Should Audi develop a crate engine?
Crate engines are all over the place, as long as you're willing to limit yourself to American makes and V8s. As cool as an LSX-powered Audi would be, it would offend the sensibilities of some, though it'd be great in a "that's just not right" sort of way. What would be right, though, is a crate engine from Ingolstadt.
More pie-in-the-sky after the jump
[Source: Fourtitude.com]
Fueled by rumor and rampant speculation, Fourtitude has laid out a convincing manifesto for a crate motor to serve as the cornerstone to a line of classic Audi restoration and upgrade parts. Nothing is confirmed, of course, but the scuttlebutt at SEMA was that Audi is working on an FSI-fed, turbocharged five-cylinder to go in upcoming overachiever versions of the TT. A modern Audi five gets the salivary glands of enthusiasts going, as the original Audi five is a thing of legend, and there's a finite amount of them. The zooted up engines carrying RS2 or Sport Quattro bits are the VAG equivalent of GM's ZL-1 big block.
We're not sure what engine-management would look like for a turbo FSI engine in a box: it's not like you're not just bolting a set of carbs on it and setting the timing. Modern engines use tightly integrated engine management systems that communicate over networking protocols like CAN. CAN is a tough nut for the backyard DIY car geek to crack, but we're hopeful that something will materialize should the engine ever make it past the point of dreaming. We could certainly envision a stripped-down longblock and a series of available induction and fueling systems sold alongside. Of course, there's always the non-trivial matter of bolting it into the car and getting it to play nice with transmissions. It is an intriguing idea, and Audis are rewarding cars to turn wrenches on, so let's cross our fingers. Besides, there's nothing like the snarl of a wound-out five.
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg "2011 Audi A8: Live from Miami")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Ken J 10:39AM (1/05/2007)
How bout Audi develop a V6 TDI crate? Everyone wants to tout the benefits of Biodiesel and what not and who better to do it than Audi? I say give the wrench turners the ability to switch over. Hell, I'd put it in my Honda.
Reply
TheOne442 10:58AM (1/05/2007)
Do it!
Reply
Dan 10:31AM (1/05/2007)
Shouldn't they learn how to make a good engine first? So far the European/Japanese engines of equivalent power with American V8s are bigger, heavier, have less torque, are less fuel efficient and cost much more. Why bother then?
Reply
bigMIKE 10:31AM (1/05/2007)
Personally, I would much rather see the big Japanese automakers offer crate engines. And I am not that big a fan of these Tuners or whatever they are called today, but from a business standpoint, they would sell tons for engine swaps in the Civics, Accords, Mazda 3's, etc.
Also, I think it would be great if BMW and VW also offered crate engines. Who wouldn't like to see the enigne from an BMW M6 stuffed in a BMW 3 series or Z4?
Reply
MaxP 10:48AM (1/05/2007)
noob comment of the day: whats a crate engine?
i'm serious.
Reply
nailz420 11:01AM (1/05/2007)
@Dan:
Could you please provide an example or two?
Thanks
Reply
John P. 11:34AM (1/05/2007)
4: Crate Engine, it's just an engine you can buy from the manufacturer, comes in a Crate. Generally they are high performance engines based on ones they currently offer in vehicles, or great engines from their past. Sometimes they offer different performance levels. Higher performance/higher cost ofcourse.
Examples are the Boss 302 from ford, which is based on the Windsor smallblock engine, and the Cammer from Ford, which is based on the 4.6ltr modular engine.
Reply
Neil 9:51AM (1/07/2007)
In response to Dan's comment about European/Japanese engines being less powerful, less fuel efficient, heavier, etc... than their american counterparts:
I would politely remind him that engines such as the ferrari 4.3 litre V8, which in its' naturally aspirated form provides over 500bhp and has enough torque to make tear up cold concrete... Not forgetting that the block is made from aluminium and magnesium which makes it considerably lighter than the pig iron favoured by american manufacturers.
The F430 compares well with other naturally aspirated V8s in terms of fuel efficiency - i.e. it is not particularly economical.
Turbocharged, direct injection engines such as the AUDI/VW TSI range in V8 form offer the best compromise performance/fuel economy in the V8 engine sector.
The new BMW 3.5 litre V8 is another example of automotive engineering excellence from Europe... I could go on about the supercharged mercedes 5.5 V8 but I think you get the idea.
Japanese automotive manufacturers on the other hand has only ever produced V8s to satisfy the american market, where you have an abundance of cheap, low octane fuel, and still make engines with push rods... it's hardly a market that would encourage an engineer to be creative... Ofcourse, the Japanese approach is to stuff V8's - go take a ride in a late 1990's Nissan Skyline with the 3.5 litre inline 6 cylinder...
Next time think, before typing.
Reply
Jason 11:22AM (1/05/2007)
Does Autoblog eat comments regularly now?
Reply
Jason 11:26AM (1/05/2007)
3. How bout Audi develop a V6 TDI crate? Everyone wants to tout the benefits of Biodiesel and what not and who better to do it than Audi? I say give the wrench turners the ability to switch over. Hell, I'd put it in my Honda.
Posted at 10:39AM on Jan 5th 2007 by Ken J 0 stars
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It wouldn't even FIT in your Honda (Pun intended).
Dan is correct.
The Chevy Small Block is a prodigioud engine--of great legend, because it produces massive amounts of power in a very compact and efficient size.
So it fits in any and everything.
Any Japanese or German equivalent would long since have a blower, weigh twice as much, be twice as large physically and be half as fuel-efficient.
They'd have to have a solid front axle just to counteract the braking dive in such a nose-heavy car.
Reply
jscro 11:50AM (1/05/2007)
The article is talking about Audi's turbo five cylinder, not their V8.
Reply
ruggels 12:18PM (1/05/2007)
Ditto to Dan, I'm not quite sure what the hell he's smoking or who's ass his head is up.
Audi's 4.2l v8 puts out 420hp. aluminum
Chevy's LS2 v8 (as seen in the vette) needs 6l to put out 400hp.
Ford's 4.6l v8 used in the mustang puts out 324hp in hertz trim
Chrysler's 5.7l v8 used in the 300 puts out 340hp
... so clearly audi's trailing there
Audi's 3.2l v6 puts out 255hp
Ford's 4.0l v6 (as seen in the mustang) puts out 210hp
Chrysler's 3.5l v6 (as seen in the 300) puts out 250hp
Chevy's 3.5l v6 (as seen in the monte carlo) puts out 211 hp)
and the really fun one:
Audi's 2.0l i4 puts out 200hp
Chevy's 2.4l 'high output' puts out 173hp,supercharged it puts out 205hp
Chrysler's 2.4l puts out 173hp,
Ford's 2.3l puts out 160hp
So honestly i'm not sure where you're coming from.
a few cars who currently have access to audi engines in what would be a 'crate' form:
Spyker (currently using Audi engines in all cars)
Gumpert Apollo using a bi turbo version of audi's 4.2l producing 650hp, 623 ft lbs torque
there are others, the list is just limited at current, i suspect that would change shortly were audi to begin supplying engines, oh and sorry about comparing audi's cars using their engines to american automaker's cars using their engines, i don't know of a convenient 'crate engine' database.
Reply
ruggels 11:53AM (1/05/2007)
"The Chevy Small Block is a prodigioud engine--of great legend, because it produces massive amounts of power in a very compact and efficient size.
So it fits in any and everything.
Any Japanese or German equivalent would long since have a blower, weigh twice as much, be twice as large physically and be half as fuel-efficient."
Explain to me how audi's 4.2l engine, made of aluminium, and producing 420hp is not compact, efficent, and at naturally aspirated "uses a blower" and weighs "twice as much" given it produces more horse power then the 6l engine found in the corvette (producing 20 less horsepower)? TIA.
Reply
zoobazz 12:23PM (1/05/2007)
Bring back the 2.7T!!!!!
Enough of this gas hungry v8 crap for the S models. I want the turbos.
Love my 3.2FSI though
Reply
MB 12:26PM (1/05/2007)
"1. Shouldn't they learn how to make a good engine first? So far the European/Japanese engines of equivalent power with American V8s are bigger, heavier, have less torque, are less fuel efficient and cost much more. Why bother then?
Posted at 10:31AM on Jan 5th 2007 by Dan"
Dan what are you trying to say with your post? Audi had a V8 powerplant in 1991 with only 4.2 Liters at 276 HP and 295 ft-lbs. The Japanese barely introduced the 5-6cyl engines at that time.
- Audi V8 hp to displacement ratio: 65.7HP/Liter
- '93 Ford Mustang Cobra 235HP and 280 ft-lbs at 4.94 Liters. 47.6HP/Liter
- GM 350 CID max power 370HP at 5.7 Liters = 64.9HP/Liter....thats the 2002 engine
Reply
MB 1:01PM (1/05/2007)
Oh I forgot Hondas, about the NSX, great engine. 3.0L at 252HP...great engines. I own an Audi A8 and a S2000, so both companies have different philosophies, but superb engines nonetheless.
Reply
The other Bob 12:38PM (1/05/2007)
From the post: "Crate engines are all over the place, as long as you're willing to limit yourself to American makes and V8s."
Actually GM sells nearly every engine they makes as a crate motor, 6 cylinders and 4 cylinders included.
People here are confusing size with displacement. What Dan was referring to is that American small blocks have a smaller size, even when they have a larger displacement. They are compact in nature and often weigh less because the have less moving parts than an overhead cam V engine. A Chevy 350 will fit in an engine compartment where some 4 cylinders will not. Its often less expensive than a 4 banger too.
The overhead cam V-6 and V-8 engines don't offer much for all the moving parts required. In fact, in many applications, especially where low-end torque is needed, they are inferior.
The push-rod Vs. OHC debate goes on here way too much. Fact is neither one is better than the other, they are just different.
Reply
The other Bob 12:44PM (1/05/2007)
…Oh and by the way. The horsepower per literof displacement comparisons are completely useless.
Often the larger displacement engine gets better gas mileage, puts out more power, has less moving parts and weighs less. If you want to compare power, per unit of gas burned, or some other factor, fine, but the displacement is pretty irrelevant.
Reply
John P. 1:08PM (1/05/2007)
umm, ruggles,
That 2.3ltr "ford" engine is making 270hp in the mazdaspeed 6. You compared a turbo Audi to a normally aspirated Ford. tsk tsk.
oh, and there are 1100hp/900ft 5.4 Ford GT's Running around with completely stock bottom ends. not a bad "Truck" engine.
Ford's 3.7ltr v6 is putting out a respectable 262hp.
I don't even want to get into the 1000hp+ ford and chevy crate motors running on drag strips as the list is too great to list.
I don't wanna argue because it's stupid, but your list is crap. nothing more than a pissing match.
Reply
Mr stol 11:22AM (3/31/2009)
Nope he's not being silly
The 2.0 FSI has no turbo at 200HP
The 2.0 TFSI has though, it delivers 265HP and is used in the Audi S3 since 2006