More volume and quicker to the market. Sounds like a winning strategy (hopefully higher volume will translate to slightly lower pricing too).<ul><li><a href="http://www.motorauthority.com/cars/audi/audi-changing-its-strategy-for-rs-models/">Link to Motor Authority article</a></li></ul>

competition. And the RS4/RS5 are the M3 competitor, and the A4 3.2 is the 328 competitor, and in the U.S., BMW has no A4 2.0T competitor.

There are a bunch of people on this forum that keep making this argument that somehow the 2.0T does not match up against any 3-series model, or that the 3.2 will not be competing with the 335i.

The fact is that the majority of the public and the automotive press regards the 328i and 2.0T as the matching entry-level models, and the 3.2 and 335i as the matching top 6-cylinder offerings for the garden variety models. Things get a little murky when you get to the S and RS models. Audi apparently uses these two models to bracket the M3 in price and performance. The S4 is cheaper but not as powerful, while the RS 4 is more expensive but more powerful (at least until the V8 powered M3 arrives on the market).

I have not seen any auto magazine of note comparing 3.2 to 335. Car and Driver, 335 vs S5, Top Gear in UK 335 vs S5, etc ... The 2.0T was compared to the 325 last year. As the models in US were 325,328, and 330, and M3. Matching A4 2.0T, A4 3.2, S4, RS4. 328 became base model in the U.S. this year and BMW now offers 328, 335, and M3 only in US. So, I don't see how you have the mags comparing 328 to 2.0T when that wasn't even the base model BMW in the U.S. until this year.

Also, the M3 V8 is still not more powerful than the outgoing RS4. They have the same HP rating, at 420HP, in fact, the M3 v8 was slated to come out at 400HP, but they upped the engine to match the RS4, not exceed it, because they thought 400HP is what the RS4 was going to have, until it hit the streets at 420HP.

Finally, the B8 S4 is coming in exactly as biturbo V6, wow, just like a 335. So, how long are you going to argue Audi doesn't intend the S4 to compete with the 335? The S5 will remain V8 as it's more of a GT car.

How can they test the A5 3.2 against the 335i coupe when the car doesn't exist?

I think the pricing pits the B8 A4 3.2 against the 335i sedan unless the twin-turbo S4 starts at a base price south of $45K. Again I think Audi is trying to bracket the 335i with 2 models instead of taking BMW on directly. The A4 3.2 quattro might be a grand cheaper than a comparably priced 335i but the S4 will be several grand more.

would have compared it to. MOre importantly with your logic than the should have compared the S5 to the M3 old or new, which is not what they did. Because we all know the RS cars are the M competitors except for you apparently, do you even follow Audi? I don't understand what's so difficult to figure out about that. Whether they were released at the same time or not the A5 3.2 would still be put up agaist the 328. Why do you think Audi is changing the RS strategy, to make it more production so it more matches M and AMG, variants production levels.

In addition the B8 S4 may likely be a little less than the S5. Due to the smaller engine, so you are going to tell me the B8 S4 with it's twin turbo 6 cylinder just like the 335 is supposed to compete with the M3 right? Come on dude, the outgoing RS4 has 420HP alone, the new RS4 will likely be 450HP ttV8, and if Audi really wants to put the smack down on the M3 they may bolt on the lambo V10 that's in the S6 and lambo gallardo. Although , I see the RS5 getting the V10 to keep inline with the A5/S5/RS5 as touring cars.

...I kind of liked the exclusivity of them. It made it more than something every other person with a boatload of money will get. Instead, it was something that only true enthusiasts would get.

And I think it is great that Audi wants to expand their performance division, it is just that when you make so many RS models, I feel as though it will loose a bit of it's mystique and rarity.

However, what I wish Audi would do is pay a bit of attention to the past models it has created and offer some performance and OEM+ modifications for these models. The Audi and VW scene has a lot of interest in modifying their cars for performance and even better looks, while keeping the car to a clean, somewhat OEM look.
I feel if they did something like Subaru does with STi/Prodrive where there is a collection of performance parts and whatnot that are readily available for models gone past.
Even better, if quattro GmbH were to produce them. OEM style boost gauges, exhaust, suspensions, lower lips, grilles, etc. etc....If they could keep the prices reasonable, they would sell like hotcakes!

Sorry, I was just thinking out loud. &lt;/rant&gt;

unless it's mercedes amg program

that's what this will look like if there is an RS model of every series. although i don't mind it

i would like to see performance versions of their models. don't know if they will use tt-rs and r8-rs as the names since they have rs4 and rs6 now

like Lexus does - answering on every MB's model. A5 - is answer on Mercedes CLK, A7 - CLS, A1 - A class, Q5 - ML, and so on. With A7/CLS this is the most obvious. The only area where Audi is leading is quattro/AWD.

But I still prefer Audi, that's why I'm here :) I think Audi does its job better than MB, and can hardly understand people buying MB. Maybe current S class is better than A8 (more "prestigious"), but E class and A6 - A6 wins.

I am only going to say this one more time and I am done beating a dead horse. If Audi had launched the coupe with the A5 3.2, you can bet your sweet dollar that it would have been compared to the 335i coupe. The S5 costs at least 7-8 grand more than a comparably equipped 335 coupe. Now I am not arguing that with better styling (inside and out), AWD and the V8 engine, the price premium for the S5 is unjustified, but one car starts at about 40 grand while the other starts north of 50 grand. But the fact remains that when the A5 3.2 comes out in the U.S. market, it will be priced very close to the 335 coupe and the comparison tests will show up in all the car magazines.

Your argument based on lack of comparison tests against a non-existent A5 3.2 boggles my mind. Why is that so hard to comprehend? Car magazines test cars they can get their hands on, and they won't wait 6 months for Audi to take their sweet time to put out the natural 335 competitor.

was designed by MB? Audi was smaller, than Daimler, secondly, they focused on at least in the U.S. market rebuilding their name after 60 minutes produced a completely errant, inaccurate report, that Audi produced cars that accelerated on their own in the 80's. With that said, they followed market trends to see where they could build the greatest following, and then as they are doing now expanding the product line, to overtake sales of both. It was a formulated plan, long ago, they plan on introducing what some almost 20 models by 2015, beginning in from 2005.

Also Audi dropped the "never follow slogan" two years ago, there motto in the U.S. "Truth in Technology" in Europe "Truth in Engineering."

They were the arms that produced the original Quattro, hence why it's called Quattro GMBH, and did the rally cars that made Quattro and Audi famous, as well as the winner of Lemans Series many year in a row now. As for following AMG all these companies recently started having their performance arms produce consumer cars, and it's helped sales, why shouldn't Audi. I don't want to wait for an RS5, or RS4, until after xyz, I actually wished they'd introduce all the cars at one time, A5, S5, and RS5, when ever a new model comes out.

If it weren't the car magazines would compare it to the M3. Finally, price is relative, the A5 and S5 are both alittle more expensive base wise than their intended competitors because they come with mroe standard features, you add the same specs to the 335 that approaches the S5 naturally and they are within several thousand dollars of one another. The difference between $50K and $55K is nothing to someone buying in that price range. It's alot different from someone who's paying $20K vs $25K where that $5K becomes a 25% increase, in the case of the bmw vs audi it's a 10% increase, and as you fully load both the 335 and S5 it becomes a paltry 9% difference in price. That's hardly anything for most people looking in the 50-60K luxury car market.

I think you want to compare the A5 3.2 when clearly it's not the 335 competitor, the S version is meant to be, like I said what more evidence do you have than the S4 in fact having a biturbo V6, just like the 335? Why wouldn't they just make it A4 V6 twin turbo, if it was the case S cars were meant to compete with BMW's highest performance cars, they aren't that's why. The are meant to compete with the car right below BMW's top performer, hence, why you the RS cars which are meant to do so.

With apologies to qwest1914 for not holding to my word (acadia1 asked me what I'm talking about, so I have to respond!), Audi is not a top tier luxury automaker in the U.S. market yet. Their reliability, service and dealership network still trails Lexus, MB and BMW. The pricing has up until now reflected this reality, with the A4/A6/A8 being a few thousand cheaper than their BMW and MB counterparts. I don't think the U.S. marketplace is ready yet to pay a 10% premium for Audi's products. Of course if AoA is intent on selling fewer cars and shrinking their market share, this strategy can work perfectly.

still "innovation through technology" and "vorsprung durch technik" all over world

- audi ethos

over the last 5 years, why because they are outpacing the growth of both BMW and MB. Perhaps, to you they have no business offering a premium but evidently they are selling more cars than ever before in the U.S. $15 billion dollar investment in technology and model development and 20+ new modelsby 2015 gives them every right to charge a premium, especially, if their cars are simply better than the competition, you must still be confusing Audi in 2008, with Audi of 1988.

They are the #1 luxury brand in China, they are actually way ahead of MB in terms of reliability and were #1 of all the german manufacturers for expected reliability in 2008. I know Audi's management and former president Peich made huge demands to improve reliability and number of models offered as well as requirments for dealer network, and it's paying off. They invested billions to improve the updating the dealer network in the U.S., notice you can't co locate Audi branded dealerships anymore, something that was common in the 80's and early 90's. As far as build Audi by many accounts by far own the quality of build department, with the S5, car magazines stated Audi again set the bar. The cars interior feels like it could be a $100K+ car, so $60K doesn't seem anywhere out of the question. If you build it they will come.

I stay stick with your 335, go sit in an S5 and if you think it compares in terms of build quality etc ... think again, look at something as simple as the difference in the buttons, be happy in your choice, I'm all for it. But make no mistake, Audi of today is an entirely different company. And more importantly consumers notice it, their sales numbers have been doing nothing but sky rocketing, like I said sit in your 335 and go sit in an S5 which will essentially be what B8 A4 build quality will feel like, and you don't notice the difference and why there is a premium, there is really nothing else to talk about. Being the stepchild makes you either become that much better than the competition or fold, and it doesn't seem like Audi has been folding quite the contrary.

Example, come on offering B&amp;O stereo's. That's a huge leap over Bose, have you walked into a B&amp;O store, when you see starting prices for B&amp;O sound systems of $20,000. We are talking a different level of quality from Audi these days.

Here is some reading from 3 years ago, and Audi has only kept improving. Notice the 3 year crusade to "stamp out Audi glitches" and expectations to be ahead of BMW and MB in that time frame. Guess who has #1 expected reliability for 2008 by JD Power and Consumer Reports, of the germans, Audi . If you build it they will come.<ul><li><a href="http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_11/b3924003.htm">http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_11/b3924003.htm</a</li></ul>

<ul><li><a href="http://forums.audiworld.com/a4b8/msgs/2735.phtml">http://forums.audiworld.com/a4b8/msgs/2735.phtml</a</li></ul>

Plus, you won't find a bigger Audi fan than myself.

But from my experience, the average American consumer still does not view Audi on equal ground to BMW or Mercedes. It's getting better, but it's not there yet.

And in fact, there model for expansion and dealership improvement and innovation wouldn't be possible if they did charge less.

Just because the American consumer doesn't know, doesn't mean Audi needs to change, the world is alot bigger than the U.S. And as stated in the world's biggest(soon to be) market China, is the #1 luxury brand, why would they dilute their brand name and stifle their innovation, because, of the perception of a relatively small number of U.S. consumers.

The reality of it, is, most consumers think of Rolex when they think of highest quality watches, should Patek Phillipe lower it's prices so it can outsell Rolex? Most consumers wouldn't even know who Patek Phillipe was and if you put the two in front of a person and said take one free of charge, they'd instantly grab the Rolex, and well too bad for them, you just walked away from the most coveted watchmaker for those in the know, in the world. Enjoy your rolex.

Bottom line is I don't think lowering Audi's prices is the solution, in fact, I think at this point they just need to keep creating great cars, and perhaps do a better job of marketing, but to be honest I wouldn't do marketing, I think mass marketing cheapens a brand. That's why you've never seen a Patek PHillipe commercial, but you've seen plenty of Rolex Commercials. That Patek will fetch well over a hundred thousand though, and so what most people better know Rolex. I see Audi keep doing what it's doing, and charge fair value for their cars, and don't cheapen them to satisfy a few people who think it should cost less than a BMW or MB, if so, that will only cheapen the brand, which is not what Audi is trying to do.

In other words...keep being seen as a non-equal in the American market. I'm not necessarly saying they have to lower their price. That's just one strategy. But they do have to do <i>something</i> to get themselves noticed. Whether it be better quality, better customer suck-up like Lexus, more TV advertising, smarter marketing, more print ads, more sponsorship, who knows what the answer is? Change doesn't happen by chance. They need to change the view of the average American that their brand is on par with BMW and Mercedes. That's a huge task. It won't happen by itself. One thing is for certain; their competitors will not sit idle. It's much better to be proactive than it is to be reactive.

Judging by the numbers, Audi is and has changed the perception. Did you even read the article I posted? Lowering the price is not one of the things that they need to do, lowering the price, will allow you to sell more cars but it will also give the impression that you should cost less and aren't equal.

Over advertising also dilutes a brand, high quality brands or atleast ones that are thought of as high quality, advertise very little.

What Audi has done is simply been producing better cars than their competitors, winning at the rallies, think 24hrs or Leman's, producing more expensive cars, think R8, and hands down having better fit and finish and interiors compared to BMW and Mercedes. If you build it they will come, Starbucks could have lowered it's coffee prices and sold more coffee than dunkin donut's, but that wouldn't have made them considered a premium brand.

There is always room for improvement, however, lowering the price I think is a bad idea, and I think Audi is doing the right thing, focusing, on simply out engineering it's competitors and upgrading it's dealership network. Notice, the price difference in 1995 24K for the average Audi, 2005 42K, and they are selling tons more cars than they were in 1995. What created that buzz was the cars themselves, not marketing, there is no better marketing than seeing a bad a$$ car rolling down the street with 4 rings.

But I'm also a realist, and unfortunately in marketing circles there's a saying "perception is realty". You could have the best product in the world, but if the world thinks it's ****, it won't fly off the shelf. Sure, if you build it they will come. But that may take several generations. Word of mouth can only spread so quickly. This is where marketing comes into play. It's there to poke and prod consumers in a particular way, and to accelerate things.

Some of the Audi commercials have been great. One recent one that comes to mind is the A4 parking itself. That's exactly what Audi needed. It showed some excitement for the younger crowd, while giving the finger to Lexus, and I believe it hit its mark successfully.

As stated their share price has soared from $40 to over $300, they are selling more cars than ever, they just released there latest numbers another huge increase in car sales.

I flip burgers at mcd's for a living and I have to say in my miniscule mind that Audi's formula is working, could it work better, sure, I'm not a the marketing guys, I'm on fries. Either way, I don't think a price decrease, was the answer, which was the original point of my post. I don't think umpteen million commercials is going to improve the upmarket move which is what Audi was aiming to do at the same time, and remember, Audi has been out from VW's 40 year management hold since '93.

I think Wonk... has it right , focus on doing what they've been doing, getting out new models to increase there portfolio, improve dealerships, and improve reliability. They've done some good things with marketing does it need help, sure, but you got to remember part of the reason Audi is popular with it's base constituents is it doesn't whore itself to everyone like say BMW does. Atleast not in public.

The woman driving the cars is a bit weird :p , but the fact remains its the S5 vs the 335i. Remember in England the 3.2 is available as well so they arn't using an S5 because the 3.2L isn't available.<ul><li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0nGH2iUaOs">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0nGH2iUaOs</a</li></ul>

Unfortunately I can't understand German and there isn't a video with subtitels but you can get an idea of how the cars perform etc with the drag race, stopping test etc.<ul><li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twoegah1-1U">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twoegah1-1U</a</li></ul>

I just followed the link. You mention stuff about how good the B&amp;O stereo is while never mentioning anything about the engines. Maybe its me but I'd prefer a top ranked engine over a top ranked stereo. If The A4's engines were as competitive as the B&amp;O stereo, then we wouldn't be having this conversation. I guess releasing a vehicle with a competitive Stereo, is more important for Audi than releasing a car with a competitive engine. Sad.

Audi is improving but they still have a way to go in regards to building competitive engines. I'm tired of Audi always bringing up the rear when it comes to engine power. Just think how nice the A4 would be if it had a competitive engine.

They make some of the best engines in the world, legendary even. From 5 cylinder Quattro to the 4.2L, they 4.2 has 100HP per liter rating, in the RS4, that's fantastic.

Waht do you think all those Le Mans victories were about, the A4 not only that, has a large range of engine options, how can you say they aren't competative. You take 1 engine and compare it to 1 car you think it should make a comparison. The 3.2L is not intended by Audi to be a 335 competitor that's your take. But, that's fine, and it has more hp than the car it's supposed to be go up against, the 328.

Ultimately, the difference in speed is so marginal, it's really irrelevant, but the vastly huge difference in materials, quality of build, fit and finish, all the other aspects of spending a time in a car, make as much a difference to me as the engine. I'm not racing from 1 light to the next, 24/7, if this were the case, why by either a BMW or Audi, you can get cars that are way more fun for that, and cheaper too.

You should just supe up that Honda Civic and call it a day, if engine and speed is all that matters.