Audi’s new 3.0-litre TFSI Engine rated at 290-hp and 420Nm torque

What does BMW have to do with this, why even bring it up. "Funny BMW cant get this type of torque from the 8's" That is pretty funny because last i checked the 550i, which is a v8, puts out 360 lb feet torque. The new v8 in the x6 and 7 series puts out an under- rated 450, so what are you talking about?

— CommonSense01 (View Profile)

Posted on 6/27/2008 12:32:41 PM | | Votes: 7   

funny the M3 torque that you speak about is only producing about 258 lbs at 2200 rpm and is flat til 8100 rpm ... That is funny ... what a goof

— BMW4me4ever (View Profile)

Posted on 6/27/2008 1:21:11 PM | | Votes: 4   

"Funny BMW cant get this type of torque from the 8's. M3.... Or their TT 6's"

Really? Because that's 308lb-ft from 2500RPM, while BMW's 3.0TT makes 300lb-ft from 1400-5000RPM. Sounds pretty similar. By the way, the RS4/R8 V8 barely make more torque than that either, so stop acting like the M3 is some anemic POS.

Listen, Audi has created a very nice engine, far better than the 3.2L V6 it's replacing. This engine is a good thing. Making stupid statements regarding the competition only degrades the achievement, however, as you pull focus off the nice new engine and turn everyone's attention on yourself and your stupid statements. Don't do that.

— JRobUSC (View Profile)

Posted on 6/27/2008 3:01:08 PM | | Votes: 5   

looks like you confused lb-ft with Nm in your torque figures. 420NM is equivalent to 310 lb-ft.

Its very good news that Audi put out a more powerful V6 which is also fuel efficient.

— MeanVulcan (View Profile)

Posted on 6/28/2008 9:37:34 AM | | Votes: 0   

You dumbass....
The Passat engine is a VR6 and not found in the A4 or the A6. The V6 in the passat is transverse mounted where as it is Longitudinal in the Audis.
Audi has less and less to do with VW. Audi does it's own thing and have their own engines..
Using a supercharger was brilliant.
it will get more torque than the VR6 and better fuel economy.
You think that the TT 6 inline on the bimmers won't be expensive to fix??
Get out of your BMW cave...

— AlexTx (View Profile)

Posted on 6/27/2008 2:07:19 PM | | Votes: 0   

290hp from 4850rpm-6500rpm is better then the 300hp between 6000-7000rpm from the 335i engine.

You could say the same thing about BMW by the way, they have a 3.2 Inline 6 making 343hp yet they use a 3.0 TT to only make 300hp. Now why would they do that, try and think logical.

— Heyhuub (View Profile)

Posted on 6/27/2008 2:49:38 PM | | Votes: 1   

Heyhuub, ignoring the fact that we all know the 335i is underrated, if 290hp from 4850-6500RPM is better than 300hp from 6000-7000RPM, then 300lb-ft from 1400-5000RPM is better than from 2500RPM.

I wish people would just focus on how this is a good thing for Audi instead of trying to turn it into a thread about how Audi's engine is better than BMW's. YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THIS ENGINE OR HOW A VEHICLE WITH IT IS GOING TO DRIVE YET. Especially compared to a 335 or 535. Just let the engine stand on its own for now, there'll be plenty of time for comparisons and wars of words when they actually put it in a car.

— JRobUSC (View Profile)

Posted on 6/27/2008 3:08:07 PM | | Votes: 3   

wow.....i beg your pardon..thank you for showing the type of person that enjoys these things and finds something like this intriguing...and Audi wonders why their sales are in the hole in America...there arent that many you LOWBROW types running to buy a luxury car.............MY point was, for those that cant READ was that why not use the engine in the Passat instead of getting 290hp by using an expensive typically more maintenance supercharger. I said nothing about the ghastly amounts of parts sharing that goes on at the VW group......It just sounds like some poor attempt at being different...Superchargers have enough downfalls to warrant not using them as a everyday typical engines which is why there isnt any...or why Mercedes gave them up, or why other companies only use them in costly variants of their vehicles....a naturally aspirated 290-300 hp V6 would have been just fine to provide decent epa ratings which the Passat has and more power/performance.....now on to the person on the bottom......For one I am not BMW insulting BMW a car company doesnt harm me......2nd. the 3.2 liter in the M car yes makes well over 300hp but also is a performance engine, and doesnt return epa ratings that would suffice in a typical luxury sedan. so that was the point...how illogical of you to even suggest that engine in a normal 3 series. Not to mention turbos tend to be cheaper and require less maintenance than a supercharger, they also tend to use less fuel where as a supercharger often reduces fuel economy

— bmwdrvr (View Profile)

Posted on 6/27/2008 3:16:09 PM | | Votes: -2   

You are saying this because you aren't thinking. What ghastly amount of parts sharing are you talking about?
The only thing the A4 has in common with VW is the Audi developed 1.8 TFSI.
Second, as mentioned before, the 3.6 V6 is designed for a transverse Golf platform. Not the longitudinal platform, such as the A4/A6. Plus the 3.6 V6 doesn't make 290hp over a 2000rpm rev-range, nor is it as economical.
By your logic they could've just kept the 4.2 V8 and be done with it, but they didn't for obvious reason you as a BMW fanboy can't see apperantly.

— Heyhuub (View Profile)

Posted on 6/27/2008 4:41:13 PM | | Votes: 2   

bmwdrvr

CAPS LOCK TIME the V6 from the Passat CAN'T FIT IN THE A6. The supercharged v6 GETS BETTER FUEL ECONOMY, MAKES MORE POWER/TORQUE.

Audi used a supercharger instead because of ITS COMPACT PACKAGING, Audi says that the fuel economy will be there, the S4 will get same/if not possibly better fuel economy than the 335i

Audi didn't use a supercharger just for laughs and giggles, they tested both a turbo and a supercharger and used the one that ended up with a better overall package.

— chewy (View Profile)

Posted on 6/27/2008 6:06:19 PM | | Votes: 3   

Another advantage of using the supercharged (because of its compact design) results in low weight.

The Audi supercharged V6 weighs 416.67 pounds, while the BMW 335i (N54) engine weights 419. Not a big difference, but the 3.2 FSI was 17 pounds heavier than the non turbo BMW I6(N52)

Basically Audi not only "caught" up to BMW, but actually ended up with a lighter engine as they both added forced induction to their V6/I6 engines.

— chewy (View Profile)

Posted on 6/27/2008 6:23:59 PM | | Votes: 2   

they can get a V10 in the A6 but a 3.6 liter V6 wont fit....what a crock are you kidding me....the passat basically gets the same gas mileage as the 3.2 liter 6.9 second in the A4 with 290hp and a 3.6 liter.....not to mention a turbo uses less space than a supercharger as a turbo is naturally more compact so your falsified argument makes no sense....not to mention the last generation A6 used a twin turbo 6,and the RS had a twin turbo 8 and now all of a sudden the new one wont fit a single turbo or twin turbo 6 CAPS TIME.....THAT MAKES NO LOGICAL SENSE.....just pulled that one from thin air right....

— bmwdrvr (View Profile)

Posted on 6/27/2008 9:28:52 PM | | Votes: -1   

The Passat VR6 is meant to be put transversly, the V6 and V10 go longitudally. The VR6 is only put longitudally in the Q7. Got it? The 300 hp VR6 uses about 10-15% more fuel than the 3.0T will. Audi says that they tested both the twin turbo setup and the supercharger and the supercharger was more compact because it fits right in the valley between the two cylinder banks and the intercooler is right around the supercharger.

Obviously Audi know what they did and why they picked a supercharger over a turbo. The new line of superchargers from Eaton allowed them to do what superchargers couldn't in the past. In the end they ended up saving about 20 pounds with the supercharger setup.

— chewy (View Profile)

Posted on 6/27/2008 10:00:55 PM | | Votes: 0   

bmwdrvr must be VERY slow.

The fact is, Audi's new unit will make over 330 BHP in the S4, but is de-tuned for other applications. So there goes your argument.

— Matthew1 (View Profile)

Posted on 6/27/2008 10:45:13 PM | | Votes: 4   

Didn't Audi just smash BMW in the reliability section of JD Powers? Where do make this stuff up. You are a pathetic fanboy.

— VISO (View Profile)

Posted on 6/28/2008 12:26:08 AM | | Votes: 2   

Utah,

Thanks for the lecture.

Now get off that soapbox.

— Matthew1 (View Profile)

Posted on 6/28/2008 5:38:49 PM | | Votes: 1   

did you just refer to JD Power as a credible means of anything........lol yeah your a joke....and clutching for any kind of credibility which neither these cars or you have.....when an MKZ can beat every other car in its class there is a problem...lol every car probably has had some JD power win....not to mention while were at it...AUDI normally consistently scrores poorly in those test anyway...while using gimmick info like JD Power...they also score poorly in Consumer Reports....they score poorly in Resale Value comparisons as well.......lol JD power as a credible source are you kidding me.....you AUdi fans clutch to anything no matter how MADE UP to justify these BMW wanna bes....lol a supercharger to get 290hp, the same amount as the LAST GENERATION G35, good job AUDI expensive technology for a mediocre car, with mediocre results...

— bmwdrvr (View Profile)

Posted on 6/28/2008 9:20:11 PM | | Votes: 2   

did you just refer to JD Power as a credible means of anything........lol yeah your a joke....and clutching for any kind of credibility which neither these cars or you have.....when an MKZ can beat every other car in its class there is a problem...lol every car probably has had some JD power win....not to mention while were at it...AUDI normally consistently scrores poorly in those test anyway...while using gimmick info like JD Power...they also score poorly in Consumer Reports....they score poorly in Resale Value comparisons as well.......lol JD power as a credible source are you kidding me.....you AUdi fans clutch to anything no matter how MADE UP to justify these BMW wanna bes....lol a supercharger to get 290hp, the same amount as the LAST GENERATION G35, good job AUDI expensive technology for a mediocre car, with mediocre results...

— bmwdrvr (View Profile)

Posted on 6/28/2008 9:20:14 PM | | Votes: 2   

bmwdrvr,

Answer me this:

Why are you trying to prove your points with terrible grammar and syntax?

Are we meant to gleam some sort of irony from that?

— Matthew1 (View Profile)

Posted on 6/28/2008 10:09:09 PM | | Votes: 0   

@bmwdrvr

300hp out of a twin-turbo 3.0? Good job BMW, Audi got 380hp out of a 2.7 10 years ago and 315hp out of a 2.1 25 years ago.

/bmwdrvr logic

— Heyhuub (View Profile)

Posted on 6/29/2008 8:48:01 AM | | Votes: 0   

heydubb:

BMW could have tacked on a 22psi turbo charger onto the N54 but they chose to tack on 2 smaller turbo-chargers to increase versatility across the power band.

I suggest you look at the powerband of both the 30V-T and the N54 and you will see stark differences in the curve.

P.S. Do you honestly think any of those engines will pass the more stringent new-car emissions these days? With that said, if those revolutionary engines were so great, why isn't VW AG still using them?

Things that make you go hmmmm.

— kablaam (View Profile)

Posted on 6/30/2008 9:29:42 AM | | Votes: 1   

Can't wait to see this engine put into future models!

— audirevolution (View Profile)

Posted on 6/27/2008 11:28:05 PM | | Votes: 3   

Not really, this isn't the S4 version. That one should be about equal as far as output, with better fuel economy and more tunability. The current one is nice but all you can really do is put an exhaust on it, which sounds even better, but does little for performeance. That or buy the expensive MTM supercharger.

— aarononymous (View Profile)

Posted on 6/27/2008 10:54:13 PM | | Votes: 1   

332 lb-ft

— chewy (View Profile)

Posted on 6/28/2008 12:54:57 AM | | Votes: 1   

no, 309lb-ft.

— JRobUSC (View Profile)

Posted on 6/28/2008 8:31:06 AM | | Votes: -1   

sorry, I didn't catch that you were asking about a different Nm figure than what this engine produces. 450Nm would be 332lb-ft, as stated above.

— JRobUSC (View Profile)

Posted on 6/28/2008 11:39:27 AM | | Votes: 1   

thx

— LexSucks (View Profile)

Posted on 6/28/2008 6:15:49 PM | | Votes: 1   

HAHAHAHA... only because its a powerful engine in an economy car, try put your WRX engine in a car that weighs the same as an A6 then we'll see...

— Matthew1 (View Profile)

Posted on 6/27/2008 10:48:03 PM | | Votes: 5   

cause that's what everyone is really wondering, right?

— aarononymous (View Profile)

Posted on 6/27/2008 10:50:59 PM | | Votes: 2   

Who cares about your riced out economy car besides your teenage friends?

— audirevolution (View Profile)

Posted on 6/27/2008 11:26:42 PM | | Votes: 2   

you can mod Audis as well. In both cases you get zero warranty left.

The latest STI has lost some of the cheap performance of the old ones, it tried going a little upscale, the new S4 will likely be a little quicker than the latest STI.

— chewy (View Profile)

Posted on 6/28/2008 3:06:12 PM | | Votes: 2   

yeah I'm boiling, you win

— aarononymous (View Profile)

Posted on 6/28/2008 6:19:27 PM | | Votes: 1   

Audi had a twin turbo V6 last decade. The V6 with the supercharger design started 4 years ago.

Most say that the BMW engine makes about 320-330 horsepower, 300 quoted. Audi underestimates its engine as well. so we will find out how it really makes after it comes out.

The supercharger in the Aud will be using virtually zero power when coasting/idling. Audi quotes that the engine will allow taller gearing because of the supercharger. In the end it won't be losing fuel economy because of the supercharger. I wouldn't be surprised with the A6 pulling out better fuel economy than the 535i and the S4 matching 335i/xi.

Like I said, the Audi V6 was somewhat heavier than the BMW I6 previously, now it's lighter when both use FI. So that means Audi saved about 20 pounds by going with the supercharger.

The two engines are really close on paper, but use different technology. To say that one is way better than the other at present times is very funny.

Valvelift might not be as advanced as the BMW version, but it's less complex and is probably lighter. Audi says that the throttle butterfly will be completely open quite often, but it's still there. Infinity leaves it there also for emission reasons

— chewy (View Profile)

Posted on 6/28/2008 6:37:28 PM | | Votes: -1   

valvelift is not a variation of the BMW system.

— aarononymous (View Profile)

Posted on 6/28/2008 10:00:48 PM | | Votes: -1