From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Founding date is wrong[edit]

It jars me that the founding year currently in the infobox - 1932 - is actually the founding year of Auto Union, not Audi in its present form. This is where it gets a bit ambiguous.

Strictly speaking, Audi has two founding years - the original August Horch enterprise in 1910, and the modern era company in 1969 when Auto Union and NSU were merged. Suggest we put both in the infobox with a title and a break in between them. Don't want to barge in and change it without sounding out other ppl's opinions first. Comment added by (RapidAssistant (talk) 13 January 2016

WW2 and connections with the Nazi Germany[edit]

Why we must forget this part where the company was using slaves in its factories? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:12, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

It´s a wiki - help yourself with the shoa-business. (talk) 03:25, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Fleshing out[edit]

Wow ... well, this page is in serious need of 'fleshing' out by an auto enthusiaist. If I have time, I'll try to do it, as I'm an avid Audi fan / owner. However, if anyone else reads this comment, please regard it as a plea to bring in some 'gear-head' and historical know-how.

I agree, I would like to find the time to do this as well. --AudiS4BiTurbo 06:22, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Agreed... I think the place we should focus our efforts is in the Technology section, especially the first three paragraphs. I'm really curious where the "World record for mpg in a full-sized car, approximately 200mpg" citation is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomisina (talkcontribs) 00:09, 30 November 2007 (UTC)


Well, what happened as how I hear it is that in the 1930's, Audi had employed a designer from Porsche to work on their cars. The German government (or someone) wanted a really cheap and easy car to build for the people to use because they realized the populating masses need to get around. The Porsche designer came up with the Beetle concept and released it under the car brand "Volkswagen" ("people's car"). This influence can be felt in some VW cars have the same type of air-(or is it water?) cooled system Porsche's used too. Audi kept chugging along, acquiring another company in the 1970's (I think NSW), while their Volkswagen unit exploded with Beetle popularity since the Beetle came out. The company then changed their name to VAG (Volkswagen-Audi Group) (others think it stands for Volkswagen AG, where AG is the abbreviation for the German word "Aktiengesellschaft" which is english for Stock Company) to reflect that VW was more of an equal partner because without their capital, Audi might not have survived into the 80's. Audi as a car brand started becoming popular through rally racing. Their advertising unit used the "if it's good enough to drive 80 mph through dark forest paths in the snow, it can handle anything you've got to drive it through" notion, and sharing the lead with Subaru in the four-wheel drive craze of the mid-80's. This goes off-topic I know, but more trivia for the readers. Subaru and Audi used four-wheel drive as a big selling point, whereas Porsche and Mercedes had it available but their four-wheel drive systems weren't as reliable with Mercedes being the worst of the group, I hear it wasn't true four-wheel drive, that it was a hybrid between four-wheel drive and rear-wheel drive. Audi took the luxury four-wheel drive road, Subaru took the economical four-wheel drive road. and all others practically pulled out but a few manufacturers still dabble or offer four-wheel drive systems on a very limited basis. --LighthouseJ 17:37, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I don't believe that this is historically accurate. Please see Ferdinand Porsche for a backgrounder on the Beetle. Jbetak 05:47, 28 January 2006 (UTC)


Your translation of Vorsprung durch Technik is not correct: "progress" translates "Fortschritt" in German. I'm afraid that I can't offer you a better translation, my English just isn't good enough. I would suggest "leadership", that's a little bit closer, but still not exactly the same as Vorsprung. Let me put it like this:

After on e wekk Lance Armstrong was only 20 seconds ahead, but in the Pyrenees his VORSPRUNG rose to more than two minutes

Who can help?-- 01:56, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)(from de:wikipedia)

To further help out the translation, I found an advertisement on the net for Audi. It poses the question "vorsprung" and then "what is it?". It then says "there are those who have it..." and shows Muhammed Ali fighting, Albert Einstein thinking and Marilyn Monroe with her famous dress, Dr. Martin Luther King at his I Have A Dream... speech, Mahatma Ghandi looks around a room and other imagery. The second part says "and those who don't" and it shows lazy guys sleeping, sipping coffee, falling asleep in a recliner and waiting for a haircut. The sequence ends with "and never will". The third part begins with "But you'll always know it, when you see it". and shows some older and powerful Audi racing films from earlier in the 20th centure and the 21st century Le Mans competitions and includes some clips from the 80's (my personal favorite time in Audi racing) of the Audi quattro kicking dirt up around turns and people desperately trying to get out of the way. Before the end, there's a radio-quality clip of what sounds like Dr. August Horch laid over film of him actually speaking that says "You've got to have the vorsprung in order to be in front." The rest of ad shows mostly racing clips intermixed with examples of vorsprung. If you are interested in watching it, I suggest you download a copy at
Vorsprung means the passion to accel ahead of the rest, to be the best.

--LighthouseJ 06:32, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I guess "vorsprung" could be loosely translated as "edge" or "competitive edge" in the context mentioned above. Advantage is a more conservative translation and advancement is closest to "fortschritt", which is not what we are looking for IMHO. My best guess: "Edge Through Technology" Jbetak 06:55, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
Apparently, Audi used "Advantage through Technology" in a 1986 UK advertising campaign. Leave it as it is then? Jbetak 07:05, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
"Vorsprung" (in this context) translates as "head start" or "lead" - so a good (non-literal) translation would be "Our technology gives us a head start over the competition"... if you try to maintain the three word slogan, taking the translation through the alternate meanings jbetak suggested gets you there... YggdrasilsRoot 20:24, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
I don't think the site Jbetak links to above implies that Audi ever used the English phrase "Advantage through Technology" in its advertising. Rather, they've always used "Vorsprung durch Technik", and "Advantage through Technology" is that particular website's translation of the phrase. Nevertheless, I do agree that "Advantage through Technology" is the snappiest possible English translation. ("Competitive Edge through Technology", while being a more faithful translation, simply falls flat.) Angr (talkcontribs) 07:56, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
I (native german) would also translate "Vorsprung" as advantage. While edge is equally fitting, "advantage through technology" has a better "feel" to it and doesn't mingle with the original balance of the slogan. "edge through technology" shifts the emphasis too much towards the end due to the discrepancy in both words' length. -- Benjamin, May 7th
FWIW, the BBC translates it as "Progress through Technology". [1] f(x)=ax2+bx+c 17:39, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
lol doesnt matter what the bbc says.. no, to be serious: you just cant translate it directly into english, there is so word for it in the english language but the actual translation in the article describes it quite well :) so, done ;)
 Done it's quite a no-brainer that it should be "advantage", so i simply changed it. Ossilator (talk) 20:38, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Marque status (luxury)[edit]

Audi? Luxury? // Liftarn

I am sorry that I have to disagree with you again but yes Audi is a luxury marque.

For whatever it's worth - Audi positioned itself as competition to BMW in late 70s and early 80s. In turn, BMW started positioning itself as competition to Mercedes in late 60s and early 70s. BMW has long attained the status of a Mercedes' heir apparent, even outselling Daimler in its own market segment for the first time in recent years. Audi's brand might not appear as established in the luxury market; BMW has about a decade advantage on them. Jbetak 06:33, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Neither BMW nor Mercedes (perhaps with the exception of some Mercedes models) are luxury, they are premium cars. Luxury cars are designed and built to provide the utmost of style and comfort. Often they are at least partially hand built and often also according to customer specifications. I find it hard to fit a compact car like Audi A2 into that description. // Liftarn
I figured out that our disagreement is due to our difference in catergorical terms. Rolls Royce and Bentley are not luxury cars. They are ultra-luxury marques. Luxury and Premium automobiles are synonomous.

I disagree. // Liftarn 12:40, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

But if Luxury and Premium automobiles are synonomous then why not call it "Premium" then? // Liftarn 08:41, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

I was about to post something along the same lines, but to your edit prevented mine from being saved ;-) Let me at least post the link I quickly grabbed from German Google: All of the three German brands have models positioned below this class as well. The sematics and culutral use is quite likely different between Germany and the US .
Jbetak 16:53, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
Is some models enough to classify the entire brand as luxury? // Liftarn 12:40, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
That's a good point. What would you call Lexus then - a brand specifically created to host Toyota's luxury models. Right or wrong, is it perceived as a luxury brand today - some 15 years after its inception? And how about Toyota? And Hyundai has a luxury model now too. Jbetak 16:04, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

I would call Lexus "Toyota" (or "a rebadged Toyota"). I would call it Toyota's premium or prestige brand. If the bar for what constitues luxury would be lowered then almost every brand would have to be called luxury since almost every brand has a model badged as De Luxe, GL (Grand Luxe) or a version thereof (GLE, GLi et.c.). Then even Nissan Micra would become a luxury automobile since it has a Grand Luxe model. // Liftarn

In the US Mercedes and Audi sell only their upper range models. The lower range models you see in Germany are not available. This allows (particularly Mercedes)to have the luxury brand image. It's all marketing. 05:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

multitronic gearbox link[edit]

I created the multitronic article in order to link to it from this Audi article, but it was removed sometime and now there's no mention of multitronic on the page at all. Does anyone know why it was removed? The cloest match is near the end of the Technology section where it mentions a DSG gearbox, which is the multitronic system, but there's no mention of multronic or a link to it.

I don't want to change the article without some talk about it first in case there's a valid reason, if not, I'd change the article and they'll just get reverted.LighthouseJ 21:06, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

multitronic is extremely different from DSG. multitronic is along the lines of a FWD driveline and similar to the CVT (junk) transmission. In all reality, people to not know too much about the multitronic because its extreme complexity and function. it can easily be "described" but the true function and technology in it is very advanced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:26, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Lead the way?[edit]

There are several lines in this article with such claims as Audi "leads the way" in technology and innovation.

I also read the same in many other automakers wikis, but its particularly bad here.

Isnt the claim "Audi leads the way" a claim after all? Therefor subjective?

I think such lines need to be removed.

If your teachers say the world is round, and your geography textbook says the world is round, do you think your teachers and textbooks are being subjective too?
If you don't think Audi leads technological advances then you aren't up to date on Audis' technological progress. LighthouseJ 17:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
I do agree with the idea that the claim "Audi leads the way" is highly subjective. To "lead the way" in automotive industry it's very complex concept, there's no authority who can determine which company "leads the way", and it can not be proven (the claim "the world is round" can be proven). For me, and so many colleagues, Audi does not (and did not) lead the way in technological advances in automotive industry. Even more, Audi has been always a step ahead other German manufacturers, not only in technology, but in quality. Since the 1990's, Audi's desperate effort to be included in the "Porsche/Mercedes-Benz/BMW" premium class, has been an intense race, in which Audi has improved prices before technology. It's a personal opinion, but not isolated...
Let the facts speak for themselves. I can only see two instances of "Audi leads the way" style narration in the current article, but I'd suppoprt the removal of both. --DeLarge 13:32, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

AUDI : 1931 first mass production of FWD about 40 years before FWD was standard in other brands AUDI : 1937 broke 400 km/h on a public rd (first ever) - very impressive if you ask me AUDI : 1976 developed the first ever 5 cyl. engine AUDI : 1980 - the first volume 4WD production car, went on to dominate the rally scene AUDI : 1986, recieves the german industry's innovation prize for their ability to develope and implement new ideas AUDI : 1994 space frame, enough said. way before its time. AUDI : 1998 QUATTRO (yes quattro) is banned from racing due to " an unfair advantage" AUDI : 2000 - revolutionary v6 twin turbo with 5 valves per cylinder AUDI : CURRENT- Direct injection (FSI), DSG, 4-link, 5-link, 5 valves per cylinder, who else has 1000+ psi in their fuel injection systems?

in reality i am sorry for taking this to the extent i have, but AUDI is and always has been a leader in innovation and technology. those are just a few examples. look at where FSI has traveled, even MAZDA and cadillac are making an attempt to have direct injection. im not saying audi is the greatest ever but to say they have not been important to technological advancement in the automobile would be insane. thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:51, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Citation needed for 60 Minutes bashup[edit]

I don't have the know-how to do a proper citation, but here's the skinny: the 60 Minutes story comes from an article titled "It Didn't start with Dateline NBC" published June 21, 1993 in the National Review, by Walter Olsen. It can be searched for in the archives of National Review at or seen online in full text at

I would be interested in more sources for this as well, since I'm familiar with this story as a child who grew up in a family that is rather fond of Audis and purchased them from before the scandal, through the court case and after Audi's name was cleared, all the way to the present day. My understanding is that there was a court case where a woman ran over her own child with an Audi, and sued Audi with this claim that Audis accelerate by themselves. The jury cleared Audi of all charges despite the extremely sympathetic plaintiff, since apparently it was demonstrated to their satisfaction that such spontaneous acceleration overriding the brake pedal was impossible (under the conditions described). According to my parents, the media covered the trial well, but said nothing about the exoneration at the end. The whole business smells like an attempt to sabotage Audi to me, although I'm willing to accept that it's simply yellow journalism rather than a conspiracy, but I just find it interesting that everyone at the time bought the story, and now everyone has forgotten that the whole thing happened... nobody in my generation is familiar with the story. --Skyfaller 06:31, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Our family was also really fond of Audi, and owned two. The second one, a red 5000, did however unintendedly accelerate when I was at an intersection, and almost caused me to get into a head-on collision as I was attempting a left hand turn. I was familiar with the news at the time regarding the unintended acceleration, and the fact that the pedals were close together, so I released my foot from what I thought were both pedals, looked down and placed my foot on the brake only, the engine kept racing, and due to my leg strength, I was able to control the 5000, but I can see how a weaker person caught unaware might not be able to control the car as the rpm's were past 5000. As it was, it still took about 10-20feet to control the Audi. If it didn't happen to me, I wouldn't have believed it. As it was happening I couldn't believe it. I find it degrading that this article tries to place the blame on the driver as there was a real dangerous issue plaguing some of their cars. In my over 800,000km's driving my various cars, trucks and motorcycles, it has happened only that one time in that one Audi. Please rephrase the wording so that the blame is placed where it belongs; i.e. with Audi and not with the operators/victims. ZYXW9876 (talk) 18:20, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

VIN decoder link[edit]

Explain why my link is no good here, but VIN decoder links (including mine) on many other vehicle manufacturers are welcome on those articles. Please stop reverting me when others aren't--see Buell Motorcycle Company history--links were cleaned up there and a VIN decoder remains. It is welcome as a part of the article. I'm putting the Audi link back up. Corey Salzano 13:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I disagree that it should be included in the article. I don't feel that it meets the spirit of WP:EL, even if I can't find a hard and fast rule. If you look at WP:EL under What to link, it includes "Is it proper in the context of the article (useful, tasteful, informative, factual, etc.)?" I don't think it's useful in the context of an article. Very few people are going to come to the Audi article and want to get more information by going to a VIN decoder. If they wanted to go to a VIN decoder, they would have searched for a VIN decoder in the first place. --Matt 13:55, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
"Very few people are going to come to the Audi article and want to get more information..." Isn't that the point of navigating to the article, though? To get more information? What about articles like Harley-Davidson that have VIN decoding information in the article. If a VIN decoder link at the bottom of the article is not to be included then shouldn't we edit out all VIN information on all vehicle articles? Thanks for the reply! Corey Salzano 14:55, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
That quote is out of context, in fact missing the critical part of the sentence. "Very few people are going to come to the Audi article and want to get more information by going to a VIN decoder". The Audi article is an article about the company, its technology, and its history, and to some extent its line-up, not about how it numbers its vehicles.
I haven't read the Harley article fully, but from a quick search I don't see "VIN decoding information in the article", just a link to the same web site as has been removed from here. I'm not saying VIN information can't be pertinent in the right context, but I would guess that a VIN decoder is going to be out of context for most auto manufacturer articles. --Matt 15:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I didn't think a full quote was necessary since your entire original message is on this same page. "I would guess that a VIN decoder is going to be out of context for most auto manufacturer articles". Yesterday was the first time anyone has reverted my edits (on 3 articles in different topics!) My first impression was "wow I'm being targeted here". If you review the Buell Motorcycle Company history as I recommended in my original post on this page, external links were whiped out but a VIN decoder link remains. I'd like to talk to IrishGuy and see why he thinks differently than other editors. Corey Salzano 15:44, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

LED Daylight Headlights[edit]

somebody needs to update this, the LED Daylight brow headlights are now set to be audi's new trademark to the car world, by 2010, they plan to include the lights on all models, the only ones that are not at this point in time are the audi a4 cabbroleit, a6 and a8, apart from that they all have them. update —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:21, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

2009 A6 does have LED daytime runing lights. along with a revolutionary supercharged v6, unheard of in the audi brand. by 2010 the a8 will have the LED's —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:58, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

This category should be generalized to indicate that they no longer have LEDs for just daylight running lights, but for all exterior lighting as well. It's currently an option for the R8, but is set to trickle to other models.Madmonky (talk) 02:26, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Rework and edit of Intro[edit]

I tried to clean up the intro. I also took out this bit:

The Volkswagen group was formerly known as "Volkswagen Audi Group" -VAG), and the "Aktiengesellschaft" or "AG" was added to indicate Ownership of Audi by its shareholders – hence the term "Aktiengesellschaft" or "AG".

I couldn't find a good place in the article for it, and I didn't think it belonged in the Intro. EmilyWolff (talk) 18:20, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Why did you remove the above? Because that was 100% factually correct! (talk) 08:26, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Audi h-tron & Prologue show car (updates from LA Auto Show)[edit]

Audi held a press conference at the 2014 LA Auto Show today, November 19, in which they unveiled two significant advancements: their A7 h-tron quattro and the Audi Prologue show/concept car. The new h-tron designator refers to Audi's new hydrogen-electric hybrid powertrain, and I've read that the Prologue is likely to be badged as the first generation A9. If anyone is familiar with either the new powertrain or the details of the Prologue/A9 please help by sharing what you know so the necessary edits can be done quickly and accurately. I'm currently trying to find available information that is more substantial than speculation from auto enthusiasts so the updates are factual.

Semi-protected edit request on 31 July 2015[edit]

I have a suggestion that the Audi AG page be updated with the new and latest information on its working and its value based information. Sree Lakshman20 (talk) 11:01, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: as you have not requested a specific change in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
More importantly, you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 11:21, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 September 2015[edit]

In the Engines section please remove the W12 engine because its from the Volkswagen Phaeton and not a Audi Car (talk) 18:11, 28 September 2015 (UTC) Not done see Audi A8 the W12 was "available in the A8, though only to European and Asian customers" - Arjayay (talk) 09:04, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 December 2015[edit]

In 2014, most of the Audi dealers in UK falsely claimed that the Audi A7, A8, and R8 were Euro NCAP safety tested, all achieving five out of five stars. In fact none were tested Audi UK have more than 10 dealerships in the UK, To say that "most of the Audi Dealers" in the UK falsely claimed when infact only 10 were tested is misleading UK Dealerships (talk) 10:10, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: read the cited source. the "nine out of ten" is the ratio of dealers that made false claims. the source goes on to say that the investigator spoke to 50 dealers, 48 of which made false claims. Cannolis (talk) 10:45, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Merger proposal[edit]

I propose merging Vorsprung durch Technik into the extant "slogans" subsection of this article. I can't see how the 5 sentences (excluding the pop culture cruft) is independently notable enough from the company to require a separate article, and the contents are basically already covered in the company's article. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 03:15, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

After no comment for more than 6 months, I'm going to go ahead and do it. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 07:16, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 September 2016[edit]

I'd like to add a "Suspension" sub-section to the Technology section of the Audi page.

This is to cover Audi's recent innovations with its eROT system. Please see the following links for more detail:;; —  CarLover (talk) 06:53, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Audi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:20, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Audi A9[edit] — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:55, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Is there a sport "compatta", Audi Prologue? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:34, 5 March 2017 (UTC)