars will take that to another level with extra tech, better suspension and all the benefits that 10 years of tinkering have brought. The V6 diesels actually sound decent, too, especially with the latest clever solutions.
There’s still a big question mark over whether a diesel S5/S6/S7 can emulate the more entertaining side of the old versions’ games, but there’s another over whether many owners really drive them like that anyway. These aren’t RS models, after all: they’re more like the range-topping A-badged cars but with more poke and trinkets. Perhaps the diesels will actually suit S buyers better… at least until Audi finishes developing something better.
Comments
“Anthropogenic climate change” has naught proof that humans are are a bother. Trees consume COtwo, humans consume Otwo. To believe in such rubbish is to believe that Smoke Alarms should have snooze buttons. It simply is the World Gov’ts wanting to CONTROL humans.
Given all that, diesels produce quicker 0-60 times than petrol motors due to TORQUE. Diesels mainly produce torque, petrols produce mainly HP. If it were the other way ‘round, petrol-locomotives and petrol lorries would exist in abundance. They do not. Torque is the delta that produces acceleration; and diesels are infamous at producing torques.
Diesels don’t produce quicker 0-60 times (ceteris paribus) as far as I am aware?
hp ist more important than torque for a motor, because the torque you get at youre wheels is made by youre transmission
I’ll have some of whatever this guy is smoking ^
Power is literally just torque multiplied by rotational frequency, that’s all there is to it. If an engine has lots of torque but a comparably low peak power that’s because its redline is lower. If a diesel engine would redline at 10’000 1/min instead of 5’000 1/min while keeping the same torque it would produce twice the power at 10’000 1/min compared to 5’000 1/min. You can’t just “mainly produce torque” or “mainly produce power”, that’s physically nonsense.
It still makes little sense to keep only diesels in those vehicles. Even VW still offers the GTI besides the GTD, and these are not as posh as Audi’ S cars. They’re shooting themselves in the foot. I mean, just in the marketing aspect, diesels are seen as less glorious, more vulgar than petrols. So you take that, and you not only put it in the sportier models of high-end cars, but you’re also putting it in the models that are at the top of the range. Just a little comparaison : BMW doesn’t propose an M7, but the M760Li is powered with a V12 and the Alpina B7 is powered by a TT V8; Mercedes lets you put a TT V12 in the S65 AMG and a TT V8 in the S63 AMG, while the flagship of Audi is literally now powered by a diesel V6 if all continues on that track. What impression is it going to make on buyers? I don’t know, but I know for sure (pinky thought) that the new S5, S6 and S7 are going to be depreciating like crazy in the next years. Not only do they get “vulgar” engines, but they also get them in the aftermath of a gigantic scandal. Petrol S5s, S6s and S7s are going to shoot up in value.
The S6 and S7 are not flagships RS6 and RS7 are flagships and don’t compare apples and oranges the S65 AMG is like 3x the price of a S6. The S6 is more compareable to the 5 series or the E class. And BMW does offer a M550d which is a diesel. Also the SQ7 is a diesel and people still buy it.
S5 S6 and S7 are all available in petrol outside of Europe
Actually it makes great sende for Audi. You see these kind of cars are perfectly suited for the better earning empoyee, witch there are sort of many from. Anyways when you are in a position like that you probalby have the ability to lease exactly something like the S modells. And leasing a diesel is way cheaper than a petrol car. So I think they must have their reasons and you should consider that bevorr complaining about Audi.
This makes perfect sense in the UK and other countries with high fuel prices and high levels of road congestion. Typically (in the UK) the Audi S models are bought by middle management types that go from meeting to meeting, covering hundreds of miles a day, usually mostly in traffic doing nothing more than 40mph and want a car that shows they have money to spend, shows their company position, and looks good in the company car park. They don’t want petrol cause the high fuel prices and masses of traffic . Audi know their customer base, as long as the RS models are petrol then everything makes sense
Looking forward to the comparison videos
Not all diesels are made equal. Some modern ones you’d actually struggle to tell the if it was a petrol or diesel driving around calmly. Some diesel engines are actually surprisingly smooth, responsive and refined.
I want one so bad. Just chip tune one and you got vehicular madness.