The German automobile press has had many reports in recent months on the new A4 to appear as a 2001 year model. A typical report, with photographs (the same "computer enhanced" photographs perhaps that have appeared in many publications in Europe) is at . Look at issue number 43, 29 Oktober 1999.

The new A4 will pattern after the A6, which is what one would expect, since Audi stresses a consistent "family resemblance." In particular, the new A4 will have what can only be described as slab sides. It will, in other words, have a much more vertical look. This is very much in vogue at the moment, vide. Ford Focus, Toyota Yaris, and (of course) Audi A2. Designers have finally come to recognize that more space for passengers can be packaged in a tall vehicle than in one that is long and low. However, for epigones (which, if I may be so frank, describes many of the designers are Audi today) this is tending to become a fetish and to lack real engineering rationale.

I for one am disappointed to see that designers at Audi are overpowering the engineers, and that Audi, instead of being a leader in the field of engineering (which it has been for almost 20 years) is becoming a follower in the field of "design". This sad state of affairs is clearest with the TT. I know many people love its looks -- the looks are fashionable, without question. What I find deeply disturbing is that the automobile was created by "designers"--not engineers. The result is to be expected. The coefficient of drag is much greater than that of the Audi 100 that appeared in 1984. Incredible! What a step backward. And not only that, the high speed stability of the TT is a disaster. Audi has had to recall the model and revise the suspension and stick on a wing. It is hard to believe that in years past such a deficient automobile would be released by Audi.

If one looks more closely at the new A4 one will see even more design features that are obviously put there for "looks" and which have no engineering rationale or detract from the engineering soundness of the design.

All this will probably not reduce the sales of the new A4 -- the public at large, after all, loves fads -- but it will undoubtedly hurt the reputation of Audi among those enthusiasts who have been loyal to Audi because of its combination of fine engineering, refinement, performance, and reasonable cost.

Rudolf

 

This was one reason why I decided to get a '00 model now.

 

Shouldn't we wait until the new A4 is released to make these kind of assessments?! Unless you yourself are an Audi Engineer I don't see how you could possibly know that this car isn't every bit as good or better (performance wise) than the current model. =)

 

Typically engineers are there to make a functional (mechanically sound) product. To make sure it's safe and operates within the design parameters that they were given. It's up to designers to make this product visually appealing as well as functional. Typically, the engineer is not involved with the aesthetics of a product. Their only interest is making it work within certain parameters. There is a little more involved with an overall design than just making a product work. If it doesn't appeal to the customer then there will be no sales. The project engineer (the person in charge) and his bosses are given (in many instances) MANY different proposals for most design projects. It's up to them and the people running the company to decide what is acceptable and what is not. What will work, what will not and what will appeal to the customer. Also they look at it from a "How does this look from the company perspective"? You have to remember that everyone has a boss and most of the time the engineers as well as the designers are doing what they are told or are only working from the design criteria that was given to them. I'm speaking in a generalized sense here but the point is still the same. It's never as black and white as some would like to think.

 

Do you or anyone else have pics of this?

 

Marketing determines the need for a product and passes it on to Industrial Design. Industrial Design interprets that information and converts it into sketches/drawings. After Marketing confirms that's what they wanted, it goes on to Engineering for development.

 

You could not be more wrong in your statements. Speaking as an Automotive Designer, I feel that Audi is a leader in design (have been for years). Your view of the TT being a followers design is laughable. There is no other car in existence today that is more emulated han the TT. In case you have not noticed, there have been numberous show cars copying the TT aesthetic.

Also, please take the time to learn a little more about this industry before you make these broad statements. There are so many things that most people don't know or don't care to know about what is actually involved in bringing an automobile to production. Feel free to flame.

RichD 99.51.8qm

 

He's talking about design copy in the new A4 models, not in the TT. He says the TT is a "designer's" car more than an "engineer's" car - and he does have a point. It is fact that in the case of the TT, design took precedence over engineering, as witnessed the poor high-speed aerodynamics and high drag coefficient. It looks good, but does not go as well as it looks.

Flame away,
adc

 

All the articles I've read indicate the TT sprang from the designers' imagination and was then presented to other departmens - marketing and Herr Piech.

Not the other way around.

The A4 however, being a high-volume product, probably follows the flow you indicate.

adc