Skip to main content
HOME   |   ABOUT   |   NEWS   |   TECH ARTICLES   |   AT THE TRACK   |   REVIEWS   |   VIDEOS   |   CONTACT ME

Super wagons, anyone?

What do you get when take a powerful V8, add a capable chassis, RWD or AWD and wrap it up in a 4 door shell with a large hatch behind the rear seat? Super wagons.. a super fast, tire shredding, grocery getters with performance that challenges supercars.

Audi has just revealed its new Audi RS6 wagon with a 4.0 litre twin turbo V8 putting out 552 hp and 516 lb-ft of torque. Audi estimates a 0-62 mph time (0-100 km/h) of 3.9 s but judging by Motor Trend's test and dyno of the Audi S8 which uses basically the same engine, I expect the acceleration and output numbers to be on the conservative side. I wouldn't be surprised if the engine puts out about the same power as the one in the S8 but Audi just gave them different ratings to market this as being more sporty.

The idea of a powerful people mover is nothing new. Large station wagons with powerful V8's were not unusual but, unfortunately, after the oil crisis of 1973, the power wars started to die. The power wars are back though and they're even better. Cars are more powerful and more fuel efficient than ever.  You can now walk into a Ford dealership and buy a car with 662 hp that gets 24 mpg on the hwy - the 2013 Mustang Shelby GT500 - all for about the same cost as a midsize luxury sedan.. you know it's a great time to be an enthusiast when the "underdog" - the Camaro ZL1 - is a car that has "only" 580 hp but is packed with suspension tech that allows it to be a comfortable cruiser and, with the push of a button, you can turn it into a track missile that can keep up with almost everything you can find on the track.

The power wars have caught up with more than sporty coupes though and the newly revealed Audi RS6 is a proof of that. The question is, why? Why are super wagons so appealing? I have read several reviews of super wagons from Mercedes, Cadillac, and others that said super wagons are not money makers for their manufacturers. I know many gear heads and many of them think that wagons don't look good and there's no need for super wagons because the only reason you would want a wagon is the space. Only a select few of the biggest gear heads like super wagons and they don't just like them, they think they're awesome. It's a love or hate thing - you either think they're useless and would never consider one, or you think they're some of the coolest things on wheels.

I happen to be part of the latter group. I think wagons are cool.. super cool. If money were never an issue, I know I would have one. And although many fans would be disappointed that Audi isn't planning to sell the RS6 across the Atlantic, I don't care.. because the coolest super wagon is available right here. I will have mine in Black Diamond please..




Which group are you part of? Do you think super wagons are cool and manufacturers should continue to update them with the rest of their lineups or you think there's no use for them?

Comments







Does An Aftermarket Grille Really Increase Airflow?
I put a Saleen S281 grille to the test to answer that question.

Stock Suspension S197 Mustang With Square 305/30/19's
What you need to fit a proper size square tire setup.

How Limited Slip Diffs Make You Faster on Track
What you need to know about how they put power down and pros and cons.

Can Telemetry Explain Schumacher's Talent?
A comparison between Schumacher's and then team mate Herbert's data.






Cayman GT4 Track Review
The first Cayman with proper (911-challenging) power.

Is an EcoBoost Mustang any good on Track?
Two days at the track in a Mustang short 4 cylinders.

2016 BMW M4 DCT Track Review
It's quick (properly quick). But is it fun?

Can a stock Golf Diesel handle a Track Day?
Not your every day track beater.




🔥 Most Visited This Week

The New Mustang Mach 1 Heads to Dealers. Here's why it matters.

No, it's not because it's called Mach 1 or the heritage that comes with the name, although that's pretty cool for Mustang fans. There are few cars out there that have the widespread track use of Mustangs. A combination of affordability, a decent RWD platform with endless aftermarket support and the potential to be competitive when properly set up makes them a staple in most track paddocks in North America. But being popular for track use comes with some headaches for manufacturers. It means that the car will be pushed hard by its customers and that will inevitably lead to discovering weak links .  The vast majority of factory main-stream performance cars have limitations on track when pushed to hot lapping pace. That's not to say they are all equal - some are, without a doubt, far more durable and dependable than others - but nearly all require modifications. Mustangs are no exception. And their popularity also means those weak links are discovered fast, and marketing d

Michelin Pilot Super Sports vs Firestone Firehawk Indy 500 - Street Review

I've been a huge fan of Michelin PSS tires and exclusively bought them for the Mustang over the last four years. So how did I end up here? This year, I was hugely interested in trying an "R-comp" tire. I had my eyes set on Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R's for two simple reasons: price and reputation. Although not a true "R-comp" tire on paper, it performs like one by the account of every single test and review I've read (down to wear rates...). They seem like they're easily the most affordable (from a big brand) R-comp tire and combine that with a reputation for having tons of grip, it was an easy top contender. I had my concerns, though. For one, I'm told and have read that they are an autox tire, not really designed for high speed, pressure, and temps associated with open track. For another, the Mustang is a heavy car (as far as track cars are concerned) being roughly 3,800 lb. (including driver), which will amplify the unwanted open track load

Michelin PSS vs Firestone Indy 500 - Track Review

A couple of weeks ago, I posted my first impressions of Michelin's PSS vs Firestone Firehawk Indy 500 tires. I've run PSS's for several years on the Boss, but I'm trying the Indy 500's for the first time. In short, I was worried about the narrower tires (I was running 285/35/18 PSS but could only find the Indy 500 in 275/35/18) and tread squirm, but I was happy with them up to that point just driving on the street. I had the chance to drive on them for three track days now. So what were they like? After my first session, they made an impression that basically persisted for the rest of track sessions on them. Phenomenal, unmatched value. Now, if value is something that stands out above all else, it typically means the compromise between qualities you want and those you don't is less than ideal, but the value is attractive. This is no different. I'll start with the bad, which really boil down to two: ultimate grip and grip longevity. Grip is noticeably l

Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2's vs Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R's

I never thought I'd ever run Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2's on my 2012 Boss 302. The cost is astronomical and they are supposed to last the least of anything comparable. So how did I end up with (nearly) fresh Sport Cup 2's? A complete fluke. I came across a lightly used set with only a few hundred miles and no track time; 305/30/19 takeoffs from a GT Performance Pack Level 2 (GT PPL2). I knew my 71R's were getting very worn before the season started and likely wouldn't last the whole season, even this short one. The price was far better than a new set of RE-71R's, a little more than half, and local Time Attack rules (Canadian Automobile Sport Clubs) recently made 180 and 200 TW tires equivalent, meaning no PAX or PIP point penalty for going with 180 TW tire like the Pilot Sport Cup 2's. I have been very curious about how PSC2's compare to RE 71R's but I stayed away due to their being painfully expensive and, up to last year, their 180 TW rating would