Jump to content



Photo

2014 Audi RS6 Avant officially unveiled

audi rs6 avant

  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#16 +Chicane-UK

Chicane-UK

    Neowinian Senior

  • 9,902 posts
  • Joined: 02-November 01
  • Location: The UK!
  • OS: MacOS 10.10 Yosemite
  • Phone: Google Nexus 4

Posted 07 January 2013 - 16:47

Someone I know owned the previous model for like 6 months.

He bought it new and sold it right after having done the first maintenance, because, apparently, those carbon ceramic brakes cost a fortune to replace them. It's a five-digit figure, something around $20,000. ROFL.

This is a supercar in a camouflage.


Yeah but then carbon ceramic brakes are meant to last years and years (possibly the life of the car) without replacement. But even normal non-carbon ceramic brakes for those cost over over $1500+ to replace... as you say, they're super cars with super car running costs - but with a bit of practicality thrown in. A lot of people don't realise that when they take them on!


#17 what

what

    Neowinian Senior

  • 7,503 posts
  • Joined: 04-December 06
  • Location: Kent, England

Posted 07 January 2013 - 20:47

This is quite possibly the ultimate all round car. Lots of power, lots of practicality, superb build quality, and AWD for when the road gets twitchy. There is nothing the RS6 can't cope with.

#18 tsupersonic

tsupersonic

    Neowinian Senior

  • 6,802 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 06
  • Location: USA
  • OS: Win. 8.1 Pro. x64/Mac OS X
  • Phone: iPhone 5S/Nexus 5

Posted 07 January 2013 - 21:01

That looks incredible... although I don't really believe that the twin-turbo V8 560 HP engine gets an average of 24 mpg... :rofl:

Yeah, that's the beauty of turbos. You usually see a increase in gas mileage. But, that depends on how you drive it (as with any mpg figure). I have a 500+ hp car, and I stomp on it every time, and it actually gets somewhat close to the gas mileage. On highway trips, I can average 24-28 mpg, which is not bad for a 500+ hp naturally aspirated 6.2L V8.

This car seems kinda slow 0-60. The 2014 E63 4-Matic Sedan (not wagon) is rated 0-60 in 3.4 seconds.

#19 Yusuf M.

Yusuf M.

  • 21,393 posts
  • Joined: 25-May 04
  • Location: Toronto, ON
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro
  • Phone: OnePlus One 64GB

Posted 07 January 2013 - 21:02

Audi is my favourite car manufacturer but I can't say I like the design of this car. The front looks very aggressive and the length of the car seems a bit excessive. I guess I'm a little biased because I don't like wagons at all (with the exception of the Audi A3).

Yeah, that's the beauty of turbos. You usually see a increase in gas mileage. But, that depends on how you drive it (as with any mpg figure). I have a 500+ hp car, and I stomp on it every time, and it actually gets somewhat close to the gas mileage. On highway trips, I can average 24-28 mpg, which is not bad for a 500+ hp naturally aspirated 6.2L V8.

This car seems kinda slow 0-60. The 2014 E63 4-Matic Sedan (not wagon) is rated 0-60 in 3.4 seconds.

The 3.9 seconds figure is 0-100 km/h. The value for 0-60 km/h is 2.34 seconds.

#20 tsupersonic

tsupersonic

    Neowinian Senior

  • 6,802 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 06
  • Location: USA
  • OS: Win. 8.1 Pro. x64/Mac OS X
  • Phone: iPhone 5S/Nexus 5

Posted 07 January 2013 - 21:07

Audi is my favourite car manufacturer but I can't say I like the design of this car. The front looks very aggressive and the length of the car seems a bit excessive. I guess I'm a little biased because I don't like wagons at all (with the exception of the Audi A3).

That's kind of the point of these high performance variants like RS (Audi), AMG (Mercedes Benz), or M (BMW). You will see different body work - whether it's bigger fender flares, use of carbon fiber, etc. I love the look of the front profile, and the rear profile, but not the side profile.

#21 Geoffrey B.

Geoffrey B.

    LittleNeutrino

  • 16,195 posts
  • Joined: 25-July 05
  • Location: Ohio
  • OS: Windows 7 Ultimate
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 928 WP8.10.14203.306

Posted 07 January 2013 - 21:09

i wish my volvo had carbon fiber on the inside :(

#22 Yusuf M.

Yusuf M.

  • 21,393 posts
  • Joined: 25-May 04
  • Location: Toronto, ON
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro
  • Phone: OnePlus One 64GB

Posted 07 January 2013 - 21:16

That's kind of the point of these high performance variants like RS (Audi), AMG (Mercedes Benz), or M (BMW). You will see different body work - whether it's bigger fender flares, use of carbon fiber, etc. I love the look of the front profile, and the rear profile, but not the side profile.

I guess so. I should have mentioned that I like the front and the back too. The newer designs from Audi are top notch.

#23 Glassed Silver

Glassed Silver

    ☆♡Neowin's portion of Crazy♡☆

  • 10,729 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 04
  • Location: MY CATFORT in Kassel, Germany
  • OS: OS X ML; W7; Elementary; Android 4
  • Phone: iPhone 5 64GB Black (6.0.2)

Posted 07 January 2013 - 21:20

I'm massively impressed there hasn't been a "that's what she said" joke yet...
Come on guys, it's so in-your-face! :laugh:

Glassed Silver:mac

#24 what

what

    Neowinian Senior

  • 7,503 posts
  • Joined: 04-December 06
  • Location: Kent, England

Posted 07 January 2013 - 22:09

Audi is my favourite car manufacturer but I can't say I like the design of this car. The front looks very aggressive and the length of the car seems a bit excessive. I guess I'm a little biased because I don't like wagons at all (with the exception of the Audi A3).


The 3.9 seconds figure is 0-100 km/h. The value for 0-60 km/h is 2.34 seconds.


If you want something more subtle, try the S6. You don't lose too much performance by dropping the R.

I'm sure he meant mph, btw ;)

#25 Gladiatorus

Gladiatorus

    Neowinian

  • 1,128 posts
  • Joined: 29-January 09
  • Location: This Universe

Posted 07 January 2013 - 22:19

Nice

#26 tsupersonic

tsupersonic

    Neowinian Senior

  • 6,802 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 06
  • Location: USA
  • OS: Win. 8.1 Pro. x64/Mac OS X
  • Phone: iPhone 5S/Nexus 5

Posted 07 January 2013 - 22:37

If you want something more subtle, try the S6. You don't lose too much performance by dropping the R.

I'm sure he meant mph, btw ;)

Yep, us Americans measure 0-60mph, where as 0-100km/h is actually 0-62mph (but 100 km/h sounds better than 96.5 km/h :laugh:)