Follow-Up Test: 2009 Audi A6 3.0T Quattro

Yeah is this car overpriced at $56k? Oh no, its an Audi. Also, it only averaged 16mpg in their testing- not good for a V6 equipped car. SHO managed 19mpg at MT with 365hp and 200lbs more weight. Now that the A4 is larger the A6 has even less of a chance of being successful.

I have to agree with you that all these cars are in the middle of an identity crisis. Honestly, the mid-sized luxury sedan market has been one of my least favorite segments of the automotive market for a long time. You spend so much money on cars that try to be everything and just end up being nothing.

The only interesting mid-sized sedan I can think of that offers anything interesting is the M5.

I agree that these mid sized cars are too similar.

And just remember, for your $50K, you also get Audi's ledgendary unreliability, and expensive service cost!

^^Sadly resonates with me. I have to agree about the G8 being the bargain buy. The A6 is gorgeous, but it just costs way too much.

Here's a thought: Let automakers choose the classes of cars they want to make. Right now, American automakers create some compelling mid and full size, while Germans build some great compacts. Consumers win! Or, let the Government decide who has to build what, and then bail Detroit out (again) after people don't buy it.

"The only interesting mid-sized sedan I can think of that offers anything interesting is the M5."

Estreka, dont forget the CTS-V! Although the M5's personality and finesse are more in line with my personal tastes the CTS-V offers a compelling yet overly brute package. Kudos to Caddy.

"Yeah is this car overpriced at $56k? Oh no, its an Audi."

"Sorry, I'll take a G8 (while I can) for $20k less. I'll buy a portable GPS and do without the AWD and get similar mileage. Alternatively I'll buy an SHO and get more power plus AWD, Nav and all the rest and pocket $10k."

Banker/1487, although the G8/SHO comparisons are interesing I find it hard to believe that people dont think this A6 should be more expensive vs the G8/SHO. It is a luxury car (the others are not) so better materials among other things are expected and of course there is a cost associated with that. I'm not suggesting this A6 3.0T isnt overpriced but you have to consider all the details (that potentially make it more expensive) instead of just looking at on paper specs.

For example, one could easily say a $45k SHO is a better car than a $45k CTS 3.6DI because it has an on paper advantage. The Taurus offers much more power/torque, more features and standard AWD. However, most of us would agree the CTS is the better executed product, at least I would.

Honda:

What is a "luxury" car in 2009? Cars from lesser brands are getting so advanced and safe that there is little reason to buy luxury brands any more- at least not brand new. Long term I think the luxury market is going to suffer vs the mainstream market if this economic downturn persists. Have you been in the new Taurus? I have not but if the interior is on par with the Flex I doubt its going to be lacking for the price. I've been in the A6 and its nice but you don't have to spend $55k to get soft touch dash materials- if you're into that sort of thing. The CTS starts at $34k and has soft touch materials as does a $25k Passat. I love all the dismissal of specs when trying to explain why similar cars are separated by $10k. The specs mean quite a bit even if they don't tell the whole story. If the Taurus is fast, quiet, roomy and full of features what exactly would we find out after driving it that would be a deal breaker? The A6 isn't really a sports sedan so even if the SHO proved less nimble than a 335i that is really irrelevant when comparing it to the 4100lb A6.

The CTS is not "better executed" than the SHO. Execution is about more than slalom speeds and corner carving abilities. The SHO is more of a powerful touring car than a sports sedan. The CTS and SHO are executed to VERY high levels but have different missions. The SHO would appeal more to DTS buyers than CTS buyers but its a great product nonetheless.

"What is a "luxury" car in 2009? Cars from lesser brands are getting so advanced and safe that there is little reason to buy luxury brands any more- at least not brand new."

1487, why even buy a luxury car in the first place? Your mentality would make a luxury car obsolete and would pretty much mean the death of all luxury brands including your much beloved Cadillac. Where do you think the mainstream cars get all their hi-tech features and safety technologies from? The luxury car!

"Long term I think the luxury market is going to suffer vs the mainstream market if this economic downturn persists."

1487, I do think the luxury market will somewhat change or evolve, however I don't think it will see the degree of or type of change you are suggesting. I think luxury cars will become a bit less expensive overall while becoming more practical in terms of service costs and more useful features. We will eventually see smaller cars with full luxury items, features, materials and craftsmanship. The downside is that when the economy does recover inflation will surface....I hate that word. Who knows...

"Execution is about more than slalom speeds and corner carving abilities."

1487... execution is about producing a product that for the most part delivers on its intended mission or promise. That said, the CTS delivers on its mission better than that of the Taurus SHO. The SHO version of the Taurus has always been the high performance version of the Taurus line while undercutting its competition in price.

I believe the 1st generation SHO's main target was the Nissan Maxima SE (4DSC) which currently sells for about $38K fully equipped. Ford should have kept the Taurus more in line with its initial goals instead of pricing it cheaper vs its own similarly featured, AWD, EcoBoosted luxury flagship, the Lincoln MKS.

That said, I just don't think Ford should have taken the Taurus this far in terms of price as the perception of the Taurus name has always been teamed with affordability and value. A $45k car isn't exactly in the reach of most American consumers, especially these days.

"And just remember, for your $50K, you also get Audi's ledgendary unreliability, and expensive service cost!"

It's unfair to apply that statement to ONLY Audi, since it is universally applicable to all German Luxury Marquees.

"What is a "luxury" car in 2009? Cars from lesser brands are getting so advanced and safe that there is little reason to buy luxury brands any more- at least not brand new."

IMO, Luxury cars get features first. They also have those options for features that are quite unique and would likely never be warranted in a cheap vehicle.

5 years ago, bluetooth, nav, etc were luxury items. They are are standard. New luxury items are things like adaptive headlights, the adaptive cruise control/lane change, parking cameras, adaptive suspension, etc.

They items may very well move down into 'normal' cars, but by that time I'm sure luxury cars will have some other feature/gimmick to offer.

"1487, why even buy a luxury car in the first place? Your mentality would make a luxury car obsolete and would pretty much mean the death of all luxury brands including your much beloved Cadillac. Where do you think the mainstream cars get all their hi-tech features and safety technologies from? The luxury car!"

Give me a break. Automakers debut technology in luxury cars because the prices are higher. These days features are coming to lower end brands faster than ever before. Look at the 2010 3 as an example. You buy a luxury car for exclusivity and great service. When you compare a car like the 2010 Taurus to the A6 ALL you are getting are prestige and better dealer service with the A6. Nothing tangible.

"The SHO version of the Taurus has always been the high performance version of the Taurus line while undercutting its competition in price. "

Fine. The 2010 model delivers as promised. I dont get your point. You seem to be saying the SHO is poorly executed because you dont like it- thats not a sound justification in my book. The SHO is not a sports sedan. Its a large, powerful touring sedan with above average capabilities. Its more like a FWD based 7 series or S class than an M5 wannabe. Most large cars do not qualify as sports sedans, not even the GErman ones.

The SHO is a limited edition performance model- not a volume player. In case you missed it the BASE taurus starts at $26k and the SEL starts at $28k or so. The SEL will be the volume model. I think Ford knows the SHO isnt affordable to the average Taurus buyer in the same way the CTS-V is too expensive for the average CTS buyer. The top trim levels for both cars are aimed at a market niche. Its no different from Acura offering the TL-AWD model that is $6k more than the base FWD model. I'm sure most TLs sold are the FWD model but the AWD model is the performance flagship for the TL line.

Doug:

You need to catch up with current offerings. Back up cameras are on everything from the 2010 Equinox to the Toyota Highlander. The new Lacrosse has a variable suspension system. Th e3 has adaptive HID lights. The Taurus and Avalon offer radar cruise control. Bluetooth is standard on the Buick Lucerne even though its optional on virtually every German luxury import. The cobalt and focus offer bluetooth now.

"You need to catch up with current offerings."

You know what I'm getting at, even if a few of my examples weren't perfect. There are plenty of features on luxury cars that are not available on 95% of 'normal cars'. They may eventually become available on everything, but then new features will have come along. The automakers set it up like this to make money.

That is less true than ever before. compare the content of a loaded Altima or 6 to a $40k BMW or MB model. The technology is largely the same. Look at automatic transmissions- BMW, JAguar and Cadillac use 6 speed automatics. Meanwhile the Fusion has a 6 speed standard for about $23k. The Cruze will have a 6 speed auto when it comes out next year. Everything from heated seats to push button start to HIDs, to name brand sound systems to DVD navigation units are available on non luxury brands. Mitsibushi was one of the first automakers to debut in car music HDs. Many luxury cars don't even have this feature.

I view the luxury market as a collections group that prices down new features for the rest of the crowd. In other words, a Lexus buyer is contributing to the initial development cost of new technology for Toyota buyers.

One exception: RWD. I would buy a tier 1 vehicle for RWD.

I agree that new features will always filter down from the luxury market, but I think that the majority of features debuting on modern luxury cars are really just "features for the sake of having features" and are thus pretty damned useless. There are exceptions, but not many.

What you're really paying for with luxury cars can be seen underneath the BMW M3 in the recent long term suspension walkaround: stuff that you can't see. Forged aluminum here and there instead of stamped steel, more advanced suspension types, etc. etc. Any company can engineer those things but the nice stuff costs money. Compare a GTI's undercarriage to an Audi A4's...the Audi's is a work of art in comparison.