Audi RS6 -- 561hp!
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,174
Likes: 0
From: Palm Harbor, FL
Originally Posted by CKit,Jun 27 2007, 09:41 AM
But I still don't know how useful more horsepower would be without AWD (in speaking of the M5). I'd love for them to do wet track testing and see what the lap times are for RS6 (or RS4 for that matter) vs M5.
The RS4 was faster around the 'ring than the M5 in the dry. I'd expect that margin to increase in the wet. Personally I'd take a car that was 1 second slower on a dry quarter mile, but MUCH faster in less than perfect conditions.
Heck, the SL65 amg is blazingly fast with a TON of hp... but it did the 'ring in 8:14 vs the RS4's 8:09, (7:58 on R-comps) and that was in the dry. That much hp is unuseable in the wet (or snow, or leaves, or gravel...) IMHO.
Was downtown and next to a C55amg. Running from stoplight to stoplight in the S2000 it was dead even because he kept spinning his wheels and couldn't hook up. It was a little dusty that day and I had to chuckle a little at him tryiing to get traction.
Heck, if I'm going to get a sedan instead of a pure track car, I want it to function well all year round and in all conditions.
The RS4 was faster around the 'ring than the M5 in the dry. I'd expect that margin to increase in the wet. Personally I'd take a car that was 1 second slower on a dry quarter mile, but MUCH faster in less than perfect conditions.
Heck, the SL65 amg is blazingly fast with a TON of hp... but it did the 'ring in 8:14 vs the RS4's 8:09, (7:58 on R-comps) and that was in the dry. That much hp is unuseable in the wet (or snow, or leaves, or gravel...) IMHO.
Was downtown and next to a C55amg. Running from stoplight to stoplight in the S2000 it was dead even because he kept spinning his wheels and couldn't hook up. It was a little dusty that day and I had to chuckle a little at him tryiing to get traction.
Heck, if I'm going to get a sedan instead of a pure track car, I want it to function well all year round and in all conditions.
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,174
Likes: 0
From: Palm Harbor, FL
Originally Posted by JonBoy,Jun 27 2007, 11:29 AM
I have a hard time believing that number unless it's a turbo-charged mill (and nothing says it will be).
The 550 hp sounds fine, by that's way too much torque for a normally aspirated 5.2L engine.
If it's turbo'd (did I miss that?), it's not so silly but it's still pretty high.
The 550 hp sounds fine, by that's way too much torque for a normally aspirated 5.2L engine.
If it's turbo'd (did I miss that?), it's not so silly but it's still pretty high.
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,174
Likes: 0
From: Palm Harbor, FL
Originally Posted by Slamnasty,Jun 27 2007, 10:34 AM
I'm with CKit. As great as it sounds to have more than 550hp in your new luxo midsize, how much of that number can you realistically use? My guess is 500hp is really getting to the limit of what, for example, an M5 can realistically have and still make use of. The same for the RS6, although it could feasibly use more of its 561hp with AWD in the equation.
Horsepower wars are great on paper, but unless you drag race all the time, forget it. I'd take a 350-400hp car that's well sorted, handles great and grabs the road than something with its dynamics offset by the fact that it has too much power. Merc's AMG cars today are a perfect example: It's hard to launch them decently because they spin the tires through the first 2 gears.
I'm sure I'll love the RS6 when it comes out. But I'm not easily swayed by a car just because it's got a stupid amount of power. Granted it's a Lambo V10, but still.
Horsepower wars are great on paper, but unless you drag race all the time, forget it. I'd take a 350-400hp car that's well sorted, handles great and grabs the road than something with its dynamics offset by the fact that it has too much power. Merc's AMG cars today are a perfect example: It's hard to launch them decently because they spin the tires through the first 2 gears.
I'm sure I'll love the RS6 when it comes out. But I'm not easily swayed by a car just because it's got a stupid amount of power. Granted it's a Lambo V10, but still.
http://www.autoblog.com/2007/06/18/spy-sho...wn-boosted-v10/
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,981
Likes: 10
From: mount airy
Originally Posted by sw05s2k,Jun 27 2007, 11:41 AM
^^^ It's what the article says -
I imagine this will top $100K so it's not for me unless a few years used.
Site Moderator
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 50,971
Likes: 3,429
From: Michigan
Originally Posted by rai,Jun 27 2007, 11:50 AM
I don't know. Either way it's a good thing to have awd in a car of this power. I drove a SLR and had a hard time putting the trottle down from a dead stop, too much wheelspin.
I imagine this will top $100K so it's not for me unless a few years used.
I imagine this will top $100K so it's not for me unless a few years used.
sounds like they are all speculating."One of the things we've focused on is that this new
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,981
Likes: 10
From: mount airy
The Audi V12 diesel turbo has 700+ TQ in the Q7 SUV
the brand will be presenting a tremendously powerful V12 TDI engine in the Audi Q7. The six-liter Audi Q7 V12 TDI delivers 500 bhp of power, plus a maximum torque of 738 ft.-lbs
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,174
Likes: 0
From: Palm Harbor, FL
[QUOTE=CKit,Jun 26 2007, 06:43 PM] http://www.autoblog.com/2007/06/26/a...making-561-hp/
http://www.autoblog.com/2007/06/16/spy-video-audi-rs6/
That's crazy!
http://www.autoblog.com/2007/06/16/spy-video-audi-rs6/
That's crazy!
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,535
Likes: 0
From: Phoenix
Originally Posted by overst33r,Jun 27 2007, 11:48 AM
So we've got two articles about the same future car saying 2 different things. If you ask me I don't see why in hell Audi would go so far as to create a *NEW* V10 that isn't Gallardo based, when they already have one. What other car would this new V10 go in? I doubt at this point it's going into the R8's upscale version, because they don't want the R8 blowing the Gallardo out of the water.
It sounds assanine - and improbable - to me to not use the Gallardo V10 and spend millions making a new one for a car that will sell so few units, when they already have an engine like that that is the exact same displacement and already makes power in the range they're shooting for. This isn't a case of watering the Gallardo's rep down either, because if they were that worried about it, they would've made a new V10 by now.
Doesn't make any sense to me for them to create a new one.
EDIT: I looked up C&D's M5-S6-E63 comparo from the Feb issue just to make sure, and though Audi told them the S6 does not have the Gallardo V10, C&D didn't buy that line either. Both are DOHC 40-valve, and have pretty high redlines (the S6's at 7100 and the Gallardo's at 8100). The Gallardo's engine is smaller (5.0) and makes more power (500 vs 435) but is revvier, while the S6's version is larger (5.2) and makes less power, but more torque (398 vs 376). The S6 makes peak torque at 3k, while the Gallardo does so at 4500. To me, it's a simple don't pay attention to the man behind the curtain job: change a few of the basic specs so the engine competes in the class, and then claim it's not based on a more exclusive design so you can have your brand cakes and eat them too. They made the S6 V10 bigger so the torque is produced lower, and they can keep the revvy setup for the twice-as-expensive Gallardo.