Perhaps there will be another A2?

J

Johann

Member
A friend emailed me this subscription only article:

Audi eyes A2 successor

Jens Dralle
Automotive News / January 16, 2006 - 4:19 pm


Ingolstadt. Audi may launch a successor to its A2 entry-level car.

The Volkswagen subsidiary stopped selling the entry-premium A2 last summer because of slow sales.

Audi CEO Martin Winterkorn confirmed that "consideration is being given to a model below the A3." He said no decision has been made yet.

To achieve a base price of about 16,000 euros, or about $19,400 at current exchange rates, the new A2 could share a platform with the VW Polo. It would not have the expensive aluminum spaceframe used for the previous A2.

A new A2 also would have more powerful engines than its predecessor. The old A2 had 1.6- and 1.4-liter gasoline engines offering 75 horsepower and a 1.4-liter, 90-hp diesel engine.

Possible engines for a new A2 could be a 1.6-liter unit rated at 110 hp or 140 hp, a 170-hp, 1.4-liter engine, and a 1.9-liter diesel engine rated at 100 hp and 130 hp.

If introduced, a new A2 would be sold in three-door version only to keep within Audi's plan for a sporty car.
 
Last edited:
Johann said:
It would not have the expensive aluminum spaceframe used for the previous A2.
Click to expand...
The aluminium space-frame is the thing that is attracting me to purchasing an A2. A car that doesn't rust is what I am after, not just another car, especially yet another Golf derivative.
 
money?

Seems like Audi have missed the point of having a modern, technically sophisticated small car. I agree with aembleton. The aluminium body and advanced engine are what attracted me to buying one in the first place. Then the fact they are not too common, and have a good standard of build quality. Low running costs too.
It would seem that the bottom line is money, or Audi not making enough to justify the production of a small aluminium-bodied car. Shame. :(
 
i would still go with the current aluminum A2.as said earlier they are rarer than rare on the roads,and a design classic that will go down in motoring history!

the list of positives about this car just go on and on,i think this car is the biggest secret on our roads!
 
I agree with all these comments. Building a car smaller than the A3, a Polo clone, misses the point altogether. The A2 is a design classic.

'The Audi A2. A completely fresh look at car design. A car with extraordinary ideas and advanced technology built in wherever you look. One that tackles head on the problem of our times to preserve individual mobility.....'

Source-Audi A2 brochure.

Even allowing for all the hyperbole in the brochure we all probably agree that the design and engineering of the A2, it's use of aluminium and innovative engines is one of the key reasons we choose to drive them. The combination of interior space, compact dimensions, performance and amazing economy are still unique.
 
The slow sales of the A2 may be blaimed on Audi themselves for making such poor advertising of the small car. I think they decided not to put much light on the A2 since they would think it would look weird that the A2 would be more sofisticated than the A3-A6 range, especially with its outstanding corrosion protection that the aluminium concept provides. How would Audi explain that the smallest car would be so much in advance of the cars manufactured for the masses?
 
I wonder whether we would all be driving A2s if it had been a soaring success? As many others here have pointed out - part of the attraction of the car is its relative obscurity on the roads. It's certainly a factor for me - as well as its progressive engineering.

Take one of Audi's other unique vehicles, the original TT. A truely fantastic bit of design thinking - but in my opinion its success is also its downfall - they scatter the business parks around here with abundance. Only outdone by the new MINIs.

I am happy that I am one of the few who own a bit of engineering history.
 
I love the fact the A2 is scarse yes. But that only happened after I bought mine in 2001. The TDI had then just come out. So the then scarcity did not make me buy it.

I think Audi did not market it well due to it being difficult to market. It is after all narrow and has only 4 seats, but yet Audi wanted the same money for it as a Mercedes A-class or a Golf. Both can take 5 people. Yes the A2 is "compacious" and very practical, but it is perceived as small. Then the metal for money ratio turns people away.

So a Polo based steel replacement is the only way forward. Exclusivity is great, but only for (some) owners. For a manufacturer they want to sell 100000 of anything they make EVERY month. They are in it to make money. Only top end halo cars like the Bugatti Veyron or VW Pheaton are ever designed and made to make a loss from the start. And even then I think they secretly hope it could make money...

I'm all for a new steel A2. It will keep a lot of people happy and introduce them to a great brand. We have had many dicusions on here about what such an A2V2 should be (http://www.a2oc.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1772), so I just hope Audi AG reads it BEFORE they start designing it!
 
My opinion is that a new A2 in steel will never be an A2. I hope Audi will rename the new one to A1 in case they make one in steel.
 
If we don't accept change then we would all still be driving Beetles!!! Things change. We all resist change and then after a while you realise it is actually different, but all in all a lot better. We won't have had the stunning new Honda Civic if Honda just continued making incarnations of the previous boring version forever and a day (and kept their average owner age at the current 58). Change is good.

Only the drivers of A2s know what they are made of. Audi's raison d'être is not aluminium and people don't associate Audi with that per se. So a small, tall, MPV-esque, 5 door car slotting below the A3 can be called an A2 regardless of what it is made from IMHO. It will still cost more than a Citroën or a Focus C-Max so will still be scarce. But perhaps not as scarce as our current car. I'd still buy another.

As I said in my A2V2 post listed above, the SEAT Altea would have made a nice A2V2. But now they are talking making it being Polo based. So it won't compete against the A-class and Golf Plus. It will be much smaller. So what will it compete against? The small MPVs are the Renault Modus and Nissan Note type things... And they cost an average of only £10000.

So A2V2 needs to be based on the Golf platform perhaps, which in turn is the A3 platform and that makes it too big and competing against its own ilk.

So Polo platform it may be. But at what price? Will people again think it too small for the money? Perhaps. And that can only be a good thing. Renault's new Twingo will be marketed as an upmarket, leather clad very small car. Like a proper smart forTwo... So perhaps Audi can join that niche? Make an über-cool tiny car? Or is that really an A1?
 
Last edited:
Johann, I really must take issue with you - Audi's raison d'etre is Advancement through Technology (Vorsprung Durch Technik). Is reverting to a steel chassis'ed car with a bolt on body advancement? When the alternative was one of the safest, non-rusting cars on the road, I think not.

The trouble with Audi, like all big businesses these days is that they are slaves to the shareholders and if a product is not returning a profit within a specified time, it is discontinued, regardless of projected future sales.

I suspect that if Audi had kept the A2 going and introduced a new range of engines, they would have been turning a profit by now, especially if they could have made a few minor design changes to accomodate parts from other cars, cutting the number of unique parts needed to a minimum. Basically, once tooled up to produce the aluminium frame and panels, the ongoing costs of actually producing the parts only got cheaper and cheaper.

It's a great pity that no-one in power had the guts to say we'll stick it out for a while - in the same way that they have done with the Veyron. For each Veyron that rolls off the production line, VAG loses around £5 million, based on the costs recouped in sales. Compare this to an average loss of about £1000 on each A2 and you'll see that it would take about 5000 A2's to make the same loss as one Veyron!

It also seems that Audi don't really want to innovate these days - take a look at the TT Mk2 - a very timid redesign, compared to the classic original. I wonder how much was spent on the A2 face-lift in 2004, with the result of just having a new grille and wiper. Wouldn't it have been better to put that cost into bringing the A2 more into line with the rest of the range, with the aim of decreasing production costs, thereby making a profit a reality.

Perhaps the bosses at Audi just despise the fact that the have produced a small car, which can be bought into for less than £15-20k, in much the same way that a lot of other Audi owners look down on A2 owners (a feeling I got rather too often at Castle Coombe last year!).

You can't fail to have noticed that the number of A2s has increased dramatically over the last 12 months, even though the demise was well known (do people really buy a car when they know it'll be discontinued? - yes they do when they know it's as good as the A2), proving that the market for this car is there - it's just that Audi never really tapped into it effectively.

So the bottom line is this - Vorsprung Durch Technik, Wenn Preiswert Genug!

Rant over!
 
My personal view why Audi did not continue to produce the A2 was that they could not re-design the car to incorporate the New Grille which is now the new face of Audi.

Has anyone tried to Photoshop an A2 with the New grille just to see what it would look like.

As for the popularity of the A2, there are more and more appearing in the Hampshire area.
 
Skipton01 said:
Johann, I really must take issue with you - Audi's raison d'etre is Advancement through Technology (Vorsprung Durch Technik). Is reverting to a steel chassis'ed car with a bolt on body advancement?
Click to expand...

Audi Q7 anyone?! A badge engineered VW Touareg?!!! Is that advancement?! And why is that any better than doing a steel A2?!! And read up a bit about what constitutes a monocoque body. Only American pick-up trucks have a ladder frame chassis with "bolt on" bits. The A2's body is no different to a steel one bar that it is obviously made of fewer bits and of aluminium.


It's a great pity that no-one in power had the guts to say we'll stick it out for a while - in the same way that they have done with the Veyron. For each Veyron that rolls off the production line, VAG loses around £5 million, based on the costs recouped in sales. Compare this to an average loss of about £1000 on each A2 and you'll see that it would take about 5000 A2's to make the same loss as one Veyron!
Click to expand...

Perhaps: But the Veyron is a top end halo model to make you think: if an indiactor stalk in that costs £4500 I wonder how well designed mine must be in my Passat?! A bottom of the range car can never be a money loser as it can never ever make people lust after the bigger models... Life does not work like that.

I wonder how much was spent on the A2 face-lift in 2004, with the result of just having a new grille and wiper.
Click to expand...

The smaller a car's facelift the more succesful the original design. Note some classics that were never tinkered with in a big way like the Pugeot 205 and the Golf 4.



proving that the market for this car is there - it's just that Audi never really tapped into it effectively.
Click to expand...

My point too! Just that I do not think people bought the A2 only for it being aluminium. It is a technological tour de force. And a steel bodied car with little bits of Polo under the skin can still be a tour de force on many other levels...
 
Last edited:
A further thought: Why should the A2 be the only Audi that is different from its competitors? The A3 is not different to its peers. The A4 is not. The TT is not. The A6 is not. The Q7 is not. Even the A8 has another aluminium competitor in the Jaguar XJ, so even that is no different to its ilk. So why should the A2 and all its current loyal customers be killed off? To be the ONLY different car out there with an aluminium body just does not make financial sense...

I think we members of the A2OC may have bought our A2s for different reasons than the general public out there. We may also see the car differently due to what it is technically. The general buying public had no idea or cared that the car was aluminium and was certainly not prepared to pay more for it. I don't think the styling was ever disliked. I just think you did not get enough metal for your money and only 4 seats.

So a steel A2 based on the Polo can only mean MORE sales for Audi and a bigger customer base. Is the Fabia just a Polo with Skoda badges? Is the A3 a Golf with Audi badges? No. They only share the most basic core parts and are for all intents and purposes different cars... So the A2 won't look anything like a Polo. Of that we don't need to be worried. It won't be like the MG versions of the Rover 75 that only had spoilers and a badge to defferentiate it from a Rover!!

So it will/could be just another Audi with the same technology as the entire rest of the Audi range. Only difference is it will be smaller than the A3, taller and cost less with smaller base engines and be called A2. So go for it I say Audi! You can only but win! (IMHO)
 
Last edited:
Audi may well produce a successor to the A2. It may well be based on the Polo/Fabia platform and if it gets built will be made from steel. From the pictures I've seen of a possible successor I'm not impressed by either the design or the technology.

Like Skipton I believe (want to believe) that Audi's raison d'etre is progress through technology. The A2 represented a bold attempt at tackling some serious issues related to the our use of oil and climate change. i.e how can we maintain our personal mobility, still drive machines that are involving and enjoyable yet minimise environmental impact. Moreover, within the next decade we are going to face some serious issues relating to energy security. If the oil experts are to be believed we are beyond 'peak' oil. i.e. we are officially using oil at a faster rate than new reserves are being discovered. The inevitable consequence is that fuel prices will rise at an ever increasing rate and supplies will be subject to disruption. The recent disruption of gas supplies to the Ukraine and western Europe are just the tip of a growing problem.

The ultimate answer may be alternative fuels in a 'conventional' internal combustion engine e.g. hydrogen, bio-diesel etc. or may lie with some alternative technology such as fuel cells. Either way we the technology seems to be as far away as it was 5, or even 10 years ago and it may still be decades before we have mass produced technology of this sort. To tide us over we need highly energy efficient cars based on present day technology.

Cars such as the A2 and Toyota Prius may well be the interim solution. They take different approaches and both can be considered successful in meeting their design briefs. It is true that cars in general are more energy efficient than they used to be. However, this is largely due to the widespread adoption and refinement of diesel technology. The new Honda Civic can achieve 55 mpg. This is a good figure but is probably getting close to the limits of diesel technology and still doesn't compare to the A2 1.2Tdi, or even the 1.4Tdi. One reason for the outstanding economy of the A2 is its light weight and this derives from its aluminium construction. It is what marks this remarkeable car out from all its competitors.

Audi really should be building on this. i.e. the next A2 should be even more radical, more fuel efficient, still a design icon and fun to drive.

There are any number of nicely styled cars out there but none that I care to own. Lets look to the future and not backwards for our inspiration.
 
Well said Dennis. I also agree that making o new A2 in steel is a step back in technology. The energy required to make aluminium is higher than steel but is saved many times once the car has been on the road it's entire life due to lower fuel consumtion than a similar steel car. I bought the A2 beacuse the extra corrosion resistance, relatively low fuel consumtion and the high technology in this car, but mostly for the aluminium corrosion resistance. Should Audi make a new A2 in steel, it would mean for me that there will be more competitors to choose from since I will have to choose among ordinary steel cars. The A8 and aluminium Jaguar would be too expensive for me. Interesting thread BTW. Let's hear more opinions.
 
I 100% agree with you on that Dennis. As a save-the-planet car, nothing beats the A2. (The Prius is made of steel that is not as easy to recycle as aluminium AND how do you recycle its batteries that need changing every FOUR yours or so?!! The Prius is a green hoax in my view and many tests have shown that per mile a proper Golf 1,6 PETROL is greener and cheaper than a Prius. So to me the A2 is MILES greener. I digress.)

Audi will do well to do another green band-wagon car. But for the foreseeable future diesel and petrol won't be seen as green. Hybrid will be (though as I said above it is not (in my view) and is only preceived as green by the buying public because of Toyota et al's clever marketing men.)

The realist in me thinks the next A2 will be a cop-out to make money. Polo based and made of steel. The optimist would hope it will be even greener than my current one... In a world where money talks, I think I know which one will be made...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top