In our Paris to Oslo EV duel, the Audi A6 Sportback e-tron performance beats the Audi e-tron GT by 61 minutes, completing the 1780km route in 19h 22min. The key advantage? 4 fewer charging stops. Route calculated on September 4, 2026 using real-time charging station data.
The Audi A6 Sportback e-tron performance needs only 5 charging stops compared to 9 for the slowest vehicle, saving valuable time.
Winner
Audi A6 Sportback e-tron performance
- Total time: 19h 22min (61 min faster)
- Charging stops: 5
- Charging time: 51min
- Energy: ~277 kWh
- Distance: 1780km
Quick Comparison
| Metric |
Audi A6 Sportback e-tron performance |
Audi e-tron GT |
| Travel time |
19h 22min |
20h 23min |
| Charging time: |
51min |
1h 50min |
| Charging stops: |
5 |
9 |
| Energy used |
~320 kWh |
~321 kWh |
Charging Strategy Breakdown
Audi A6 Sportback e-tron performance Route
- Start: Paris (100% charge)
-
Stop 1:
EnBW Vennbahncenter (10 min, 27% → 65%)
-
Stop 2:
Shell Tankstelle Autohof Osnabrück-Hafen (10 min, 19% → 61%)
-
Stop 3:
AVIA Tankstelle (10 min, 10% → 57%)
-
Stop 4:
Uno-X Danmark (10 min, 10% → 57%)
-
Stop 5:
Supercharger Importgatan (11 min, 10% → 60%)
- Arrival: Oslo
Audi e-tron GT Route
- Start: Paris (100% charge)
-
Stop 1:
Carrefour Valenciennes (10 min, 47% → 72%)
-
Stop 2:
McDonald's Debyestraße (18 min, 17% → 72%)
-
Stop 3:
Shell Tankstelle Teutopark (12 min, 10% → 54%)
-
Stop 4:
KFC (10 min, 10% → 46%)
-
Stop 5:
Decathlon (10 min, 12% → 47%)
-
Stop 6:
Clever Erhvervspark (12 min, 13% → 57%)
-
Stop 7:
Fastned Barbecue barn (10 min, 10% → 46%)
-
Stop 8:
McDonald's (14 min, 13% → 61%)
-
Stop 9:
Tradenvägen (14 min, 10% → 59%)
- Arrival: Oslo
Why the Audi A6 Sportback e-tron performance Won
The Audi A6 Sportback e-tron performance achieved a 61-minute advantage over Audi e-tron GT on this 1780km route. Key factors:
- Fewer charging stops: 5 stops vs 9 for the slowest vehicle means less time spent finding and connecting to chargers.
- Faster charging: Total charging time of 51min vs 1h 50min thanks to higher peak charging speeds or better charging curve.
- Better efficiency: Lower energy consumption (~277 kWh vs ~398 kWh) means less time spent charging.
Related Comparisons