Audi S6 test in AMS

[Hawk]

Audi S6 test in German AMS...
0-100km/h: 5.5s
0-160km/h:12.2s
0-200km/h:19.3s
1992kg(!)(weight distribution 59.5% front/40.5% rear)

Summery: excellent engine, very smooth for V10, awsome torque in low revs, very stable on the road with amazing traction(new 40/60 power distribution). Good brakes and very good handling for heavy car. Not so comfortable as they expected but, new front seats are very supportive.
Very good understatement alternative for M5 buyer and best car in the class on wet road...

[Leadfoot]

No faster than a S4v8 but almost £20K more. I don't think it's very good value for money, with those figures. :rolleyes:

[JavierNuvolari]

Originally posted by Leadfoot
No faster than a S4v8 but almost £20K more. I don't think it's very good value for money, with those figures. :rolleyes:

Good point...

[KK265]

Any scans please?

[eazy]

I think it should be the same test as here:
http://www2.rs6.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=9252

[Angellus]

Not quite as fast as I expected but not bad. I do think a chip might produce a nice result on this car as teh V10 is held back quite a lot.

[SpinEcho]

Cars are getting too heavy ... :rolleyes:

[ott]

I don't believe, that many buyers will be cross shopping between S4 and S6, regardless their similar performance.

[7:53 RS6]

Originally posted by ott
I don't believe, that many buyers will be cross shopping between S4 and S6, regardless their similar performance.

You have a point, agree.

[Leadfoot]

I know that different people buy S6 over the S4, but you have to agree that it's performance doesn't justify the price increase, that all.

[ott]

If someone's objective is only affordable performance, he will probably end up buying Evo IX or something.

I see your point, but for example, I have three kids to carry with me in car and therefore I need rear seat space. And some people just like to drive in larger cars and are ready to pay more for it, even when they don't get better performance.

So consider yourself lucky, that you can drive smaller car and therefore get similar performance for less money. Just not all people have that option and then it's easy justify, why to buy bigger, more expensive car.

[Leadfoot]

Originally posted by ott
If someone's objective is only affordable performance, he will probably end up buying Evo IX or something.

I see your point, but for example, I have three kids to carry with me in car and therefore I need rear seat space. And some people just like to drive in larger cars and are ready to pay more for it, even when they don't get better performance.

So consider yourself lucky, that you can drive smaller car and therefore get similar performance for less money. Just not all people have that option and then it's easy justify, why to buy bigger, more expensive car.

Point noted,

Why not sell the RS6, get a two year old X5 and buy a sportscar. Something only you and the wife can go in, get yourselves away from the kids.

On second thoughts buy an XC90 you possibly need the extra seats in 9 months time. :hihi:

[Benman]

Originally posted by Hawk

1992kg(!)(weight distribution 59.5% front/40.5% rear)



And that is being nice. Automobile just put the weight for the car they tested at 2039kg!!!

I'll be keeping my "heavy" RS 6 at 1865kgs (which is less than 100kg heavier than the "light" US Spec RS 4...).

Ben:addict: