OV9

Rich B wrote: Fri Feb 20, 2026 11:56 am
the previous RS4s had kind of lost much visual appeal for me

Fair.

Rich B wrote: Fri Feb 20, 2026 11:56 am
they just looked like diesel S line estates.

Claim disputed.

mik wrote: Fri Feb 20, 2026 12:23 pm

Rich B wrote: Fri Feb 20, 2026 11:56 am
the previous RS4s had kind of lost much visual appeal for me

Fair.

Rich B wrote: Fri Feb 20, 2026 11:56 am
they just looked like diesel S line estates.

Claim disputed.

Thats one the better angles, but overall they’re just dull looking to me, the smoothed box arches just don’t do it for me at all. It just looks heavy and bloated whereas flared arches are supposed to give it muscle visually imo.

Rich is correct - the B8 RS4 had a much more muscly look with its properly flared arches. The B9 arches don't look quite right though in the flesh it has a subtle muscularity which isn't evident in pictures.

ETA: I've just realised the grey one above is actually an RS4, not a diesel to compare. Proves it

Your (shared) dislikes are what appeals to me. Subtle, but clear to those in the know. Moh q-car - as that's very much what I'd want my rapid estate car to be.

I'm sorry, if it has tailpipes you can double fist, it ain't a q-car (assuming you're talking about the new one)

Beany wrote: Fri Feb 20, 2026 1:11 pm it ain't a q-car (assuming you're talking about the new one)

No. Keep up at the back kids.

10 responses since Jobbo mentioned two fists in the tailpipe and no one has posted that pic...

This place has changed...

The pipe is already gaping and doesn't need to be held open to get two fists in. Not like the old Olympics logo suggestion.

mik wrote: Fri Feb 20, 2026 1:17 pm

Beany wrote: Fri Feb 20, 2026 1:11 pm it ain't a q-car (assuming you're talking about the new one)

No. Keep up at the back kids.

.....no.

There are some good deals on M5 Touring as a company car, I know a few who've gone down that route.

But... interior quality looks a step down from M3. Interior lighting looking like a 90s Dixons hifi has gone up exponentially. Lots of people complain about the ride quality and tyre noise. And handling.

And nearly every single one is black.

But I do still have a saved search on auto trader alerting with new listings.

F150 is also lighter. The aluminium bodied pick ups are surprisingly light weight for their size.

RS6 will probably be over 3T!

So other pics have made the curves look less pronounced.. I can’t decide if that’s a good thing or not! What width is it?

Listening to the Autocar podcast this week, Matt Prior mentioned that his driving impressions story and video on the RS5 are published next Wednesday. But he also mentions that the fuel tank is only 45l and the boot is compromised by the batteries (which I thought must be the case because the seats-up capacity is in the ~360l region in the press data whereas the S5 Avant's capacity is nearer 450l).

So no matter how nicely it drives those sound like they may be deal-breakers for me. Even on the E53 AMG wagon, the boot is compromised by the floor being raised to accommodate the batteries; the RS5 is a smaller car to start with. Typically, the M5 Touring's boot is not similarly afflicted (though BMW quote 500l for the M5 Touring and 570l for a standard model Touring, so I think there is an under-floor storage area which has disappeared). But I don't want an M5 Touring.

I do feel like PHEVs are a bit of a dead end compromise anyway - the technology is always going to be improving and a 2026 PHEV is going to be pretty olde worlde in 2030 so will probably depreciate like mad. Unless of course everything launched next decade has a 4-cylinder or smaller ICE engine... Anyway, looks like the S6 will be staying because I'd miss too many of its abilities if I switched.

A 45 litre tank is terrible.

Surely they can find a few more litres of space under the floor. So the new RS5 can do 25mpg US so about 30mpg, add in the 50 mile range and 260 mile petrol range and you can hyperbole it to 310 miles, yeah, that's not that good. Although I do much prefer a long range.

Are all modern cars fitted with small tanks now?

Dave!

They’re definitely smaller on the whole - but 60l for the E53 AMG is more acceptable. Seems SUVs still get proper sized tanks.

An Audi RS and a solicitor by trade, you must really want people to hate you

Jobbo wrote: Fri Feb 27, 2026 6:31 pm They’re definitely smaller on the whole - but 60l for the E53 AMG is more acceptable. Seems SUVs still get proper sized tanks.

What's your mileage cut off ? Shrank size isn't as directly related to that as it once was. It would get annoying to have to fill up and extra time each week when you just want to get home.

A very easy drive like a wally 300 miles for me. On a long run every car can do 400 miles and only the TT we had to really try.

I assume that the RS5 range is done with a pre-charged battery and if it has to charge itself when driving the mileage will drop yet again. It would've annoying, especially for a small family estate.

Dave!

It’s not a cut-off point so much as being used to an easy 600 miles’ range. Even in the MX5 which can do 300 miles I have to think about finding a petrol station sooner than I’d like.

I bet the RS5 will not average 30mpg so 45l is simply too small. Maybe a 300 mile range if you can do 50 miles on a full charge.

My M2 (and the e92 M3) only had 220ish mile range, it was noticeable how much less time i spent in petrol stations when i got the van. I was filling at least once a week.