RE: Audi RS6 downsizes to 560hp V8
Discussion
melvster said:
I dont think you need a Porsche 911 Turbo when this is nearly as quick, has twice as many doors, massive boot and goes like s
t off a shovel. My ultimate daily driver.
Totally different cars... this is the type of car the 911 owner buys when his kids get too big for the back seats and the Mrs complains!t off a shovel. My ultimate daily driver. I like it, a lot! But I do wish they'd gone the supercharging route also. I know turbos are commonplace in Audi S-car history, but I was pleasantly surprised when I found out that the new V6 3.0T in the S4 was actually supercharged and not turbocharged (and so impressed overall after driving one that I bought one as my daily). It is a fantastic engine.
So I do wonder why they went a little off-piste (for Audi) with the supercharged S4 lump (and detuned in the A6), if they weren't going to carry the trend through in other models. It's just so much nicer to drive without that rubber-band turbo throttle response!
So I do wonder why they went a little off-piste (for Audi) with the supercharged S4 lump (and detuned in the A6), if they weren't going to carry the trend through in other models. It's just so much nicer to drive without that rubber-band turbo throttle response!
mikEsprit said:
Yeah, and they also say after putting it on the rollers (subjective I know) it's putting out way more than claimed. The S8 is supposed to be 520Ps. If it is actually way more, then what if the new RS6 is also under claimed? If the S8 in that vid can do a sub 12 sec quarter mile at 118mph, then this RS6 will be ballistic.Best looking RS6 yet imho. - love it.
mikEsprit said:
Blimey ... That's faster than pre 2011 GTR and practical/comfy too! I wish I win the lottery sometime soon. Massive want!Massive want for this 
For those worried about the quattro logo in the front grill. Its only an option (or deletable) as these other pictures show;
.......I reckon it's done for packaging / cost reasons. One manifold and one downpipe as opposed to a pair of manifolds and DPs that are harder to get at. I suspect another reason for the change is that it keeps turbo heat away from the aluminium chassis rails in the engine bay now they are using the MQB platform.
I remember reading that the heat from the turbos was the big problem stopping people being able to put the C5 rs6 engine into the aluminium D2 S8 of the time.
For those worried about the quattro logo in the front grill. Its only an option (or deletable) as these other pictures show;
SuperchargedVR6 said:
Dr G said:
ScoobyDoo69 said:
"the new engine puts induction on the ‘outside’ of the cylinder heads, while the turbos and exhausts sit inside the V, which should enable faster throttle response."
So the turbos will sit in between the cylinder heads as opposed to either side? Will this not create a massive heat pocket in the middle of the engine? Never heard or seen that done before...
Very common now, look at an M5.So the turbos will sit in between the cylinder heads as opposed to either side? Will this not create a massive heat pocket in the middle of the engine? Never heard or seen that done before...
I remember reading that the heat from the turbos was the big problem stopping people being able to put the C5 rs6 engine into the aluminium D2 S8 of the time.
Edited by JordanTurbo on Thursday 6th December 09:17
SuperchargedVR6 said:
The Audi A4 2.5 TDI had it's turbo in the Vee back in 2001. Definitely easier for maintenance!
I can't see how it will improve throttle response though as the air still has to go through an intercooler before hitting the throttle plates.
I reckon it's done for packaging / cost reasons. One manifold and one downpipe as opposed to a pair of manifolds and DPs that are harder to get at.
Sort of; the V6 diesels still do this and the turbo sits above and behind the engine, just over hangng the V. The inlet/exhaust arrangement on these is conventional.I can't see how it will improve throttle response though as the air still has to go through an intercooler before hitting the throttle plates.
I reckon it's done for packaging / cost reasons. One manifold and one downpipe as opposed to a pair of manifolds and DPs that are harder to get at.
sisu said:
J4CKO said:
Who actually buys these ?
Even the wealthier people I know seem to have gone for higher end diesels.
If you are in the UK maybe. Alot of people have bought the Panamera. Even the wealthier people I know seem to have gone for higher end diesels.
The business case used to be against time saved and public transportation costs.
Not only that but the fuel and servicing costs to run the V10 RS6 as "fast motorway transport" would have been astronomical. This would not have been a problem with a business fuel card.
Now the tax rules have been tightened up those sales have gone to the diesel models leaving these types of V10 based cars as dinosaurs.
That's why i don't buy the engine downsizing thing, it's just been done to protect business car sales, if it improves the car - that is a happy co-incidence.
Edited by Carl_Docklands on Thursday 6th December 11:30
melvster said:
I dont think you need a Porsche 911 Turbo when this is nearly as quick, has twice as many doors, massive boot and goes like st off a shovel. My ultimate daily driver.
Might be quick in straight line acceleration, but trust me these RS6s go like bloated whales round the twisties. I had a 2009 RS6. Very disappointing drive dynamically.t off a shovel. My ultimate daily driver. Carl_Docklands said:
A high percentage of these types of cars (M5 also) used to be purchased with company money.
Not just the high purchase price but the fuel costs to run the V10 RS6 as "fast motorway transport" would have been astronomical.
Now the tax rules have been tightened up those sales have gone to the diesel models.
That's why i don't buy the engine downsizing thing, it's just been done to protect business car sales, if it improves the car - that is a happy co-incidence.
Fuel isn't that bad, its disks, pads and tyres that make you cry on a regular basis.Not just the high purchase price but the fuel costs to run the V10 RS6 as "fast motorway transport" would have been astronomical.
Now the tax rules have been tightened up those sales have gone to the diesel models.
That's why i don't buy the engine downsizing thing, it's just been done to protect business car sales, if it improves the car - that is a happy co-incidence.
andi_p said:
Carl_Docklands said:
A high percentage of these types of cars (M5 also) used to be purchased with company money.
Not just the high purchase price but the fuel costs to run the V10 RS6 as "fast motorway transport" would have been astronomical.
Now the tax rules have been tightened up those sales have gone to the diesel models.
That's why i don't buy the engine downsizing thing, it's just been done to protect business car sales, if it improves the car - that is a happy co-incidence.
Fuel isn't that bad, its disks, pads and tyres that make you cry on a regular basis.Not just the high purchase price but the fuel costs to run the V10 RS6 as "fast motorway transport" would have been astronomical.
Now the tax rules have been tightened up those sales have gone to the diesel models.
That's why i don't buy the engine downsizing thing, it's just been done to protect business car sales, if it improves the car - that is a happy co-incidence.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff