2016 Audi A6 / S6 Pros and Cons: Why (Not) This Car?

	Compared to the CTS
Driving position & visibility	Better Worse

The view from the Audi A6's driver seat dramatically differs from that of its rear-wheel-drive competitors. The instrument panel and center console are lower and more compact, the pillars are thinner, and the windows are taller. The first benefit: better outward visibility, especially forward, but also to the sides and rear.

Front seat room

Better Worse

The second benefit of the Audi A6's more open and expansive interior: it feels roomier, especially in the front seats. With no "race car" or "jet fighter" pretensions, the Audi is easier and more relaxing to drive. The BMW, Cadillac, and Mercedes interiors all feel tighter and more confining.

Interior styling

Better Worse

Though others have been improving, in part through imitation, Audi remains the industry leader in interior design thanks to a tasteful minimalism. In comparison, Cadillacs and BMWs appear cluttered inside.

I haven't rated the relative handling of these cars, as they excel in very different ways.

If you're seeking the fancy-brand midsize sedan with the sportiest handling, then head to the nearest Cadillac dealership. But for typical around-town driving, the Audi A6 handles the best. Though I've driven the A6 and A7 in 3.0T form a few times, this was my first experience in the 2.0T. Well, with 100 fewer kilos in its nose, the A6 2.0T feels much more agile, responsive, and light-on-its-feet than I recall the 3.0T feeling, belying a 3,957-pound curb weight. While the A6 3.0T dutifully headed where it was pointed, it couldn't dance the way the 2.0T can. Less weight on the front tires might also contribute to more nuanced and natural-feeling steering feedback than I recall from past A6s, and than you'll receive in competitors.

Push the A6 2.0T hard, and it can feel a touch soft and rolly in ways that the more firmly sprung and more tightly damped CTS does not. Take a corner at speed, and the Cadillac leans and plows less. But how often does a largish sedan get driven hard? In typical driving, the A6 2.0T's driving position and handling combine to make it both relaxing and delightful, a difficult combination to pull off. When pushed hard, it lacks the athleticism of the CTS, but remains easily controllable. I was surprised by how much I enjoyed my week with it.

Ride smoothness

Better Worse

The Audi A6's relatively compliant suspension absorbs bumps better than the Cadillac's (and the BMW's as well, if memory serves). You don't sense the weight of the wheels and tires as they rise and fall over uneven pavement. Noise levels also seemed lower than I recall in past Audis, if still not the lowest in the class.

	Compared to the CTS
Exterior styling	Better Worse

I'm less fond of the A6's exterior than of its interior. The long front overhang required by the forward-mounted engines and the weak rear haunches that are the flipside of the relatively thin rear pillars and tall windows don't lend the car the sportiest proportions or lines. The exterior of the related A7 hatchback is far more enticing. Unfortunately, the A7 isn't offered in 2.0T form and is about $8,000 more when comparing 3.0T to 3.0T.

This said, the A6 isn't an unattractive car, and as "why nots" go this is a weak one.

Front seat support & comfort

Better Worse

Want a second reason that the Audi A6 might not be your best bet? Perhaps its front seats, as these despite a four-way lumbar adjustment (driver only unless you get the 3.0T Prestige) are just okay. Though likely what a German orthopedist recommended--I've sat in these seats for ten hours without any soreness--I'd personally prefer seats that are less firm and more form-fitting. This said, forms differ, and the Audi's might fit yours better than mine.

The rear seat is roomy but, like most, is mounted too close to the floor to provide adults with sufficient under-thigh support.

With that, I'm pretty much out of why-nots (though I'll touch on a potential one below). A very good all-around car, the Audi A6 has no glaring faults.

	Compared to the CTS
Powertrain performance	Better Worse

With a boost from 220 to 252 horsepower for 2016, Audi's turbocharged 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine can accelerate the A6 to 60 mph in about seven seconds, a time that required a V8 not long ago. That said, the 333-horsepower A6 3.0T can do the same in under six.

The tested car was fitted with all-wheel drive, and thus the same ZF eight-speed automatic transmission as most Audis, BMWs, and Jaguars. With front-wheel drive, the A6 2.0T is now paired with a seven-speed dual-clutch automated manual transmission rather than the CVT of previous years. (Auto writers tend to despise CVTs because of their odd, non-linear feel.)

Beyond the objective full-throttle numbers, the 2.0T loses some points. Compared to the 3.0T's 333-horsepower V6, the 2.0T engine feels laggier, to be expected since it relies more on boost and employs a turbocharger rather than a supercharger. While the 3.0T responds instantaneously and effortlessly, the 2.0T's operation is less transparent, though still more refined and pleasing to the ear than the more pedestrian-sounding and -feeling 2.0T engine in the Cadillac. (The noises emanating from the Audi 2.0T tend to be lower in frequency.)

Fuel economy

Better Worse

Among non-hybrid gasoline-powered upscale midsize sedans, the front-wheel-drive A6 2.0T has the highest EPA ratings: 24 mpg city, 35 mpg highway. (The BMW 528i scores one mpg lower in both tests.) Opt for "quattro" all-wheel drive, as in the tested car, and the ratings fall to 22/32. Still very good for the class but lower than the BMW 528i xDrive's 22/34.

Though improved for 2016, the Cadillac CTS still isn't in the running, scoring 21/31 with RWD and 21/29 with AWD.

Want the even better fuel economy of a diesel? Well, at the moment it'll have to be a BMW or Mercedes-Benz. Audi has benched the A6 TDI due to its well-publicized emissions issues.

Moving in the other direction, you don't sacrifice much fuel economy with Audi's even stronger engines. The A6 3.0T rates 20/30, while even the 450-horsepower V8-powered S6 manages 18/27--astoundingly good for such a large, ultra-powerful car.

In my real-world driving the A6 2.0T quattro's trip computer reported averages as high as 27 mpg in both suburban and highway driving. Make use of the engine's performance potential, and the reported average can fall as low as 18 mpg.

Controls and instruments

Better Worse

All current premium brand midsize sedans have complicated controls. Relative to the touchscreen-based system in the Cadillac, the knob-and-button-operated MMI in the Audi is easier to use. After a few days I usually could perform the necessary operations without looking down at the console. But this isn't the same as being easy to use.

Price or payments

Better Worse

Though the A6 2.0T's starting price of $47,125 isn't exactly low, it is the most affordable midsize Audi. Add $2,200 for all-wheel-drive and $3,700 for the Premium Plus Package standard on the 3.0T (navigation, proximity key, blind spot warning, obstacle detection, rearview camera, power steering column adjustments), and it's still $5,300 less than the latter. So how much is the supercharged V6's stronger, more immediate power delivery worth to you? For many buyers of these sedans, probably not $5,300 given that the 2.0T is already quick.

The tested car additionally included a $900 Warm Weather Package (4-zone climate control, sun shades) and $800 to upsize the wheels from 18s to 19s, for a total of $54,725.

When similarly equipped, the Audi A6 and Cadillac CTS tend to be very close in price, especially after adjusting for any remaining feature differences. A BMW 528i lists for a few thousand more than either. Not a big difference, but a significant one.

The value play in the segment comes from a volume brand, Hyundai. The second-generation Genesis lists for about $8,000 less than the Audi. But what do you give up? I'll be comparing the two cars in my next review.

Reliability & durability

Better Worse

I wavered on whether to include reliability among the reasons not to buy an Audi A6, and ultimately did not because the issues here are largely potential ones. As it ages, the 2016 A6 could prove troublesome. The 2012s, after a good first few years, have been requiring more than the average number of repairs lately. But over the past year the 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016 all have been good. Will this change as they near the end of the 4/50 factory warranty? Perhaps, but this remains to be seen. Or not.

In general, recent German cars tend to be good for the first four to six years--the latter the point at which CPO (certified pre-owed) warranties end. I often suggest that there are two smart ways to own a German car: under warranty, or if you're willing and able to perform most repairs yourself.

And the Cadillac CTS? We have a limited amount of data on the current car. What we do have suggests that it is more troublesome than the Audi.