[s-cars] RS6 Vs. ????

[TM]

Robin,
No offense, but no matter how much torque there is, I want to be able to
shift gears myself and I don't want a torque converter slushbox. Even if
I
hit the lottery tomorrow I wouldn't buy an RS6.

Comparing a big pig like the RS6 to a 993 or 996 turbo is ridiculous.
Maybe
in straight line speed, but I'd like to see lap times.

There's a big reason why I'm starting to see exactly what my mechanic
has been
saying all along- no matter what I do to the car, a big pig isn't going
to be
very satifying on the track compared to something like a '70 911 w/ a
3.2 Carrera
motor- 2400lbs., 232hp, you do the math.

Taka

-----Original Message-----
From: s-car-list-admin at audifans.com
[mailto:s-car-list-admin at audifans.com] On Behalf Of Robin St.Clair
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 8:01 PM
To: s-car-list at audifans.com
Subject: [s-cars] RS6 Vs. ????


--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]

Guys

There has been some speculation about comparisons between the RS6 and
other super sedans, such as the M5.

I was even amused to see requests for magazine comparisons with the M5.
On this topic I only have two observations:

   You still believe journalists??????
   And for those that still believe, the German Motoring Press is
comparing the RS6 to Porsche Turbos. The M5 is being compared to the
Jaguar S Type R.

The torque curve of the RS6 renders a gearbox redundent - not required.
Sure you can use the paddles, but why, the car does everyrhing you want
without fiddling with paddles. As somebody said "...think Modena 360 F1,
without the Jerks..".

Even the brakes are pretty good, not fantastic (and my comparison is
abso;ute, not relative) but pretty good. Tap them a couple of times and
the rear seat driver is grabbing his stomach. The suspension is a
revelation, the steering feels good, think communicative, bumps and
holes are absorbed.

Surprise, the ESP is sporting in character, the rear end will go out
without ESP's intervention, though power slides require its deselection.

What this car excels at is long distance fast cruising, with one
exception, at 175 MPH, you are burning 46 litres per 100 km (5.12 mpg
US), so frequent stops for gas, and it revels in high octane.

Getting up to speed moves heads backwards, no matter the load, cornering
is unlike any recent Audi.

Dilemmas, yes - 18" or 19" wheels, until the rumored 19" high speed
(runflat?) from Michelin appears, the fast guys are sticking with the
18" rims for their higher speed and load rating. in case any of you
think this is a bit wimpy, Audi find tyre pressures important enough
that they through in a remote tyre pressure monitor, by no coincidence,
so did Porsche with their 959.

I asked a senior AOA person  why they were not bringing the Avant to the
States and was told that theS6 Avant was a dog on the market, and that
they weren't making that mistake again. mark you, I believe the S6 was
the mistake, not the Avant, poor value for money!

Arounfd the time I drove the RS6 i also drove a highly refined RS4, with
'sorted' brakes and suspension, and a well tuned engine. The RS6 still
impressed.

Much of the speculation about the car is based on the non-realisation of
the paradyme shift this car embodies. Shame really, so few places to
appreciate it as it is built to perform. Shortly after the Le Mans race
finished, I was able to discuss the engine with its designer, who had to
scratch his head somewhat, after all, he did the job in 1986 and Audi
has been waiting for brakes and chassis ever since. To fill the idle
moment, the self-same designer occupied himself with the design of the
R8 engine in recent years.

For those of you who insist on manual shifting, there is a solution, at
a price, oh, and expect to see the cars at a race track near you next
season.

R+C





---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Sign-up for Video Highlights of 2002 FIFA World Cup
_______________________________________________
S-CAR-List mailing list
S-CAR-List at audifans.com
http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list