Last post on May 03, 2007 at 3:41 PM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
Jaguar XJ-Series, Maserati Quattroporte, Volkswagen Phaeton, Mercedes-Benz S-Class, BMW 7 Series, Audi A8, Sedan
#429 of 448 Re: New Audi S6 Debuts! [merc1]
Jan 21, 2006 (9:09 am)
Good pic. Looking at the way that engine "fits", I'd have to say "Access denied".
#430 of 448 Re: New Audi S6 Debuts! [merc1]
Jan 21, 2006 (10:21 am)
It is amazing they're able to fit that thing in... Holy crap!
Anyone know what the front/rear weight ratio is? You gotta believe the car's really front-end-heavy...
#431 of 448 Re: New Audi S6 Debuts! [bdr127]
Jan 23, 2006 (1:23 pm)
First I really love this car (from reading the linked material) -- the content other than the drive train is also impressive.
The question pertaining to nose heaviness stands, IMHO, as a key point.
I know that Audi is, at the moment, eschewing bi-turbo applications going for the "no substitute for displacement" attitude.
But, my read about the FSI engines (e.g., the 2.0T and the 3.2) leads me to wonder what could be brought to market (speaking weight wise) in terms of performance if the "T" treatment from the 2.0 engine were to be applied to the 3.2FSI engine.
We go to a 450 pound V10 to achieve some impressive accelerative numbers and just having a V10 would be "instant tang!" to be sure. But, as noted the new S6 despite all its wonderfulness must WANT to understeer so badly it can taste it.
Why not put the 2.7T Sline A6 turbo treatment on the 3.2 (which certainly would mean overall improvements that have happened since that engine underwent the turbo meister's touch)?
My issue is there seems to be a missed opportunity to have a version of the A6, heck call it an AS6, with 295HP (to keep the number low enough to not threaten the 4.2) and 300+ ft pounds of torque from 1850 RPM on. . . .
Put the high zoot suspension, wheels, brakes and up tuned tiptronic on it -- the fancier electronics, etc. And price it between the current models or just bag the 3.2 normally aspirated engine all together?
I'd like to have a smidge more performance (at least 10% more HP and 20% more torque.) I like to have some "factory" bits that could be ordered to raise both the performance and or sizzle content AT MY OPTION.
My "regret" with my A6 3.2 at $53,286 MSRP? "If I only had a brain. . .," I would have spent another $250 for the sport suspension since I already sprung (no pun intended) for the $1,000 18" wheel option.
I'd love to be able to order the 19" S6 wheels as an option, perhaps a sport suspension without thousands of dollars worth of appearance items (although I do like the SLine's looks.)
On the other hand, perhaps the 4.2 has been somehow made far less thirsty than my LAST 3 Audi 4.2's which certainly were the inspiration for Ross Perot's phrase "giant sucking sound" (as in gas sucking.) The 3.2, by contrast is adequately powered, sounds nearly like a V8 and sips gas -- a little goose in HP and torque and the availability of some stand alone sport options would punch up sales, at least here in River City.
Although I did appreciate and love my Audi 4.2 equipped cars (1 A8 and 2 A6's), I have become less concerned with bragging rights ("mine's got a V10) than I used to be. And, more to the point, I really miss my allroad's 2.7T engine mated to a 6spd manual.
That unmodified engine (on the BPV's were non stock) had locomotive torque, fantastic acceleration and despite being thirstier than I would have liked, was less thirsty than the V8 and performed within .1 second.
C5 A6's quickest model? The 2.7T Sline or 6spd manual (bye bye V8.)
I am often wrong here, out of step with the market, but a V10 equipped A6 almost seems like the answer to a question no one asked. After all this isn't even the direct successor to the RS6, this is "just" an S6 for pity's sake.
OK, OK, if not a 3.2T, why not at least offer a goosed up version of the A6 C6 4.2 -- goosed beyond being called SLine, which, although pretty and although it does contain some handling performance improvement bits, is really a heavily appearance based upgrade rather than a performance biased upgrade.
Of course I read the new Automobile magazine review of the S8 and although it was generally quite positive, it also seemed to indicate that the performance, while impressive, was not "awe inspiring" as they had hoped.
I'm probably the one who needs my head screwed on correctly, but this new S6 really seems like such a limited market product (at a premium but not a super premium price.)
Why not come out with an AS6 based on the 3.2 powerplant that has a base price of $49,900, put a little bit of energy and money into advertising and stand back.
It is hard for me to buy that the new V8 Q7 in totally stock form can be quite posh and be offered for under $50,000 but there is no "step" up A6 unless one is willing to make the step up a somewhat impressive 5 figure number to the left of the decimal point.
Clearly this is rocket surgery.
#433 of 448 Re: An alternative to AMG S55 [vchiu]
Feb 05, 2006 (6:04 pm)
That's very nice. If I could get a Phaeton with an Audi 4.2 V8 from the turbocharged S4 I'd be in nirvana.
#434 of 448 Luxury Owners
by KarenS HOST
Mar 31, 2006 (11:15 am)
A national newspaper is looking to interview consumers who have had to replace a car key, which ended up costing over $200 or $300. Please send an e-mail to ctalatiedmunds.com no later than Monday, April 2, 2006 containing your daytime contact information, the cost to replace your key along with the make and model your vehicle.
#435 of 448 Re: An alternative to AMG S55 [paldi]
Apr 06, 2006 (11:20 am)
You might like the Phaeton W12, normally aspirated. I have the factory USA auto show car with this engine and in the 4 seater configuration. It is utterly outstanding in every respect. Audio magazines have rated the Harold Levinson system in it the very best car sound
in a production car sold in America. Unfortunately the W12 will probably not be available in the "Phaeton II", a 5 door fastback with totally different styling which will replace the
Phaeton I after 2007. One can only surmise it will have a few less amenities and come in above the Passat closer to A6 territory rather compete with the A8 as did the earler Phaeton.
Some used W12 VW's may be available at good prices.
#436 of 448 Re: Phaeton with Bentley GT wheels [paldi]
Apr 06, 2006 (11:26 am)
British car mags agree with you in that they refer to the new GT and Flying Spur as "a Phaeton in a hand made suit".
#437 of 448 Re: Phaeton with Bentley GT wheels [cashcar]
Sep 09, 2006 (3:58 pm)
Phaeton is a cheaper Flying Spur, if you look at them both, you'll notice that they look 99% the same!
#438 of 448 Re: Phaeton with Bentley GT wheels [v_d]
Sep 21, 2006 (7:36 pm)
You are probably right!