We knew that the new Audi S4 was due to be unveiled within the next six months, but CAR was able to confirm that the supercharged sled will make an official appearance at the Paris Motor Show this September. As previously reported, the new S4 will ditch its 4.2-liter V8 in favor of a new supercharged 3.0-liter V6 producing around 350 hp – a few ponies more than the current S4's output.
CAR got the details about the new S4 while running the twin-clutch-equipped S5 through its paces, and is able to confirm that the S-badged sedan will benefit from the same seven-speed gearbox, with shifts taking place in 200 ms. Naturally, the S4 will be equipped with quattro all-wheel-drive, and sales will begin in the UK in early 2009, with wagon and convertible variants following thereafter.
As for the future of the RS4, Audi isn't confirming any specs yet, but they're confident that when the new M3-fighter hits the streets in 2010, the new S-tronic dual-clutch gearbox's shifts will be reduced to around 140-150 ms.
[Source: CAR]
Paris Preview: Officially Official, Honda's new hybrid is the Insight!
Mazda Kiyora city car concept, MX-5 facelift head to Paris
Leaked: Official updated Mazda MX-5 image
Reader Spy: Chevy Volt caught on set of Transformers 2
Spy Shot: Production interior of Chevy Volt (maybe)
In the Autoblog Garage: 2009 Jaguar XF Supercharged
By the Numbers - August 2008: New Digs Edition
In the Autoblog Garage: KITT Shelby GT500 KR
First Drive: 2009 Cadillac CTS-V
In the Autoblog Garage: 2009 Nissan Murano
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
ASEVENSEE4 @ Jun 3rd 2008 1:34PM
S/C B8 A4+DSG=hotness.
rsfourever @ Jun 3rd 2008 1:36PM
"wagon and convertible variants following thereafter"
i thought that the A4/S4 convertible was disappearing with the new A5/S5. am i wrong?
Jono @ Jun 3rd 2008 1:48PM
this car is stupid. it's caught in limbo between trying to compete with the 335i or M3 and therefore confuses consumers on where it actually stands. Audis are conventionally more heavy due to the AWD transmission though so I would say that the S4 is more of a competition for the 335i than the M3. RS4 is the proper match for the M3.
Flashpoint @ Jun 3rd 2008 1:51PM
I could accuse you of fanboyism in favor of BMW, but that fanboyism would have a true basis.
BMW's cars are the best driving cars out there.
I took a 7 series around corners at 30 mph and didn't feel tremendous corner roll. The 3 series and 1 series are just as good.
The Audi's have never interested me, and I've driven their S8 and A8L (my own personal car is an S550).
Audi's are too heavy and not balanced as well as BMW.
This car is also too small - I've seen it in person.
It would have beeen alot nicer with a good CVT.
zamafir @ Jun 3rd 2008 2:04PM
"Audi's are too heavy and not balanced as well as BMW."
Correct but let's be real. This car is LIGHTER then the car it's replacing and BETTER balanced. So yes, it's not a BMW but it is a GREAT step forward.
"This car is also too small - I've seen it in person. "
Too small? Considering it's as big as the previous A6 from a generation ago and BIGGER then the 3 series and E class, I take it those to are also too small.
Can't wait to drive this at infineon.
nagmashot @ Jun 3rd 2008 2:25PM
@flaschpoint
you failed with flining colors..
The A8/S8 is by far the lightest luxury sedan in the S-Class, 7series class... thanks to Audi space frame...
The A8/S8 is with quatttro AWD in general ~200lbs lighter as comparable BMW 7series models with RWD..
The new Audi A4 (B8) 3.2l quattro which is avaible in Germany since 2007, is with AWD exactly as heavy as the E90 335i. More amazingly with 40hp less than the 335i it reach exactly the same laptimes in German car magazine track compares..
HeyHuub @ Jun 3rd 2008 2:46PM
The S2/S4 always stood above the highest 3 serie and below the M3.
But i guess BMW fans are confused by this, seeing as it doesn't directly compete with a BMW model.
c @ Jun 3rd 2008 2:53PM
"it's caught in limbo between trying to compete with the 335i or M3 and therefore confuses consumers on where it actually stands."
who's to say bmw gets to define the market segments?
Jono @ Jun 3rd 2008 3:00PM
Okay I admit my comment was slanted towards BMW, but I also think it applies to all other luxury brands. No other car brands have 2 levels of performance like Audi does... IS -> IS-F, C -> C63 AMG, and so on. Audi is creating a car for a market that isn't even there!
HeyHuub @ Jun 3rd 2008 3:39PM
Seeing as they sell more then enough S series there must be a market.
fer @ Jun 4th 2008 9:10AM
thats cause all you can think of is bmw, if you were in europe youd only go to buy a car you like and not care about categories etc
ASEVENSEE4 @ Jun 3rd 2008 2:01PM
They have a CVT, and if you're talking about performance why bother with a CVT?
The new B8 chassis has been reworked for better balance, and the numbers (70mph slalom and .86g on the skidpad) for the new A4(not even S4) is amazing and better than the 328/335.
The A4 is as big as it needs to be, it looks almost as big as an A6.
Todd @ Jun 3rd 2008 2:01PM
Sad to see the ultimate sleeper go, but I guess it's a sign of the times ( R.I.P. Hummer ). My immediate question is; since a supercharges V-6 is much, much cheaper to build, does that mean we can get one for like $50k? $40k?
Thank you to Audi for making the v-8 S4 available here ( bet all those embarrassed Corvette owners are cheering! )
Biscuit @ Jun 3rd 2008 3:27PM
Why do you say the ultimate sleeper is going? The 4.2 in the current S4 is only rated at 340HP. I assure you the Super6 will not disappoint. Have you ever driven a Mercedes C32 AMG? Same setup. 3.2L Supercharged 6 making 349hp.
Speaking of Mercedes... I think it's funny that Audi and Merc are going in opposite directions. Merc towards big engines (From the 3.2L Supercharged 6, to the 5.4L V8, to the 6.2L V8) while Audi is now downsizing and going back to forced induction and BMW talking of doing the same. Bring on the boost, I say!
Ultima GT-R @ Jun 3rd 2008 2:02PM
I'd hit that.
CG @ Jun 3rd 2008 2:16PM
200 ms for a DSG? Wikipedia cites the Audi/VW DSG as capable of 8ms upshifts. Seems like a complete dog of a transmission for a twin clutch gearbox to shift that slowly. What's going on?
Noe @ Jun 3rd 2008 2:25PM
remember ur talking about WIKI a user contributed site! SURPRISE!!! they have something wrong
c @ Jun 3rd 2008 2:26PM
i think these shifts times quoted in the hundreds of milliseconds i keep seeing are just being pulled from someone's ass, and for some reason people (even in the automotive "press") keep latching on and perpetrating the myth.
i don't know about 8ms (i see that's what wikipedia states for dsg) - that might be brutal - but the real shift times are certainly much, much closer to 8ms than 200ms.
MikeW @ Jun 3rd 2008 4:20PM
Wet double clutch transmission don't shift gears.
They transition gears.
clutch 2 starts closing while clutch 1 is still driving, then clutch 1 is opened while clutch 2 finishes closing.
If they [the marketing department] wanted to, they could quote negative times for the shift because clutch 2 started engaging before clutch 1 started disengaging.
Basically 200ms is a good realistic time for the 'shift'
Take a digital wristwatch, see if you can get sub 100ms start/stop or start/split times?
[that 100ms of the Lexus IS-F is complete marketing BS]
8ms, that wacky-pedia...
F1 is in the 25-50ms region
CG @ Jun 3rd 2008 5:27PM
"Shift" is used in terms of interrupted power. In other words, an 8ms DSG shift means the driveline is unpowered by the engine for 8ms, as a result of clutch 1 disengaging and clutch 2 engaging simultaneously (relatively).
The F1 times can't be used as a defense because they use an entirely different transmission, the automated manual, and also cannot by rule have continuous power delivery.
The wikipedia article also cited two sources, so it's not like it's made up out of thin air. Where those sources got their information is another story, but you can follow that path forever. Especially since you discount numbers from the manufacturer as marketing bs.
I don't know what the stopwatch comment relates to, it really makes no sense in this discussion.