Re: A6 Avant (Re: Audi at the NY Auto Show)

[Ralph Poplawsky <rlpplsky@ix.netcom.com>]

You are right-on Bob.  Another interesting comparison would be between the
new A6Q and other cars (not trucks) in the same price range.  For the $40K+
price range, there is no excuse for the Audi's poor hp/weight ratio.  Now,
if the car really comes over next summer with the 265hp twin turbo, that
will be a different story.  For now, I'll pass (it easily with both of my
cars).

Ralph Poplawsky
'91 200Q
'95 850 turbo wagon

At 05:33 PM 4/13/98 -0500, you wrote:
>>Ditto. I drove the new A6, and it not all that bad. I noticed a
>>difference (naturally) over my V-6. The power is certainly adequate. Some
>>might say more than adequate.
>
>Oh, I wouldn't say "it's more than adequate" unless the person we're
>talking has driven a slow truck/SUV/minivan all his life. With 0-60 at 9.4
>sec and 1/4 mile at 17.1 sec, it's more like "slow, somewhat adequate."
>But put it in an Avant, and I think the number will suffer for the worse.
>And if you're going to use the Avant as it's intended (like hauling
>butts), it'll suck big time.
>
>I looked at R&T's list of cars that have been tested. Here's the list of
>cars/trucks/SUVs that can get their butts' kicked by the A6.
>
>                            0-60(sec)     1/4mile(sec)
>VW Cabrio                     10.1            17.4
>Toyota Corella DX             10.2            17.6
>Isuzu Rodeo LS                10.3            17.7
>Ford Explorer XLT             10.5            17.7
>Plymouth Grand Voyager        10.7            17.8
>Land Rover Range Rover        10.5            17.9
>Ford Expedition               10.7            17.9
>Nissan Sentra GLE             11.0            18.1
>Nissan Pathfinder SE          11.2            18.1
>Honda CR-V                    11.9            18.7
>Toyota RAV4                   13.0            19.2
>
>Here is the list in which they run neck-to-neck with the A6.
>
>                            0-60(sec)     1/4mile(sec)
>Mazda Millenia S               9.1            17.0
>Mercedes ML320                 9.2            17.0
>Chrysler Sebring JXi conv.     9.6            17.0
>Mazda Protege ES               9.1            17.1
>Jeep Grand Cherokee            9.3            17.1
>Chrysler Cirrus LXi            9.4            17.2
>
>Here's the list where they will out-accelerate the A6 sedan by a finger
>length, but sill within A6's accerlation performance range.
>
>                            0-60(sec)     1/4mile(sec)
>Honda Civic Coupe EX           9.1            16.8
>Chevrolet Blazer               9.0            16.9
>Cadillac Catera                9.2            16.9
>
>Side note: With list price as reference, the A6 is the 5th most expensive
>car behind Expedition, ML320, Millenia S, and Range Rover. With tested
>price, A6 is second to Range Rover -- and the car with biggest jump
>between the list and the as-tested price, by approx $10,000. A typo,
>perhaps?
>
>The A6 is among the slowest passenger vehicles the industry produces as
>far as accerlation is concerned. I believe the main problem is the
>U.S.-bound A6 only gets the auto.
>
>Confession -- I haven't driven any new Audis with the 30-valve V6, so I'm
>only looking at the 30-valver through magazine tests.
>
>------------- clip here with virtual scissors --------------
>************************************************************
>Keyboard stuck error. Press F1 to continue.
>New rates for unsolicited e-mails:
>Any unsolicited e-mails will be charged $3000/KB, $5000 min.
>Just say "Your lights are on" to DRLs
>************************************************************
>
>
>