Edmunds.com follow-up test - 2006 A6 4.2 quattro S-Line
08-18-2006, 01:00 PM
#11
AudiWorld Super User
Thread Starter
In that case, sorry for the repost. I was only about 0.2 sec off on the best 0-60 time
I bet you that you will not find one published report with a sub-6 second time for the non-FSI engine.
08-18-2006, 01:22 PM
#13
AudiWorld Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Compete where? On the drag strip?
Since you reposted an article I'll repost my previous response:
BASE PRICE:
The E550 4 matic is $62,275
The A6 4.2 quattro is $53,370
Options on the E550 are extremely expensive (Bluetooth is $350 and split folding rear seats are $310, both standard on the A6 - just as an example) and the A6 looks 10 times better inside and out.
The A6 far outsells the E-class in GERMANY, as well as the 5 series. They probably know why over there ...
But then, some people need the 0.5 s to win drag races in a luxury car, and some don't.
Personally, I can live with the fact that MB builds a car that costs >$10k more when optioned similar to an A6 and is a little faster. Not that it matters in the land of 75 mph highway speed limits and permanent congestion on all major roads in major cities.
0.5 seconds is unnoticable, unless you get to drag race from a light. If you like to do that, buy an Evo or STI - they are faster AND cheaper.
BASE PRICE:
The E550 4 matic is $62,275
The A6 4.2 quattro is $53,370
Options on the E550 are extremely expensive (Bluetooth is $350 and split folding rear seats are $310, both standard on the A6 - just as an example) and the A6 looks 10 times better inside and out.
The A6 far outsells the E-class in GERMANY, as well as the 5 series. They probably know why over there ...
But then, some people need the 0.5 s to win drag races in a luxury car, and some don't.
Personally, I can live with the fact that MB builds a car that costs >$10k more when optioned similar to an A6 and is a little faster. Not that it matters in the land of 75 mph highway speed limits and permanent congestion on all major roads in major cities.
0.5 seconds is unnoticable, unless you get to drag race from a light. If you like to do that, buy an Evo or STI - they are faster AND cheaper.
08-18-2006, 01:30 PM
#14
AudiWorld Super User
Thread Starter
If you get the 4.2, you obviously care somewhat ....
Since you can basically get all the 4.2 options on the 3.2, the main reason for the upgrade is the added power. You mention a 0.5 second difference but Edmunds cites about a 2 second difference. I agree with you that half a second is no big deal.
08-18-2006, 01:59 PM
#15
AudiWorld Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 4.2 has a 1.2 sec lead over the 3.2 from 0 - 62 mph
That's based on information on the German Audi Website (5.9s 0-100 km/h to 7.1s for the 3.2L tip). The S6 (for comparison) takes 5.2s from 0-100 km/h.
The 0.5 second difference between the Audi and MB is based on looking at the A6 4.2 specs on the German Audi Website and the E550 4MATIC specs on the German Mercedes-Benz Website.
The 2WD version of the E550 might be a little quicker, but only on a dry, clean surface. In any kind of wet weather or on bad roads with less grip, the advantage will be with the 4WD system.
But I wonder if you can judge a vehicle like this solely on it's 0-60 performance.
For me the A6 is a combination of performance, exterior looks, interior design, MMI, safety (the A6 is an IIHS Top Safety Pick, the E550 isn't, and neither is the 550i) and other factors. The A6 is heavy, but the quattro and the safety structure don't come for free.
US car magazines (paper and online) are WAY to hung up on performance numbers, and not looking into other apsects of vehicles enough. In Germany, where you can actually USE the performance of these cars every now and then (i.e. legally drive >75 mph), the A6 has won almost every comparison with comparable BMW and MB offerings, be it Diesel or gasoline engines. That includes the S6, that recently beat the M5 despite it's lack of HP in comparison.
A car is more than just it's engine. And performance is more than 0-60 times under IDEAL conditions. I bet you that the quattro will leave any RWD BMW and MB way behind if the road conditions are less than ideal, i.e. water or snow/ice on the road.
The link is to a comparison test in a German car magazine where the S6 defeated the M5 (471/600 vs. 448/600 points), despite the M5's 72HP lead over the S6.<ul><li><a href="http://www.autobild.de/test/neuwagen/artikel.php?artikel_id=11474&artikel_seite=0"> http://www.autobild.de/test/neuwagen/artikel.php?artikel_id=11474&artikel_seite=0</a</li></ul>
The 0.5 second difference between the Audi and MB is based on looking at the A6 4.2 specs on the German Audi Website and the E550 4MATIC specs on the German Mercedes-Benz Website.
The 2WD version of the E550 might be a little quicker, but only on a dry, clean surface. In any kind of wet weather or on bad roads with less grip, the advantage will be with the 4WD system.
But I wonder if you can judge a vehicle like this solely on it's 0-60 performance.
For me the A6 is a combination of performance, exterior looks, interior design, MMI, safety (the A6 is an IIHS Top Safety Pick, the E550 isn't, and neither is the 550i) and other factors. The A6 is heavy, but the quattro and the safety structure don't come for free.
US car magazines (paper and online) are WAY to hung up on performance numbers, and not looking into other apsects of vehicles enough. In Germany, where you can actually USE the performance of these cars every now and then (i.e. legally drive >75 mph), the A6 has won almost every comparison with comparable BMW and MB offerings, be it Diesel or gasoline engines. That includes the S6, that recently beat the M5 despite it's lack of HP in comparison.
A car is more than just it's engine. And performance is more than 0-60 times under IDEAL conditions. I bet you that the quattro will leave any RWD BMW and MB way behind if the road conditions are less than ideal, i.e. water or snow/ice on the road.
The link is to a comparison test in a German car magazine where the S6 defeated the M5 (471/600 vs. 448/600 points), despite the M5's 72HP lead over the S6.<ul><li><a href="http://www.autobild.de/test/neuwagen/artikel.php?artikel_id=11474&artikel_seite=0"> http://www.autobild.de/test/neuwagen/artikel.php?artikel_id=11474&artikel_seite=0</a</li></ul>
08-18-2006, 03:35 PM
#16
New Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe that's why they came out with a 5.2L A6 (called the S6)
I believe this was the point an earlier poster was making about comparing the right models.
And if you think about it, the fact that the heavier Audi is only a few ticks slower than both BMW's and Merc's new models that have about 20% more displacement, they seem to be competing pretty well.
And if you compare their performance on the road once they already moving, you will find little to no difference because the Audi no longer has to overcome the weight/intertia disadvantage and can make use of its freer-breathing 5-valve design.
Plus, who buys 4,000lb plus luxury sedans to drag race anyway? I guess the answer to that will be the RS-6 buyers.
And if you think about it, the fact that the heavier Audi is only a few ticks slower than both BMW's and Merc's new models that have about 20% more displacement, they seem to be competing pretty well.
And if you compare their performance on the road once they already moving, you will find little to no difference because the Audi no longer has to overcome the weight/intertia disadvantage and can make use of its freer-breathing 5-valve design.
Plus, who buys 4,000lb plus luxury sedans to drag race anyway? I guess the answer to that will be the RS-6 buyers.
08-19-2006, 04:30 AM
#19
AudiWorld Expert
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 28,041
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
0.5 seconds is a big deal.
Depends where that 0.5 seconds is.
Okay, between 7 and 7.5 not a big deal.
But between 5.9 and 6.4, definately noticeable on the butt dyno.
Virtually every other car manufacturer when you compare the AWD version to the RWD, the timing difference is 0.1 or 0.2 seconds.
Okay, between 7 and 7.5 not a big deal.
But between 5.9 and 6.4, definately noticeable on the butt dyno.
Virtually every other car manufacturer when you compare the AWD version to the RWD, the timing difference is 0.1 or 0.2 seconds.
08-19-2006, 04:32 AM
#20
AudiWorld Expert
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 28,041
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
*ding*
The 4.2 litre engine came out around the time the 540 and E430 were still around.
BMW and Mercedes have had two iterations since then.
Audi will eventually respond but not before a few more suckers have bought the 4.2
BMW and Mercedes have had two iterations since then.
Audi will eventually respond but not before a few more suckers have bought the 4.2