2.0t Premium 2.0l Turbocharged Sun/moonroof Ice Silver Metallic No Reserve on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Are supercars becoming less special?

There's little doubt that we are currently enjoying the golden age of automotive performance. Dozens of different models on sale today make over 500 horsepower, and seven boast output in excess of 700 hp. Not long ago, that kind of capability was exclusive to supercars – vehicles whose rarity, performance focus, and requisite expense made them aspirational objects of desire to us mortals. But more than that, supercars have historically offered a unique driving experience, one which was bespoke to a particular model and could not be replicated elsewhere. But in recent years, even the low-volume players have been forced to find the efficiencies and economies of scale that formerly hadn't been a concern for them, and in turn the concept of the supercar as a unique entity unto itself is fading fast. The blame doesn't fall on one particular manufacturer nor a specific production technique. Instead, it's a confluence of different factors that are chipping away at the distinction of these vehicles. It's not all bad news – Lamborghini's platform sharing with Audi for the Gallardo and the R8 yielded a raging bull that was more reliable and easier to live with on a day-to-day basis, and as a result it went on to become the best-selling Lambo in the company's history. But it also came at the cost of some of the Italian's exclusivity when eerily familiar sights and sounds suddenly became available wearing an Audi badge. Even low-volume players have been forced to find economies of scale. Much of this comes out of necessity, of course. Aston Martin's recent deal with Mercedes-AMG points toward German hardware going under the hood and into the cabin of the upcoming DB11, and it's safe to assume that this was not a decision made lightly by the Brits, as the brand has built a reputation for the bespoke craftsmanship of its vehicles. There's little doubt that the DB11 will be a fine automobile, but the move does jeopardize some of the characteristic "specialness" that Astons are known for. Yet the world is certainly better off with new Aston Martins spliced with DNA from Mercedes-AMG rather than no new Astons at all, and the costs of developing cutting-edge drivetrains and user interfaces is a burden that's becoming increasingly difficult for smaller manufacturers to bear. Even Ferrari is poised to make some dramatic changes in the way it designs cars.

2015 Audi A6 spiffs up for Paris Motor Show duty

While the big names at the Audi booth might be dominated by the TT line, it's not the only product getting some attention from the German company. The A6, on sale in its present form since 2012, is getting its official mid-cycle refresh.
Featuring light exterior freshening, the new fascia wears a tweaked grille and slimmer, more expressive headlights. The rear end sees more substantial changes, with a freshened rear bumper that features rectangular exhaust outlets and more dramatically redone taillights.
Under hood, the 3.0-liter, supercharged V6 engine now produces 329 horsepower, while the 3.0-liter, turbodiesel V6s are available in 215- or 268-hp varieties, or in twin-turbocharged form, with 315 hp or 322 hp. The other big powertrain news surrounds the transmission. Audi has finally dropped the continuously variable transmission from the base, front-drive A6, slotting in a dual-clutch transmission in its place.

Looking for meaning in Audi killing off its $1m electric supercar

Audi's most ambitious - well, most expensive, anyway – electric vehicle is no more. After building fewer than 100 of them (perhaps a lot fewer), Audi has cancelled the R8 E-Tron. Maybe it was the million-dollar-plus price tag. Maybe it was the " supreme hand-built quality." Maybe it was the fact that a non-electric R8 could be had for $164,150. Whatever the reason, was killing the R8 E-Tron a good idea? The R8 E-Tron would have been a good halo vehicle for the brand Here's the case for this being a shortsighted move. As we all know, the VW Group – and Audi especially – is in the middle of an electrification kick, and the R8 E-Tron would have been a good halo vehicle for the brand. Instead, it can stand as a prime example of waffling on the promise of plug-in vehicles. After all, Audi used to be incredibly proud of the R8 E-Tron, even if it had a tough history. The whole program was an on-again/ off-again kind of thing, but with enough momentum to get the EV some time at the Nurburgring. With both Mercedes and the EQ brand and BMW with its i brand moving strong into EVs, letting the headline be "Audi killed an EV" is not exactly fitting. It's not like Audi was wasting time making a lot of these. The R8 E-Tron went on sale in 2015 to customers who made a special request for it, and apparently only 100 did. But let's stop there. Getting 100 people to plunk down a million dollars or so for a car totals up to be a lot of money. There's no reason for Audi to price the car this high (forerunner vehicle programs almost always lose money for a time, just ask Toyota RE the Prius), but it did. And $100 million (if almost 100 were indeed sold) is nothing to scoff at, is it? It obviously wasn't enough to keep the lines and tooling open for this limited vehicle, and that sort of opens up a bigger question. Does the end (the second end, really) of the R8 E-Tron say something more important about EVs? Are they becoming less exotic high-end fixtures and more everyday transport? In a world full of Bolts and Ioniqs and E-Golfs – so, the world of 2017 and beyond – does a super high-end EV have any meaning? Gas-powered cars have managed to pull this off for decades, with Lamborghinis and Maseratis surviving just fine even with millions of Corollas out there. In a more-developed EV ecosystem, expensive EVs like the R8 should be able to do the same. Just not right now.