VW pulls head out of Gas. Finds ultimate emissions cheat car.

[SabrToothSqrl]

Audi opens reservations for its first all-electric vehicle: e-tron quattro

LOL. I seriously wish I got paid to make titles... it's so much fun!

Lest anyone think I hate anything not-Tesla... this is a good looking car. Ok, it's not the new Jag SUV good looking, but it spanks the Model X that's for sure. Any has exactly 2 less overly complex for no reason doors! Maybe, unlike my S, this VW will also not have Goldberg door handles... (I'm on my... 9th replacement, and have 2 now acting up).

I know, I know... it doesn't have any charging infrastructure worth a damn... but outside of Tesla... is this the first real EV from an old-fashioned car maker? Quick, someone hack together a Super Charger adapter. Just don't tell Tesla

 

[ecarfan]

I am glad to see that Audi is getting closer to finally offering a BEV for sale. If this car can get 275 miles of range (EPA) from a 95kWh battery that would be right in line with Model X energy efficiency and it would be real competition, except of course for the lack of a well designed long distance charging network. That will hopefully come, eventually.

But the car's shape doesn't look very aerodynamic.

Lots of unknowns at this point with the e-tron quattro, like DC and AC charging speeds, cargo volume, and of course price. From the electrek article, quote:

"The only thing left to know is how competitively they will be able to price it and how widely available it will be. They have been saying that the e-tron quattro is between Audi Q5 and Audi Q7 in term of size and those vehicles have starting MSRPs of $41,000 and $49,000. If the e-tron quattro is offered around the same price before incentives, it would shake up the market, but it’s doubtful at this point."

Obviously the e-tron quattro will cost much more than a base Q7. My guess is at least 50% more, and then options will be on top of that. I expect it will cost about the same when comparably equipped to an X.

And will Audi sell it everywhere in the US or initially just in the CARB states?

 

[Nikxice]

Always good to see competition and auto manufacturers moving forward with plans for producing new EVs. Just don't get why they're still hung up on faux grilles. With regards to ecarfan's comment, can't help much with the aerodynamics. Audi designers playing it safe with their base? Must be some alternative design options available to cleanly display those four rings.

 

[Jeff N]

If this car can get 275 miles of range (EPA) from a 95kWh battery that would be right in line with Model X energy efficiency

The "275" mile estimate was Fred Lambert winging an EPA guess at that Electrek article based on Audi's prIminary NEDC estimate of 310 miles (500 km).

The Opel Ampera-e (Chevy Bolt EV) has a final NEDC estimate of 323 miles (520 km) with a final EPA estimate of 238 miles on a 60 kWh pack.

 

[AudubonB]

As far as my own tastes go, that is the least-hideous front of an Audi in quite a while.

I'd still far prefer to be behind its wheel than have to look at it coming down the road. Still, did anyone else notice that its cab has three screens - all similarly-sized - to entertain and delight your attention?

 

[ecarfan]

The Opel Ampera-e (Chevy Bolt EV) has a final NEDC estimate of 323 miles (520 km) with a final EPA estimate of 238 miles on a 60 kWh pack.

Jeff, thanks for that data point. I agree that Electrek was quite possibly being overly optimistic about the e-tron quattro EPA figure. But for Audi to position it as a Model X competitor, with a 95kWh battery it is going to have to an EPA rating of significantly more than the X90D rating of 257 miles, meaning in my opinion at least 270. Whether Audi can achieve that figure with that squarish body styling is unknown at this time. And yes, the faux grill is not aesthetically desirable to my eyes.

its cab has three screens - all similarly-sized - to entertain and delight your attention?

Do I detect just a touch of sarcasm? The lower center console screen looks poorly positioned to me, especially with part of the dash hanging over it.

After seeing the Model 3 design, my preference is for a single large center screen. I don't think a display behind the steering wheel is necessary. But until I can drive a 3 I can't be certain of that.

 

[gregd]

Interesting, 3 motors. One driving the front, two the rear. They don't say if the rears are independent, which could make for some interesting torque vectoring opportunities, or if they're just putting the two in tandem to drive a single axle. I'm guessing the later...

(p.s. Yes, excellent subject line!)

 

[Jeff N]

Interesting, 3 motors. One driving the front, two the rear. They don't say if the rears are independent, which could make for some interesting torque vectoring opportunities, or if they're just putting the two in tandem to drive a single axle. I'm guessing the later...

I'm guessing torque vectoring (like Faraday Future's prototype). It would be weird to use two motors in the rear but not do torque vectoring and it gives them a performance and handling feature that Tesla doesn't yet have.

 

[gregd]

I'm guessing torque vectoring (like Faraday Future's prototype). It would be weird to use two motors in the rear but not do torque vectoring and it gives them a performance and handling feature that Tesla doesn't yet have.

I was thinking it might have been for cost / manufacturing supply purposes. Use three identical motors instead of two different ones (one front and one rear). Either way, it will be an interesting car to watch.

Now, if only the other manufacturers would remove their collective heads from their [dependency on] gas...

 

[stopcrazypp]

I'm guessing torque vectoring (like Faraday Future's prototype). It would be weird to use two motors in the rear but not do torque vectoring and it gives them a performance and handling feature that Tesla doesn't yet have.

I was thinking it might have been for cost / manufacturing supply purposes. Use three identical motors instead of two different ones (one front and one rear). Either way, it will be an interesting car to watch.

Now, if only the other manufacturers would remove their collective heads from their [dependency on] gas...

The Fisker Karma used two motors coupled together, likely for sourcing reasons (they either couldn't source a single motor that can do the same power, or it was cheaper just to couple two motors together).

But given Audi's Quattro history, they might have a reason to make it torque vectoring for historic bragging rights reasons.

 

[Saghost]

Interesting, 3 motors. One driving the front, two the rear. They don't say if the rears are independent, which could make for some interesting torque vectoring opportunities, or if they're just putting the two in tandem to drive a single axle. I'm guessing the later...

(p.s. Yes, excellent subject line!)

I'd bet on Torque Vectoring. Honda (Acura) has been pushing that for a while now with the RLX sport hybrid, and many of the newer prototypes call for one motor per wheel - three motors is a reasonable compromise between the added cost/complexity and capacity. If I remember right, Audi was experimenting with some very complicated differentials to deliver some degree of vectoring on conventional ICE cars the last few years.

I'm expecting Tesla to do the same thing when the time comes to move beyond the P100D - individual rear motors will let them eek just a little bit more acceleration out of whatever grip the tires have, and two "small" motors have slightly more maximum output than the single large one as well. Looking forward to seeing what the 2170 based P120T can do.

If they do away with the entry-level RWD Model S at the same time, it'd also let them move all production to the current "small" motor, which seems to be a lot more reliable than the first generation motors and again simplifies the production process/reduces cost.

 

[SabrToothSqrl]

You can use different gearing in the motors front/back, but not side to side... I'm having a hard time thinking that for a street car, that 3 or 4 is the way to go over just two... the added complexity/cost/etc. just not seeing the value...

 

[ggr]

I'm guessing torque vectoring (like Faraday Future's prototype). It would be weird to use two motors in the rear but not do torque vectoring and it gives them a performance and handling feature that Tesla doesn't yet have.

With two motors at the rear you don't need a differential any more, or even the inner sections of the driveshafts. Even without torque vectoring it might be almost no weight penalty.

 

[RubberToe]

So has Audi announced the day 1 reservation count?

Should Tesla start working on their Chapter 11 filing now in preparation for this Tesla killer???

RT