Last post on May 01, 2013 at 3:12 PM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
Lexus GS 430, Acura RL, BMW 5 Series, Volvo S80, Audi A6, Infiniti M35, Infiniti M45, Mercedes-Benz E-Class, Cadillac STS, Sedan
#8732 of 10338 Re: Audi, safe at first [cstiles]
Nov 21, 2006 (4:38 pm)
In 2000, I picked up an A6 4.2 quattro sport -- it was a 2001 model. It had -- heck it was an alphabet soup of TLA's like ESP, APC, ETC, TCPIP, ABS, and a partridge in a pear tree, it had sat nav and a hands free factory phone for what that is worth (with a directory, phone book and so on), too.
Now, the gov says "ESP" is a requirement in all cars by 2012? That is either 12 or 13 years later! My '87 Audi had ABS and it was two years behind my friends '85 BMW which also had it.
Even in the 2 minute demonstration given on the Today Show this morning about the safest cars, the A3 spinning out of control with ESP off is an impressive testimonial to the value of ESP.
Yet, you can bet even the cheapies these days have power operated everything, CD changers, sunroofs and at least A/C if not climate control.
Having a car without ESP seems -- these days -- about as nutz as it would be to buy a car without a steering wheel.
ESP, as I recall from the Today show, is like a guardian angel watching over us, bla bla bla.
And the example was a rain slicked test track not snow, ice or other lower coefficient of friction surface.
After 5 driving schools now (4 Audi 1 BMW), it really seems "most ridiculous" not to put ESP in all cars from this day forward.
Are "more well to do" folks (One Must Assume?) the only ones who need such wonderful technology?
There are so few LPS cars, one would think the cars with greater market penetration would be the best place to put this technology and perhaps save all of us -- our lives and our money (via insurance premiums.)
12 years later? By that time, the LPS cars will have force fields and there will be a mechanism that will "automatically raise the shields [Mr. Sulu]."
Give me a break! Or, er, brake!
#8733 of 10338 Re: Audi, safe at first [markcincinnati]
Nov 21, 2006 (7:56 pm)
I totally agree that automakers should make ESP/ESC standard, without the need for a mandate from Uncle Sam. I suppose it's a matter of economics and marketplace acceptance, but hopefully the market forces will bring this to reality before 2012. It's also good to see that tire pressure monitoring systems will also become required in a couple years. We are notorious for driving around with grossly underinflated tires. That alone was a significant contributing factor to the Ford Explorer debacle of a few years ago, design flaws of the Explore notwithstanding.
The fact that ABS did not reduce accident frequency when the systems were first introduced was very unfortunate. Due to driver ignorance and lack of proper training, drivers freaked out when the ABS systems made unprecedented vibrations, pulsations, and sounds; sometimes contributing to accidents rather than preventing them.
Fortunately, ESP is much more seamless and transparent from the driver's standpoint.
#8734 of 10338 Audi adjusts to American way
Nov 21, 2006 (9:54 pm)
Audi of America is mounting an effort to reshape its image. Johan de Nysschen, executive vice president in charge of Audi of America said the company needs to be "more American" in its marketing strategy -- more provocative and less about simply German engineering.Audi plans to emphasize the lifestyle of Audi owners. Its customers are mostly self-made affluent people who are younger and more likely to have a college-degree than those of its well-heeled luxury competitors, he said. U.S. Audi sales are up 4.1 percent this year and the company is on track to report its best-ever U.S. sales year, with around 85,000 vehicles sold.
#8735 of 10338 Question about Tire
Nov 21, 2006 (11:40 pm)
I bought RL on 11/19/06. I felt the transmission tends to stay at higher gear. i.e. felt short of torque. It is non-tech package. But i just realized it has PAX tires(run flat tire). Its diameter is 20 inch instead of 17. is this feel of short torque due to larger tire without changing transmission related firmware?
I don't like PAX system. I saw bad reviews and I have to change not only tires but wheels also if i want to go for conventional tires. BAD dealer....
#8736 of 10338 Re: Question about Tire [royal3]
Nov 22, 2006 (4:41 am)
A couple of points:
1) You aren't alone in your dislike for the PAX system, checkout this discussion (different vehicle, same tire) for more information: steve_, "Run-flat, self-sealing, PAX tires for Minivans" #1, 29 Nov 2004 7:27 pm
2) It is very unlikely that the diameter of the overall tire and wheel assembly is anything other than what Honda designed it to be. Consider the following:
Acura RL standard tires: 245-50 R17
Acura RL cmbs/pax tires: 245/680-460
The wheels of the standard tires are of course 17" in diameter while the wheels of the PAX system are 18.11" in diameter. As for the tires, the overall diameter is 26.8" for the standard setup while your PAX tires are 26.77".
True, the wheels are larger for the PAX system, however, there is virtually no difference in overall tire diameter and as such, any differences in revolutions per mile will be irrelevant.
#8737 of 10338 Re: Question about Tire [shipo]
Nov 22, 2006 (9:44 am)
#8738 of 10338 Inside Line Audi S6 Follow-up
Nov 26, 2006 (11:53 am)
Apparently Edmunds does not share all the favorable opinions noted here. The S6 did not compare well with their counterparts at MB and BMW. Kind of surprising.
#8739 of 10338 Re: Inside Line Audi S6 Follow-up [houdini1]
Nov 26, 2006 (11:11 pm)
"Apparently Edmunds does not share all the favorable opinions noted here. The S6 did not compare well with their counterparts at MB and BMW. Kind of surprising."
And quite different from the conclusion reached at Automobile Magazine, when they compared the M5, the S6, and the Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG. The found the S6 and the E63 neck-and-neck for first, with the M5 not comparing well: "At an expected $85,000, the Benz digs deepest into the budget, but it is worth every penny--against the stopwatch and in smiles-per-miles currency. It wins on merit and appeal, even though it surpasses the S6 only by a whisker.The fact that the M5 has fallen so far so fast tells you three things: That this is an extremely fast-moving business. That even a well-founded status quo can be eroded by clever evolution. And that the big-engine-in-a-mid-size-car game is more competitive than ever."
Fame is fleeting and and love is fickle in the automotive press.
Nov 26, 2006 (11:44 pm)
This really isn't much of a surprise. The S6 is a in between sort of car like the Jaguar S-Type R. The class has moved on to 500hp and 400hp just wont cut it, but the S6 is still a great car IMO, especially when you take a glance at the interior. Audi is trying to bracket the AMG/M cars with S cars on the bottom almost priced like "regular" MB/BMW models and RS models on top of the M/AMG models in price and performance.
#8741 of 10338 I like the S6....
Nov 27, 2006 (6:38 am)
I was dissapointed by it's performance numbers. It however is more handsome than the M5, and almost as stylish the Mercedes. Audi, needs to rework the V-10 to get better performance out of it. That's my only gripe with the car otherwise it's the perfect all-weather, performance luxury car.