Rs6 Avant test in German AMS

[KresoF1]

0-100km/h: 4.4s
0-200km/h:15.2s
Measured weight: 2148kg(57.9% front, 42.1% rear)
Max: 280km/h

Verdict: 4 star out of 5
+excellent traction
+engine very powerfull with linear power delivery(for turbo engine)
+excellent build quality
+standard brakes more then enough
-engine producing vibration on idle
-very prone to understeer
-DRC setup not very best

From drive point of view AMS stuff claim that S5 is much more dynamic car then RS6 Avant. Engine is producing too much mechanical vibration for their taste(this is confirmed by my Motorpresse friend who also drove new RS6 Avant. To his supriese M5 V10 is producing almost non vibration in comparison with RS6 Avant V10.). Standard brakes excellent both in feel and power.


My personal observation...

Do you all really still think that RS6 Avant(or autumn coming Saloon) is faster in 0-200km/h then M5(Saloon or Touring)? All four major German magazines(AMS, Auto Zeitung, Auto Bild Sportscars and Sport Auto) already tested and measured four different examples of RS6 Avant. NONE of them were able to achive factory claimed 0-200km/h in 14.9s.... 15.1s was the fastest time... You will see all tests published in nextz two weeks.... Lowest measured weight was 2111kg(with Ceramic brakes and Bucket seats)...
BTW, are you interested in 0-250m/h for RS6 Avant and M5 Touring? M5 Touring almost 2s faster...

[KresoF1]

And did you all read drive impression in latest EVO? Very similar words to AMS... EVO liked M5 Touring more...

[Erik]

What was the 0-200 km/h time side by side with the M5?

[tvrfan]

no new autobild today has test between RS6 avant, E63 AMG t-modell and M5 touring. RS6 got 0-100 4.4 sec. 0-200 14.3 sec. and M5 touring 0-200 14.6 sec. The AMG was the slowest. but the E63 wins bevor audi and then BMW. i cant scan. sorry.

[KresoF1]

Test in today's Auto Bild is interesting since in forthcoming issue of thier Sportscar edition RS6 Avant did not achive that good 0-200km/h results...

Sport Auto test results are not that brilliant either as you will see next week...

[Erik]

14.3 secs to 200 km/h!!! :MTM:

:rs6kiss:

[KresoF1]

14.3 secs to 200 km/h!!! :MTM:

:rs6kiss:

Erik,

According to you current enthusiasm about Auto Bild(overoptimistic IMHO) test results you will HATE Sport Auto test results... Just a hint for you...

[Qisha]

Dear Friends,

the Test your discussing about:

http://www.autobild.de/autobild-tv/?clip_id=419

Qisha

[artur777]

Dear Qisha,

why the results are that different in different mags?
Where is the truth lies for good sporty but not pro driver?

RS6 is a masterpiece in our minda.
We don't want its image be broken.

[Charles DLF]

results differ because of the drivers/weather/Altitude.... blablabla; there's one million different factors that can influence a result...

Qisha thanks for the vid, would have loved to see a stupid drag race between the 3, to see who's the daddy! :hihi:

[audi_ch]

0-100km/h: 4.4s
0-200km/h:15.2s
Measured weight: 2148kg(57.9% front, 42.1% rear)
Max: 280km/h

Verdict: 4 star out of 5
+excellent traction
+engine very powerfull with linear power delivery(for turbo engine)
+excellent build quality
+standard brakes more then enough
-engine producing vibration on idle
-very prone to understeer
-DRC setup not very best

From drive point of view AMS stuff claim that S5 is much more dynamic car then RS6 Avant. Engine is producing too much mechanical vibration for their taste(this is confirmed by my Motorpresse friend who also drove new RS6 Avant. To his supriese M5 V10 is producing almost non vibration in comparison with RS6 Avant V10.). Standard brakes excellent both in feel and power.


My personal observation...

Do you all really still think that RS6 Avant(or autumn coming Saloon) is faster in 0-200km/h then M5(Saloon or Touring)? All four major German magazines(AMS, Auto Zeitung, Auto Bild Sportscars and Sport Auto) already tested and measured four different examples of RS6 Avant. NONE of them were able to achive factory claimed 0-200km/h in 14.9s.... 15.1s was the fastest time... You will see all tests published in nextz two weeks.... Lowest measured weight was 2111kg(with Ceramic brakes and Bucket seats)...
BTW, are you interested in 0-250m/h for RS6 Avant and M5 Touring? M5 Touring almost 2s faster...


normaly ams test are pretty objectiv, we will see what sportauto does in the comparing test m5 vs rs6.

But we can see already know, m5 touring and rs6 avant are pretty mutch equal

[AndyBG]

To much difference between mag's... :vhmmm:

14.3, sounds best to me... :D , alltough, I would be more happy if RS 6 is little bit more over its rivals...

[Xpower]

M6 has got 12.8 to 200 as tested by many magazines including SPort Auto & Auto Bild. The best M5 sedan to date is 13.5 to 200.

[Leadfoot]

It's great to see the RS6 beating it's rivals in a full blown acceleration race up to 200km/h but a victory of only 0.3s is very small, especially when you consider that the Audi has an extra official 70hp and close to 100ft/lbs. I sincerely hope that in this is just a blip and future tests will improve on the gap as this amount of power should result in a bigger victory.

The fact that other tests are finding things different is very disappointing.:noshake:

[Xpower]

It's great to see the RS6 beating it's rivals in a full blown acceleration race up to 200km/h but a victory of only 0.3s is very small, :noshake:

What are you talking about. The self-same Auto-Bild got the M5 to 200 in 13.5 about 4 years ago.

[Leadfoot]

Xpower,

I remember a certain M&M member (BWM Fanboy) which you might remember ;) that always insisted that you only look at results on the day and not something which was 4 years ago. On this test, on this day and with these cars it was the RS6 which proved to be the quicker.

I will wait until some UK magazines test the two just to see if on our surfaces the RS6 is still victorious.

[audi_ch]

Xpower,

I remember a certain M&M member (BWM Fanboy) which you might remember ;) that always insisted that you only look at results on the day and not something which was 4 years ago. On this test, on this day and with these cars it was the RS6 which proved to be the quicker.

I will wait until some UK magazines test the two just to see if on our surfaces the RS6 is still victorious.


how you know that auto blöd, did drive them the same day...

Lets wait for the sport auto in Germany witch compares both in the next mag.

Autobild is just a bild newspaper and really no reference, (objectiv, accurate)

[artur777]

To my mind, RS6 will not be faster than M5...
I think that this period of competition is for BMW.
Audi should concentrate at RS5 and RS4 - that will be the edge
Everybody understands it, but is afraid of saying it

[Kliko61]

@ arthur

I completely agree with you, because the average acceleration of Audi RS6 to 200 km/h is around 14.8, and that is not way faster than the M5. The fact is that these two cars are very close to each other, nobody can regret that I think...I'm a little bit dissappointed in the acceleration from 0-200 km/h, but the RS6 is just beautifull!!

[Leadfoot]

Unless the RS6 is weighing a lot more than will believe or the M5/6 has a lot more power than quoted then the RS6 should be the quicker, especially as the speed increases when weight becomes less of an issue and power/torque becomes all important.

[KresoF1]

Leadie,
RS6 Avant measured weight by AMS is 2148kg. Audi official claim is 2025kg.
In any case RS6 Avant is about 250kg heavier then M5 Touring...

[Freddesix]

Those numbers just won't do it, it had to beat the M5 and equal/slower (!) just isn't an option. Screaming out loud over what the new RS6 has peformed looking at the numbers presented in this thread is just silly compared to what the M5 has been doing for years now.

I thought the new RS6 would bring the M5 to the slaughter. It didn't. In my opinion, you pay more to get more. Of everything. RS6 just doesn't do it anymore, it was the other way around with the former model versus M5 E39 :w:

[chewym]

So people are comparing Avant to sedan once again? Brilliant. Let's wait for head to head.

[Leadfoot]

Leadie,
RS6 Avant measured weight by AMS is 2148kg. Audi official claim is 2025kg.
In any case RS6 Avant is about 250kg heavier then M5 Touring...

I stand by my opinion that BMW must be offering more power than they are quoting because it's horsepower and torque which give acceleration. Sure weight plays it's part at lower speeds but as speed increases it becomes less of an issue.

Do you have figures from say 50-150mph to compare, if the BMW is quicker here then I reckon it's putting out more power than it says.

[artur777]

M5/M6 have some more power than quoted
In my opinion M5/M6 have about 525-530 hp due to some tests at the engine stand?

[artur777]

KresoF1, how could it be that AMS weighted RS6 at 2150kg instead of 2025kg?
It seems to be a nonsene, that's just insane....
May be it was a typo or a weight with two drivers inside??

[Leadfoot]

KresoF1, how could it be that AMS weighted RS6 at 2150kg instead of 2025kg?
It seems to be a nonsene, that's just insane....
May be it was a typo or a weight with two drivers inside??

Some say that Audi don't quote weights the same way as BMW, if so then you would have to add the 75kgs which BMW includes. That would make the weight 2100kgs, where the extra 50kgs is coming from, your guess is as good as mine.

P.S.

If the M5's true figure was 530hp and the RS6 was only making it's true 580hp and not the believed 600hp+ then I reckon things would be a little different with the results. Whether it's enough to sway the favour so comfortably into the hands of the M5 again is anyone's guess.

[artur777]

Some say that Audi don't quote weights the same way as BMW, if so then you would have to add the 75kgs which BMW includes. That would make the weight 2100kgs, where the extra 50kgs is coming from, your guess is as good as mine.

P.S.

If the M5's true figure was 530hp and the RS6 was only making it's true 580hp and not the believed 600hp+ then I reckon things would be a little different with the results. Whether it's enough to sway the favour so comfortably into the hands of the M5 again is anyone's guess.

I see your point - it's reasonable.
We should wait for some more tests.
And about weight: does they add not only driver's weight but 90% fuel tank also? maybe it's the answer?

[BobLeBuilder]

2025Kg is the dry weight.

[artur777]

2025 kg - dry weight!!!???
Comparing 2150kg to 1950kg kerb weight of M5 Touring it's insane.
Big difference.
2150kg is too much for a sporty car....

[BobLeBuilder]

I think too many of us are getting too hung up with performance, and worrying about M5 vs RS stats and vica versa. This is the sporty business driver end of the market. There are much quicker cars out there than M3/M5/RS4/RS6's, that can be had for less. The M's and RS's are really quick touring cars, not full-on supercars. Most of us will use them day-to-day and not spend even 1% of the time on the track, if any at all.

Personally speaking, if you can afford an M or RS and would like one, get it and just enjoy the experience, and don't worry about fractions of seconds here and there, or what other bitter and twisted fanboys (IHateRWD) tell you you should have (not that any of you listen too him).

They are all bloody quick and will allow you to pass 99% of other cars relatively easily. Once in a blue moon you may meet what some would consider their nemesis at the lights - but you all know how unhappily that can end (e.g. bent round a tree).

In the past I have had all sorts of fast motors, yet my fave drive was slower than the latest M's and RS's. (A TVR Chimera if anyone is vaguely interested).

[gjg]

Most of us will use them day-to-day and not spend even 1% of the time on the track, if any at all.

They are all bloody quick and will allow you to pass 99% of other cars relatively easily. Once in a blue moon you may meet what some would consider their nemesis at the lights - but you all know how unhappily that can end (e.g. bent round a tree).

you nailed it :thumb:

[chewym]

The S6 tested by American magazines performed better in handling than the M5 and E63. Go look at the Motor Trend virtual race track video. The "slow" S6 easily stayed with the M5 because of superior handling.

Face it, big breaks and wheels, stiff chassis with trick suspensions all add weight. Go look at the "performance" versions, always heavier than the basic version.

And adding passangers and gear will add plenty of weight.

[artur777]

It was a slow track with no place to accelerate
It's just AWD, not anything else that helps to stay with M5
AWD helps to corner faster but all other components add nothing else at all :-)

[Leadfoot]

It was a slow track with no place to accelerate
It's just AWD, not anything else that helps to stay with M5
AWD helps to corner faster but all other components add nothing else at all :-)

I feel you are dismissing the benefits that awd is making to the S6's performance. I agree that that particular track didn't allow the others to stretch their legs and thus open a gap, but one thing this track did show was that on pure handling the S6 with much less power and more weight (especially over the nose) didn't effect it's ability and proved that Quattro was the key to what made it's result so special.

If the same test had involved the RS6 instead of the S6 then the resulting times would have shown a marked difference. Quattro allows you to put the power down much sooner and controls a wayward chassis due to excessive throttle at the wrong moment.

Few cars allow inexperienced drivers to drive as quickly, definitely not an M car that is for sure. In those you do have to be quite skilled to approach anywhere near it's limits.

Also I think we need to hold off on thinking that the RS6 isn't as fast as we first thought. ;)

[artur777]

Leadfoot - agree with you!

Let's wait for the first full comparative test of M5, E63 and RS6 - that will be the answer.
But besides all that the car needs to be exciting!

[KresoF1]

Autobild measured track time as well and difference between RS6 Avant and M5 Touring was very small. RS6 Avant was just 0.6s faster around mid-lenght track(but, this track is longer then Hockenheim for example). So, since RS6 Avant is more powerfull, use better tires difference is IMHO very, very small...

Regarding S6...It achived slower time then S5 for example on Hockenheim by Sport Auto...

[Leadfoot]

I am sticking to my guns as to saying that in the majority of tests (production ready cars) the RS6 will be the quicker.

Don't ask me how I know this though. ;)

[chewym]

So the RS6 ends up being faster.

[kip]

What are you talking about. The self-same Auto-Bild got the M5 to 200 in 13.5 about 4 years ago.

You are now comparing sedan vs Avant. Wait for the RS6 sedan or compare to the M5 Touring :

http://www.autobild.de/artikel/test-m5-touring-gegen-s6-avant_60277.html

M5 touring Auto-Bild 0-200 14.7