Audi A6

merc1 · February 2004

I usually wait until the final pictures to say anything, but every picture so far has been just the current car with the new-look grille and a Saturn LS looking rear end.

I hope Audi is just warming over the current car. I was looking for something shocking and stunning with the new grille and all. This car in the spy shots looks more like a "facelift" than a redesign.

M

trejos28 · February 2004

I just had '01 A6 2.8 serviced and it was recommended by my dealer that I add a Fuel Additive.

Any recommendations?

Thanks.

markcincinnati · February 2004

The dealer sells fuel additive but it is the same stuff that is at Chevron.

Empty tank, add "big jug" fuel additive, fill up with super premium. Rinse lather repeat -- 1 time.

Change oil and filter, early as doing the above will turn your oil blacker than a trapped coal miner.

Then, afterwards use "small jug" of fuel additive perhaps one out of every four or five tankfulls.

Depending on the milage of your car, changing the spark plugs, oil+air filter and oil all at the same time (see above) may contribute to better gas milage and if things are really bad right now, perhaps even smoother and more power.

Techrylene? Heck, it is something like that.

nosho · February 2004

While I'm not yet in the market to replace my 2000 A6-2.7T. I am starting to look and I am disappointed to see that a manual won't be available from Audi. I will be taking a close look at the Cadillac CTS-V - 400HP with a stick (but not AWD, but with LSD).

kirby2010 · February 2004

I stopped by my dealership on Friday for an oil change. Only one 2.7T with 6-speed left. I think it was the Audi USA site that had the "base" 2.7T no longer available after 1/1/04. Replaced by the S-line with automatic only. The salesman didn't have much of an idea where Audi is headed with all this. I have to say, though, that it is a sad day to see the manual cut from the list of choices. I had been considering trading my '01 2.7T w/6-speed in the spring. On hold now, at least for the short term. I think my fall-back position will be to go with the 4.2 if I have to go automatic. (There were a couple RS6s there - $88K is pretty steep.)

markcincinnati · February 2004

The Audis that come to the US are, IMO, likely to come with 6spd tips, CVT's if they ever get them to be quattro and high torque friendly and/or DSGs.

The thought process, he said as if he knew for sure rather than just speculating, must be that the automatics with 6 forward speeds and a variety of technologies can -- technically -- equal or better the stick shift in power/performance/control and fuel economy. From my vantage point, the 5spd tip has been a fair transmission -- some people like them. AT this price point, though, you would think you would want better than a "fair" transmission. Does anyone have a good 5spd manu matic?

I find them vague but passable. Given a choice (which I was when I bought my current allroad a 2003 2.7T) at this point in time, I would go with the 6spd manual. The DSG, CVT and 6ormore spd tips may change my mind.

I am not opposed to having my mind changed.

I am just doubtful -- espcially with the numerous tiptronic related complaints ALL over the Internet about the tip as it is currently rendered in Audi and VW's!

I have had 4 tips -- I loved the fact that 3 of them were connected to Audi V8's -- but the transmissions did rob a lot of power and a fair amount of "real time" responsiveness from an otherwise awesome drive train.

I keep swearing I will test a 6spd tip -- for I am 90% certain that the new A6's will ONLY come with that option or if not this new A6, next year, for sure.

The DSG is supposed to be THE one to have, BTW.

What are they thinking?!?

Will the 5 series BIMMERS still have manual as an option? And, is the rumor about the BMW's offering AWD across the line fur real, fur sure?!?

merc1 · February 2004

Well we'll soon know exactly what the next A6 looks like:

http://www.audiusa.com/EventPastDetails/0,4356,eventDropdownDate-- February%2B2004_status-P_eventDropdownCallingPage-eventSearch_eve- ntDropdownTab-P_postSummaryId-2946_eventDropdownCategoryId-2_even- tDropdownStateId-0_eventSearchPageNum-1_,00.html?referringPage=ho- me

(I know its a long link!)

M

bretaa · February 2004

Criticize BMW's recent styling, but it appears everyone is getting in the act on the front light "eyebrow," Audi looking like it has a lower one and Scion (in the recently introduced coupe) has an upper one...

- Bret

markcincinnati · February 2004

caslin · February 2004

AOA site still claims 258# torque? Why(& how) boost hp 15 and not move torque even "1"? At one time I was mad at my dealer for not telling me about the new S-line when I ordered my A6 2.7T w\ 6 manual in Sept. By the time I picked it up (11\22\03) I was aware of the auto only on the S-line and also found myself scratching my head and forgiving my dealer. I obviously didn't get the last manual, but I never dreamed how close to that I was. Considering myself lucky, my first Audi and the last of the best at the same time (excluding auto only RS6). Separate issue-Has anyone had any experiences with "short-shift" kits? Looking at one from Stratmosphere. Worth the trouble? Any Audi warranty issues? Appreciate input on other brands too!! 4500 miles and still smiling-nare a problem.

caslin · February 2004

Just double checked AOA site, have now updated site to show 280 ft\lb torgue. 15 ponies and 22 ft\lbs and all they got was .2 on the 0-60mph? That Tip is a power hog indeed!

markcincinnati · February 2004

. . .could read "robust power, not just ground effects, now at 265 strong horses is just one of the hallmarks of the new for 2004 A6 S-line [sic]" -- now the A6 2.7T S line, the only one available from such and such a point forward is .4 seconds less quick than its standard line predecessor.

I have the Audi brochure -- which clearly states the 0-100kph time for the Audi A6 2.7T is 6.0 seconds flat. Indeed, the Audi A6 2.7T sport for 2004 was, with the exception of the S4, the quickest Audi in the US -- quicker than an S6, quicker than an A8, quicker than an A6 4.2 and quicker than a 225HP or 250HP TT.

Why not boost -- ever so slightly -- the HP and torque, put the ground effects and uprated wheels and tires on the A6 2.7T and leave it alone -- my gut says that it would then be 0-100kph at 5.7+ seconds -- darn close to the S4 and a lot more comffortable to boot.

It seems exactly backwards to push the performance envelope of a car higher and effectively lower one of the Key Performance Indicators (acceleration) by a factor of ~ a half second.

Of course they could've improved the performance even more and kept pushing the S line (with a Tip) to 6.0 seconds -- but then that would REALLY kill the 4.2's sales, which is rated at 6.7 seconds.

I loved my 4.2 A6, it felt strong, muscular and powerful -- like The Hulk! -- and nothing could be finer than the sound of that V8.

But a year and a half with a 2.7T 6spd (in an allroad, no less) has given me an appreciation for the "right now" power of the 2.7T (when mated with the manual transmission).

My 2.7T Audi (stick shift) makes me yearn for a drive in a factory modified 2.7T equipped car -- sadly the only way to get the S Line is equipped with an "on line, big time and NOT real time" tiptronic transmission.

I could just scream.

caslin · February 2004

Just double checked AOA site, have now updated site to show 280 ft\lb torgue. 15 ponies and 22 ft\lbs and all they got was .2 on the 0-60mph? That Tip is a power hog indeed!

markcincinnati · February 2004

. . .is that the new version is now .4 less quick than the outgoing version (in 6spd trim).

cdnpinhead · February 2004

I feel your pain.

The people who built the car I drive have given up on the manual, and I've alienated any number of the faithful (who also drive it) by harping on the subject.

I keep myself somewhat calmer by contemplating my potential next car: G35, CTS, BMW 5, Audi A6, or whatever else may come down the pike that meets my requirements. Having even one from the pool (especially the one with the nicest interior and the wonderful memories from three business trips and a European vacation) drop out is disheartening.

In 1 - 5 years (how reliable is my Lincoln LS, really?) I'll need a new car. It will have a manual. It will be rear-wheel or all-wheel drive. It will handle well, have a decent interior and an upgraded audio system.

I'm guessing Cadillac, Nissan and BMW will still be in my game, but one never knows.

It's becoming sadly apparent that Audi will not.

markcincinnati · February 2004

. . .the 3.2L engine will crank out 250HP, same as the outgoing 2.7T used to put out. Moreover, the 3.2 probably has a few tricks up its sleeve (perhaps without turbocharging or without any heroic mods by Audi the power can be upped to 275). Turbo charging the 3.2, which has been rumored (by the VW Passat crowd) may come; and, I have seen power predictions for the 3.2 of between 250 and 320 HP in various possible and logical configurations.

. . .the 4.2L engine will never crank out less than 310HP and probably will, from this point forward produce numbers north of that.

[A6]. . .improved weight distribution and chassis/body/frame "stiffness" will certainly move in the right direction too. Even Audi engineers are talking about a more balanced power delivery (which never actually says "rear wheel drive" biased, but sort of sounds like it might be leaning that way -- or maybe it is just that the weight distribution will shift a bit from front to rear, which ought to decrease understeer and improve cornering).

Audi has brought 3 notable transmissions to market, a 6spd tiptronic, a CVT (which has been "threatened" to be made quattro compliant) and the award winning 6spd DSG. Both the CVT and the DSG offer performance that gives up nothing to a manual transmission. I can't speak to the tiptronic except to say I hope that the "lag" associated with the 5spd models has once and for all been expunged from the future and current 6spd versions.

So what? Well, there are times when almost anyone would want the car to be able to shift for itself -- IF there is no penalty in performance, control, safety or milage. "Apparently" both the CVT and DSG can offer "the best of both worlds."

There is, of course, at this point of inflection, so to speak, only DSG in the TT and only CVT in the FWD models. The jury is "hung" as far as I know with respect to the 6spd tip -- yet in the S4 there apparently is at least ONE positive effect: no gas guzzler designation with the 6spd tip but one with the 6spd manual. Go figure.

So we will have 2 A6 sedans from which to choose: a 3.2L model and a 4.2L model.

What do you think will happen, perhaps not in '05, but no later than '07, I'll wager? Greater power for both engines (achieved either naturally or "forced" -- but achieved nevertheless). Improved chassis dynamics and probably at least two transmission choices: my guess -- 6spd tip and DSG or 6spd tip and CVT (once the latter transmissions can be made to withstand higher torque and, in the case of the CVT, configurered for quattro.)

I have given up, so to speak, on the 5spd tip. If that is all there is -- and the gremlins have not been driven out -- well, I am not in the market for an Audi of any ilk so equipped (exception: RS 6, but not for $85K).

If during the second half of the model year 2005 (which will start in January 2005) there is an A6 that can be equipped with an "ambitious" sport package, a lag-less autotrans (6spds forward) and a spunky and strong V6 or V8 (turbo on not), well, I will probably be in line for yet another Audi.

In the mean time, an S4 certainly looks like it could win my heart and dollars -- and I predict for the forseeable future that the S4 will be offered with a stick shift!

Don't give up on Audi just because they apparently have decided to eschew the "row your own" transmission. The new technology may actually be an improvement over the old.

shipo · February 2004

Okay Mark, you have me intrigued, a little. I really like rowing my own, and I really like engines that have been breathed on, preferably by an exhaust driven turbo.

My concern with Audi's move to eliminate the third pedal in the entire A6 lineup in favor of a CVT or DSG unit is that while they might well be able to equal or even surpass the conventional manual transmission in a balls to the wall driving environment, I really don't see how they can dynamically and smoothly change into 'Tooling around mode' in the bat of an eyelash. The beauty of a manual is that you can ease into a gear, ease the clutch into full engagement, mash the throttle and drive hell bent for leather and then go back to tooling around mode as fast and as often as you want. Until a CVT, DSG, Step, Tip, SMG or whatever can see the curve, corner or other obstacle in front of you and read your mind as to proper gear selection AND speed of engagement, I just cannot see them truly replacing a car with three pedals.

Regarding the new 3.2 V6 replacing the blown 2.7, even though it has similar power specs, I have always loved the "Go anywhere, climb anything, pass everything" capabilities of turbocharged engines at altitude, and while I now live on the East Coast and haven't gotten to the Rockies or the Sierras since I've lived here (although I have had the pleasure of driving the Alps a couple three times), I would still choose a blown 250 hp mill over a normally aspirated 250 hp mill any day.

Regarding Audi's new found attention to a cars' balance (both in power delivery and weight distribution), I can only applaud them.

So, what would I REALLY like to drive next? Hmmm, how about the new A6 with as near to a 50/50 weight and power distribution as possible equipped with a twin turbo 350 hp 3.2 liter V6 connected to the drive train via a 6-Speed manual transmission. Ohhh, not quite Nirvana, but good enough. ;-)

Best Regards,
Shipo

markcincinnati · February 2004

. . .but I must say, I agree. First the phrase there's no replacement for displacement has been for my money effectively amended with the less catchy suffix -- "except for volumetric improvement."

A 2.9T engine -- in lab only form -- presumably was created about the time the 2.8 was replaced with the 3.0. There was a problem, of course -- the 2.9T engine "blew away" (I crack myself up) the 4.2L V8. Completely detuned, a 2.9T easily produced 295HP and blew through 300 foot pounds of torque at just south of 2000 rpm's. The performance of an A6 with a 2.9T so tuned smoked even the high zoot 4.2L (@ 340HP) due to the early on torque.

The current 2.7T vs the current 4.2L -- both mated to tiptronics -- produces a clear winner in the acceleration department: the 2.7T (this was even true before the modest, some would say almost non-existent S-line boost). Of course the recent 2.7T when coupled to a 6spd was .7 seconds quicker to speed.

Now, there were/are many reasons to lust for the A6 4.2 beyond stoplight acceleration, but the point is the state of the Audi engineering capability with respect to turbo charging has made virtually ANY thing Audi produces with 6 cylinders (when blown) outperform significantly more expensive V8 variants.

So, apparently there will be NO 2.9T, apparently (for the time being) no Audi 3.2 (or would it be 3.1) "T" either. Imagine, the conservative Audi engineers adding the bi-turbo to the 3.2 engine and finding out that even mild blowing raises the horsepower by 20% -- and WHAM, there you are with a 3.2T rated "easily" @ 300HP when the S4 "souped up" version has but 340 and barely crosses the 300 foot pounds of torque point (at 3500 rpm, to boot?)

The ante of easily obtainable power and torque is upped quickly, efficiently and with the latest designs even CLEANLY -- all with two tiny turbos.

Reliability issues -- especially compared to the 2.7T which has had some knotty problems reliability-wise -- have all but been banished with improved engineering and manufacturing methods. Yet the issues IMO are NOT engineering and manufacturing related. Nor are they cost related (well, OK, maybe a little), warranty related or pollution related (OK, again, maybe a little) -- nope, nope, and nope. The issues are MARKETING related.

I suspect that Audi will NOT abandon turbo charging, but I also suspect that only the highest buck versions will be turbo charged (exhibit #1: the RS 6, exhibit #2 the RS 4). Perhaps the 1.8T will soldier on -- but even here, again IMO, the 1.8T is probably likely to be discontinued in favor of the 2.0 with the new ultra high pressure fuel injection technology and sans blower.

Perhaps there has been a perception that turbo charging was "cheating" or perhaps that turbo charging was being added to improve performance instead of improving performance by engineering improved engines. BMW, Audi's claimed target, produces [non-permissible content removed]-for-tat cars to go up against Audi -- (yet pick a line 3,5, or 7) and note that the Bimmers generally out accelerate the Audi's -- and there have been no turbo'd BMW's.

The A4 3.0 put against the BMW 3.0 -- BMW has the bragging rights. The A6 3.0 or 4.2 against a similarly equipped BMW model -- the BMW takes the drag strip honors again (the 2.7T, did better the 5 series with the 3.0 engine -- and for lower dollars.) Yet, somehow, the BMW "appeared" in every category to produce a clear differentiating characteristic when advertised and/or tested: 0-60 times that beat the "supposedly comparable Audi."

My friend and I bought matching year cars, forgive me if I get the "L" wrong, the spirit of what I will say is correct. The year was 2000, my friend bought a 528 and I an A6. We paid the same (MSRP). I got an A6 4.2, however -- not an A6 2.8 or 3.0 V6. My AWD V8 equipped Audi could blow-away his 6 cylinder (straight 6) equipped car; and, for what it's worth it was a "4 seasons" car, while his became virtually useless in winter (so much so that he garaged it in winter and drove a Jeep).

Yet the comparison, at the time was often the minimum equipped Audi A6 with the BMW 5 series (and in that configuration, without mention of price, the BMW did indeed "best" the A6.) At the price point, the Audi clearly was a winner, equipped "similarly" the Audi was far less money. Somehow these points did not come across -- the Audi was presented "as if" the comparison was apples and apples, which of course it was not -- when I saw my friend's BMW 528's MSRP and it was within a couple hundred bucks of my 4.2L V8 A6 quattro, I knew that "marketing" had won again. This was not lost on Audi.

My other friend, "the sensible one," drove the 6 cylinder 5 series and the 2.7T A6 -- the 2.7T was even quicker than the V8 Audi and was thousands less than either the V8 Audi or the straight 6 BMW.

The point of all this is to suggest that even with such "clear and logical (there's the problem)" differentiation, the Audi was not able to end up favorably compared.

It must've occurred to Audi that what they needed was to abandon the "unfavorable" image of the turbo engines (among other things) and produce cars that relied on the "there's no replacement for displacement" phrase rather than volumetric efficiency.

Marketing was winning.

Now, simultaneously, Audi was desirous of producing a PRODUCTION "supercar" (perhaps to demonstrate that they could produce a rival to the M5). They didn't have any engine -- unblown -- that could do the job. So, marketing to the rescue. Somehow the bolting on of a bi-turbo to the 4.2 has been made to be seen (or at least represented) as something reserved for the most expensive and exoctic cars ever to wear the 4 interlocking rings.

So, those mere mortals (who think $50,000 is enough to pay for a car) will probably have to deal with bigger engines, normally asipirated. The "instant tang" of the 2.7T is the last we'll see in the non-super-car price range.

And, the truth of the matter is that the stick shifts -- for whatever reason -- don't sell. Which came first "no or low stick shift inventory" or no or low customer demand.

I have my opinions, and I'm sure they do not jive with Audi's. Frankly, I am probably wrong, too -- for I know of only and ever shrinking population of folks who will (or can) drive a stick shift.

I am 52 -- the folks I work with are in their 30's -- most of them are now having children and when the kids come the stick shifts go. The "fleet" of Audi A4's is traded for mini-vans, pick-ups, SUV's and "sedans" -- and with them come automatics (even if the brands they buy offer sticks, most choose the automatics because they do not wish to special order the stick shift versions).

The CVT and DSG probably cannot do what you suggest -- and they are almost certainly less fun, lower in "performance" (other than straight line acceleration where they claim to be equal) and lower in absolute control and safety, whaddya gonna do?

shipo · February 2004

...so I'm not very creative. I can live with that. ;-) I still like my cars to have three pedals and a blower, and for that matter, I like my airplanes to have two pedals and a blower as well. ;-)

Regarding the on-going Audi vs. BMW debate; prior to my first BMW in 1999, I had driven two VW's and three Audi's and considered myself an "Audi guy". Unfortunately it was the issue of the stick shift that drove me to even consider BMW in the first place. In 1995, my first child was on the verge of needing a new car seat, a forward facing one this time, and for the first time in my driving career, I NEEDED a sedan. As fortune would have it, VW released the new for 1995 Passat GLX and I was hooked. I turned in my leased car (which I leased one day before I found out that my wife, then girl friend, was pregnant) early (taking a bath in the process) and got a fully loaded VR6 Passat GLX 5-Speed. That is unless you consider a car not "Fully Loaded" unless it has an automatic.

Four years and over 85,000 miles later, I was in the market for a car when much to my chagrin, VWoA decided to cancel the 5-Speed version of the 1999 Passat GLX (the one with all of the power goodies that I wanted) and force me to look further a field. In the end, the A4 2.8 and the 328i were my two finalists, and two things tipped the decision in BMW's favor:

1) Rear seat leg room. While neither of these two cars could even come close to the leg room of my 1995 Passat, the 328i had an inch or two more than the A4, and with both of my children buckled into their car seats right on the showroom floor, the 328i won.

2) Lease price. I lease for business purposes, and the 328i was considerably less expensive than a comparably equipped A4 2.8. So much so that the 328i was only $10 per month more than my business partners' Dodge Intrepid!

Now that Mr. Bangle has absolutely destroyed the BMW product line, I was hoping to be able to return to the Audi fold, but alas, I'm not sure that I can convince myself to drive a car sans stick.

Best Regards,
Shipo

markcincinnati · February 2004

shipo · February 2004

markcincinnati · February 2004

10/29/2004 -- 2005 Audi A6 3.2 and 4.2 leave US port for dealerships. Customer acceptance early to mid November 2004 planned.

2005.5 A4 -- two engine choices (excluding S4) 2.0 non turbo and 3.2 V6 (also non turbo). It is assumed that the S4 will have no less than it has now (340HP). Changes to "refresh" A4 style to new corporate look should be incorporated -- hmm that means for the first time, perhaps, that the 4, 6, 8 lineups will have the "corporate face" more or less. Love it or hate it, who knows.

Bye bye 3.0 -- hello mo' power!

Get this -- the 3.2 engine in an A4 will produce (if nothing changes) 250HP (I know, I know, "what's the torque and at what rpm?" -- I don't know, yet). The last S4 -- which I thought was very powerful, quick and competent (and was the top o' the line "4") was 250HP.

So the base 2.0 A4 will be what? 200HP? (I think that is what he said) and the "up model" will be 250HP? The horsepower wars are in full swing.

Order guides for the new A6 (options, features, colors and interiors) April 2004. Official orders may commence from that point forward.

Still no sign of ED (no not that)-- European Delivery -- program. Check out BMW's ED program -- about 7% off (US price) which, based on my wife's and my habits pays for about 50% of a 4 to 5 star 5 to 7 day EV (European Vacation) on a $50K car.

Hello Audi, is this thing on?!?

Testing testing, hello, is this thing on?

nyccarguy · February 2004

It seems that with the 3.2L V6 that VW/Audi is moving away from Blown 6cyls (shame as they are really great to drive).

According to the lastest issue of ROUNDEL, BMW sold more over 26,000 more 3 series in the US (111,144) than Audi sold cars (85,726).

stmech · February 2004

There have been some recent posting regarding the Audi CVT transmission. I have a 2002 A6 with the CVT. I chose the CVT instead of 4WD because I thought the trans was worth it. This is spite of the fact that I live in a hilly region that gets plenty of snow in the winter (good winter tires, along with traction control and ABS seem to work just fine).

I have been very satisfied with the operation of the CVT. It is truly a "Jeckyl & Hyde" device - it is an uncannily smooth transmission (no apparent shifts)in "D", yet a fun, solidly and quickly shifting clutchless 6-spd manual when you want it to be. Gas mileage is terrific - 25 in general driving and 29+ at typical interstate speeds. After 45,000 miles it has been 100% reliable. When the car has been in for periodic service, the dealer gives me a new or nearly new loaner that is always a "normal" auto transmission Audi A4 or A6. I wouldn't trade the CVT for the normal auto under any circumstances. I understand the appeal of a true stick shift (I have 2 other vehicles with stick shifts), but they are not so much fun in traffic.

andys120 · February 2004

as soon as they offer it with Quattro. What's taking so long, Nissan offers the CVT in the 245hp awd Murano?

markcincinnati · February 2004

Once the CVT becomes both V8 and quattro capable, the tiptronic will be nothing but a bad bad memory instead of a recurring nightmare for so many.

Hopefully the 6spd tip is better or hopefully the DSG will come to the rescue if the CVT can't be made robust enough!

nosho · February 2004

Installed a Stratmosphere kit. I prefer it over stock. Should be no warranty issue as installation is from the passager compartment.

liferules · February 2004

I like the look. It's not revolutionary, but has nice lines. Of course, I'll need to see it in person...

boomsama · February 2004

i think the exterior looks great, but the interior looks abit old

merc1 · February 2004

Well as always I'm still taking all the pics in.

I can say that I'm not wowed by it, like I was with the A8's introduction.

This new A6 curiously has some BMW 5-Series details.

Look at the cut-line along the bottom. Look at the wheels.

The rear is very much like any regular American or Japanese car, especially with that chrome bar.

The interior seems a little busy and it surely isn't as expressive as the old car's.

I guess what I'm saying is that it isn't a totally new look/car, it's just a cautious update of
the previous. I expected more from Audi.

M

6thbeatle · February 2004

i think the new audi A6 is a nice-looking car. from the rear it's got some similarities to the new acura TL, especially around the lights, and with its continuous crease that runs along the side. i think the new signature grill reminiscent of the old auto union racers is a much more distinctive look--good show! and that interior--phwoarrrrr! love it. the best yet.

i'm disapponited to hear that some people have been unable to get comfortable in the driver's seat, but that is truly an important consideration. when the jeep liberty first came out, i liked the upscale two-tone leather interior of the limited but dismissed the entire vehicle outright because there is a sizeable bump in the floor around the front passenger's left foot that drove me crazy, and i couldn't imagining giving a ride to someone i liked with that annoying bump getting in the way of a relaxed seating position. if my leg was rubbing all the time on any part of the interior, i would feel very constricted.

that's one reason i'm still fond of big american vehicles like the cadillac DTS or lincoln aviator for example. big enough so you can REALLY stretch out your legs without hitting anything. overall i think that audi designs really smart-looking, chic, and sexy-in-a-sophisticated-way cars.

merc1 · February 2004

I just noticed another BMW-like feature of the new A6, it's interior has the same cockpit-type layout that BMWs used to have. Notice the center console and it's angle towards the driver.

M

mariner7 · February 2004

I've thought for quite some time the new Acuras, TSX & TL, look Audiesque. I'm glad someone agreed with me. Especially the housing of the front headlights. But I think Audi has leapfrogged Acura with new A6.

Audi is the only car maker whose lines remind me of well cut Italian men's suits, very sharp and distinct.

bretaa · February 2004

After the flurry of ugly "spy shots" and photocrops, I'm pleasantly surprised. I especially like the c-pillar/rear quarter window better in this version. Like all Audi's, conservative and powerful.

The interior I'm mixed on. I love the luxurious A8 style center console and the fact that (finally) Audi is tilting the dash towards the driver (something BMW seems to be moving away from, unfortunately). However, I don't like the large expanse of plastic on the top of the dash that feels purposeless, abandoning the Audi gauge "pod." It almost looks like the previous generation Pontiac Grand Prix, with it's driver information center sitting there. Hum...

If this drives like a 5-series, though, wow...

- Bret

prattster · February 2004

A very play-it-safe redesign in my book not really all that much different than the old model. The roofline arch appears the same and the new car looks almost identical in dimensions but is prob. bigger marginally. The grille is a little too excessive in my book, should be toned down a bit, too much Chrysler in the grill area. Audi is understated elegance not flash. Another small issue, why is Audi not using pull out door handles like everyone else instead of the paddle type on all their models?

The interior isn't all the innovative in execution, the dash design that curves towards the driver is what Toyota/Lexus were doing in early to mid 90's and the 1st GS300 had a very similiar design. The materials and quality of look should be a cut above Benz/BMW interiors any day.

The A6 never really was a big selling model as is the flagship A8 which only sold 4000+ cars last year. I don't see how this remake is going suddenly change that overnight especially since two new highly anticipated makes from Japan are coming as in the Acura RL and new Infiniti M35/45.

timcar · February 2004

http://www.audiworld.com/news/04/a6/

shipo · February 2004

"I don't see how this remake is going suddenly change that overnight especially since two new highly anticipated makes from Japan are coming as in the Acura RL and new Infiniti M35/45."

That's simple. Ever heard of Chris Bangle? Just the cross over buyers from BMW alone should help the A6 quite nicely. Now, if only Audi would offer a 6-Speed manual in the A6, it would be nearly perfect. ;-)

Best Regards,
Shipo

motokichi · February 2004

just got my first look at the caranddriver.com. Love the Nuvolari inspired look, and the fact that the base model will come with the 3.2FSI. Anybody know how much this car will weigh w/quattro? Also think they should offer DSG.

andys120 · February 2004

What are they doing to our beautiful Audis! Did they hire Chris Bangle? :^(

jstyle · February 2004

Outside, not so good, inside the BMW drivers cockpit returns!!! YES.

http://www.germancarfans.com/printablenews.cfm/newsid/2040216.005

cdnpinhead · February 2004

this excellent link makes it very apparent that Audi makes (or will soon) some very interesting automobiles.

How many of them will be available in the land of EPA (with the onerous & many wickets that need to be gone through) remains to be seen.

shipo · February 2004

"How many of them will be available in the land of EPA (with the onerous & many wickets that need to be gone through) remains to be seen."

Apparently it has already been decided that the three pedal variety will not make it across the pond. :-(

Best Regards,
Shipo

cdnpinhead · February 2004

To a kindred spirit. . .thank you, and let's all hang in there.

In a year or three (or five, if I'm lucky) I'll be looking for yet another 3-pedal vehicle. It's becoming apparent that the field is narrowing.

I enjoy your posts here and elsewhere and will pay close attention to what you think is worthy.

There aren't many.

Take care.

jodar · February 2004

The new models look very Passat-like, with the exception of the rather large grill. Its too bad we can't get that 225 hp TDI.

markcincinnati · February 2004

. . .that the manual A6's will be banished from North America. BMW's new 5 series offers a stick shift. Mercedes does not.

Audi says "we will compete and beat BMW on a model for model basis!"

Does not these mean that at least the new A6 3.2 will be offered with a 6spd manual.

The European press release indicates that in Europe BOTH the V6 and thee V8 will offer the row your own version.

No decision has yet been made public about this subject -- despite what AutoWeek says (Autoweek claims that the stick WILL make it to the US).

For what it's worth, I will not be surprised no matter what is brought to the US -- I would be somewhat more amazed if the V8 has the manual, however.

hhyg · February 2004

There are many pics for new a6 at audiworld.com.

dwongswong · February 2004

I saw the spy photos on the new A6 a few weeks ago and thought that the new style was ugly. Now that I saw the pre-Geneva Auto Show unveiling, I know for sure that my 2003 A6 will be my last. I really dislike the big "bass mouth" grill. The interior is alright except for the GM-like automatic stick shift.

Why do German automakers have to try a dramatic change to their lineup? Were sales not good enough for Bmw or Audi (maybe just Audi)? Is Mercedes going to go down the same road? If Lexus or Infiniti start to make better looking cars (except for the Infiniti G35 Coupe, which I like), I may switch to Japanese. I saw the replacement for the Infiniti M45 in Motor Trend, and it looks good. Oh well, at least the A8 will keep the same grill for a little longer.

liferules · February 2004

I like the car and don't think it is very different from the current model. I can't see how everybody is getting all freaked out about it. It looks to be minor improvements, nothing dramatic at all, on the current model with the continued quality interior.

Anyway, change is good. Anyone who wants the same old car year after year shouldn't buy a new car.

markcincinnati · February 2004

. . .I like the look.

My current 2003 Audi allroad will NOT be my last.

To each his/her own, I always say.

I look at this new Audi as the evolution of the species, not a new animal.

I don't like the BMW 5 series -- to me it looks like a Pontiac -- not that I have anything against the look, it just looks too much like something else.

That said, I'm sure the new BMW 5 series is a fine automobile -- too bad it doesn't come in AWD; if it did, Audi should quake in its boots.

shipo · February 2004

I've had my ear to the BMW rail for a number of years now and FWIW, I have heard that BMW is planning an AWD version of the new E60. Personally I doubt it will do much to Audi sales, after all, the new A6 is as attractive as the new 5-Series is "only a mama can love it ugly."

The only fence sitters that Audi might lose are those who prefer to stir their own, that is unless Audi decides to bring a third pedal to the NA market. One can always hope. ;-)

Best Regards,
Shipo

Audi A6

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles