Autocar RS6 PE Review

[Markp]

His reference to ride etc on steel springs made me wonder if he has ever driven a C7 before - or whether he is confusing it with previous versions. I think the ride is amazing on air or DRC compared to 5/6.

[MikeFish]

DRC uses steel springs Mark.

But he said there was little body roll on air! The air suspension rolls far too much, even the DRC car rolls too much.

[DragonRR]

I think, as mag reviews go, the review is fairly balanced to be honest.
I went from an F10 M5 to an RS6 because, whilst the M5 really was more fun on a sunny day where the back end would twitch out and you could burn rubber setting off... this was a disaster in poor conditions which we experience all too often in the UK. The RS6 (aside from a little torque steer) just goes in almost any condition. It all depends on what you are after. I remember being completely unable to keep up with an A5 TDi quattro on a sliproad in damp conditions in my M5, which was just annoying. Journalists love rear wheel drive cars because they are more fun on tracks where they spend a lot of their review time. You only have to look at their comments about the four wheel drive 911s like the TTS. The TTS can keep up with an GT3RS round a track despite the GT3RS being close to a race car, no rear seats, awful ride and sticky tyres.. But the TTS is apparently a bit too lacking in feel and "dull".

[Markp]

DRC uses steel springs Mark.

But he said there was little body roll on air! The air suspension rolls far too much, even the DRC car rolls too much.

I know that Mike - it was the reference to the ride I was highlighting, suggests he was basing it on previous test drives in older RS6sas in my experience the C7 has great ride whether on steel (DRC) or air.

And I agree re roll. Odd review.

[PSB1]

Odd review (sponsored by JLR).

[mik15]

i think so too it is a balanced review and it does point out the weak and strong points of the RS6 very well, i've had 3 RS6, 2 x C5 and one C6 and while i do love it i am also very aware that they're not the most involving cars to drive and the experience is not similar to the M5 or AMG, obviously they all have their pro and cons, but overall the review seems very close to reality, i'd however disagree with the 3.5 mark, i think it deserves a 4 with not doubts if not quite a stretched 4.5

[DragonRR]

Agreed 4 out of 5. However - it is probably the best car in it's class RS6 PE>Panamera>AMG estates (IMO) and considering getting another (2nd hand non PE) to replace the Golf so I must like it

[Ian_C]

I think, as mag reviews go, the review is fairly balanced to be honest.
I went from an F10 M5 to an RS6 because, whilst the M5 really was more fun on a sunny day where the back end would twitch out and you could burn rubber setting off... this was a disaster in poor conditions which we experience all too often in the UK. The RS6 (aside from a little torque steer) just goes in almost any condition. It all depends on what you are after. I remember being completely unable to keep up with an A5 TDi quattro on a sliproad in damp conditions in my M5, which was just annoying. Journalists love rear wheel drive cars because they are more fun on tracks where they spend a lot of their review time. You only have to look at their comments about the four wheel drive 911s like the TTS. The TTS can keep up with an GT3RS round a track despite the GT3RS being close to a race car, no rear seats, awful ride and sticky tyres.. But the TTS is apparently a bit too lacking in feel and "dull".

This. In the real world, 4wd means you can use more of the performance more of the time. Modern hot hatches / saloons / estates have so much power and torque nowadays - petrols and diesels - that 2wd no longer makes sense imo.

15 years ago, a Ferrari 360 Modena had 400 bhp. For one example - an Audi S6 makes 450 horsepower stock. And a shed load more torque. But whereas the Ferrari gets driven on dry weekends and summers evenings, the Audi gets used in rush hour, winter rain and snow, four or five up, wife and kids aboard etc

I can imagine the M5 must have been a nightmare in anything other than dry conditions!

(says the man who has had solely torsen quattros for six years and is considering going Audiless for a while for an Octavia vRS daily hack. I know I'll miss 4wd pulling out of junctions / roundabouts etc..... decisions decisions)

[robf]

Just actually read the review and came away thinking it was very positive! Don't understand what people are moaning about.

[PSB1]

3.5.

[DragonRR]

I think, as mag reviews go, the review is fairly balanced to be honest.
I went from an F10 M5 to an RS6 because, whilst the M5 really was more fun on a sunny day where the back end would twitch out and you could burn rubber setting off... this was a disaster in poor conditions which we experience all too often in the UK. The RS6 (aside from a little torque steer) just goes in almost any condition. It all depends on what you are after. I remember being completely unable to keep up with an A5 TDi quattro on a sliproad in damp conditions in my M5, which was just annoying. Journalists love rear wheel drive cars because they are more fun on tracks where they spend a lot of their review time. You only have to look at their comments about the four wheel drive 911s like the TTS. The TTS can keep up with an GT3RS round a track despite the GT3RS being close to a race car, no rear seats, awful ride and sticky tyres.. But the TTS is apparently a bit too lacking in feel and "dull".

This. In the real world, 4wd means you can use more of the performance more of the time. Modern hot hatches / saloons / estates have so much power and torque nowadays - petrols and diesels - that 2wd no longer makes sense imo.

15 years ago, a Ferrari 360 Modena had 400 bhp. For one example - an Audi S6 makes 450 horsepower stock. And a shed load more torque. But whereas the Ferrari gets driven on dry weekends and summers evenings, the Audi gets used in rush hour, winter rain and snow, four or five up, wife and kids aboard etc

I can imagine the M5 must have been a nightmare in anything other than dry conditions!

(says the man who has had solely torsen quattros for six years and is considering going Audiless for a while for an Octavia vRS daily hack. I know I'll miss 4wd pulling out of junctions / roundabouts etc..... decisions decisions)

Indeed. I'm debating between the RS6 and a C63 AMG Coupe (2016). I was going with a comp pack M4 but I've (almost) ruled that out now. You are spot on with your comment about junctions. The RS6 is 100% useable all the time. The M5 was brilliant but awareness of road conditions was vital. No point in trying to drive fast in the wet at all and forget snow altogether. I don't really understand why I'm struggling to choose although I love coupes and the new C63 presses all the aesthetic buttons.

I've posted this before but this is a pic of my M5 after being towed to this point and left. It was unusable for over a week.

[robf]

But in snow you are limited by tyres. An M5 on winter tyres would outperform an RS6 on standard tyres in the snow.

I get what everyone is saying; it's the whole reason i am opting for an RS6 - a balanced all rounder. But i'm also not ignorant to the fact that, if i was looking for a true driver's car, an Audi would be bottom of the list.

[almoRS]

I went from a C63 Coupe (6.2 engine) to the RS6. I had winter tyres for the C63 and it was fine, no issues. New C63 Coupe does look fantastic but still love the sheer brute force of the RS6. See what happens when the bring out a black series

[Andy_W]

His reference to ride etc on steel springs made me wonder if he has ever driven a C7 before - or whether he is confusing it with previous versions. I think the ride is amazing on air or DRC compared to 5/6.

I thought the same. Seems to be many comments without substance. My Dynamic C7 rides better than anything I can remember for a long time F10 M5 and S63s included.

[MSF21]

DragonRR

Curious as to why you have ruled the M4 Comp out now?