MCoupe

http://www.cnn.com/2006/AUTOS/10/10/audi_r8/index.html

V8 420 bhp
0-60 in 4.6 sec
Top Speed 185 Mph

Now the big one: $130K

For that kind of money, please give me the 997 Turbo which will blow it away in any performance area.

Actually those numbers are fairly close to our 997S.

Hmmm let/s see what the mag reviews come up with in terms of numbers.

Alan Smithee

MCoupe, you've taken that slightly out of context...it is a $130k sports car (as the headline reads), but not necessarily with the V8. That's most likely the price for the V10.

ryssyr

its a neat car, but i think the styling may get a little tired after a couple of years.

i liked the original look of the audi tt's before they started making it less "bubbly" the latest incarnation is not as unique.

dnp_now

What do people mean when they say "the design will look dated"? Is it because its too modern? Don't all cars look dated when newer models come out?

fast1

The 911 hasn't changed much in over 40 years. Do the 911s look dated?

MCoupe

Alan...you are probably right but if the V10 will be around 130K, then the V8 should still be over 100K. I find it expensive for that type of performance. Exclusive yes....like the Aston AM V8. I am still curious to see the final prodcuts + options and pricing.

Putt-Putt

I agree. R8 does not lend itself to evolution. Audi diddn't hold back design-wise, like Porsche does. Where do you go from here for the next R8? Typical halo car, which is bad marketing. Without a base competitor to the Porsche in the lineup the R8 is likely to be short-lived.

Will people think Audi sedans are as good as BMWs because of the R8? If so, mission accomplished, but whole plan seems too simplistic.

Coochas

There was a blurb in a recent Autoweek that suggested that Audi was not going to use the Lambo V10 (500 hp) but instead just the RS4's V8

phantomias33

I think saying the "design will look dated" is pretty acurate. A common critique of Audi is that they're too conservative vs. slightly more aggressive BMW designs. However, at the expense of less exciting designs, Audi's look 'classy' and age well. So when you see a 1999-2000 A8, it still looks sharp and not like a much older design....thanks to the conservative design cues. The R8 is a departure from that line of thinking and probably a welcome one at that.

I agree that their strategy seems too simplistic. If they don't have longer-term plans for the R8 or at least general plans for sports cars in the segment they're entering, it won't do much. For ~$100k (+/- $10k), who really wants exclusivity from Audi? Think VW Phaeton....good car, but no one wants that expensive of a VW. I do like the R8 and it does offer an alternative choice and hopefully pressure others in the sports car segment. Classics like the 911 aren't born every day (or even every decade). But, I guess Mazda pulled it off with the Miata despite a brand image with anything but sportiness at the time. However, that car was much more affordable.

I think marketing the RS4 and focusing on press comparisons with the BMW equivalents (and winning those comparisons of course) will do more strengthening the brand than the R8. But hey, in the end I'm just a consumer and not interested in managing Audi's brand. So in that regard...I welcome the R8

texas911

Ferraris don't age well either. Not.

Putt-Putt

Ferrari cannot let a car age. They just scrap it. The price paid by Ferrari is to be in constant redesign hell. The R8 too. Porsche has got it right with the 911. Baby steps. This results in a better car, IMO.

erv

Look no further than the Ferrari 512bbi and the Testarossa, that replaced it, for a good comparison of cars that age well and do not. The former, IMO, will become a classic and the latter already looks very dated.

Bob Rouleau

The R8 will go up agains the M6 and MB Sl 55 I think.

Congo

I think the 512 TR and 512 M have aged well considering the have roots in the 80s.

It's too bad the R8 is a reworked Gallardo and not something unique like the real R8.

dnp_now

I'm not a car "collector" so I have no idea about aging well, looks dated, etc. I just see it as new vs old models. I think the 993/996 looks dated and old compared to my 997. Maybe the 959 have aged very well in that aspect. But the 928, 944 all look old and dated to me.

Same thing with the F430 vs F360. Even the F40/F50 look old and dated to me compared to the Enzo. Or the new lambos vs the old lambo. Same thing with the Ford GT. Old looks dated compared to the new Ford Gt. So there are only a few cars to me that may hold its appearance (Mclaren f1, since its so unique).

So again, I'm confused as to why people may think the R8 will look dated when a new model appears. Isn't that the purpose whenever a new model appears? I mean people were crying up and down the street when the 996 headlights were changed. Just as some people are concerned about an upcoming facelift with the 997 in 07/08 model.

The jury is still out on the peformance of the R8. But if its anywhere near the performance of the 997tt, then it has my interest. This car could be the NSX generation of our time. Great supercar but under appreciated. And yes, the NSX looks dated to me as well. But isn't that suppose to happen with all cars?