GTPNewsWire
Contributing Writer
- 16,734
- GTPHQ
This is the discussion thread for a recent post on GTPlanet:
This article was published by Andrew Evans (@Famine) on March 15th, 2018 in the Automotive News category.
Audi Confirms Electric GT Coupe for 2020 (But it Doesn't Look Good for the R8)
- Thread starter GTPNewsWire
- 105 comments
- 8,372 views
I don't care about the R8 if there are more and more Coupe/Sport electric cars ! I prefer electric cars and this one looks really nice in the teaser.
- 5,834
- Home
The R8 should had died a long time ago 
- 775
- Longueuil
Pointless if electric cars use power made with coal or natural gas. Still better than nothing I guess...
- 84
- Canada
- thegregfranklin
- 55,157
- Starbase
- R1600Turbo
He means that the electricity that is used to charge the batteries comes from coal burning facilities. Which is mostly true.
- 84
- Canada
- thegregfranklin
I did some research and you are absolutely correct. I figured very little coal was utilized to produce new electric cars but I was wrong. However all in all they are still significantly cleaner.
https://greentransportation.info/energy-transportation/evs-need-clean-electricity.html
- 775
- Longueuil
Cleaner here in Quebec with 99% of hydro power if you consider flooding vast areas of land suistainable with all the decaying organic matter.
- 22,532
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
- 1,270
- Devon UK
Oh.....Sorry to talk about Gran Turismo on GTPlanet!!
I thought the front end looked a lot like the teaser picture in the Audi VGT story. Im not sure now I look again though. The bonnet is too high on this EV.
- 22,532
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
No where do I say you can't talk about Gran Turismo on GTP, what I said is, why have you asked about a car being released on GTS in an article and section not even talking about it. Not everything on this forum is specific or only applicable to GT games. This forum does have more depth than that, like talking about real life concept cars that are geared toward the public, not a game.
If it ends up having a relation to the VGT, great, but since there is no link to that and the bigger story here is the death of a very popular Super Car by Audi, it was strange to see your question. The article is giving insight on where the company is head design wise.
Last edited:
- 44,153
- Blackburn
- Furinkazen_54
- 25,802
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
Oh look, a unique argument...
Disagree.
Generally speaking, the eye is naturally drawn to just two vertical (to say nothing of lateral or longitudinal, which are obviously important perspectives) components when it comes to vehicle design; there's the greenhouse (from the top of the area made up of glass or other materials that make clear visibility possible, to the bottom of this area which is typically in line with the top of the hood in front to some key feature in the rear, be it a trunk, top or bottom of a taillight, or even a bustle of some sort), and then there's everything below the greenhouse (all the way to the ground).
When viewing these two components, if the height of the area below the greenhouse is significantly less than or greater than 1.618 times the height of the greenhouse, proportions are skewed unfavorably. Why 1.618? Well that's phi, also referred to as the "golden ratio," and it appears innumerable times in nature in forms that we commonly view as attractive.
So what do designers do when they slam a vehicle all the way down so that it stops on a dime only because it can't make it over, but still want to conform to the golden ratio? Well, they either squash the greenhouse down so much that the occupants would need to see a chiropractor after just driving to the chiropractor, or they increase the height of those side panels to the point that you end up with something like a new Challenger or Camaro where you have to open the door just to scan a card at a toll booth. /rant
- 263
- England
I just can't wrap my head around electric sports/supercars like this. It doesn't really offer anything unique over a Tesla or any other luxury electric car. If you are a track-going person maybe an electric Caterham makes sense but an electric supercar type thing for road use seems totally pointless. It's a bit like a £20,000 quartz watch. I really hope someone develops synthetic fuel so engines can be kept alive in the same way the watch world has kept mechanicals alive, because the experience is on another level.
- 25,802
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
Why does it have to? It doesn't. Actually, it does offer something that those others don't: the Audi nameplate and styling characteristics that identify it as such.
Tesla revealed a market for such a vehicle, and it's only logical that other companies vie for market share.
I agree completely, but that's not what this is.
- 263
- England
Like an A3.
Because if it doesn't offer a different experience to an electric saloon car then I'm not paying double or triple the price for it and what a waste of money it would be to have it as a second car.
As far as I'm aware it offers the same badge as an A3 electric (if it exists/when it exists) I'm sure I can find something like an electric Honda S2000 which will look as nice for 1/3 of the price.
The biggest difference between an A3 2.0 TDI and an R8 is the V10 sound and the straight line performance. I challenge anyone to tell me the great benefits of a Carbon Monocoque or carbon brakes or super high tech suspension or anything else like that driving at road speeds. If you can buy an A3 with the same straight line performance and the same sound then I ain't paying much more for the same experience because it looks different. And really, you'll never use 700bhp anyway. Would have way more fun in the previous gen manual R8 V10.
Back to watches as I feel like they're basically the same but 40 years ahead, no one pays more than £1k for a quartz watch and it's pretty hard to find anyone who would even consider paying that much. I think like with the watch industry where quartz was seen as exotic and high tech in the 70s and the mechanical industry went into rapid decline, a couple of decades later luxury buyers will start to realise a £200k Ferrari doesn't really feel much different from a £30k Alfa Romeo, a nicer leather and different design doesn't really cut it, a lot of people will want the glorious machine with all its nuances and interest back again, and hopefully there will be synthetic fuel or something to bring that back without any environmental issues. Then again, maybe the future renting silent driverless boxes to ferry you from A to B and it being illegal to drive. All speculation anyway.
- 25,802
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
Clearly you're not their target consumer.
Me? I've made up my mind that my next new vehicle is going to be an electric and I'm at a point in my life where I desire some luxury and can justify the expense (to an extent) associated with it. I don't want a cobbled-together econobox that creaks and rattles down the road, "but at least it's electric." I'm holding out, however, because I really don't want a Tesla.
I brought up the badge and associated styling language, not because I have any particular allegiance to Audi (it's one of just two major German marques available here that I have yet to have owned an example of, and I feel no urgency to do so--the other is BMW), but because it offers something I feel is important...choice.
It seems we have wildly different opinions on what luxury is. My last three daily drivers had leather seats and only the most recent one, an Acura ZDX that is starting to show its age, offers anything even remotely akin to what I consider luxury. But it really doesn't.
True luxury, to me, is so far beyond material quality. True luxury means being able to cross vast swaths of land in considerable comfort, being all but completely oblivious to variation in terrain, having a powertrain be completely unstressed at moderate speed, having minimal road or wind noise make it into the occupant compartment and being unaware of road (or lack thereof) debris pinging against the underside of the vehicle. There are other qualities, of course, but none of those listed have the least bit to do with what animal got peeled to allow me to sit my ass down.
- 263
- England
Nice.
My point is every brand can have a £100k sports car/GT/supercar which is virtually the same experience as their £30k counterparts. Your description is more like Rolls Royce than whatever this Audi is.
Well the engineering required to achieve your ideal car got a whole lot easier, cheaper and less impressive with electric cars. You basically need quiet tyres, sound proofing, noise cancellation. The power source in a Nissan Leaf is not going to be any louder than future electric Rolls Royces or a future Lamborghini SV. They will all be the same.
Which links to what I was saying - I just can't see the point when they're all the same like that. I'm not looking only for luxury, I'm looking for interest, unique, experience, fun, variety. I can't separate Renault Zoe from Tesla Model S in that regard. There's no gear ratios, amount of gears, type of gearbox, engine sound, exhaust sound, engine layout, type of engine, driven wheels, forced induction type, forced induction pressure, power curve, torque curve, rev limit and so on. No individual characteristic. All that is left is badge and styling. The difference between a Mercedes C200d and a C63 is mental. Completely different animal. The difference between a Tesla Model S and whatever the new cheap one is called? Think about the experience and character and engineering philosophies of a Subaru Impreza compared to a Ferrari 458 Speciale. Then take the engines away and put batteries all across the floor and make them both gearless and AWD. I know what you describe is a whole experience itself, but that's just one type of car and experience. I don't want it to be the experience of every car.
Last edited:
- 25,802
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
And you know this because you're so keyed-in on the development of this Audi? It's true, these qualities are present in a Rolls, but that supports remarks I've made. In order to carry itself along in the manner that I stipulated, a vehicle kind of needs to be large.
Insulation takes up space, so if you cram more insulation into, say, the Nissan Leaf you cited (and hey, the fact that I've driven one allows me to better compare these qualities), you're going to be cutting into the cabin volume. Insulation also adds weight, so in order to retain a robust drive unit to move the added weight along effectively, things are going to get larger and will still need to be kept cool, so allowing for the increased component dimensions and area for them to "breathe," the already small interior is getting even smalle
Now, the Leaf is also getting heavier still with these additions, so more robust suspension components will be required, and they're probably going to be larger and need more space. Some of the components required to operate the power unit are in the way, so they'll have to be moved. The bigger battery necessary to power the larger motor without reducing distance travelled on a charge also no longer fits in its place. That's okay, the displaced components can be put in the backseat (need the trunk for the obligatory golf bag). Well, this more luxurious Leaf just became a 2-seater and can no longer compete with the Model S.
Now those tires... Well, larger diameter tires make differences in terrain less apparent because the increased diameter spans gaps better, and they'll absorb more unwanted sensations you get rolling down the road, but you need to steer them and you haven't the clearance. Let's move that pesky motor to where the passenger seat was once positioned.
LuxLeaf is now a single-seater, but the big electric motor next to you didn't eat up all of the space once taken up by that seat, so the driver's seat can be made more robust and supportive. And that motor offers plenty of warmth for those trips to the ski chalet.
...
Yeah, that's all pretty ridiculous, but it illustrates that a small car will never be truly luxurious, and even if you're okay with that, there are lots of people interested in that sort of opulence who are willing to buy into it.
Edit: Whoops! Part of the reason I thought it so prudent to mention having driven a Leaf was that I noted significant noise in the drivetrain as speed increased to highway rates. Odd considering the "hush-hush" electric motor that's "the same as" what's in a Tesla.
Last edited:
- 79,033
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
More like an A8. Well, maybe an A7 Sportback. Just fully electric.
It will be the third fully electric car in Audi's range, following an SUV this year that's currently just called "e-tron", and a second vehicle next year. It's planning 20 BEVs and PHEVs by 2025, probably covering a range from something the size of an A3 to something the size of a Q7.
At 70mph neither of those make much of a difference. I'd suggest that there's a significantly larger difference in the number of seats, boot volume and visibility - all in the A3's favour.
I don't know what any of that has to do with a full electric four/five-seat Audi GT car though.
The C200d and C63 are different grades of the same model. The Model S and the Model 3 are different models.
If you're looking between different models, a better question would be what the difference is between a C200d and an E220d - or an S350d. If you're looking between different grades of the same model, a better question would be what's the difference between the Tesla Model S 75 and the Tesla Model S P100D.
Again though, I don't know what any of that has to do with a full electric four/five-seat Audi GT car.
I can't tell, but your points seem to suggest that you think Audi shouldn't bother making a big electric car because the batteries and motors mean you can't tell electric cars apart from each other, and because Tesla already makes a car like this.
- 263
- England
This just sounds like arguing for the sake of arguing. Audi has never in its history made a car to compete with Rolls Royce and you think it is not reasonable to assume that an upcoming "GT" is also not going to be a Rolls Royce rival?
And all of this was easier with engines, transmission tunnels, exhausts, fuel tanks etc was it? There was no engineering required to make every component of the engine quiet because it wasn't already quiet by design? Who said anything about cars having to be small? I don't get the point. Are you telling me electric cars are special and have their own character because they can be vary in size? Or agreeing with me that it is easier than with an ICE car? Can you tell me which is quieter at speed - A Ford Fiesta or a Nissan Leaf?
The A3 is a well made car. The R8 always looked like a V10 powered TT to my eyes, not comparable to the A8. But I suppose I have no idea about this one, if it does have A8 quality then whoohoo, buy an A8 instead.
So you often get into a car, instantly reach 70mph and stay there in a straight line until the destination? And even then, I can tell the difference. Can you tell me which aspects of the electric car make a difference at 70mph? You have just picked a very specific scenario I rarely find myself in to try to convince me all those things I said make no difference when of course they do.
I think that's the second time you've done that lol. I don't know if this was meant to counter my point or what but you've just emphasised my point. The C200d and C63 are the same model yet the difference is a million miles greater than the difference between two separate Tesla models - lowest power car they sell and highest power car they sell - in driving experience.
Yes they are comparable to Tesla. The C200d and E220d and A200d and any other with that engine is exactly like the Teslas - virtually the same driving characteristics. The point was that the C200d and C63 aren't comparable like all Teslas and that they have much more variation and unique experiences, even though they're the same model.
No, I said I can't get my head around why anyone is interested in the new Audi electric GT or the new Mercedes electric GT or the new Ferrari electric GT or the new Porsche electric GT when they're almost indistinguishable apart from the way they look and don't offer the drastically different experience that current and past supercars do
Last edited:
- 79,033
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
With the TT the engine is in the front and drives the front or all four wheels. With the R8 the engine (V8 originally, then V10; exclusively V10 now) is behind you and drives the rear or all four wheels.
The A8 is a four-door, four/five seat saloon car. I'm not sure exactly how it's supposed to be "comparable" to the R8, or who suggested it was...
The A8 isn't a BEV.
Pretty much. That's the point of arterial roads - you set off from A, get onto the arterial road network within a couple of miles, get off it a couple of miles from B and then end up at B.
I used to do 650 miles a week, mostly on motorways, mostly at 70mph and rarely with any need to brake or accelerate.
Aside from the fact it's usually quieter in an EV, I doubt it.
None at all. For almost all of the market there's very little difference between any car and any other car at constant cruising speeds. Cheaper cars generally echo more, SUVs generally have more wind noise, cars with big wheels generally have more road noise and EVs are generally quieter. Aside from weight and susceptibility to air movements from wind and lorries, there's not a huge difference between driving at 70mph in a Volkswagen up! and doing it in a Bentley Flying Spur.
You said two things, which were the V10 sound and straight line performance, as the major difference between a diesel A3 and an R8 V10. I pointed out the fact that the R8 only has two seats and smaller boot are significantly larger differences because, day to day, a V10 and straight line performance don't matter. Most driving is cruising at the speed limit, changing to go faster or slower for the next speed limit, and slowing down from or speeding up to the speed limit because of a junction. Hitting 30mph in 1.2 seconds in a cacophony of ten-cylinder madness, then staying there isn't exactly a huge world of difference from coasting up to it in five or six seconds with a diesel clatter and then staying there.
Incidentally, you have to be quite careful with the R8's boot. It's quite small and in the nose. Anything too heavy can result in you grounding the car under heavy braking.
If you sit in a C200d there's almost no difference from a C63, except some AMG badges, different seats (exact specification depending) and a bit of carbon fibre trim. And a Performance+ mode in the driving mode selector. Whether you're at a junction, sat in traffic or cruising at 30/40/50/60/70mph, there's no really relevant difference between them.
If you sit in a Tesla Model 3 and a Tesla Model S, there's several differences, because they're different cars. So it doesn't really emphasise your point at all.
If you want to compare like with like, try the C200d vs E220d for different models of Mercedes, or the 85 vs P100D for different trims of Tesla.
As you were talking earlier about straight line performance, the C63 officially hits 60mph in 3.9s, with the C200d at 9.7s. The Model S P85 does it in 5.4s and the P100D in 2.3s. That means that the C63 is 59.8% faster than a C200d, while a P100D is 57.4% faster than a P85. Looks like they're pretty much the same amount faster then.
That's interesting, because the A200d is front-wheel drive (4MATIC optional) and the engine is transverse, while the C200d is rear-wheel drive and the engine is longitudinal, and the E220d is rear-wheel drive (4MATIC optional) and the engine is longitudinal. And the 200 is a 1.6-litre, while the 220 is a 2-litre. And the A is a hatchback, while the C and E are saloons, convertibles, coupes and estates. Did I mention the E220d is a 9-speed automatic, while the A and C offer 7-speed autos, or a 6-speed manual?
I mean, there's quite a few differences there. Before we even get to the straight line performance that you value - the A200d hits 60mph in 9s, the C200d in 9.7s and the E220d in 7.8s.
You've not established how much variation and unique experiences the two cars offer - but then you literally only came up with two differences for an Audi A3 2.0 TDI and an Audi R8; the R8 makes a V10 sound and has more performance.
If it's going to come down to "The C63 makes a V8 sound and gets to 60mph quicker", you're not exactly exploring the differences. If it helps, I actually have driven both - and the E220d (estate), Tesla Model S and X, and A-Class (petrol). And A3, and R8. Not the A8 though.
I'm not familiar with the Ferrari - Ferrari has said it intends to build a V8 hybrid petrol, for its new "FAV" (SUV, but a Ferrari), but no EVs, and not in a GT as far as I can tell. Nor Mercedes, for that matter. Mercedes is certainly big on developing electrified drivetrains, and AMG is going to develop performance variants, but other than an EV SUV under the EQ brand, EVs aren't in the schedule yet, and there's no EV GT I'm aware of.
Nevertheless, if you think there's no difference apart from the looks between an EV GT from Audi and Mercedes (Porsche is in the same family as Audi, so there'll be some similarity; the "e-tron GT" is supposedly on the same platform as Porsche Mission E), do you think there's a difference between the Mercedes C-Class and the Audi A4? The Mercedes S-Class and the Audi A8? The Mercedes GLE and the Audi Q5? The Mercedes SLC and the Audi TT? If not, why not - these are cars the two manufacturers produce that are direct rivals to each other. If you think they are different, why can't the EVs be different?
Is it literally just that you think every battery and every motor in every electric car is identical, but somehow it's not in petrol/diesel cars?
- 25,802
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
What?
I'm speaking of only electric cars, specifically electric luxury cars, and arguing against your claim that a £100k car isn't different from its £30k counterpart.
Well, there's that glaring fallacy at the end that I ought to address last but can't wait that long. There is not a single example now, among ICE cars, nor will there be among electrics when they make up a significant enough portion of the market that one is able to so weigh their options, of two cars at those wildly dissimilar price points that offer the same driving experience. Nope, not one.
As far as cars having to be small, I don't know of that requirement being specified in this discussion, however I stated that truly luxurious cars, regardless how they're motivated, cannot, given what true luxury constitutes and what's needed to meet that definition, be small.
I can't get my head around why you seem to think everyone has to think the same way you do.
- 9,036
- Murica
- BasedAckbar
I imagine a lot of this car has to do with cleaning up the VW/Audi Dieselgate scandal.
That said, I expect this car to be well received.
That said, I expect this car to be well received.
- 25,802
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
Or it has to do with, you know, the general electrification of the automotive industry.
As do I.
- 9,036
- Murica
- BasedAckbar