X post: I totally agree with Reggie.
 

<ul><li><a href="https://forums.audiworld.com/canada/msgs/115160.phtml">Turbos</a></li></ul>

certainly not stock though
 

wouldn't you say? i think twin turbo v6's again in performance Audi's is a great move, the right move! just wondering why it was the 3.0 and not 3.2.

there's no need for V8's which are slaves to top-end power, where you have to have the revs wild to get potential out of the car. that has never been Audi's way, and it doesn't serve them well, IMO. and especially now with the looming oil crisis and skyrocketing gas prices.

I'm with Jet Jockey on this one

not a moment too soon

You'd dish out the $$ for that?

They debore the engine to make it stronger. 2.7T was debored 2.8L.

There's a reason why only a very small % of passenger cars are turbo'd. It's not economical! We
 

are enthusiasts who are price inelastic when it comes to consuming automotive products and hence willingly consider turbos as an option. Obviously to some a very desireable option. To me, it's just a complicated pia to produce more power I don't need (not anymore anyway) delivered in a manner I don't enjoy.

Clearly, even with today's technology, going turbo is not green. If it was, there'd be more of them out there. Different story with the diesels.

Tim

previous RS6 had a 450hp/450lb TT V8. Easily modded to 500+/500+ ...

yes, but only a small % of passenger cars are performance cars
 

and in the case of getting more out of an engine, and keeping decent fuel mileage(a green issue), turbos are desireable.

the turbo lag issue has been made almost non-existent, so theres no longer that stigma attached.

i've never disliked turbos, and they will hold up fine over the long term if you don't abuse them. plus, there's nothing like the rush of a turbo when it comes to acceleration.

that's tiny, the difference