Video: Tesla Model S P85 Versus Audi S6


This ain’t your ordinary Tesla versus ICE race.

Keep a Close Eye on the Tachometers

Keep a Close Eye on the Tachometers

This time the focus of the camera is solely on the speedometers of both vehicles.

The vehicles, a 2014 Tesla Model S Performance and a 2013 Audi S6 are rather evenly matched in terms of horsepower, but only one can come out on top.

Watch the video the see which speedometer hits 170 km/h first.

Categories: Racing, Tesla, Videos

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

24 Comments on "Video: Tesla Model S P85 Versus Audi S6"

newest oldest most voted

Yes, but which one caused more lung cancer?

That answer depends on what percentage of coal the powerplant fueling the Tesla was using. For some locations, the answer to your question would be the Tesla.

Nope, that’s a myth. (You’ve been watching FOX News too long… change the channel.)

On average, even using electricity produced partly from coal, an ICE vehicle *still* has a larger overall carbon footprint than a comparable EV:

Only in the WORST POSSIBLE CASE (where ALL the electricity for the EV is produced from coal) the EV and ICE still come out with an even carbon footprint:

But, most electricity is NOT produced from coal (and the amount that is, is decreasing). In the US, well under half of the country’s electricity is currently produced from coal:

EVs are simply a more efficient mode of travel than ICE, no matter which way you slice it. And, the carbon footprint of any EV can be made instantly smaller, simply by changing the method of electricity generation. ICE vehicles will always use gasoline and will always have the same, large, unchanging carbon footprint.

Even worse, the ICE vs EV comparison is usually has a Prius for the ICE, not an S6. 🙂

In addition, the EV includes upstream emissions, but the ICE does not.

I’m usually one of the first to lay the smack down on anyone making false well-to-wheels claims against EVs when it comes to CO2 (i.e. I agree with you that EVs are in the worst case at least as good as very efficient non-EVs), but to be fair, the original comment was about lung cancer. I haven’t read much about air pollution causing lung cancer, but I think it’s a safe bet NOx and SOx and other byproducts of fossil fuel combustion are much more of a concern than CO2 (which is a product, not a byproduct). And in that regard, modern vehicles have actually gotten MUCH cleaner over the past 30 years, whereas power plants haven’t been under as much scrutiny. End result is that in areas with predominantly coal-fired electricity, EVs generally result in greater NOx and SOx emissions than non-EVs, unfortunately.

But of course, the grid is getting cleaner every year… It’s not like there are any EV advocates out there who aren’t also advocates for cleaner electricity!

Powerplant byproducts like SO2 and NOx are emitted in areas with low population density. That makes a huge difference, which is why air quality is so much better in the middle of nowhere than in the middle of a city.

The only way that you could reduce the impact of pollution to simply adding up the total emissions around the country, like CherylG wants to, then air quality would be the same everywhere.

More importantly is that even in areas with heavy coal usage, EVs don’t add to coal burning. They charge at night, when natural gas generators idle. They’re the ones that will turn on to provide the demand from EVs.

agree with all of your points. Was going to make some of them myself as counterpoints, but got tired! Thanks for filling in! I haven’t seen any studies that quantify the intensity of air pollution emitted in population centres vs dispersed pollution from power plants, but anybody looking at a big city on a hot summer day can probably guess that the air quality issues are concentrated around where the combustion vehicles are!

Also, coal power-plants, which I am not a fan of, are not usually located in heavily populated areas, meaning any lung cancer inducing substances are strongly diluted before reaching anyone.

Leave it to Cheryl to insert both an inane and patently false post in the middle of every article.

I thought there was something fishy about this video, as the S6 was never that fast. But sure enough, it has apparently really stepped up its game in terms of 0-60mph. 3.7 seconds, according to CarandDriver, vs 5.4s for the last generation. That’s intense! I must admit it’s not the outcome i was expecting.

Most of the super sedans in that class (M5,E63,S6) will clobber a P85 in acceleration. They have over 550hp 500tq, and weigh hundreds of pounds less. And their interior quality and amenities are in a whole different class. Hopefully there is some way to make a 2 motor model S perform in the same playing field.. If battery tech allows it to. Carbon fiber would help… BMW with its more advanced technology will even be bringing carbon fiber construction to its next 7 series.

Not surprised the S6 would win from zero to 160km/h, but from 0 to 15 km/h?

In the video it seems the Audi is starting earlier :-). S6 is 0-60 in 4,7 sec, Tesla 4,4 sec.

to my surprise, apparently the S6 will actually do 0-60 in 3.7s

How can we keep an eye on the Model S tachometer like the graphic says?

Ha! I was a trick caption. (Clever, these guys.)

Another Apples to Oranges kind of thing; a clean air 4600lb EV with electric one gear drive train vs lighter weight, multiple gear polluting gas guzzler; To make it intererting, install a multi-gear in the “S”

Is it an S6 or an RS6? The 0-60 is in the 3 seconds for the latter, so it would make more sense.

BTW there is a Tesla taxi in Munich now, probably no RS6 taxis.


I currently live in Munich and the only Teslas I have seen outside the store were one roadster about six months ago, and the Model S two streets from my place, which was only borrowed.

I am very disappointed in the wealthy here.

You’re disappointed by the wealthy that would choose vehicles that have proven to be more reliable to date and are better designed for your roadways?
If you are going to drive conservatively a city car makes sense if faster, the Tesla S has a very limited top end (which is why you see drag races but never any top end comparisons where the Tesla would lose).
Additionally many of the EU sales are predicated on absurd tax codes that are assisting the wealthy to buy luxury item 2nd vehicles (Tesla) instead of putting more EVs in the hands of the average citizen.
If Germany should be proud of its wealthy for make the rational choice.

“…better designed for your roadways”
Better, really…
Of course, it is well known how BADLY engineered Tesla cars are 😉

“conservatively a city car makes sense if faster, the Tesla S has a very limited top end”
Not everyone wants two cars where one will do. It is nice that we can drive fast here, but few ever want or get the chance to drive as fast as the S can go and for very long distances.

“Additionally many of the EU sales are predicated on absurd tax codes that are assisting the wealthy to buy luxury item 2nd vehicles (Tesla) instead of putting more EVs in the hands of the average citizen.”
Not knowledgeable of history or economics, are you?
Almost all that the average citizen can or could buy was made possible because wealthy people chose to pay the high price that came with a new product.
The tax code applies to all evs, not only the expensive ones.

“If Germany should be proud of its wealthy for make the rational choice.”
You should really spend some time researching the meaning of rational.

Which one is more likely to contribute to $$ going to countries/individuals that will fund efforts that some day result in a nuke (or other type of bomb but you get my point) being detonated in the USA….

which P 85 is limited to 170 km/h? My Model S Taxi is limited 201 km/h and is just a normal 85 not a P 85.
Is it a 60 kwh Model S?