2025 Audi SQ6 E-Tron First Test: Incredibly Quick, But Otherwise … ?
Pros It's how quick?!
Home-charging port on both sides
Quickly adds range at fast chargers Cons Slow-acting charge port doors
Not as fun as the competition
Needs more exterior and interior colors
What a breath of fresh air. Where the BMW iX's extroverted design leans too hard into the future and the blobby Mercedes EQE lacks premium proportions, the 2025 Audi SQ6 slices the competition right down the middle. Here's a conventionally handsome electric luxury SUV with 509 hp to transform every green light into an adventure.
The road to success should be easy for this Audi, right?
Right ? Why We Tested an SQ6
After starting its EV game strong with what became known as the Q8 E-Tron, Audi faltered with the smaller, more affordable Q4. The latter electric SUV didn't initially meet our expectations of how an Audi should feel, and a gaping hole formed between the two.
Now, after some delays, the 2025 Audi Q6 and more powerful SQ6 are here, striking at the heart of the market—a comfortably sized five-seat SUV more luxurious than the Q4 but less pricey than the Q8 E-Tron, more or less the electric equivalent to the brand's popular Q5.
Instead of a base Q6 RWD's 322 hp or a dual-motor AWD model's 456 hp, the SQ6's dual-motor AWD setup manages 509 hp with launch control. In terms of horsepower bragging rights, the smaller Q4 doesn't come close. SQ6 Tested: A Polestar-Sized Issue
The standard Q6 does , however. In our testing, a Q6 AWD sprinted from 0 to 60 mph in 4.6 seconds, a full 0.3 second quicker than Audi's own estimate. The SQ6 follows suit, beating Audi's 4.1-second estimate; in our testing, the SUV hit 60 in just 3.7 seconds.
Just a few years ago, that kind of explosive performance would have been reserved for RS models like the RS3 and RS6.
One of the SQ6's best features is how that acceleration feels in the real world. In any drive mode, slam that accelerator pedal to the floor, and as the nose of the SUV lifts, you're off.
The near-instant rush of acceleration people associate with electric cars is easier to feel here than in the Polestar 3, another similarly priced electric luxury SUV with sporty intentions, and especially compared to the regular Q6 E-Tron. And that electric Polestar is about as quick as the Audi, with a MotorTrend -tested 0–60-mph time of 3.8 to 4.1 seconds depending on model.
If your driving thrills mostly happen in a straight line, the SQ6 is a great option. It's when the road starts to curve that we start daydreaming about the Polestar 3. On the figure-eight course, our racetrack-in-a-bottle test, the Audi turned in a respectable performance of 24.7 seconds at 0.80 g (average), to the Polestar 3 AWD's 24.4–24.6 seconds at 0.81–0.82 g (average, from two 3s).
But setting the objective numbers aside, the Polestar simply feels more fun and lighter on its feet, which is interesting because it's about 250 pounds heavier than the Audi. As our test crew noted, the SQ6's chassis is composed if you take it down a few notches. But drive it at a faster pace, and the SUV just doesn't feel as fun—it's competent, not captivating.
On the road, the SQ6's adaptive air suspension strikes a good balance between comfort and a sporty feel. Just like the SUV's styling itself, ride quality is good enough that you could live with it for years to come.
That's true up to the moment you hear the hollow thrumming sound coming from the tires on the highway. There's a partial fix for that, though: Turn up the volume on the Bang & Olufsen sound system, which has a 3D sound feature and headrest speakers. The acoustic front door glass on the top SQ6 trim pairs well with the excellent sound system and adaptive cruise control to make stop-and-go traffic more tolerable. Range and Charge Testing: Hey, Not Bad
We know the SQ6 isn't the sportiest or most spacious electric SUV around, and, well, it's also lacking any claims to class-leading range. A 275-mile EPA-rated range is fine, however, and in our Road-Trip Range test—which simulates how you might drive on the highway—the Audi managed 266 miles, nearly matching its claim.
Getting that close to the EPA figure is impressive, as is what happens when the Audi is fast-charged. The 2025 SQ6 added back 160 miles of range after 15 minutes in our testing, which will make public charging stops quicker and more convenient.
Few vehicles we've run through these tests have added that many miles in 15 minutes. As a bonus, the SUV is capable of 400 kW of recuperative braking—meaning it can pile electrons back into the battery quite rapidly when using the motors to slow itself down, stretching your around-town range. What About Tesla?
What about Tesla? With the spacious Model Y SUV, Tesla has produced one of the most popular vehicles on the planet. And the newest model's updates promise improvements at a lower price than the Audi, Polestar, or BMW.
What Tesla can no longer provide is a positive status boost you can count on, like most other luxury brands. We're not just talking about the CEO's unpredictable antics but also the sales troubles faced by one of its halo vehicles, the Cybertruck.
So if any of the above—or the Model Y's ubiquity— bothers you, it's time to consider other brands. It's Fine. But Is It Fiiine ?
We like the 2025 Audi SQ6 a lot; we just don't have much love for it. The design is conventionally handsome but may look too much like the smaller Q4 at a glance. The range is decent in the real world, but that's also true of the competition.
We like the real, pull-out door handles and the cargo area's convenient netted cubbies, but what are we talking about here, a RAV4 or a luxury SUV?
The SQ6 delivers fantastic acceleration for quick thrills pretty much anywhere. We understand why Audi buyers will be drawn to it, as it's very, very Audi-like, but the BMW's interior feels richer, and the Polestar is more fun to drive.
That leaves the Audi right down the middle. We understand the SQ6's appeal, and it is quicker than a run-of-the-mill Q6, but that model more or less delivers the same verve—even without an S badge.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Motor Trend
17 minutes ago
- Motor Trend
The Ringer: 1985 Honda Civic CRX Si
[This story first appeared in the Fall 2010 issue of MotorTrend Classic] If you're too young to understand the appeal of the first Honda Civic CRX, consider the first Apple iPod. It put out five to 10 gigabytes, came only in snow white with a chrome silver backing, and held 1000 to 2000 songs. It inspired industrial designers working on various projects to try and capture the essence of its cool design in cars and other products. Even if the original iPod is mostly forgotten, it taught the PC world something important about Apple's irresistible design aesthetic. Eighteen years earlier, the 76-horsepower 1984 Honda Civic CRX was a revelation in a world in which the epitome of affordable performance was the 190-horsepower, Chevy Camaro Z/28. On paper, the CRX—Civic Renaissance Model X—with its 12-valve, 1488cc single-overhead-cam aluminum four, compound vortex combustion chamber, and Keihin three-barrel carburetor, was no more impressive than a 10 GB iPod. There are more important numbers. For the iPod, it was: You're holding 2000 of your favorite songs in your hand. For the CRX, it was: The car weighs 1800 pounds, following Colin Chapman's philosophy: 'Adding power makes you faster in the straights. Subtracting weight makes you faster everywhere.' MotorTrend's first road test in the December 1983 issue bench-raced a natural competitor, the new Pontiac Fiero. 'As it stands, the Fiero is heavier, not quite as quick, less economical, and a lot more expensive than the CRX 1.5,' Kevin Smith wrote on his way to becoming one of several journos to buy a CRX. What really impressed the automotive press is that the 1984 CRX was one of four new Civics Honda introduced at once, all of which were segment leaders: the ultra-modern hatchback, the extra-versatile wagon, and the preternatural premium small car, the sedan. Honda and the uninformed masses called the CRX a commuter car and focused in on the $6100 HF. With a 58-horse CVCC, eight-valve 1.3-liter and five-speed manual, the HF was the most fuel-efficient vehicle sold in the U.S., rated 51/67 mpg at the time, 38/47 mpg using current EPA standards. The CRX was really a sports car. Front suspension consisted of struts—sprung with torsion bars instead of coils—and an anti-roll bar. The innovative rear suspension worked like a beam-axle but a bearing in the center makes it semi-independent. There was also an anti-roll bar. It was perfect for slicing and dicing through urban traffic, with unassisted steering offering great feel and feedback. Turning radius was an amazing 28.2 feet, good for quick U-turns when that space in front of the coffee shop suddenly opened. EPA fuel mileage was 36/49 mpg according to our spec sheet. The modern numbers are 28/35 mpg for the standard 1.5-liter and five-speed manual (slightly less for California or the three-speed automatic). The flip side is a dearth of sound insulation to keep out road, wind, and engine noise. That flips it back to its sports car appeal. Steering, handling, brakes, all feel direct, an extension of the driver. The urbanite owner could let loose on weekends and take it out to the country and look for twisty roads. In MotorTrend's 1984 Import Car of the Year contest, the Honda CRX and Civic scored just behind the BMW 318i in roadholding and beat it in the slalom: CRX at 6.62 seconds, Civic S at 6.65, and 318i at 6.81 seconds. We gave the award to the CRX, with the Civic scoring second and the Prelude third. For 1985, Honda added the CRX Si, with programmed fuel injection replacing the single downdraft carb. Horsepower increased by 15 to 91 in the Si and peaked 500 rpm lower, at 5500. Wheels were a half-inch wider to accommodate new 175/70R13 tires, though in the March 1985 issue, MT found the Michelins 'woefully inadequate to handle the torque of the responsive four-banger'—now, 93 pound-feet at 4500 rpm, up from 84 pound-feet at 3500. MT's skidpad figure dropped to 0.80 g from 0.82. The CRX's 0-to-60-mph time vastly improved, though, from 10.2 seconds for the '84 to 8.2 seconds for the '85 Si. Just as the carbureted CRX 1.5 was quicker than the four-cylinder Pontiac Fiero, the fuel-injected 1.5 was quicker than the new Fiero V-6. From 1985 on, the CRX came with three trim levels, HF, DX ( still carbureted), and Si. For 1986 and 1987, Honda replaced the Civic line's recessed sealed-beam headlamps with flush, aerodynamic lenses. The DX's optional automatic was now a four-speed with lockup torque converter, and the HF got a cleaner, 1.5-liter eight-valve engine. Inside, the Si, DX, and HF got new door panel inserts with fabric to match the two seats. Outside, the Si got new body-color lower panels and 185/60R14 Yokohamas. This mid-cycle refresh came with a weight gain. The DX, which was the 1802-pound '84 model, crept up to 1866 pounds by '87. The Si was up 123 pounds for '86, to 1953 and then to 1978 for '87. Mark Wanzel's first CRX was an '84 1.5; his second was an '85 Si; and now, so is his third. At 37, Wanzel might relate to the iPod metaphor, if not for his father, who took him to club races at Atlantic Motorsport Park in Shubenacadie, Nova Scotia, in the mid-'80s. 'You'd see fleets of CRXs racing, along with MR2s, RX-7s, Fieros, Rabbit GTIs, and Sciroccos,' Wanzel recalls. The CRXs have been his daily drivers, though he also owns a '92 Acura Integra. Canada didn't get the Si until '87, and Wanzel prefers the lighter-weight, recessed-headlamp '85. He bought this red Arizona car for US$2500 and uses his previous Si, a black '85, for parts. We like original cars in Classic, but Wanzel's CRX has some period-correct modifications. In place of his '85 Si's U.S.-spec D16 SOHC engine, this car has Honda's ZC engine, a 16-valve, 1.6-liter DOHC four, also with programmed fuel injection, the 130-horsepower European-market CRX Si engine also used in the CRX-based 1986-89 Acura Integra. Rated 113 horsepower in the Integra, it's available as a remanufactured engine from Japan. Wanzel spent 15 years trying to find his car's Mugen Power CF 48 wheel rims. His red CRX also has a Mugen Power paint-matched rear lip spoiler and three-spoke steering wheel. Finally, Wanzel's CRX has adjustable Koni shocks, 'because OEM shocks are no longer available.' He takes advantage of the adjustable torsion bars to lower his Honda. Wanzel and his fiancé, Julie, drove it from Barrie, Ontario, to Ann Arbor, Michigan, in the lowest setting and never bottomed out. After Wanzel raised the suspension for our photography, he noticed his car had a better ride with no handling degradation. Steering feels heavier than my '87 DX, and the five-speed gearbox is notchier. The clutch is light and progressive. The CRX launches like most Hondas, bereft of low-end torque, but progresses very quickly, courtesy of maybe 13.9 pounds per horsepower, and you find yourself reaching the 7000-rpm redline easily. Steering is as advertised. Simple, intuitive controls with ball-bearing feel are user-friendly, and unlike a modern Mini Cooper or Mazda Miata, there's no traction or stability control to shut off. The car makes quick, sharp left-right transitions, good for city traffic slaloms and canyon roads. Turn-in is sharp, and you can go from mild front-drive understeer to tucking in the tail by lifting throttle mid-turn. Get back into the throttle, and the CRX maintains its momentum, as you'd expect from a car that doesn't tip a ton. 'The car really likes late braking,' Wanzel notes. The all-new Mark II '88 CRX (with corresponding Civic sedan, hatch, and wagon) featured control-arm front and rear suspension and steel front fenders. The '88 Si weighed 2017 pounds, and powered by a 105-horse 1.6-liter SOHC four, it started at $10,195. It won Motor Trend's Import Car of the Year, again. Honda followed that up with the 1993 Civic Del Sol, badged CRX in other markets. Appropriately, it won nothing. Honda's cars grew and, by virtue of safety and convenience features, gained weight. The new CR-Z is about the right size, but as a hybrid-only car, it doesn't rev like the original CRX. It's made for HF devotees. There are faster, quicker, more powerful, better-handling sports cars. There has never been a 'commuter car' that proved Colin Chapman's ideals quite like the Honda CRX. Thanks to modern consumers' demands for safety and convenience, there never will be again. Ask The Man Who Owns One Mark Wanzel (above, with fiancé, Julie Ward) is a photographer who shoots freelance and for The Barrie Examiner in Ontario, Canada. Why I like it: 'Without even discussing its innovations, for me, the Mark I CRX will always be great because of its light weight and sporty feel, useable practicality, and boy-racer looks. Few cars in history deliver like the CRX, and when you consider the Si, it becomes a full-package car. It's way too much fun for a road car.' Why It's Collectible: Most Mark I CRXs were driven hard and allowed to rust, and there won't be a modern sports car this light, efficient, and affordable again. Restoring/Maintaining: Engines are bulletproof if maintained. Most other parts are unavailable without a parts car. Replacement plastic front fenders and hood headers are available from China and European/Japanese-spec engines are available from Japan. Beware: You'll find examples that haven't rusted away only from California and Southern states, so watch for faded and damaged interior/exterior plastics. Shocks, struts, and boots went quickly and must be replaced regularly, now only with aftermarket parts. Timing belts must be replaced every 60,000 miles to avoid valve damage. Expect to pay: Concours-ready: $2450; solid driver: $1200; tired runner: $575 Join the club: CRX Owners Group, Club Si, Northern California CRX Club, Red Pepper Racing, Our Take Then: 'Honda's all-new Civic CRX 1.5 suggests the term 'Rollerskate GT.' Not only is it roomy and neatly done inside, it's a delight in motion. Running around town, blitzing a mountain road, or cruising cross-country, you have a responsive, well-balanced performance automobile under your command.'—Kevin Smith, MotorTrend, November 1983. Now: What the enthusiast world needs is a car this light and this much fun, one that delivers equal helpings of performance and efficiency. If only Honda had kept developing the car, like BMW with the Mini, instead of replacing it with the Dull Sol. My CRX I test-drove a white 1984 Honda CRX five-speed at a dealership in Brookfield, Wisconsin, figuring the payments on a $6600 car wouldn't be much more than what I spent on parts in an average month on my 1977 Triumph Spitfire. I didn't buy one until three years later, after leaving the Quad-City Times for the San Diego Business Journal. California dealers were still getting close to sticker on CRXs (and most other Hondas). Insurance rates were especially high on the Si for twentysomething single guys, so in September 1987, on the day after my 29th birthday, I bought a red DX five-speed with no A/C for, I think, $8125. I ran it up and down Highway 1 between San Luis Obispo and San Francisco whenever I could. I drove it fast and hard, was meticulous with service, got 33 mpg in the city and about 40 mpg highway, and moved to Washington, D.C., in it. In February 1994, a lawyer with a medical condition who shouldn't have been driving his 1981 Olds 98 passed out on a boulevard outside Georgetown, plowing into oncoming traffic and taking out my CRX at low, constant speed. I had only a sore wrist from clenching the wheel. I still miss that car.
Motor Trend
17 minutes ago
- Motor Trend
Hiding in Plain Sight: 10 of the Coolest Sleeper Wagons of All Time
Looking back, the IS300 SportCross might be one of the weirdest Lexuses ever made. It felt like it was caught in between a hatchback and a wagon, as it was neither square nor sloped enough to be definitively either. But because it was based on the sedan, we'll classify it as a wagon. Plus, it just gives us an excuse to write about it. From the rear doors forward, it was basically indistinguishable from its sedan counterpart and came with all the IS goodies of the day, including what is arguably one of the coolest analog driver gauges ever designed. 'At our test facility, we expected a wagon based on an already great compact sedan to be good, but not this good—nor this close to the sedan,' Walton wrote. 'A 0–60-mph blast takes just 0.2 second longer (at 7.6 seconds), and the quarter-mile run of 15.6 sec at 89.7 mph is closer still. As if that weren't enough, its slalom speed of 66.5 mph is a breath away from the sedan's 67.6-mph best. Brakes? Just 5 feet farther from 60 mph at 118 feet.' Practically speaking, the SportCross rode and handled like a sports car, which was just an added sleeper bonus.
Bloomberg
23 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
FTSE 100 Live: London Takeover Targets Getting Bids at Huge Premiums
UK assets have struggled for direction, leaving much of the focus on two takeover offers in London and the questions they raise about the health of the market. Here's what happened today: Semiconductor firm Alphawave agreed to be bought by US chip giant Qualcomm, and precision instruments maker Spectris has received an approach from private equity house Advent. Both of the deals are pitched at massive premiums, indicating that a chasm remains between how much a potential buyer thinks a London-listed company is worth and the value the market ascribes to it. The Alphawave deal also means yet another tech stock will disappear from London. A dearth of high-growth names is a big reason that investors have struggled to build enthusiasm for the UK's benchmarks. And those domestic investors aren't coming back to the UK in the way they are in Europe. Escaping that vicious cycle will be tricky. Elsewhere, ad giant WPP's CEO will leave at the end of the year, with the group's shares languishing as the worst performers in the FTSE 100 in 2025. Diageo is benefiting from a good mood in European booze stocks. And BP getting bought by a rival looks unlikely right now. That's all from us for now. Join us here tomorrow for the jobs data and updates from the likes of homebuilder Bellway.
