There's no denying that Audi is planning more variants of the TT and R8, but most of the speculation revolves around fitting both models with high-output engines to produce RS variants. The TT-RS is expected to house a turbocharged, five-cylinder engine making around 350 hp and the R8 will benefit from some form of forced induction, with either a V8 or V10 mill taking the place of the stock 4.2-liter V8 – not to mention the V12 TDI mill. But what about weight reduction?
According to Inside Line, Audi is considering "Sport" variants of both models, a concept that was executed back in 2005 with the introduction of the TT Quattro Sport, which featured a slight bump in power, revised suspension, Recaro thrones and nixed some of the superfluous material inside. Unfortunately, it never made it Stateside.
The new "Sport" versions of each model would use a similar philosophy, and in the case of the R8, that could mean a boost in power to around 500 hp, limiting some of the creature comforts like heated seats, climate control and stereo, and replacing the hood, engine cover, dash, doors and roof with carbon fiber components. And while Inside Line was speculating, they threw on some carbon ceramic brakes for good measure. All told, that could drop the R8's curb weight by some 200 pounds, dropping its 0-60 time into the high three-second range and paying dividends in the handling department. Inside Line expects both models to make it to production next year as 2010 models, although distribution in the U.S. is still an open question.
[Source: InsideLine]
Spy Shots: Production Audi TT Clubsport Quattro
Chevy Camaro getting early unveil at Indy in September
James Garner recovering from mild stroke
VIDEO: God's ringtone is a V10-powered Audi R8
IIHS releases official results on the smart fortwo
Autoline on Autoblog with John McElroy
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Ford Shelby GT500 Mustang
Future Classic: 1984 Chrysler Minivans
First Drive: 2009 Volkswagen Jetta Sportwagen
_thumbnail.jpg "Lamborghini Reventon unboxed in Las Vegas")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Franz @ Apr 8th 2008 2:12PM
The TT could really use a diet.
zamafir @ Apr 8th 2008 2:26PM
So true, it's 100lbs heavier then the Z4, with AWD, and only 100lbs lighter then the 350z, it needs to loose weight fast!
nagmashot @ Apr 8th 2008 2:27PM
the current basic TT weights 2772lbs(as much as a Honda S2000) why does it need a diet?
Only the V6 powered TT versions are heavy...but they are not offered as the perfromance versions they are the comfort versions of the TT.
The 2008 270hp TT-S with AWD weights 3069lbs that is clearly lighter as the old 240hp TT quattro sport from 2005 (old model)
The TT RS is no new news... and funny that all the R8 rumours are english press only.. I give not a penny on that claim..
Franz @ Apr 8th 2008 2:59PM
@ Nagmashot:
If you're gonna compare a TT to the S2K, then it has to be the TT roadster 2.0 TFSI. (Powered soft tops add a lot of weight, and Honda doesn't make a hardtop S2K) That's the only way the cars match up evenly in terms of body style and powertrain. Then you'll see that the TT is a porker @ just shy of 3200lbs. It's also underpowered in that match up, coming it at only 200hp. Face it: it needs to shed some pounds.
R @ Apr 8th 2008 3:29PM
@Nagma, where are you getting 2772? Audiusa.com says 2965 unladen. Just curious.
Also, unfortunately, the 2.0 variants only come in wrong wheel drive, so you'd (well, I would) want the 3.2 variant, which is about 3200+ pounds. These are all for the coupe variants as well.
Anyway, looking forward to these lightweight versions.
Reality_check @ Apr 8th 2008 4:37PM
Good, and Audi could you also paint the whole R8 so that every costumer doesnt have to go aftermarket it on it.
why not the LS2LS7? @ Apr 8th 2008 5:33PM
The internets say 2850.
I don't believe any of them. I'll give $100 to the person who weighs their new TT and gets a figure under 3,000lbs.
HeyHuub @ Apr 9th 2008 5:25AM
Official dry weight by Audi is 1260kg, thats 2778LBS. Sport Auto had a test weight with driver and feul of 1322kg, thats 2950LBS for the TT 2.0
The TT 2.0 Roadster was tested at 1386kg, thats 3055LBS.
The TT 3.2 quattro has an official dry weight of 1410kg, thats 3108LBS.
When Autozeitung tested it against the base Porsche Cayman it had a test weight of 1455kg, thats 3207LBS while the Porsche had a test weight of 3100LBS.
Not bad for an AWD car with a relativle old steel block VR6.
WOuldn't be fair to compare the roadster to the S2000, seeing as the S2000 was developed as a roadster and the TT as a Coupe, plus the S2000 is 8 years older then the TT.
why not the LS2LS7? @ Apr 8th 2008 2:36PM
Hmm. When they talk of making the R8 lighter, it reminds me of the GT-R. Is this the new trend, make a car heavy and then go back and make a lightened version.
R @ Apr 8th 2008 3:32PM
Unfortunately, I think so yes. The modern "sports" car is a heavy beast because the majority of the market is comprised of people who want to drive something that *looks* sporty, with numbers that they'll never really use. Respect to the GTR, but to me, it's a Playstation on wheels that does all the driving for you. Well, if all those rumors of lightweight sports cars making a comeback are true, that'll be pretty cool.
zmf001 @ Apr 8th 2008 7:12PM
I don't mind this new trend. I just wish more people followed it, and then proceeded to sell the cars in the US.
Just think if BMW makes a lightweight 1-series, which I think they will. Will it actually be sold in the US, or will it be a Euro only model?
Audi already has some lightweight models in production, just not sold in the US.
tanooki2003 @ Apr 8th 2008 2:42PM
Hmm a "sportier" sports super car? Does this mean it will have flying capabilities too?
akatsuki @ Apr 8th 2008 2:56PM
What they really need to do is just dump the TT in favor of a lightweight R4. But with Porsche now in the mix, that will never happen.
Leaf @ Apr 8th 2008 3:27PM
I have a serious crush on the R8.
Is that wrong?
Quattroporte @ Apr 8th 2008 3:53PM
I don't think so, since I extremely like the R8 as well, but it bothers me enough that Audi, regardless of quattro, is a FWD company that I would not buy one (I think...ok I really don't know).
Quattroporte @ Apr 8th 2008 5:40PM
@zamafir
It doesn't bother me that Audi makes FWD cars, but that FWD is their philosophy. Other than the R8, all their cars are derived from FWD chassis's. The idea that if I were to walk in an Audi dealership and find the rest of their product range not fitting to what I believe a good car should be is disappointing. The R8 is to Audi what the
Cayenne is to Porsche. And, to make a couple things clear, I'm not a GT-R fanboy and the Versa is French.
Matty @ Apr 8th 2008 6:25PM
To me, Audi is a quattro company above all. I think much of their engineering takes place with AWD in mind. While it surely adds weight, the handling and traction advantages of quattro are really excellent. I can attest that my quattro A4 has saved my ass a few times when I've made a poor decision or hit a massive puddle. Audi is also getting better at sending more power to the rear wheels for a sportier feel for those who want RWD. Still, having the option to send power to the front wheels for when it's needed is a really great thing to have. Even the GT-R, which behaves as an RWD vehicle most of the time, makes use of this technology. Plenty of companies make crappy FWD cars wearing the same badges as their better models. It's silly to scoff at a GT-R because of the Sentra, a Corvette because of the Aveo, or an F430 because of the Fiat Panda. Car companies need to make money too. They do that by selling cars to the 90% of people who aren't enthusiasts and are primarily interested in safe transportation. FWD takes care of their needs, making money that can be spent on building better AWD and RWD rides.
Quattroporte @ Apr 8th 2008 7:28PM
From TopGear.com's drive of the S5.
"At the end of my drive, the chassis engineer asked whether the new front axle layout made much difference. I didn't want to offend the guy, so I made noises about the improved steering accuracy. But given that he'd asked, I had to say the S5 still felt nose-heavy and lifeless at the limit. "Exactly," he flatly replied.
Seems the new layout means he can make the car far more playable, but the marketing types told him he had to pull it back to the usual Audi understeer because the customers like it..."
I thought Audi wanted to become "The Ultimate Driving Machine". If Audi's own engineer feels their new car is inferior dynamically, why should I like or even respect it. If their engineers were allowed to do what they wanted I wouldn't have a problem. I thought Audi's slogan is Truth in Engineering.
I know this doesn't directly apply to the R8, but it doesn't make me feel any better about Audi. The Aveo does not hurt my view of the Corvette, the Cayenne of the 911, or the Fiat Panda of the F430. The new A5 was supposed to be as good to drive a 3-series, but, from the reviews I've read, it doesn't. I was hoping there was finally a rival for BMW, but Audi, on an affordable level, let me down. BMWs, in general anyway, are fun whether you're buying a 335i or an M3.
Mobius_1 @ Apr 9th 2008 7:50AM
@ Leaf
You are not alone, lol
And btw, the R8 quattro system never routes i think more than 25% (?) of the torque to the front wheels, so yeah
zamafir @ Apr 8th 2008 4:14PM
Wow, seriously? Seriously? lmao, alright. I'd love to see you track an R8, the most glorious car ever to wear four rings, then come off the track, shake your head and complain "well... they also sell a few fronttrak cars". That's just stupid.
"yeah, the GT-R is quick, I guess, but they also make the versa, which has no bearings on the GT-R but still, I wont consider one because they build it"
or better yet
"yeah the 911 Turbo/GT3/Carrera GT are stupid entertaining, but porsche does offer a v6 cayenne in europe so it's a no go".
You sir win today's award for the most retarded qualification.