Audi Q6 e-tron vs Audi Q6 Sportback e-tron
Biggest differences: Charging 10–80% — Audi Q6 e-tron 21 min, Audi Q6 Sportback e-tron 22 min · Consumption — Audi Q6 e-tron 15.9 kWh/100 km, Audi Q6 Sportback e-tron 15.3 kWh/100 km · Boot — Audi Q6 e-tron 526 l, Audi Q6 Sportback e-tron 511 l.
Audi Q6 e-tron
The Audi Q6 e-tron is an electric SUV in the D segment, offering four powertrain variants with different power and range.
Audi Q6 Sportback e-tron
The Audi Q6 Sportback e-tron is a D-segment crossover offering four powertrain variants with power ranging from 252 hp to 489 hp.
Profile against the market: Audi Q6 e-tron vs Audi Q6 Sportback e-tron
Audi Q6 e-tronperformance- Audi Q6 Sportback e-tronQ6 Sportback e-tron performance
Audi Q6 e-tron or Audi Q6 Sportback e-tron — who wins where
It's a tie: 2 to 2
Click a slice to see only those metrics. Each bar shows where the car stands against the whole catalogue.
- WLTP range kmAudi Q6 Sportback e-tron +18 km
- Battery kWhNo difference
- Consumption ↓ kWh/100 kmAudi Q6 Sportback e-tron −0.6 kWh/100 km
- Power PSNo difference
- 0–100 km/h ↓ sNo difference
- Top speed km/hNo difference
- DC charging kWNo difference
- AC charging kWNo difference
- Charging ↓ minAudi Q6 e-tron −1 min
- Weight ↓ kgNo difference
- Boot lAudi Q6 e-tron +15 l
Technical data: Audi Q6 e-tron vs Audi Q6 Sportback e-tron
Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data
| Key parameters | Audi Q6 e-tron performance | Audi Q6 Sportback e-tron Q6 Sportback e-tron performance | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Range and energy | |||
| WLTP range | 661 km | 679 km | Audi +18 km |
| Battery | 94.9 kWh | 94.9 kWh | No difference |
| Consumption ↓ | 15.9 kWh/100 km | 15.3 kWh/100 km | Audi −0.6 kWh/100 km |
| Charging | |||
| DC charging | 270 kW | 270 kW | No difference |
| AC charging | 11 kW | 11 kW | No difference |
| Charging 10–80% ↓ | 21 min | 22 min | Audi −1 min |
| Range per minute of charging | 22 km/min | 21.6 km/min | Audi +0.4 km/min |
| Voltage | 800 V | 800 V | No difference |
| Performance and drivetrain | |||
| Power | 306 PS | 306 PS | No difference |
| 0–100 km/h ↓ | 6.6 s | 6.6 s | No difference |
| Top speed | 210 km/h | 210 km/h | No difference |
| Drivetrain | RWD | RWD | — |
| Practicality | |||
| Weight ↓ | 2200 kg | 2200 kg | No difference |
| Boot | 526 l | 511 l | Audi +15 l |
| Length | 4771 mm | 4771 mm | No difference |
| Width | 1939 mm | 1939 mm | No difference |
| Height | 1648 mm | 1611 mm | Audi +37 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2893 mm | 2893 mm | No difference |
The better value in each row is bold and underlined in the colour of the car. Metrics marked ↓ — lower is better. Dimensions are shown without picking a winner.
Energy cost calculator
Audi Q6 e-tron
Audi Q6 Sportback e-tron
Amounts are in your currency — enter prices in the currency you use.
Video reviews of both models
Audi Q6 e-tron
Audi Q6 Sportback e-tron
Other comparisons in this class: SUV / Crossover, segment D
Frequently asked questions about this comparison
Which has the longer range — Audi Q6 e-tron or Audi Q6 Sportback e-tron?
The Audi Q6 Sportback e-tron goes further: 679 km WLTP against the 661 km of the Audi Q6 e-tron. That is a difference of 18 km.
Which charges faster?
The Audi Q6 e-tron accepts up to 270 kW DC, the Audi Q6 Sportback e-tron up to 270 kW. Charging from 10 to 80% takes 21 and 22 min respectively.
Which is cheaper to run?
The Audi Q6 Sportback e-tron uses less electricity: 15.3 kWh/100 km against 15.9 kWh/100 km in the Audi Q6 e-tron. Over 15000 km a year that is a difference of 90 kWh — the calculator on this page turns it into money.
Technical data comes from official manufacturer materials and we do our best to verify it, but a manufacturer can change a specification without notice and mistakes do happen. Confirm the figures with a dealer before you buy — we accept no liability for decisions made on the basis of this data. Full disclaimer
Range, consumption and weight are given for the base configuration: manufacturers homologate them as a band of values that depends on wheels and equipment (e.g. 533–592 km), and we take the lightest variant, on the smallest wheels — i.e. the most favourable. The same model on larger wheels will travel a shorter distance.