ABC

meh, i would not pay the money for that. I wonder what the lease price/specials will be on it to move them.

DustinV

Beautiful car.

I really like the conservative yet elegant stance this design conveys to the beholder. It has class written all over it. The cabin is stunning and the attention to detail is remarkable.

If you ask me, it is one of the most beautiful cars in its class. I am serious.

T0ked

iTrader: (2)

Do the RX or ES come in 4 cylinder guise? Also, I see many, many A4 and A6 with 2.0T and no quattro badging. Many CPO 4 cylinder models at the dealer, too. Not sure about the breakdown, but many of them are out there. I don't know why, but they are.

Mr. Burns

What Audi is very good at design wise is the shape of the car overall rather than the details. IMO they're second only to BMW in that area. I'm sure those huge wheels have something to do with this, but the car looks well planted with a broad shoulder and tight shape. It definitely looks trim and athletic, unlike say an Infiniti M (though that car has different appeal). Aside from that the lines and surfaces to me seem quite dull and there is little detailing. I would still take this car over the XF, I think the A6 looks more sophisticated. Having said that though I'd be hard pressed to take one over an F10 which can be had with RWD and a manual. You need an AWD A6 for it to be any good versus much of the competition which also have very good RWD configurations.

Compared to the new GS I prefer the Lexus. I think it's nicer inside and more dramatic outside, RWD, lighter and has an NA engine.




And when it comes to surfacing and details I don't think anyone does it better.



Still the A6 would be my 3rd choice in the segment.

Blackraven

I must say though that I'm attracted to the S6 Avant.










If the S6 Avant looks stunningly gorgeous, then I can't imagine what the RS6 Avant will look like.

MPLexus301

iTrader: (3)

Thank you. I see more FWD 2.0T A4s with the cheap 6 spoke wheels and no LED headlights than I ever have the more premium or discontinued 3.2 models. That said, congrats to Audi for figuring out how to get people to pay $36k for cars with less features, less technology and less power (and the same drivetrain setup) than a Camry that costs $11k less.

DustinV

It's not as uncommon as you might think.

Virtually all FWD cars before the MINI had this setup.

Citroen Traction Avant / 2CV / DS / SM / GS / CX / Ami / Mehari / Dyane etc.

Several pre-war Audis and DKWs and ALL post-war FWD Audis

Oldsmobile Toronado

And many other vehicles.

...had the longitudinal engine setup rather than transverse.


And the Renault 21 was especially unique.

Unusually, the Renault 21 was offered with disparate engine configurations. The 1.7 litre version featured an 'east-west' (transversely) mounted engine, but Renault had no gearbox suitable for a more powerful transverse engine: accordingly, faster versions featured longitudinally mounted (north south) engines. The two versions featured (barely perceptibly) different wheel bases: the engines were all relatively compact four cylinder units and the engine bay was large enough to accept either configuration without reducing passenger space. However, at a time when production technologies were relatively inflexible, the need to assemble differently configured engine bays on a single production line, along with the supplementary inventory requirements imposed both on Renault and on the dealership network, did compromise the Renault 21's profitability


Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault_21

LexFather

Then I assume you think a Corolla or Camry is a work of art. B/C there is nothing beautiful about stretching and widening the same boring design you had in 1980 to 2012. Nothing. Adding some quirky christmas lights and a cave for a grill does not make beauty. The cabin is okay and attention to detail is overrated. Quite frankly I find BMW interiors on par or better, something that could not be said ten years ago.

I'm a car guy and I confuse A4/A6/A8 etc etc so much in various generations its not even funny. Now to their credit they are not ugly, harmless if anything which is good. I always liked Audi's understated design.

Beautiful? More like yawn inducing.


This.....credit their marketing

cino

iTrader: (1)

Wow, I was sleeping when I first saw the pictures. I don't see anything this car offers best in the class. I would take Jag XF or 5ser F10 over this car. All Audi look the same now. The old A6 is far better than this.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

that statement is so ridiculous it's barely worth responding to, but what the hell.

here's a 1981 audi 4000, the 'a6' of its time.



if you think the 2012 a6 looks anything like this you should change your handle to mr. magoo.

i think the 4GS is much more yawn inducing. seriously.

Mr. Burns

Probably not, the 4GS is a lot more 3 dimensional than the A6 (wheel bulges, hood, grill, lower front fascia) which on the road translates to better presence.:





The A6 is a very nice car, I've grown to appreciate it quite a bit more ever since it was released. However I'd take the 4GS over it every time. It would be interesting to see a comparison test between all these cars. I wonder when the first reviews of the 4GS will hit the blogs and mags.

LexFather

And you just want to argue ...same thing same windowl-line, same proportions...stretch it, widen it, add x-mas lights, add giant grill, viola Audi car.

Why is it when we discuss a German car negatively people like to say "oh well this Lexus doesn't....yadda yadda"....we are not talking about Lexus We know Lexus has bland but at least the 4GS cannot be confused with any other GS or any other Lexus sedan for the matter.

Its funny how boring, bland German cars are classy and beautiful and boring, bland Toyota/Lexus are "OMG that is so Corolla"

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

no really i don't, but that audi 4000 and a new A6 have NOTHING in common looks wise.

certainly not confusing the 4GS for a corolla or anything like that, but in mr. burns pic above, the 4GS front wheel fitment (continuing the trend) just stinks compared to the a6.

the shaved off (flattened) wheel arches of the 4GS just scream cheap to me, whereas the A6 has elegantly curved ones.

i think the A6 headlights are far more interesting than the 4GS.
i also think the A6 rear end is far more attractive than the 4GS.

the 4GS also looks big and bulky, wheras the A6 looks svelte and athletic.

so no, i don't think the A6 is bland at all. i think it's great. the 4GS? yeah, pretty bland.

was in lovely Winter Park yesterday... loads of Audis, only Lexus' there were RX. so i guess others like audi style too.

Joeb427

iTrader: (1)

I agree.

spwolf

wipe that front grille and A6 could be any car out there... profile has no character at all.
It is also FWD vehicle, with some funky lights that would look too gaudy on an Lexus.

As to the AWD fitment, once again, it is question of using AWD or not... I know SoCal guys want AWD slammed but that makes no sense at all. One of the reasons I got my AWD was due to raised ground clearance.

Interior materials are far superior on GS, at least from the Mr. Burns pics, Audi still has a lot of matte black plastics everywhere. Sure, once again, parts of it are gaudy but overall, just like exterior, it falls short overall.