While stopped at a traffic light a little while back I was surprised to see one of Audi’s aluminium wonders in a dealer’s used car yard, because they never sold them here. Not surprising when it is claimed to be one of four in the country!
Photo: Audi Penfold Burwood
Here are some more photos from the dealer’s website, where it is still for sale at AUD$19,990. This is a 1.4L petrol engine version, which has 56 kW or 75 hp.
1993 ASF concept
The Audi A2 story is a case of a manufacturer pushing technology further than what consumers were ready for, and particularly in 1999 when it was implemented in a small hatchback, even if it was preceded (rightly) by Audi’s flagship 1994 A8. There is a reason why new technology is normally introduced in top-of-the-range cars, so perhaps they should have followed up the A8 with the A7 rather than the A2, or done the TT in aluminium?
1997 Audi AL2 concept
The A2 dates from a fairly remarkable time in VW history, with cars like the VW Phaeton and Bugatti Veyron having their design set as much by what seem like arbitrary design specifications or challenges as much as by market research. Of course there is a common factor here: Ferdinand Piëch. Need I say more?
In the A2’s case, it was “Transport four people from Stuttgart to Milan on a single tank of petrol”. That is only 505 km (315 miles) which shouldn’t be much of a challenge even if you have a small 34 L (or just under 9 US gallons) of fuel in your tank. Highway fuel consumption for the 1.4 petrol version is rated at 4.7 L/100km or 50 mpg US, at least for the Euro extra-urban cycle. Not bad but not amazing, given the cost involved.
Of course most of the body was Audi’s second-generation Aluminium Space Frame (ASF), of which 60% was stamped sheet, 22% castings and 18% extruded profiles. In a first, many of the pieces were laser-welded together. There were still a few steel pieces including the firewall and the front crossmember, while the external panels were not load-bearing, in the manner of the Citroen DS for one. The ASF construction saved 150 kg (330 lb) compared to a conventional steel body shell.
Infamously the bonnet (or hood) was not hinged but removed altogether when necessary for servicing, but in day-to-day operation the grille panel opened instead for checking oil and water. The lack of bonnet hinges, and lighter bonnet itself, saved 5 kg.
Other than the construction method, careful attention was paid to the aerodynamics in the name of fuel efficiency, as this car was intended for use on the autobahn in addition to city streets. The original versions had flush wheel covers rather than the alloy wheels seen here.
Inside it was fairly conventional, within the tall-hatch form factor that is ideal for maximising interior space within a given footprint. I wonder if it is in response to the rise of the CUV that ‘normal’ cars seem to be getting lower again? A narrow car like the A2 (1673mm / 65.9”) can be a challenge to avoid feeling like you are sitting on a bar stool, through the amplified effects of body roll. Audi’s solution was firm springing and a hefty anti-sway bar; the counter-effect of this is a firm ride
The back seat doesn’t look very accommodating, but was said to provide good room even for tall passengers thanks to the A2 using a similar layout to the original Mercedes A-Class with a sandwich floor that in the rear seat created particularly deep footwells.
Similarly the boot is unusually roomy at 390L or nearly 14 cubic feet, as large as the best C-segment hatchbacks today. Don’t forget the A2 was just 3.8m long (150.6”), and was impressively light at only 895kg (1,973 lb) in 1.4L petrol form. Add 100kg for the 1.6 FSi or 1.4 TDi versions. The aluminium construction had a significant drawback in service though – accident damage is very expensive to repair, which has lead to many A2’s being written off, even when relatively new. Parts specific to the A2 are quite expensive too.
I mentioned not amazing fuel economy, but there was a version of the A2 with a 1.4L 3–cyl TDi engine that improved things considerably (3.7L/100 / 63.5mpg highway), but the amazing version was the one with the 1.2 TDi drivetrain from the Lupo 3L. That refers 3L per 100km or 78 mpg, and that is for the combined cycle; the highway rating is 2.7L/100km or 87 mpg. What is more impressive is that you can apparently actually achieve those numbers! Mind you, to make sure you couldn’t take full advantage of this economy the fuel tank was reduced to just 21 litres (5.5 gal). The normal tank was optional, so I wonder if making the rating was such a close-run thing that a few kilos made the difference, and further how many cars were built with the small tank?
Interestingly, an A2 was converted into a ute by trainees at Audi’s Neckarsulm factory. Perhaps they should have sent those to Australia? Probably not, I doubt they would have sold as well as the Suzuki Mighty Boy…
Nevertheless like cars such as the Ford GT or Lexus LFA, the A2 is notable as a car that pushed technology and manufacturing processes along even if they weren’t completely profitable as a stand-alone project. The advertisement for our feature car states that it would be “great for a collector”, which is very true.
Further Reading:
Mads Jensen’s Curbside Classic: Audi A2 1.2 TDI – Vorsprung Durch Technik
If a Dodge Caliber and an Audi TT had a baby, it would be this thing. It even has its uncle Jeep Patriot’s taillights.
I rode A2 once and found it very underwhelming and bit tight in the width. Actually, I found Mercedes-Benz A-Class (W168) roomier and more spirited than A2 (due to more engine choices).
The non openable hood and that little meager maintenance area provided by the faux grille is by exact description every car enthusiasts exaggerated criticism of modern cars. I can’t believe there’s a real life example, and from Audi no less!
That did seem like an odd design choice. Do I remember correctly that at least the early Boxsters also went with the same kind of minimalist access for basic maintenance?
There are two twist latches to remove the hood (visible in the picture), that don’t even require tools, so it is a pretty quick process if necessary.
Given that I have an efficiency freak streak, I was very intrigued and impressed by the A2. The idea of getting 75+ mpg in a car that seats four in comfort seemed like mission impossible. But then that’s what Piech was out to prove: that the seemingly impossible was possible.
Now if only Piech had been an EV maniac like Elon Musk…
Or at least an environmental maniac so that VW diesels wouldn’t be known worldwide as evil polluters!
Maybe this car was a little too far ahead of it’s time, but pretty impressive MPG results. 50 MPG on gasoline on a non hybrid, without a hybrids extra complexity is hard to fault.
Having spent lots of wheel time in one on a 6000 km trip across hungary and former yugoslavia, I am thoroughly convinced by the brilliance of this little car. As a bulky 2m guy sharing the interior with two other fellows and an extensive amount of camping gear for two weeks, the interior really looked tight and narrow but never actually felt the part. Neither did the ride cause great hardships on widely neglected roads of Tito’s provenience.
As for the engine accessability: It actually quite mirrors that of a T3 bus (vanagon) on tour and lifting the hood off is rather less hassle than clearing the bus’ engine cover. Also the probability of being forced to do so is infinitely less likely to occur with the a2.
I wonder if this car was somewhat like the 1st Prius? The 1st Prius was a fairly radical concept, although in the case of the Toyota it was wrapped in ordinary, somewhat conservative styling. Would the A2 have “succeeded” if the plug had not been pulled after the 1st generation?
It doesn’t sound as though the gas engine models were all that economical, for the price that these sold for that was probably a drawback, too.
Apparently the A2 lost $1.5b for Audi – I wonder how that compares for the first Prius?
The car was economical, but people were not buying them to save money.
Well, I’m a fan of the 3L version. I don’t know if I could actually handle its lack of performance but everything about an efficient, comfortable, advanced car is just so right.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-european/curbside-classic-audi-a2-1-2-tdi-vorsprung-durch-technik/
I can understand why Audi didn’t officially import this car into Australia. Audi is largely an “aspirational” brand here for those wanting to signal “Euro-cool” credentials and a little econobox like this wouldn’t cut it – especially at the price point which Audi would have needed to have sold it for.
It would also have struggled to compete against the second generation Prius (except on status) which has very similar fuel economy figures, probably more useful on-road performance and certainly substantially more interior space (going by the photographs of the A2).
And 67Conti’s comments about hybrid “complexity” are pretty out-dated. Apart from the NiMH battery itself (under development since the 1960’s I think) the only complexity of a hybrid like the Prius is the solid state electronics and its software. Not surprisingly, they have proved to be very reliable.
I think it would have been too expensive to sell, readers from Britain or Europe may correct me but I think that the A2 was more expensive than the M-B A-class, and that started at $35k here, the Prius was $37k.
The fuel economy seems pretty impressive to me. I had to double check that the given numbers were US MPG and not the sneaky British MPG numbers that trick so many people.
What an amazing find. On an intellectual level I love the idea of the aluminium space frame construction and the resultant economy, but on a practical level I’d be afraid of the chance of it becoming damaged and being irreparable.
I’m pretty firmly in the “folly” camp. As with the Passat W8 or the Volkswagen Phaeton, it’s not that the A2 had no virtues, but its priorities are so arbitrary that it seems like a term project for engineering students rather than a practical product.
(I feel similarly about the current BMW i3, which strikes me as an astonishingly pointless exercise whose virtues are difficult to see if you’re not either stuffed with free BMW press event chow or the sort of prat who recommends yoga as a cure-all and tries to feed their dog a vegan diet.)
Well, it’s all about context. Over here in Denmark cars are taxed on import – 120 to 180 percent of the price of the car itself. Mileage decides the tax, so every little helps. On top of that, there’s an ownership tax that is also based on mileage, so you pay between 20 USD/yr and around 3,000 USD/yr, so also in this respect there’s money to be saved. Add to that fuel prices many times higher than in the US, and it starts making sense. Until recently electric cars were completely tax free, which made them very attractive (in Norway they have the same arrangement, which made the Tesla Model S the top selling car a couple of years back). So in short, there are markets for cars like these.
The 3L long range A2 was also a sort of halo car – it was way too expensive for what it was, but VAG wanted to make the point that it could be done. There’s money to be made off statements like that as well.
The Phaeton, though, is pretty weird: “We can make a supreme luxury car!” “You mean like the A8?”
Same for the Passat W8: “We can stuff a sophisticated, powerful engine in a family car!” “You mean like the VR6? The R32?”
To be clear, my perplexity at the i3 is not that it’s an electric car — which is fine and makes sense in certain contexts — but that it’s an expensive car dressed up as cheap one for the sake of virtue-signaling. I also find it quite distressingly ugly (every time I saw journalists praise its styling, I could only assume the press event had excellent booze) and the fact that the optional “range extender” fails to extend its range into the same realm as pure petrol- or diesel-fueled cars is just bizarre.
Discounting the powertrain, its object appears to be to demonstrate that a B-segment car can be really innovative if cost is no object. Which I guess is true, but again seems like an engineering exercise in search of a point.
Aaron, apart from small = cheap I don’t get that either this A2 or the i3 are dressed up as cheap cars. Quite the opposite, I see them as a bleeding-edge early adopter “cost be damned, I want the best” type of thing, like buying a fancy watch.
There is undoubtedly an element of save the planet, it certainly isn’t saving money. Both cars I think are also about building the high-tech image of the company, perhaps to counter all the cheap leases?
Another great post, John. Would love to know how the four got here at all.
I love these, for perhaps irrational reasons. I can’t help but love the haughtiness of VW having made them, for the experimentation, and then for their achievement as a working object. Remember that Toyota is reputed to have lost money on the entire first generation of Prius, and it seems less indulgent.
Mads Jensens’ original post (and didn’t that attract the hisser and spitters!) has it right. They made an ultra-economy car roomy, and luxurious in feel. You could re-release this right now, though the styling would need to abandon the subtle ’30’s aero cues and get lots of angrification to be sold presently. Apparently.
Ofcourse it’s a folly, a Piech indulgence. But unlike other meglos, no-one was harmed in the making (shareholders be damned). I’d buy it tommorow.
But for a 15 year-old orphan in Aus, at exactly half THIS price, Penfold Audi, a price I regard as a complete stab for the tail on the donkey.
Each A2 was a waste of money for Audi.
If these cars with this tech would have sold, with the real cost… Prices rocketing to a level of impossible sell/buy, by rational standars.
Another V.A.G. swangsong
In the 90’s almost all manufacturers forced the markets to buy hatchbacks, the sensation and the way for designers be cool was create jelly beans style or little cars while almost all people was looking for minivans, SUVs and pickups. I remember that not only Audi, but many more manufacturers bet in the wrong way…
I so wanted to like the A2 after having had such great service from an A6 but could not live with the crashy ride, Absolutely love the first gen A8, such an elegant car
After trying an A2 I found it delivered no more than a 1.3 1st gen Petrol Toyota Yaris and the diesel Yaris is just as economical on the road.
I find the Yaris hard to fault if you want basic, reliable and economical transport, because my brother is a non car chap I advised him buy a 1.3, not 1.0 petrol Yaris (no diesel DMF issues, huge difference in feel over the 1.0 and almost as economical as makes no difference) and its given sterling service for a few years now, I borrowed it once on a 300 mile trip in the UK, it was comfortable enough and gave 50mpg. Yes its white goods but dammed if I could justify the extra that an A2 costs on a small car.
The 3L A2 is second to none on mileage for diesel and gasoline powered cars. Contemporary testers actually exceeded the claims by the factory as mentioned by John875 above. Other cars have claimed similar mileage since but in real world condirions they fall short.
Not enough as a total package, any superiority in fuel consumption is quickly negated by any repair costs, in the long run I will take the Toyota any day for honest basic transport
I am totally happy with 50mpg, exceptional reliability and cheap repair costs, in the 4 years of ownership my brother only replaced the exhaust at 155k miles and just had anti roll bar bushes fitted to pass its MOT, fair wear and tear in my book. The Yaris does not excite me but it fit for purpose.
A big Audi yes, but the A2 just doesn’t justify its price, I was initially taken with its small size and economy, but after road testing one, I only drove a few mile to realise I could not live with it
For me German cars peaked in the mid 90s when the were excellent as demonstrated by my 95 A6, but their reliability record since then, especially diesels is not so great, and dam expensive to fix
They are cheap to get overhere, and technically not to good, lots of troubles, and expensive repairs.
The follies of a different era. It really is too bad neither Audi nor Mercedes followed up on the fantastic space efficiency of their smallest models. Probably too expensive to produce. Neither had much to say in terms of driving dynamics, either – not a chance against the (horribly cramped) BMW 1-series.
Until the current (about to be replaced) A-class Mercedes were still doing the tall-hatch thing, and still are with the B-class. I would speculate that Audi are happy for people wanting more space to buy a Q2 (as pictured next to the A2 in the first photo actually!) while the A1 is perhaps more stylish if not more trendy.
The face is adorable, but the rear has the look of a miniature Rendezvous. Neither aspect is something most Audi customers are looking for, it seems.
The car may have been better off as a Volkswagen model, to coincide with their upmarket aspirations of the time. It would have been no crazier than the Phaeton.
Perhaps the Up! was the non-experimental but spiritual follow-up.
This might have made sense as an electric car – it reminds me of the BMW i3, which I drove last year and absolutely enjoyed despite its unusual appearance. Ahead of its time, and maybe too costly in terms of its technology for what many would have seen as an entry-level hatchback. Kind of like the “glorified Smart Car” that was the first Mercedes A-Class, which came out around the same time.
Great article, some great posts and some assumptions.
I own a 1.4 petrol A2 and I love this car. I enjoy efficient and well build products and my A2 fits right in. It’s build quality is very good (still no rattles or wear and tear after 16 years), economical and cheap to run and maintain. The problem was the unusual looks, solving problems which weren’t an issue in 2000 and it was very expensive. You could buy 2 base Polo’s, a turbo and well equiped Golf, a base Passat or an A3. And still Audi lost money on every A2 sold.
But it’s not a perfect car at all. It’s biggest letdown is the uncomfortable ride. It’s ok on our motorways, but when i get to the autobahn, I prefer our other car. Although the 1.4 is reliable, due to the wear of the coating from it’s pistons, it does consume more oil then I’d like to see.
Despite it’s flaws I still love my A2 and I still get positive comments from total strangers at the gasstation or people who ride with me and are suprised by the interior.
At the moment I’m in the market for an Up, but somehow the A2 keeps me from buying one.
More info engines and models Audi A2
http://www.audia2museum.de/7.html
200 horse power https://www.vau-max.de/magazin/auto-der-woche/einer-wie-keiner-mehr-oem-geht-nicht-1-8t-motor-im-audi-a2.4916
We own an audi A2 1.4 petrol BBY engine 2nd hand purchased in June 2013 with km position 160,000 km Original Dutch license plate no imported 2nd hand from abroad ..
Meanwhile, there is now 371,000 Km on it without any engine overhaul, so only the service Long Life 30,000 km annually.
The fuel consumption is around 1 liter at 16-18 km possible at speeds of 100 km / hour
The car looks small but on the inside very mature in terms of space.
Advantage of lacquer finish.
Fully serviced Audi dealer and roadside assistance service. It is a car that you do not see much on the road in the Netherlands only about 6000 were sold