RE: Engine Design Question

[Fringe Ryder <Fringe@ai.net>]

In much of Europe, the performance bar is lower, or at least different.
Smaller engines, due to both high displacement taxes and higher gas taxes.
(U.S. gas is comparatively cheap.)  We -are- getting the largest engine Audi
puts in the A4.

To put this in perspective, Chrysler and BMW's Rover just announced plans to
build an engine plant in South America to produce a Chrysler-designed <2.0L
engine, purely because they need a tiny engine to be competitive in Europe.
(Chrysler is virtually non-existent there, compared to Ford and GM.)

Therefore, Audi's 2.8L V6 is probably designed more for smoothness than for
speed - it's the luxury engine for those who can afford the gas. <grin>

Regards

On Tue, 1 Oct 1996, Achille Riviello wrote:

> I have a stupid question:
> 
> Why, when designing a new car or engine, don't the engineers make the engine
> the most it can be?  (humming the Army recruiting tune while writing
> this...)  It just doesn't make sense.  For instance, my new A4Q has a 2.8
> liter V6.  Ok, ample HP and torque, right?  Well, at 172 HP (5500 rpm) and
> 184 ft-lbs of torque (at 3000 rpm), it it only ample.  The engine is SOHC
> and only 2 valves/cylinder.  Why didn't the designers make it DOHC and 4
> valves/cylinder?  I would have happily paid $2000-$3000 more for that
> engine.  The HP probably would have been up about 300 with torque better
> than the M3.  So what gives?  Why not spend an extra couple thousand and get
> what we really want?