Talk:Audi 80

it's stated that the facelifted B1 was fferd with a 110 bhp fuel njected engine which replaced the 100 bhp from the GT. In fact the GT replaced by the GTE in October 1975, well before the facelift.

All images in this article were on speedy delete list so removed. Please use free pictures in future. Justinc 23:44, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

I removed an add-on to the S2/RS2 section; this is an encyclopedia, not a free bulletin board for ads.

Motorsport

I think a small section on the end of the article should be designated for the Audio 80/90 and its participation/usage in Motorsport. It was a notable entrant in the ISMA GT Championship for a few years as a Space-framed chasis. Considering it was beating GT cars such as the Ferrari F40 it was quite successful as a race-car. Although, it would be quite hard to find any references on its various exploits in and around the racing world.

Variety of English

I hesitate to bring up this thorny issue... but the present article has got a mixture of US English (sedan, station wagon, liter) and British English (coupé, with the e acute, and also "petrol tank" rather than "gas tank"). The British version seems justified because of the e acute being part of the actual model name, so far as I can see.

The Manual of Style says we should never have a mixture. But there are two conflicting cases about what to do: one suggests to go with the variety of English used in the home country of the product, and we get into the thing of Germany not having its own variety, but being part of Europe where the only official variety of English is British (not considering differences for Scots and Irish...); therefore British English should be used. But the other consideration in the Manual of Style is not to make mass changes of English variety for their own sake. On that basis it would also be a bad thing to change the page. My personal view is that the need for consistency over-rides this.

So on balance I'm minded to bring consistency to the article by switching to British English and changing sedan to saloon. Will this hugely offend anyone? – Kieran T ^(talk) 13:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Recommend "fuel tank" in cases where the type of fuel is not important. —überRegenbogen 08:56, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Panhard rod?

The geometry of the stabilizing strut (citing physical observation of mid-1970s Audi Foxes and VW Dashers) is significantly different from the illustrations and description in the Panhard rod article. Notably, rather than connecting to the body and cross-beam with ball joints, it is welded to the cross-beam and to the body-end of one of the trailing arms—forming a solid a-frame with them (and eliminating the arc motion that is specifically cited as a disadvantage of a Panhard rod).

The question—or questions—then are:

• Does this difference in design make it not a Panhard rod design?
  or:
• Is the Panhard rod article too specific in its description?

—überRegenbogen 09:41, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't know, but by the 80s the rod was articulated at both ends (with rubber bushings). You can see it quite well in this picture [1] which is a 1982 Coupe unit. Huw Powell (talk) 03:39, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Model 80 with Inline 5 cylinder Engine

It suggests in this article that the 2.3L I5 was not offered in the 1991 (80), but I owned a 1991 US model 80 with that particular setup. It was a front wheel drive, 2.3L I5, with a 5-speed manual transmission. It still had the B3 body style, so i don't think that it was an early B4.

Does anyone have any insight about this?

Magnacurt 23:58, 1 May 2007 (UTC)magnacurt

Picture

I added my picture of the 93 90S back, since someone removed it when the put up the picture of the white cabriolet.

Power

Can somebody check the power outputs of the various engines? This change by an anon from 110bhp to 101bhp, for a 1.6 engine which is in both cases more powerful than the 2.0 makes me suspicious that we may have subtle vandalism creeping in. When figures change without a reference or an edit summary it's always tempting to just revert, but it's often not obvious that the initial figure has any more authority — without going back to find who first added it, which is obviously very time consuming. Incidentally, no offence to this particular anon. If you're making valid changes, however, would you please start to use edit summaries to explain them, or source your information with references? Ta. :) – Kieran T ^(talk) 09:50, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

The 1.6 E used the new crossflow engine with MPI that had 101 PS (74 kW). It was more popular in Southern Europe where engine displacement was taxed. The 90 PS (66 kW) 2.0 was available in Germany to have an 80 in a lower insurance bracket (insurance is payed according to horsepower). A 1993 or 1994 Automobile Revue Katalog will confirm those horsepower values. --Pc13 10:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that info. Nice to know the edit was genuine. – Kieran T ^(talk) 10:49, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

B1 had auto tranny

When I was a kid we had a 1975 Audi Fox station wagon with automatic transmission. This was in Texas. Unfortunately I don't know any more about it (# of speeds). --ScottJ 22:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Scott, the early 80/Fox was available with a four-speed manual or a three-speed automatic only. --328cia (talk) 13:38, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Removed

this sentence:

The Audi 80 sold well in Germany, however the Netherlands and Denmark were its two biggest selling markets.

It simply cannot be that Audi sold more 80s on comparatively small markets (totalling about 300.000 cars per year each) than on its home market (2.5 million cars per year).

Also, I removed the hint concerning mainland European cars with the US-style quad headlamps. These were at no time used by the factory in Europe (except on the pre-facelift Coupé and Ur-Quattro, where they were standard, and on the first-gen Audi 200).

--328cia (talk) 13:38, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

FWIW, I finally found a source with some figures to back up my claim made above:

All Audi models sold, Denmark 1983/1984: 758/638

All Audi models sold Netherlands 83/84: 38.059/42.286 (Volkswagen included!)

Audi 80 sold in Germany 83/84: 77.654/71.306

--328cia (talk) 00:52, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Rs2logo.gif

Image:Rs2logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:07, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Model years Vs Years of production?

I know for a fact that there are 1987 B2 audi 80/90s in europe, AKA Audi 4000, but also Model year 1987 B3's in Europe, along with 1992 B3's. Are we going with Model years or production years for year designations? Pastorboy0 (talk) 02:18, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Model years are for American cars only. We go with production years for all other cars. --Pc13 (talk) 18:59, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Audi Coupé/Cabriolet B3

The Audi Coupé "B3" and Cabriolet (typ 89, more correctly 8B and 8G) definitely deserve their own article. As it stands, they are a very awkward fit on the Audi 80 page as they are a mishmash of B3 and B4 parts, and have entirely different development histories. I suggest a page titled Audi Coupé/Cabriolet for these cars. Additionally, the Audi Cabriolet is referred to as a B4, which is not correct. The Cabriolet is based on the typ 89 Coupé (nicknamed B3), it just happened to appear around the same time as the introduction of the "B4" Audi 80. Also, such a change would allow us to place the Audi S2 Coupé in its correct place rather than (perversely) as a subsection to the B4.  ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃  (talk) 20:44, 16 January 2011 (UTC)