Posts: 110
Joined: 11/11/2004 From: Jersey Status: offline
I heard they dont make the current RS6 in manual because the force it puts on your right hand would be to great of a force to shift into gears. Correct me if im wrong
_____________________________
silver 2001 A4 TQ
18 x 8.5 BBS CH's
customized angeleyelister curved dual tip axelback
wrong. it doesnt even have 1g of acceleration force. they dont offer it for the same reason benz doesnt offer any manual transmittion. people that can afford an rs6 dont want a manual tranny
It's interesting reading that you think that it would be too much for them to create a manual box that could handle the power
I currently own a 2004 STi but I'm also buying a new S4
Having owned an STi with heavy modifications (425whp via an FP Green) I've never had any reason to doubt the Subaru STi 6 speed.....many guys in the Portland area PDXWRX group have put down over 500whp on their stock STi trannys....
I would think that Audi would be more than capable of making a tranny that could handle the Rs6's torque and power...many EVOs and DSMs run far greater power on stock trannys and differentials and never see them break
I wonder if the reason Audi does that is more because the buyers of an RS6 dont want a manual....it should be a simple engineering task to build such a tranny....
Vipers and Z06's put more power into manuals and they seem to run fine
well, as much as the 6speed manual seeing duty on the S4 now a days could handle the power, it wouldn't be as reliable as it should be. at some time, with taht power the 6speed might break... which should never happen on a factory car. i'm sure your STis are fairly close to breaking... it's more than likely a matter of time.
Vipers and Zo6s would be useless without a manual, the RS6 is a completly different type of buyer.
buyer wants, buyer needs. rich people still feel the desire to drive their car, and select their gearing... porsche 911 turbo converter to the RUF R Turbo, has over 560hp with 600 tq. im more then positive this car is stick... audi...porsche...audi....porsche, sh!t lets throw a VW in the mix, whats the difference? same company no?
btw. the RUF R Turbo does 0 to 100 Km/h in 3.7 Sec, so believe the clutch is getting popped..
yes, same company. buyer buys all 3 for style and reliability... but audi: class porche: speed VW: price (thus... i'm not quite understanding the phaeton and the touareg)
hehe, but they have a tranny that could handle that power, why not incorperate that into the rs6? an aftermarket tranny swap could be done too prolly, it may be pricey, but if u have an rs6, u prolly wouldnt care lol..
not like the rs6 is the fastest car in the world, and is impossible to mate to a stick, theres faster cars with a 6 speed gear box...
True, there are much faster cars than the RS6. But let me pose this question, can you find a car that is just as fast and ALSO just as heavy? Two cars come to mind and that is the E55 (only offered in auto), and the M5 (new one only offered in SMG). The old M5 you could get a manual option, but it still was not as heavy, nor as powerful, as the RS6 or E55. Comparing a Porsche RUF and an RS6 is like comparing apples and oranges; they aren't in the same class. However with that being said, you would still think that Audi would figure out a way to make a manual. But that takes us back to the point of those that buy the car typically (typically not always) want to use this car as an everyday driver/luxury sedan, but still have the bad ass, race car type feel. It's all about what the customer wants and the type of customer that buys. Take this into account: a lot of people say the ultra sport is much more agressive looking than the new S4 because of the "honeycomb" type girll. But guys that buy the S4 are typically in their 40s and don't necissarily want an overly agressive looking car. Whereas the ultrasport buyers tend to be younger and have less money to spend, they want the more agressive look. There is a reason those marketing dudes for any major company make a lot of money.
k. the 6sp COULD be put on the RS6, but you wouldn't get the mileage out of it you would expect from a factory. you COULD retrofit a honda civic tranny onto a Mustang GT as well... but the mustang's stock tranny is gonna last much longer, right? in order for the RS6 to have a tranny that would last the proper mileage, they would have to develop a completly new tranny... which doesn't make business sense, for aforementioned... the manual wouldn't sell enough to make profit out of R&D.
slapping the civic tranny onto the stang raises another question, ever thought that the 6sp gearing is worse, and much slower than the auto tranny? therefore making the manual a worse choice durability AND performance wise.
some1 that is gonna spend 118k on a non-practical car and then the extra $$ to ruf it is an enthusiast, knows what he/she is doing and probabaly tracks and competes alot. an rs6 on the other hand is not in the same class as a ruf r, i don;t get ur comparision, but the person who is driving the ruf is completely different than the person driving the rs6 imo. both dead sexy however
i guess weight would play a slight factor...but we are talking about audi, they prolly have this tranny engineered already. i can understand that not making profit outta it, but thats why it should be optional to have a manual mated to it. where in many cases the automatic is an option u get. take the new lambo murcielago, optional automatic, 10,500 factory option
Printable Version
RS6 - 
