	easycarblog www.easycarblog.com
	View My AgentPage

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

easycarblog submitted on 06/27/2008 Official AutoSpies Timestamp: 11:37 AM
from: www.easycarblog.com

[73] user comments | category: Misc News

Print this Page |

Digg It |

del.icio.us

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

Audi has officially announced their new 3.0 TFSI engine. The new engine is a high-tech V6 that will have Audi’s latest technologies such as gasoline direct inject and supercharging. The new motor will be punching out 290-hp and 420Nm of torque. Read Article

Comments:

Images hosted in your AgentSpace can now be posted in the comments section using the following syntax (case matters):
[img]IMAGE URL[/img]
Example: [img]http://agent004.myautospies.com/users/150/Sample-Gallery/sample1.JPG[/img]

Vantage - 6/27/2008 12:23:08 PM

-10 Boost

Funny BMW cant get this type of torque from the 8's. M3.... Or their TT 6's. But they are the best, right.
On a side note its nice to see car companies going TT 6's instead of 8's.

reply to this comment

CommonSense01 - 6/27/2008 12:32:41 PM

+7 Boost

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?

BMW4me4ever - 6/27/2008 1:21:11 PMView My AgentSpace

+4 Boost

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

JRobUSC - 6/27/2008 3:01:08 PM

+5 Boost

"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.

MeanVulcan - 6/28/2008 9:37:34 AM

0 Boost

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.

BMW4me4ever - 6/27/2008 1:22:39 PMView My AgentSpace

+3 Boost

it is a better engine than what they have now. I dont understand why Audi doesnt install this engine into the new A4. It would make it more competitive vs the 335, g35 & IS350

reply to this comment

Matthew1 - 6/28/2008 10:12:02 PM

+1 Boost

Lol utah,

Please don't be afraid of the metric system.

reply to this comment

IamEvilHomer - 6/30/2008 12:49:14 PM

+1 Boost

bmw4 - they are and it will be called the S4. I just drove the new A4 and the S4 has to be great. Look for a higher Hp (like 330-360) and Audi's new Torq vectoring rear suspention.
you add kompresser, FSI, quattro, valve lift, the new 7 speed s-tronic, drive select, a torq vectoring on that platform and you have yourself a nice little auto

reply to this comment

CommonSense01 - 9/9/2008 1:14:31 PM

+1 Boost

Utah

I dont think its to confuse you. In physics, the twisting force or torque is measured by newton meters and not LB feet as in the U.S

reply to this comment

Heyhuub - 6/27/2008 12:57:57 PM

-1 Boost

Most likely as 333hp variant in the S4

reply to this comment

bmwdrvr - 6/27/2008 1:40:10 PM

+2 Boost

they have a 300hp 3.6 liter in a version of the passat and they have to tack an expensive supercharger to a 3.0 engine to get 290hp.....does that make sense.....what was the point...that and supercharged engines tend to be notoriously expensive to fix and maintain on top of the reliability woes they already have..that as a base engine for the A6 lol great strategy..

reply to this comment

AlexTx - 6/27/2008 2:07:19 PM

0 Boost

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...

Heyhuub - 6/27/2008 2:49:38 PM

+1 Boost

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.

JRobUSC - 6/27/2008 3:08:07 PM

+3 Boost

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.

bmwdrvr - 6/27/2008 3:16:09 PM

-2 Boost

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

Heyhuub - 6/27/2008 4:41:13 PM

+2 Boost

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.

chewy - 6/27/2008 6:06:19 PMView My AgentSpace

+3 Boost

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 - 6/27/2008 6:23:59 PMView My AgentSpace

+2 Boost

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.

bmwdrvr - 6/27/2008 9:28:52 PM

-1 Boost

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....

chewy - 6/27/2008 10:00:55 PMView My AgentSpace

0 Boost

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.

Matthew1 - 6/27/2008 10:45:13 PM

+4 Boost

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.

VISO - 6/28/2008 12:26:08 AM

+2 Boost

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

Matthew1 - 6/28/2008 5:38:49 PM

+1 Boost

Utah,

Thanks for the lecture.

Now get off that soapbox.

bmwdrvr - 6/28/2008 9:20:11 PM

+2 Boost

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 - 6/28/2008 9:20:14 PM

+2 Boost

Matthew1 - 6/28/2008 10:09:09 PM

0 Boost

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?

Heyhuub - 6/29/2008 8:48:01 AM

0 Boost

@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

kablaam - 6/30/2008 9:29:42 AM

+1 Boost

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.

chewy - 6/27/2008 1:54:03 PMView My AgentSpace

+2 Boost

The 3.0TFSI has potential as it makes 290 at under 5,000 RPM.

reply to this comment

audirevolution - 6/27/2008 11:28:05 PM

+3 Boost

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

Vantage - 6/27/2008 2:02:13 PM

-4 Boost

I actually just wanted to piss the BMW fans off. Guess it worked. But if you noticed I was referring to the M3 8.

reply to this comment

chewy - 6/27/2008 8:01:23 PMView My AgentSpace

+2 Boost

The Audi engine is lighter, more power/torque (depending on state of tune), the same if not better fuel economy. I would say the two engines are very similar. I am sure there will be plenty of comparisons in the near future, until then you have about zero facts to use.

Tell me exactly how the BMW 3.0 I6T is "way" better?

reply to this comment

LexSucks - 6/27/2008 9:41:43 PM

-2 Boost

I6's are Waaaay smoother than a V6. not to mention they sound sexier.

reply to this comment

aarononymous - 6/27/2008 10:52:01 PM

+3 Boost

BMW & everyone else is tired of you, your parents should do time.

reply to this comment

M_Coupe_MonacoBlue - 6/27/2008 4:52:20 PM

+5 Boost

Just like Lexus? i know u going to say that !

reply to this comment

ThierryHenry14 - 6/27/2008 5:45:50 PM

+5 Boost

Good Job Audi. hope it does enter the A4 range...

reply to this comment

aarononymous - 6/27/2008 7:34:26 PM

+4 Boost

This is de-tuned version going in the A6 (refresh or new model I don't know), this motor will be going in the new S4 when it comes out making at least 333hp and I would assume in the S5 as well.

reply to this comment

bclemans - 6/27/2008 8:18:50 PM

+1 Boost

Car and Driver quoted Audi's new engine output as 290 horses and 309 lb feet of torque (I guess that is the result of translating 420nm). See link below.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_lists/car_shopping/latest_news_reviews/audi_3_0_tfsi_v_6_could_power_2009_a6_2010_s4_car_news

reply to this comment

idriveslowandfast - 6/27/2008 9:17:39 PM

+3 Boost

Nice

reply to this comment

LexSucks - 6/27/2008 9:18:29 PM

-2 Boost

The S4 just got a downgrade.

reply to this comment

aarononymous - 6/27/2008 10:54:13 PM

+1 Boost

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.

LexSucks - 6/27/2008 9:43:05 PM

-1 Boost

How much lbs ft or torque is 450nm?

reply to this comment

chewy - 6/28/2008 12:54:57 AMView My AgentSpace

+1 Boost

332 lb-ft

JRobUSC - 6/28/2008 8:31:06 AM

-1 Boost

no, 309lb-ft.

JRobUSC - 6/28/2008 11:39:27 AM

+1 Boost

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.

LexSucks - 6/28/2008 6:15:49 PM

+1 Boost

thx

rexracer18 - 6/27/2008 10:26:33 PM

-6 Boost

HAHAHA... I enjoy reading all of these comments, well i will tell you what, anybody who wants to play with this new engine go ahead, but i guarantee my Subaru WRX that i paid $13,000 for with only $5000 in modifications will take it...

reply to this comment

Matthew1 - 6/27/2008 10:48:03 PM

+5 Boost

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...

aarononymous - 6/27/2008 10:50:59 PM

+2 Boost

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

audirevolution - 6/27/2008 11:26:42 PM

+2 Boost

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

TheSailor - 6/28/2008 4:40:08 AMView My AgentSpace

+4 Boost

This is so cool... Finally an Audi engine to compete with the BMW N54B30! This just got a whole lot more interesting! Can't wait to test one of those...

reply to this comment

rexracer18 - 6/28/2008 2:55:42 PM

0 Boost

Only problem is that my "Riced out Economy car", as you call it, which totally is not riced out can eat alive almost any audi on the road, other than the audi r8, other than that, bring it... and btw sorry to prove you wrong but i am not a teenager... Sorry...

Matthew- i am sure that my engine in an A6 would not be as efficient as in my WRX light weight body but i am sure it could still have some go to it...

aarononymous- I just posted this to see how many people would get mad... Congratulations, you were the first...

Subaru FTW...

reply to this comment

chewy - 6/28/2008 3:06:12 PMView My AgentSpace

+2 Boost

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.

aarononymous - 6/28/2008 6:19:27 PM

+1 Boost

yeah I'm boiling, you win

911gt2 - 6/28/2008 3:48:49 PM

+2 Boost

This should be a nice engine. But BMW pushes the boundaries of engine technology more than any other manufacture.The tt3.0 has been around for 3 years now, and Audi just came up with an answer. They were clearly caught off guard.

Turbos are more efficient because they create boost from wasted exhuast heat as it expands while leaving the combustion chamber. Superchargers are less efficient because they create boost by spinning directly from the engine crank. Both deliver the same "forced induction". Turbos have been given a bad rap for turbolag, but thats almost non-existent in modern, low-inertia, multi-scroll units. Superchargers get a bad rap because efficency decreases with engine RPM. However, you can always put an electromagnetic clutch on the supercharger pulley and disable it when not needed.The supercharger used on the Audi is almost identicle to the one used on the Cadillac cts-V.

"The Audi engine is lighter, more power/torque (depending on state of tune), the same if not better fuel economy. I would say the two engines are very similar. I am sure there will be plenty of comparisons in the near future, until then you have about zero facts to use."-chewy

"depending on state of tune" that is totaly irrelevent.The same could be said about the BMWs motor.Also the 4lb diff. in weight is now even worth braggin about, thats like the weight of an airfilter and hose, absolutely no performance advantage there.

Example as to why BMW IS better at builing engines.

(Audi relesed this 4 days ago)its called Audi Variable Valve lift system.

After six years of development Audi has revealed the Audi Valvelift System (AVS). Now available on the direct-injection 2.8,3.0 and 3.2-liter V6-FSI engines, the system takes variable valve timing to the next level resulting in smooth power build-up, spontaneous throttle response and most importantly, reduced fuel consumption by up to seven percent.-WCF

Audi Variable Valve lift system, is a valve lift variation system, meaning it makes the valve open less or more according to the load needs. The main thing here is that this, interesting as it may be, is a variation of a system called valvetronic presented many years ago by BMW. In BMW's valvetronic the system goes even further, using the lift variation to totally control the inflow and thus render useless the use of the throtle butterfly. Nice try, 6 years of development and still short of the stick.

reply to this comment

chewy - 6/28/2008 6:37:28 PMView My AgentSpace

-1 Boost

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

aarononymous - 6/28/2008 10:00:48 PM

-1 Boost

valvelift is not a variation of the BMW system.

rexracer18 - 6/28/2008 5:23:35 PM

+2 Boost

Chewy- This is true, both can be modified, stock vs. stock, the new S4 will probably be able to take the new STI. The reason i like Subaru though is because modifications to the engine on WRX & STI are sometimes pardoned because the company knows that they are going to be modified, modifications are also much cheaper for a Subaru than for an audi.

reply to this comment

aarononymous - 6/28/2008 9:57:07 PM

+1 Boost

we should set up AN "idiot test"

reply to this comment

Matthew1 - 6/28/2008 10:10:49 PM

+2 Boost

"lack of education"

I'd hate to know what sort of school you attended when you have the worst grammar on Autospies.

reply to this comment

IamEvilHomer - 6/30/2008 12:57:51 PM

+2 Boost

amazing as so little life that he jumps on his blackberry to say " just a rebagged vw" 100 times a day on the audi post.

I am sure the same fanboys that said "real sports cars are not turbocharged" when Audi was using turbo and BMW was not are the same guys that will be supporting superchargers in 3 years when BMW starts using them again.

reply to this comment

idriveslowandfast - 6/30/2008 11:31:01 PM

+1 Boost

Seriously how old are the people on this website.

Autospies, this site is worthless.

All the threads on here are just transfered from other sites like autoblog, emgemcartech, etc...

reply to this comment

To post a comment for this story, you must first Login.

If you do not have an account, you will need to Register (It's Free!).

Most Recent Stories

2010 Nissan Cube Revealed: Coming to U.S. in spring 2009 2010 Mercury Milan & Mercury Milan Hybrid Launched in L.A.2010 Ford Fusion Facelift Breaks Cover 2010 Toyota Prius US production in danger?Ford Fiesta Sedan makes debut, coming to U.S.2009 Toyota Venza LA AUTO SHOW: Spies Add More Photos And A Close Up Look At The Next E-Class Coupe Interior And Nav LA AUTO SHOW: Spies Get You Inside Show ONE DAY EARLY With EXCLUSIVE PHOTOS!!!LA AUTO SHOW: BMW Releases Mini E Electric Vehicle Chrysler Blames Financial Meltdown For Woes, But It Needs $22 Billion For Health Care And Retirees Hyundai's Genesis Ranks In NADA Top 5 Luxury Cars BMWNA acknowledges N54 engine turbo lag issue Chrysler Woes Bankrupt Getrag Dual Clutch Transmission Plant SOUND OFF: Has Detroit Just Become Another Dirty Word?Cutaway Shows The True Nuts And Bolts Of Acura's New NSX UAW Says It Will Rather Tax Payers Foot The Bill Than Accept Cuts To Keep Detroit Afloat Rumor Mill: Are The Chinese Carmakers Quietly Planning To Buy GM and Chrysler?2009 Nissan GT-R Series II: New details leaked GM Delays Dealer Payments To Conserve Cash Next-gen Audi S5 getting V6 engine LA AUTO SHOW: Pontiac Releases 2009.5 G6 Details Nissan GT-R named 2009 Motor Trend Car of the Year Senator Wants Difficult 2020 Mileage Standards Doubled Ford Follows GM's Lead And Sells Off Mazda Shares For Needed Cash LA AUTO SHOW: Ford Takes the Wraps Off Of The 2010 Mustang NEW 2010 Ford Mustang LEAKED-63 PICTURES LA AUTO SHOW: Is The Infiniti G37 Coupe BETTER Looking AND Worth More Than The New 370z?2008 Porsche Cayenne GTS by JE Design 2009 Audi S3 and S3 Sportback receive new S Tronic transmission 2010 Ford Mustang revealed LA AUTO SHOW: Going Green Will Mean A Whole Different Thing At The Show On Nov. 23rd Production Volt Interior Further Refined: Center Screen, Center Stack Buttons, and Vents F1: New Aero Era Begins in Spain Daimler employees sabotaged own cars Nissan's 370Z Details Spring A Leak Report: Chrysler and Chery small cars may never happen Diesel Mercedes-Benz AMG model coming by 2012 Refreshed S-Class Delayed Until April 2009?Toyota Demands Payment For Fan Created Wallpapers Is This Video From The Auto Industry Painting An Accurate Picture Or Just Spreading Fear?Washington Says US Automakers Should Not Dip Into $700B Bailout Funds 2010 Ford Mustang: Prices and details leaked Is The House Of Cards Falling? 100 Auto Suppliers Now Want Access To $700B Bailout GM Dumps Suzuki Shares In Effort To Conserve Cash Audi A4L: A long-wheelbase A4 for China Comparison Test: 2009 Acura TL SH-AWD vs. 2009 Infiniti G37 Journey Senators bash Big 3 CEOs, calls them dinosaurs M3 eligibility for Le Mans a possibility Eye Candy: BMW 7 Series Tries on Hamann wheels sets DETROIT RESCUE: UPDATED: Obama Tells 60 Minutes He's Yet To See A Plan That's A Bridge To Somewhere

More Recently Added News

Join AutoSpies

Photo Galleries

AutoSpies presents the best Auto Show Photos, Automotive Videos, Car Reviews and Hot Rides.

Latest Galleries

Cars

Auto Shows

More Galleries