Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans Luxury Performance Sedans
10007 messages, Last post on Dec 01, 2009 at 7:40 AM
You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
Replying to: royal3 (Nov 21, 2006 10:40 pm) 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. Best Regards, Shipo
|
|
|
Replying to: shipo (Nov 22, 2006 3:41 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.
|
|
|
Replying to: houdini1 (Nov 26, 2006 10:53 am) 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. |
|
|
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. M
|
|
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.  Rocky |
|
|
Replying to: merc1 (Nov 26, 2006 10:44 pm) Im not sure about the RS6, but the RS4 wont be able to hold on to its performance crown for very long. Edmunds test of the 335i coupe had it within a hair of the RS4. That means the new M3 is going to be a 4 second car, and the RS4 cant touch that.
|
|
|
Replying to: lexusguy (Nov 27, 2006 5:57 am) M
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: merc1 (Nov 27, 2006 6:42 am) True ... and, in fact, Edmunds comparo ended with: "But the situation might be changing, as a new, more powerful Audi RS6 should debut at the 2007 Geneva Show. Built by Quattro GmbH (an Audi subsidiary) just like the RS4, this new RS6 will be powered by a turbocharged version of the S6's V10. We're expecting an output somewhere around 550 hp, a number that could change the game completely."
|
|
|
Replying to: domenickamarc (Nov 27, 2006 9:04 am) Although these cars compete in the same segment, they are not exactly apples to apples due to Audi's exclusive reliance on quattro. An AWD car has inherent weight, handling, and design obstacles that dampen outright performance (assuming comparable displacement). Plus, an AWD car just feels different from one with RWD, beyond the understeer considerations. Weight is the enemy of performance, and Audi engineers start with a 200-300 lb weight deficit. Want 50-50 weight distribution? No way Jose. But as Rocky said, what you get with the Audi is the best performer in virtually all weather conditions. Not sure the others can remotely make that claim. There are comparos currently pitting the TT vs. the Cayman, with the Porsche winning fairly handily in terms of handling and "performance." But are these cars truly apples to apples? Do they even compete in the same segment? I think it's debatable since the cars feel so differently from each other, and the price points differ. Quite often, the Audi is a hell of a value in a price-dependent comparo. And if the owner values AWD, it's gravy. Mark---can I hear an amen? =)
|
|
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2007 Lexus GS 430
2011 Acura RL
2011 BMW 5 Series
2010 Volvo S80
2010 Audi A6
2010 Infiniti M35
2010 Infiniti M45
2011 Mercedes-Benz E-Class
2010 Cadillac STS
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
