2011 Audi RS4 Not a Turbo

Ha I thought thats was funny

...the article references the RS5 also...

bmw and now audi are backwards in there battle for fuel economy. You don't get more efficient cars by making larger displacement naturally aspirated engines. If that was true, the viper would emit rain drops and sunlight. A smaller similarly powered turbo charged engine will give you better fuel economy. That being said, screw fuel economy! These cars are beasts, and I would love to drive/own them.

wrong, not a single one of there cars makes it over 20mpg in the city. http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/compx2008f.jsp?hiddenField=Manufacturer&year=2008&make=BMW

actually, weird as this may sound, if you compare all the different manufacturers this way, American car companies are doing really well http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/2008bymanuf.jsp?year=2008

your ford ranger is a truck. no matter what engine you put in it, it is going to get horrible mileage. They aren't aerodynamic or light weight, smaller engines need to work harder and thus pump more gas.

OooKkk... how dumb of me. Just noticed that small print that the pic's an RS5 rendering...

hahaha, hydrogen 7. please. Do you know anything about hydrogen cars aside from the fact that they make water? First of all, to make hydrogen you have to use a tremendous amount of energy. The process to make it is now only about 70% efficient. Then to store it you have to super cool it so that you get liquid hydrogen, this requires more energy, so you are down to about 55% of the energy left in it is comparable to what you put into it. Next if you use the fuel cell at room temperature you will only get about 60% chemical to electrical efficiency, if you do it at about 800 celcius then you can get as high as 90% efficiency... but to do that you have to invest a lot more energy converting that supercooled liquid nitrogen to a super heated gas... and then there are electric motors which are only about 80% efficient... in comparison to a gasoline powered vehicle where 30-40% of the chemical energy is converted into forward momentum, the hydrogen vehicle uses about 15% of the originally invested source, couple that with the fact that most power plants are only 70% efficient and you have one mighty un-green vehicle. Try electric dude, at least the only bad thing there is chemical inefficiencies in storing power and the fact that the battery might end up in a landfill.

it you want a truly green car, http://www.automedia.com/Volvos_Concept_for_Cleaning_the_Air/dsm20030601vc/1 no it isn't a high revving large displacement v10 *eyesroll*

HYDROGEN 7 JOE LEMON

Do you always whine this much, or only when you have the opportunity to fanboy out on BMW?