this doesn’t necessarily mean that he had Roman Catholic transubstantiation in view.
In your opinion. However, 1600 years of careful review and study by many scholars much more capable than you or I has shown that he was, indeed, speaking of the Roman Catholic view.
No, it's not just my opinion. Your statement is quite incorrect for a number of reasons. To say that there has been "1600 years of careful review and study by many scholars much more capable than you or I" suggests that there has been some sort of systematic, objective investigation of what Augustine meant - the sort of investigation that has only realy existed in the literary and textual realm for the past 200-300 years. Later medieval Catholic theologians uncritically citing him and using him as an authority to a priori prove their own beliefs doesn't really fit the criteria for "careful review and study."
In more modern times, there have been quite a number of scholars (not even all of them Protestants!) who believe that Augustine's view was closer to the spiritual view held by Reformed theology, and that he did NOT view the communion of the body and blood of Christ as being any sort of "real presence".