History of the 2.7 liters bi-turbo engine

[AFAP18]

Does anyone know how audi came to a near to perfection engine.Would be glad to know about the history of it, since it looks like we are not getting any V6s in the meantime.


Best Wishes

WOT FREAK

[AFAP18]

Come on guys. no one ?

[feelou]

Can only guess. Was it a Cosworth evolution of Audi's 2.8 block?

[Golich]

Can only guess. Was it a Cosworth evolution of Audi's 2.8 block?

I don't think so. Audi only bought Cosworth around 1997/98ish. The first S4s came out in 97ish and of course the RS4 didn't come out until 2000.

As you probably know Audi gave Cosworth the Bi-turbo engine to develop specifically for the RS4. I'm fairly ceratin of this as I bought my previous S4 from Cosworth. I was told by Cosworth that it was one of 4 show cars that came into the country. It did the laps and then the Cosworth management were given the cars as a sweetener in the deal.

When I went to pic it up. Cosworth had the RS4 version of the Bi-turbo engine on display in all its glory in their receiption area. NICE model!!

As you said the 2.7 bi-turbo is essentially the 2.8 V6 engine that has been around for years. You can read all about the evolution of it from 2.8 to 2.7 to 2.7 RS4 in the Audi techs self study guides in the down load section and the power of the RS4 article respectively.

[derdle]

Hi all,

The 2671cc engine was given to Cosworth to develop for the RS4. When the RS4 was launched Top Gear did a bit on the telly about it - that's when I decided I NEEDED one. I actually have a video clip of the Top Gear article but it is probably copyrighted so can't be uploaded to the forum. I suppose I could always send it by pm if anyone interested. (It's approx 32Mb!)

Paul

[AFAP18]

Thanks for the answer Golich. I will try to search at the tech area.

Paul, could you send it to me at

andreabreupereira@mac.com


Here is a part of the Cosworth History and the up-grade motor:
Cosworth: The Two Companies
By William Kimberley, Editor
Automotive Engineer, London, England

------------------------------------------------------------------------


Assembling the RS4 engine for the Audi Avant quattro at Cosworth Technology.

It's a name that to many is the epitome of motorsport engineering. Its very roots stem from the fact that it was founded by a couple of young engineers who wanted to modify standard engines for race cars. Later on, its logo on a car—usually a Ford—adorned the model with instant street cred—it was a must-have machine for boy racers and car thieves alike. That was until 1998 when it all became rather confusing...

When you visit St James Mill Road in Northampton, about 60 miles north of London, you are confronted by an array of buildings that proudly boast the Cosworth Racing banner. Drive a little further down the road, though, and you come to one that is not adorned with the bright red and blue sign writing but one that is in two shades of grey announcing Cosworth Technology. They may live cheek by jowl, but the twain do not meet as Cosworth Racing and Cosworth Technology are now quite separate businesses owned by different companies.

Although "Cosworth" is regarded in the motorsport world as rather a blue-chip engineering company, it has had something of a chequered history as far as ownership is concerned. After being established in 1958 by Mike Costin and Keith Duckworth—thankfully opting for "Cosworth" as an amalgam of their family names rather than the Tinduck alternative—the company soon made a name for itself in motor racing. It really hit the headlines, though, in 1967, when Jim Clark won the Dutch Grand Prix in a Lotus powered by a Cosworth DFV engine. What was so sensational about this result was that it was the first Formula One engine produced by the company and it won on its first outing.

From that time on, the company never really looked back.

However, Cosworth did not put all its eggs just into the motor racing basket. In 1979, for example, the company built its first foundry. In 1983 it began supplying Mercedes-Benz with cylinder heads for a high-performance road car, and a year later it set up a new engine plant for low-volume production.

During this time, though, the company itself had been through a variety of ownerships. In 1980 it was taken over by United Engineering Industries, which, in turn, was taken over by Carlton Communications eight years later. In 1990 the Cosworth part was sold to Vickers, the British engineering group that also had Rolls-Royce Motors in its portfolio at that time, which kept it for eight years. In 1998, though, came the most fundamental change, when Vickers sold Cosworth to Audi.

At the time, this caused enormous surprise. Cosworth had had such a long and successful relationship with Ford, especially on the motorsport side, that many, even within Ford itself, believed it to be part of the company. In acquiring Cosworth, Audi effectively had Ford's motorsport life in its hands. It was there-fore with some relief in Dearborn that the German company sold the racing side to Ford in 1999.

The glamour boys may have been sold off to the blue oval, but the key engineering facilities remained with Cosworth Technology, as the rump was renamed, or "CT," as it now likes to be known. These included the HQ building and the engine and powertrain design and development center in Northampton, including the engine test cells, the two foundries in Worcester, some 50 miles to the west of Northampton and the limited-run low-volume engine plant at Wellingborough some dozen miles away. Audi also acquired the company formerly known as Intelligent Controls Inc of Novi, Michigan, now known as the Vehicle Information and Diagnostic Systems center.

One of CT's unique selling points is its patented aluminum castings process. In 1978 the company invested a great deal of money in setting up a subsidiary company, Cosworth Research and Development, to develop a new casting process and provide a facility for the casting of performance engine components. As many past attempts to produce aluminum castings by reducing the growth of flaws in the mould had failed, Cosworth successfully developed a process whereby the flaws in the mould were eliminated. This resulted in castings of outstanding integrity, substantially porosity-free and with excellent mechanical properties being produced with exceptional dimensional accuracy and stability.

The process calls for the metal to be heated in a large covered vat so that impurities can sink to the bottom. A special electromagnetic pump forces the aluminum into a mould that is then sealed and rotated until the metal has cooled. As the mould is made from zircon sand, it means that tighter tolerances are allowed in the cast parts so that the smallest channels for engine cooling and lubrication can therefore remain "as cast," avoiding the need for later machining and so reducing machining times and costs.

Among the components currently cast in this way are the heads of Audi's V6 engine and the blocks and heads for Aston Martin's 6.0-litre V12 that nestles under the hood of the DB7 Vantage. These are then delivered to the engine plant in Wellingborough where the V12 motors and transmissions are assembled ready for delivery to the Aston Martin plant. The Audi V6 heads, though, have a longer journey to make before they are complete.

The newly launched limited edition RS4 Avant quattro is the most powerful production car in the Audi range powered by a 2.7-litre twin-turbocharged V6 pumping out 380 bhp. As befits such a high-performance machine, every one of the 4,000 engines that will be made in the 12-month production run will be a bespoke item. After being cast in Worcester, they are sent to the Györ plant in Hungary for machining, they are then returned to the UK for assembling in Wellingborough before making their way to Neckarsulm in Germany where they join the car. From an initial output of 25 engines a day, daily output is scheduled to have increased to 35 by the time the 4,000th one comes off the line next April.

The racing heritage may have been sold off, but as far as Audi is concerned, it has retained the real jewel in the crown: Cosworth's proven ability in designing and building high-performance engines for the road.


Best Wishes
WOT FREAK

[Golich]

Top read AFTAP18 I particularly liked the 'Tinduck alternative'

[Nordschleife]

Sadly, CT does no more work for Aston Martin or Audi. Audi neglected the company and ended up selling a company that had become a shadow of its former self. CT was (is???) really good at foundry technology, its really hard to get a German to learn from a British expert when it comes to making things, not entirely without justification.
R+C

[Dippy]

its really hard to get a German to learn from a British expert when it comes to making things, not entirely without justification.

I'm not sure what you mean there - are you criticising the British or the Germans?

[Nordschleife]

I'm saying that in certain areas the British reputation for quality is not the best. Sadly, that can be justified as anybody who has driven a TVR can attest, or relied upon the Price of Darkness to light the way home.

Germans think that they know more about making things than anybody else. Well there is an element of truth in that, too. As long as its not too hi-tech, like cars. And as long as they can use Italian machines to build them. Its easy to have a laugh at the dears, they think they invented the computer...... and the atom bomb........and television.

But if you want your British car (Bentley) to zoom effortlessly down the road at 180mph for hour after hour (well not that actually, you have keep filling up the piddly tank every hour, that's a flaw in the master plan) then you had better get the German lovvies to fettle it for you and some Scottish leather to park the derriere upon. Amid all this demonstrable Teutonic Superiority, its a bit hard to get them to flex the neck a bit and consider that the Brits just might know a thing or two about casting technology.

So I'm criticising, and not criticising the British and the Germans on the basis that if I'm rude and polite to everybody then I'm being fair and even handed!

[SimonS4MTM]

How about all of the F1 teams we have in the UK, and then all of the other non UK teams are filled with mainly UK engineers.

Maybe if the Audi techs had used Cosworth for the RS4, we would still have turbo's

Open for discussion!!!

[joss1]

go to bed!

[Dippy]

I'm saying that in certain areas the British reputation for quality is not the best.

That's alright then - I can certainly agree with that.

It's just that you wrote about Germans learning from British experts. As Simon mentions, our expertise in motorsport is unquestionable.

I am certainly generally satisfied with the quality of my Audi. However there are several aspects of the design (such as manufacturing efficiency) which I could criticise.

The British may have had a disasterous motor industry (and one look at the ZT 260 reminds us all how bad it still is), but let's not forget that VW would not be where it is now if it had not been for the efforts of the British Army after WWII!

[Nordschleife]

It's just that you wrote about Germans learning from British experts. As Simon mentions, our expertise in motorsport is unquestionable.

Just to clarify things, I am a Brit.

Your point about British expertise in motorsport is well accepted in Britain.

However, I was at Le Mans with Team Joest when Joest taught the Brits how to run a Le Mans winning car. Not that the Brits learnt a damn thing. They thought they knew it all. After Sebring earlier that year ( a complete disaster and bollux up) it became obvious that the Bentley people were not going to work with the Joest people, so the team was split in two with Audi doing the engine. Despite this the Joest team tried to pass helpful information to the Brits but it was ignored. Two of the faults which the Brit Bentley had would not have occured had they listened to what the Joest guys passed on. The atmosphere in the pits was electric, I have NEVER experienced such an unpleasant atmosphere at the races before. As it turned out, the Brit car finshed two laps down on the Joest car, of all the classes at the finish, only these two cars did not go into formation at the finish. The victory party was notable for the absences of many participants and two of the winning drivers were heard to express their delight that they would never have to drive under those conditions again.

It was not just a 'German' thing either, there are numerous Aussies and Kiwis on the Joest staff. The 'Bentley Boys' were bloody arrogant, I was glad I could point out I lived most of my life in NZ.

A trip round Audi, Porsche, BMW and Mercedes factories will show how efficient the Audi manufacturing process actually is, compared to the others. And it has to be, given the cost of labour in Germany.

R+C

[Dippy]

Hell, I thought you were a Yank! You have a German sense of humour at least anyway

Aren't most Audi's made in Hungary now? And isn't one of BMW's most successful cars made in the UK? The German labour force is going to have to understand that there is only one solution for a high labour rate and high unemployment...

Anyway I wasn't referring to factory efficiency, I was referring to Audi's 'design for manufacturing' or rather lack of. Why they use 101 different variations of some components when they could easily standardise is beyond me.