Utterly Ridiculous New Audi Nomenclature Scheme Is Not Happening in the United States

by Timothy Cain

Published: October 20th, 2017

utterly ridiculous new audi nomenclature scheme is not happening in the united states

See that new Audi A3 with between 109 and 129 horsepower? That’s an Audi A3 30. And see the badge on the back of that Audi A4 2.0T? Right, it doesn’t say 2.0T. It says Audi A4 45.

Huh?

Exactly. Huh. Many huhs. “Huh?” is being heard everywhere. In fact, even within Audi, “Huh?”, was an expression heard often enough that Audi of America won’t be adopting the new model designation format. That’s a relief.

Remember when you looked at the back of a German car and could instantly decipher its engine displacement?

Ah, yes, the BMW 328i, a 3 Series with a 2.8-liter inline six. The Mercedes-Benz S500, an S-Class with a 5.0-liter V8. The Audi A4 2.0T, aforementioned, with a 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder. It all made so much sense.

For the 2018 model year, the BMW 340i is equipped with a 3.0-liter turbocharged straight six. Same engine as the BMW 330i? Of course not: the 330i uses a 2.0-liter turbo. At Mercedes-Benz, the 2018 S450 has a 3.0-liter turbocharged V6 under the hood. And if S63 has you thinking V12, don’t be so silly. That’s a 4.0-liter turbocharged V8.

Granted, it’s not just the Germans. Slathered across the trunklid of the 2018 Lexus LS is an LS500 badge, but the car features a 3.5-liter turbo V6. Even worse, the 2018 Lexus IS uses a different engine in the Lexus IS300 and the Lexus IS300 AWD.

Fortunately, Audi will refrain from utilizing the most confusing badging scheme of them all, Car And Driver reports, “at least for the time being.” Audi is certainly making enough headway in America without absolutely bewildering consumers. Sales have risen in 81 consecutive months, jumping 6 percent in the U.S. through the first nine months of 2017 even as industry-wide sales slip 2 percent.

[Images: Audi AG]

Timothy Cain is a contributing analyst at The Truth About Cars and Autofocus.ca and the founder and former editor of GoodCarBadCar.net. Follow on Twitter @timcaincars and Instagram.

#Audi #AudiOfAmerica #Nomenclature #NomenclatureSystems

Timothy Cain

More by Timothy Cain

Comments

Join the conversation

3 of 41 comments

Lorenzo on Oct 22, 2017

This is one of those cases where a focus group is needed. It should be 6-year-olds who will pan anything that doesn't make sense to them.

Like Reply
- Eyeofthetiger on Oct 22, 2017
  
  This is the all new 2018 Audi lineup: The Audi Little Car, the Audi Fast Car, and the Audi Big Car.
  
  Like
CRConrad on Oct 23, 2017

Those numbers feel a bit like the "Tax Horesepower" the French, and before them the Brits, used to have. Citroên 2 CV, Audi 35... Yup, same thing.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

W Conrad I'm not afraid of them, but they aren't needed for everyone or everywhere. Long haul and highway driving sure, but in the city, nope.
Jalop1991 In a manner similar to PHEV being the correct answer, I declare RPVs to be the correct answer here.We're doing it with certain aircraft; why not with cars on the ground, using hardware and tools like Telsa's "FSD" or GM's "SuperCruise" as the base?Take the local Uber driver out of the car, and put him in a professional centralized environment from where he drives me around. The system and the individual car can have awareness as well as gates, but he's responsible for the driving.Put the tech into my car, and let me buy it as needed. I need someone else to drive me home; hit the button and voila, I've hired a driver for the moment. I don't want to drive 11 hours to my vacation spot; hire the remote pilot for that. When I get there, I have my car and he's still at his normal location, piloting cars for other people.The system would allow for driver rest period, like what's required for truckers, so I might end up with multiple people driving me to the coast. I don't care. And they don't have to be physically with me, therefore they can be way cheaper.Charge taxi-type per-mile rates. For long drives, offer per-trip rates. Offer subscriptions, including miles/hours. Whatever.(And for grins, dress the remote pilots all as Johnnie.)Start this out with big rigs. Take the trucker away from the long haul driving, and let him be there for emergencies and the short haul parts of the trip.And in a manner similar to PHEVs being discredited, I fully expect to be razzed for this brilliant idea (not unlike how Alan Kay wasn't recognized until many many years later for his Dynabook vision).
B-BodyBuick84 Not afraid of AV's as I highly doubt they will ever be %100 viable for our roads. Stop-and-go downtown city or rush hour highway traffic? I can see that, but otherwise there's simply too many variables. Bad weather conditions, faded road lines or markings, reflective surfaces with glare, etc. There's also the issue of cultural norms. About a decade ago there was actually an online test called 'The Morality Machine' one could do online where you were in control of an AV and choose what action to take when a crash was inevitable. I think something like 2.5 million people across the world participated? For example, do you hit and most likely kill the elderly couple strolling across the crosswalk or crash the vehicle into a cement barrier and almost certainly cause the death of the vehicle occupants? What if it's a parent and child? In N. America 98% of people choose to hit the elderly couple and save themselves while in Asia, the exact opposite happened where 98% choose to hit the parent and child. Why? Cultural differences. Asia puts a lot of emphasis on respecting their elderly while N. America has a culture of 'save/ protect the children'. Are these AV's going to respect that culture? Is a VW Jetta or Buick Envision AV going to have different programming depending on whether it's sold in Canada or Taiwan? how's that going to effect legislation and legal battles when a crash inevitibly does happen? These are the true barriers to mass AV adoption, and in the 10 years since that test came out, there has been zero answers or progress on this matter. So no, I'm not afraid of AV's simply because with the exception of a few specific situations, most avenues are going to prove to be a dead-end for automakers.
Mike Bradley Autonomous cars were developed in Silicon Valley. For new products there, the standard business plan is to put a barely-functioning product on the market right away and wait for the early-adopter customers to find the flaws. That's exactly what's happened. Detroit's plan is pretty much the opposite, but Detroit isn't developing this product. That's why dealers, for instance, haven't been trained in the cars.
Dartman https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-fighter-jets-air-force-6a1100c96a73ca9b7f41cbd6a2753fdaAutonomous/Ai is here now. The question is implementation and acceptance.