Audi A5 Sportback - don't call it a hatch!

I noticed the same thing - and also with the BMW GT and Porsche Panamera. Even the Audi TT and Porsche Cayman have hatches that are never used in marketing. Its like the hatch is a kind of secret. Maybe they are worried that Aussies are too conservative to embrace hatches.... but I think years of Saabs, Citroens, Toyotas and others should surely demonstrate that hatches are cool down-under. I have to admit that if Saab had died last month, my next car may well have been an A5 Sportback in a few years time.

Audi has a problem with naming.

Sportback is not Hatch and Wagon is not Avant. Or something like that.

A3 wagon --> A3 Spotsback
A4 Wagon --> A4 Avant
A5 Hatch --> A5 Sportback
A6 Wagon --> A6 Avant

If Audi would use that SAAB advert it would read like this.
Audi gives you durable construction like Volvo,
the luxury of a confortable interior like Mercedes,
and not even half of the luggage room of either of them.

The things that were the main attraction of the CombiCoupe was that you had a long enough load bay to lay down and sleep...on the flat floor...

Is the Audi long enough, and the seats don't fold flat either... Also, the way the Audi hatch is designed it doesn't appear if any more room is created...

This is sort of a proof of concept. Is it not? Can't wait to see the new hatch.

I was pretty unimpressed by the Audi website, which fails to actually mention anything interesting or worthwhile or give a straight up page on features without a flash video full a car...driving around. I don't need to cap my speeds doing that, I can just go outside and sit in my Saab...

My personal aversion to hatches came about from the endless range of subcompact hatches like the Barina (gag) marketed at my particular demographic. Apart from these cars and sportcombis, and the upper end of SUVs, there really didn't seem to be anything in between. But this Audi "Sportback?" It's a hatchback I would actually want to buy! Really beautiful, sleek and functional design. Though I agree with Swade that the front rather lets it down ;-)

"Why go to the trouble of developing a body style like this if you're not going to max out the promotion of it?"

Because the car will be sold on style, not functionality. very similar to the Merc CLS and VW Passat CC.

I can't stand all this rubbish being spouted by car makers these days!
I mean just what the hell is the BMW X6? It is not an SUV or a coupe or a saloon or anything I can think of.
Cars like the A5 sportback?! are just design items for those amoung us with too much money and a need to have a label dangling from them. These cars have no functionality and are all show IMHO.
Can't wait for the new crop of SAABs to come along and offer funcionality, style and a bit of individuality to counter some of these odd offerings from the Germans!

Doesn't the cargo bay on the A5 fold completely flat? Doesn't look like it, but maybe it's just a poor picture? I agree with Peter Jones, that's important, not least because it gives you the opportunity to sleep comfortably there, on a mattress, instead of cramped in the front seat. In fact, I think in the new 9-3 hatch, Saab should install a little reading light conveniently placed to accomodate a person lying diagonally across the bay. It would be a small and simple thing that gives a little extra customer satisfaction for those who use it.

As for the Audi, I guess their clientel would never dream of sleeping in the car anyway, so it's not important for them...

Audi seems to be embarrased to show the hatch itself just as you may have a difficult time trying to see the Opel Insignia hatch which can only be identified by the rear viper.

Not sure why Opel should have a hatch when Saab couldn't.

What I really miss on all those Sportscombi, Sportbacks, Hatchbacks and whatever those things are called is the REAL space and possibilities you can find in the "old" 900 Combi Coupe. It really has SPACE in the back, but you dont notice it at all - and finally I figured out how they did it: the Classic 900 is the only car with a small built-in black-hole plus antigravity field. This enables it´s unbelievable flexibility and enourmous space in combination with just 4,70 length and a weight of just 1250 Kg fully loaded with all the features plus an special factor that puts a smile on your face each time you start the engine!

Why is nobody (even Saab) able to built these features in actual cars anymore?

Having driven (had to drive would be the better wording) a few Audi's in my time, I just cannot seem to get excited by any of them. The last Audis I liked were the 100S coupé from the late sixties and the first squarish Quattro coupés from the seventies, you know, those that won all those rallies. Since then, I cannot relate to most, if any, of their models any more, they are all just so bland and clinical. Highly adequate transport I'm sure, and well made too but there you are... Plus that I somehow always get roadsick in an A6, don't know why, has to do with the suspension travel, I guess. One exception, up to a point: I disliked the V8 and later A8 series less than the others. The car's styling was not all that exciting either but I liked the engineering a lot.

Ivo

Had an extensive look at the a5 at IAA. Looks like a hatch, but doesn't have it's utility. The trunk is deep and shallow (like in the ng 9-5 :-() and there is almost no room above the trunk cover for expansion, if need be. It really is a Coupe. Do you like the Audi interior? I was disappointed, boring, kitsch and cluttered. Even the Skoda Superb has better interiors, imho.

Audis (I mean the bigger A4/6/8 models)look great as sedans and wagons.
Making it a hatchback for me is something a bit artificial. Looks as bad as BMW 3 Compact.
The best ever Audi was the first generation A8. The real limousine. They should keep close to it.
I think car makers make a big mistake trying to offer a wide (complete) range of cars rather than build cars they are good in and famous for. I can't understand why PSA decided to make a SUV. They are much better in cars designed to drive on normal roads and should concentrate on them. Why has Porsche built a Panamera? the worst ever looking Porsche. A sedan? a limo? an executive car? What the hell this car is?

When they start building a van like Chrysler Voyager in Trolhattan I will probably loose my interest in Saabs. It would be something that doesn't fit the Saab image.

Also, as we were recently talking about Saab's SUVs, I think the 9-4x, or any next crossover made by Saab will match Saab's image only if it is really capable of off road driving. Just remember the basic rule of Saab design: "Form Follows Function". If the car looks like an off-roader it must be really able to drive in muds. Otherwise the design reflects a fashion rather than the function of it.