Audi reverses an unpopular move that confused customers.
In the competitive luxury automotive market, clear product naming is crucial for customer understanding and brand recognition. After all, each premium brand has at least a dozen models of which there are a variety of body styles, engine types and outputs. We’ve been covering nomenclature (naming scheme) for some time now and Audis has gone from good to worse and now they’re reversing their older attempts at a revamp.
The 2017 Power-Based System: A Complex Solution to a Simple Problem
In 2017, Audi introduced what many industry observers considered an unnecessarily complicated naming system based on power output in kilowatts. The system utilized two-digit numbers combined with existing drivetrain designations like TFSI and TDI. The nomenclature ranged from number 30 through 70, increasing in increments of five to denote different performance levels. For instance, a Q2 30 TFSI represented an 85 kW output, while at the other end of the spectrum, a Q7 50 TDI indicated a 200 kW power output.
At the time, Audi’s Board Member for Sales and Marketing, Dietmar Voggenreiter, justified the change by citing the decreasing relevance of engine displacement as a performance indicator. However, the system proved counterintuitive for consumers, who had to memorize arbitrary number ranges rather than relying on traditional engine displacement figures.
The 2025 Reversal: Simplifying the Complex
Eight years later, Audi has effectively admitted defeat by announcing a complete overhaul of its naming convention. The new system, announced in 2025, returns to a more straightforward approach focused on vehicle size and positioning rather than power output. Under this revised structure, Audi employs a simple alphanumeric format where letters A and Q continue to differentiate between low-floor and high-floor vehicles, while numbers from one to eight indicate the vehicle’s size and market position. The system maintains clarity through familiar body style descriptors such as Avant, Sedan, and Sportback, while powertrain identification relies on established codes like e-tron, TFSI, and TDI.
Marketing Missteps: Learning from Failure
The 2017-2025 naming saga reveals several critical marketing failures. First and foremost, the 2017 system introduced unnecessary complexity by requiring customers to understand power output ranges that had no intuitive connection to the numbers assigned. Despite claiming the change was for “clarity,” the system actually made it harder for customers to understand vehicle positioning within the lineup. The recent reversal, with explicit mention of “intensive discussions” and customer feedback, suggests strong resistance to the 2017 system from both consumers and dealers. Perhaps most notably, the implementation and subsequent reversal of the naming system resulted in wasted marketing resources and potential customer confusion.
Moving Forward
Audi’s latest naming convention appears to learn from past mistakes by prioritizing simplicity and customer understanding. The new system, starting with the upcoming A6 model, promises better alignment with customer expectations and dealer feedback. This case study serves as a reminder that even established luxury brands can falter when prioritizing technical specifications over customer comprehension. As the automotive industry continues to evolve with multiple powertrain options, clear and intuitive naming conventions become increasingly important for market success.
