AutoZeitung: Alpina B5S vs. Audi RS6

[Erik]

Here's an awesome test: BMW Alpina B5S Touring vs Audi RS6 Avant:

B5S RS6

€97 900 €106 900

Round 1 "Karroserie" : Larger luggage capacity and space for passengers gives victory to the Audu RS6

Round 2: "Fahrkomfort": The nicer "dialled in" have more comfort.The Alpina B5 is also equipped wtih comfort seats whic hare alot more comfortable than the sport seats of the RS6.

Round 3: Motor / Getriebe: Win for the Alpina B5S. More cultivated and less loud than the bi-turbo V10 of the RS6. Also with a top speed of 313 km/h it's alot mroe than the Ingolstädter. For €1600 a 280 km/h option is available.

Round 4: Fahrdynamilk: With firstclass brakes the Audi RS6 sets a benchmark.

Round 5: Umwelt / Kosten: The smaller costs has the Alpina B5S: cheaper to buy as new, better exhaust values and lower insurance. €60 000 in loss the first four years.

SUMMARY: When sumamrized the points, the Alpina B5S Touring is clearly in front. It is a very solid car but neverthelss a very primitive; like a ironfist in a velvetglove. The Audi RS6 is the more active driving car and when you want to, more sportier. But when comfort and top speed it cannot keep pace with the Alpina.

They are both full family and everyday cars despite driving capabilities of Lamborghini-level.

B5S Touring vs. RS6 Avant

0-60 km/h 2,3 s 2,0 s
0-100 km/h 4,4 s 4,2 s
0-140 km/h 7,2 s 7,2 s
0-160 km/h 9,2 s 8,8 s
0-180 km/h 11,3 s 10,1 s
0-200 km/h 13,9 s 13,5 s


Top speed: 313 km/h 250 / 280 km/h
Handling: 1,51:7 min 1,48,5 min :deal:
Slalom pylondistance 18 m 61,1 km/h 63,6 km/h
Braking cold: 36,7 36,5
Braking warm: 34,2 33 ,9

Test consump: 1,62 l/ 10 km 1, 73 / 10 km

CO2: 296 g/ km 333 g/km

TOTAL POINTS: 3143 3095 of 5000

http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=116547
http://www.autozeitung.de (article not online yet)

------------------------

Some comments from my side

Another 0-200 km/h in 13,5 s for the RS6 Insane! :hihi:
Gallardo times for an estate. :cool2:

3.2 second difference on the track! What were they doing? :stick:
That's like light years of difference.

Also, look at this 0-140 km/h 7,2 s / 7,2 s then the RS6 pulls again.

The Alpina wins due to better comfort and economy. :doh:
Looking at performance it's such a huge win for the RS6.

I personally would prefer a system like when they test wine.
Grade it according to you liking, and let the people who buy the car/wine
deceide if they want to pay for it.

[Michaël Barbé]

any video?

MB
:rs6kiss:

[tvrfan]

its not autobild, its autozeitung. and the B5S wins.

[Erik]

its not autobild, its autozeitung. and the B5S wins.

Thanks for the update. I blame Gustav ;) Changed.

[Leadfoot]

Erik,

Thanks for this.

That's the second review to prove that my early predictions on it's acceleration was spot on. It's also proving that what I said about Audi turning up the wick was also correct.

Erik, remember your reply to me, I think you will find in the near future the RS6 will be untouchable by the M5.

P.S.

What even more insane is reaching 100mph in 8.8s. :MTM:

[LU-RS6]

Respect for the Alpina, what a magnificent car.

the acceleration times for the RS6 are mind-boggling :applause:

[Ruergard]

Another 13.5 sec time to 200 km/h for an ESTATE CAR! This is madness... bring on the sedan please? :hihi:

[Pit]

what will a chip tuned sedan do 0-200 km/h ? 12s ?

[Leadfoot]

what will a chip tuned sedan do 0-200 km/h ? 12s ?

Imagine if Audi said 'F-ck it' and decided to fit this engine complete with turbos into the RS5.

Now that would be insane...............but in a GOOD WAY. :D

[LU-RS6]

Imagine if Audi said 'F-ck it' and decided to fit this engine complete with turbos into the RS5.

Now that would be insane...............but in a GOOD WAY. :D

I just wet my pants :jlol:

[audi_ch]

Erik,

Thanks for this.

That's the second review to prove that my early predictions on it's acceleration was spot on. It's also proving that what I said about Audi turning up the wick was also correct.

Erik, remember your reply to me, I think you will find in the near future the RS6 will be untouchable by the M5.

P.S.

What even more insane is reaching 100mph in 8.8s. :MTM:

thats a great result, but strange is, exactly the same car, (same nr plats) was in the sa Test, and there he had on better weather conditions 14,8 secs. Thats more than 1 sec difference for the same care in the same discipline with even better weahter conditons in the sa test.

how can that happen. The sport auto is the most accurate in messuring acceleration and lap time, magazine in Germany.

Either they were wrong, or Autozeitung witch is a cheap magasin is wrong.

i would understand a difference if there where 2 different car, and one is a press car, but the same car mor than 1 sec different fully automatic, just cant be the truth

[Erik]

Maybe there was a problem and Audi fixed it? Between tests I am sure Audi will check the cars.

Still 14.8 is under the factory time which is not usual...

I tested an RS6 Plus ojnce and it was severly beaten by journalist, and quite slow in fact. :(

[AndyBG]

I don't know about you, but what ever test results come, RS 6 is the :king: for me...

Is there comfort seat option for the new RS 6...?

[artur777]

When will we see the Sedan?

[KresoF1]

Maybe there was a problem and Audi fixed it? Between tests I am sure Audi will check the cars.

Still 14.8 is under the factory time which is not usual...

I tested an RS6 Plus ojnce and it was severly beaten by journalist, and quite slow in fact. :(

Erik,

My comments here produced a response even on some other forums... I fully agree with audi_ch since it was the same car...

I spoke last night with my Motorpresse(company that publishes both AMS and SA) about that AZ test. He said that 13.5s was NOT possible with that example. After Anja drove it Horst von Saurma also drove that example of RS6 Avant and 14.8s is the best time that they achived.
In all truth Sport Auto test was not that positive at all since they claimed that RS6 has truck steering feel at low and mid speed and that you can feel its weight right from the start. Yes, 1:15,7min Hockenheim track time is excellent but, tires lasted only ONE lap.

Do not get me wrong here I like RS6 a lot and IMHO it is better car then M5. BUT, I do not belive in way overoptimistic AZ test results.

Auto Bild 14.3s is on the edge but, 13.5s??? Come on!

[Leadfoot]

KersoF1,

Is this not the second time that the RS6 has posted 13.5s to 200km/h, if so then surely the majority rules. Just because Horst can't get the RS6 to perform equally as well means it isn't true, come on.

There is lots of reasons for the two tests to produce different results, test conditions - if one is more slippy than the other, was the acceleration times conducted before or after all other discipline, track temperature, etc, etc.

I personally don't rate SportAuto reviews that highly at all, maybe because I am British and think we over here get a more realistic result than anywhere else. When EVO or Autocar test the RS6 then I will take note.

[Leadfoot]

Kerso,

What times has SA got from an Alpina B5S?

Also based on these results if you look at the 160~200km/h both cars post an identical time so I would reckon the Alpina might pull a little after this point but then again it does have 530hp and even more torque than the Audi, also it is quicker than the M5 in an case. :hihi:

[KresoF1]

Leadie,

Just this 13.5s is achived only ONCE. By Auto Zeitung...

15.2s Auto, Motor und Sport
14.8s Sport Auto
14.3s Auto Bild
13.5s Auto Zeitung

Also cars from SA and AZ are with the SAME equipment.

[MPT]

Leadie,

Just this 13.5s is achived only ONCE. By Auto Zeitung...

15.2s Auto, Motor und Sport
14.8s Sport Auto
14.3s Auto Bild
13.5s Auto Zeitung

Also cars from SA and AZ are with the SAME equipment.

Never the less, it did 13.5 - that's a fact!

[audi_ch]

KersoF1,

Is this not the second time that the RS6 has posted 13.5s to 200km/h, if so then surely the majority rules. Just because Horst can't get the RS6 to perform equally as well means it isn't true, come on.

There is lots of reasons for the two tests to produce different results, test conditions - if one is more slippy than the other, was the acceleration times conducted before or after all other discipline, track temperature, etc, etc.

I personally don't rate SportAuto reviews that highly at all, maybe because I am British and think we over here get a more realistic result than anywhere else. When EVO or Autocar test the RS6 then I will take note.

Hi,

there is now doubt in Germany witch mag is the most accurate and respected, but i cant say that there ar not existing better mags in the world

But in the next sa will be a test of the new B6 with 530 hp. If the time of the b5 with, 13,9 sec is wright, wich i do not believe, then the lighter b6 (almost 200kg Lighter) has to run a low 12 sec or even a high 11 sec time from 0-200 hunderd agree..


and comon there must be a reason that audi clames an offical time from 14,9 secs, (witch i personally think is a really good time for this car).

you can underright your time but not by 1,5 secs, there is know reason for that.

And once again the sa test had better weather conditions then the az, in terms of temprature and air pressure.

i personally even if i wish it, i dont believe to the az results.

But it doesent matter to me, rs6 is great

[Leadfoot]

Kerso'

I took the liberty of adding the M5 saloon times along side that of the RS6 just to see how Auto Zeitung's times compared to the other magazine for the M5 and to me they look very similar, in fact slap bang in the middle of Sport Auto's times.

RS6 vs M5 (Saloon)
14.8s vs 13.8s & 14.1s Sport Auto
14.3s vs 13.5s Auto Bild
13.5s vs 13.9s Auto Zeitung

You read into it what you will, but to me I see an improvement happening in the RS6 times for one reason or another. ;)

Watch this space and wait and see what the saloon RS6 will do. :D

[Leadfoot]

But in the next sa will be a test of the new B6 with 530 hp. If the time of the b5 with, 13,9 sec is wright, wich i do not believe, then the lighter b6 (almost 200kg Lighter) has to run a low 12 sec or even a high 11 sec time from 0-200 hunderd agree..

There is a known diminished return in performance, so don't expect the B6 to be able to drop a whole 2 seconds on the B5S time.



and comon there must be a reason that audi clames an offical time from 14,9 secs, (witch i personally think is a really good time for this car).

you can underright your time but not by 1,5 secs, there is know reason for that.

Tell me, what do BMW claim for the M5, is it not similar to that of the RS6 yet it too has achieved an identical time and no one batters an eyelid. I think some people are having double standards based on brand, me think 'fanboy' would be a suitable name to use.

I have told you what I know and yet you still deny the fact that Audi have to ability to adjust the power of the RS6 at their pleasure, just to stay ahead of the competition. I said read it and weep. :hihi:

[artur777]

Leafoot, nice one post
waiting for sedan to improve avant's times
the only rs6 problem is weight...

[Erik]

15.2s Auto, Motor und Sport
14.8s Sport Auto
14.3s Auto Bild
13.5s Auto Zeitung

Audi is claiming 14.9 seconds to 200 km/h so I would say that even the 15.2 time by AMS is OK - within limits of what can realistically be expected.

The other times are just a bonus! :hihi:

PS My collegue drove his RUF R Turbo with 650 hp (Rt12 engine) 0-200 km/h and the time he got was 10.65 seconds.

[audi_ch]

There is a known diminished return in performance, so don't expect the B6 to be able to drop a whole 2 seconds on the B5S time.




Tell me, what do BMW claim for the M5, is it not similar to that of the RS6 yet it too has achieved an identical time and no one batters an eyelid. I think some people are having double standards based on brand, me think 'fanboy' would be a suitable name to use.

I have told you what I know and yet you still deny the fact that Audi have to ability to adjust the power of the RS6 at their pleasure, just to stay ahead of the competition. I said read it and weep. :hihi:

Personally i dont care what bmw is doing, because my hart is beating for audi, so i dont know the official bmw time 0-200, but i think bmw quots 0-1km, on its website... Not sure

So if i understand you right, audi took the rs6 after the sportauto test home, give him more pressure on his engine propably over ajusdement of the wastgate, because they were not happy with the time achieved on the sa test.... give him back to the autozeitung test and there he run 13,5..

Seems unrealistic to me, more i think there were differenc on messuring the times on both mags.

So otherwise lets say 14,8 sec is achieved with 580 horsepower, how mutch horsepower is needed for 13,5 sec. 650-700 hp, dont know somebody has maybe mor technical know how then me and can explain that to me how many horsepower would be needed to make a sutch heavy care running a sutch a great time.

curiose..

[Leadfoot]

Leafoot, nice one post
waiting for sedan to improve avant's times
the only rs6 problem is weight...

Please, lets not piss take. The RS6 is already quicker on the track than the M5 so any improvement that comes from the saloon is a bonus, we all know that these big cars are too heavy, reminding us of the fact that are already known serves no purpose to the discussion.

Lets re-cap on the facts here.

1/ The RS6 Avant has matched the best time posted by the saloon M5.

2/ The RS6 Avant is quicker on the track than the M5.

3/ The RS6 Avant is quicker off the track than the M5.

4/ The RS6 Avant is quicker in wet conditions than the M5.

5/ The RS6 Avant is easier to drive quickly than the M5.

6/ The RS6 Avant is more stylish than the M5.

7/ The RS6 Avant is more powerful, more economical and has lower Co2 levels than the M5.

8/ The RS6 Avant has beaten the M5 in all the reviews of the products so far.

P.S.
Guys please add anything that I may have missed. :hihi:

[Leadfoot]

So otherwise lets say 14,8 sec is achieved with 580 horsepower, how mutch horsepower is needed for 13,5 sec. 650-700 hp, dont know somebody has maybe mor technical know how then me and can explain that to me how many horsepower would be needed to make a sutch heavy care running a sutch a great time.

curiose..

And still we dismiss the BMW times and look solely at what Audi have quoted and achieved. Can I answer this question with personal experiences, I timed my own S4 when I had it and got on one occasion a 0-200Km/h time of 18.8s but on another time it was over 20s. Does that mean that my car's power increase over night, no the simple answer is I launched it better and the car didn't bog down the same.

Look at any car's 60mph times compared to their 120mph times and you will see that if they don't get a brilliant 60mph time their other time will also be affected.

[Erik]

Seems unrealistic to me, more i think there were differenc on messuring the times on both mags.



All we know is we don't have a clue... :vhmmm:

[Mockenrue]

Please, lets not piss take. The RS6 is already quicker on the track than the M5 so any improvement that comes from the saloon is a bonus, we all know that these big cars are too heavy, reminding us of the fact that are already known serves no purpose to the discussion.

Lets re-cap on the facts here.

1/ The RS6 Avant has matched the best time posted by the saloon M5.

2/ The RS6 Avant is quicker on the track than the M5.

3/ The RS6 Avant is quicker off the track than the M5.

4/ The RS6 Avant is quicker in wet conditions than the M5.

5/ The RS6 Avant is easier to drive quickly than the M5.

6/ The RS6 Avant is more stylish than the M5.

7/ The RS6 Avant is more powerful, more economical and has lower Co2 levels than the M5.

8/ The RS6 Avant has beaten the M5 in all the reviews of the products so far.

P.S.
Guys please add anything that I may have missed. :hihi:

10/ The interior of the RS6 is superior to that of the M5, from both fit/finish and ergonomics perspectives.

11/ If one compares the build quality of the C6 with the E60, the RS6 will also be better in this respect than the M5.

[artur777]

Leadfoot and Mockenrue,

pure truth of your comparisson between M5 & RS6
I like RS6 every time more than M5