In case the homage to the late-‘80s Audi 90 quattro IMSA GTO car hadn’t made it clear, the incoming RS6 Avant GT is very much about making the firm’s North American buyers feel all warm and gooey. That doesn’t mean that the Old World will be denied the run-out, coilover-wearing special edition model - indeed, 60 of the 660 total build volume are allocated to the UK alone - but Audi is forthright about its appraisal of the USA as a growth market and the RS6’s halo-ish place in it.
‘The company wants to strengthen its brand in North America and sees the region as one of three pillars worldwide. Ten new market launches will follow by 2026 as part of this strategy. Now in its fourth generation, the Audi RS 6 Avant enjoys cult status in the USA,’ insists the press blurb. It was not always thus, of course - the engrained ‘station wagon’ reputation proved hard to shift in the US, and after failing to make a splash with the first-generation C5, Audi gave up with its flagship RS model for the better part of two decades. Until some enthusiast lobbying reanimated the C8 in the home of the brave.
Now, with Audi on the march, it gets a variant redolent of the car that tore up the second half of the IMSA GTO series in 1989. Needless to say, that cherry-picked moment from motor racing will mean little to most Americans - but if the liveried paint scheme doesn’t get their engines revving, then the Nardo Grey alternative ought to do the job. (You can also have Mythos Black, but obviously you shouldn’t.)
Shown for the first time as part of the early media drives in the States, it inevitably turns the car’s menace factor up to 11 - and while it is a truth universally acknowledged that anything on four wheels looks infinitely cooler under Californian sun, it does now raise the question about which one we’d take were me magically given the choice. After all, Nardo Grey has been making RS cars look cool since forever. But clearly there is much to like about the IMSA colour scheme - not least the mandatory white wheels. Thank goodness we don’t have £176,975 to spare, eh…
1 / 8
