Major differences, other than cosmetics, between '01 2.7T 5-speed and '02 2.7T 5-speed are
08-26-2005, 05:47 AM
#14
Most 02s have Parktronic. Had to get Nav in 01 to get it so very few have it :-)
In fact most 02 2.7ts have all the major options packages. The rare options for 02 turbos were Sport and Sunshade.
08-26-2005, 05:55 AM
#15
AudiWorld Expert
Parktronic, Nav, Sport Package, and sunshades were all options in 2001 as well
...and are you sure about the NAV required for the Parktronic? My co-worker's 2002 6-speed sport has the parktronic but no Nav.
08-26-2005, 06:35 AM
#16
Great list, BD! But re: the transmission ratios... (edited)
It should probably noted that you're referring to the Tiptronic, and not the manual. But... I didn't recall any transmission changes. So I double checked the model guide, and it appears that you compared the 2001 4.2 transmission to the 2002 2.7T numbers. In fact, the 2.7T trannies for the 2 years were the same.
Also, the '02 facelift included new alloy suspension components for a bit less unsprung weight.
Very impressive memory recall!
<edit> Oh, and ESP was standard beginning MY'01, as was Immobilizer III. Some very early builds didn't get the Immo, because the factory didn't get it into the production line.
Also, the '02 facelift included new alloy suspension components for a bit less unsprung weight.
Very impressive memory recall!
<edit> Oh, and ESP was standard beginning MY'01, as was Immobilizer III. Some very early builds didn't get the Immo, because the factory didn't get it into the production line.
08-26-2005, 07:10 AM
#19
AudiWorld Expert
Oops! I grabbed the wrong column data for the gear ratios...edited :)
...but I only indicated the tiptronic because the initial question was about the tiptronic models.
Hey, what do you think about the difference in front and rear track? I never really noticed, but now it makes sense that the tires on my co-worker's 2002 2.7T 6-speed sport look like they fill the fender better, even though we are running the same size tire (235 45 17) and the same offset wheel (ET43) and the same width rim (17x7.5"). I always thought it was an optical illusion because of the difference in the sidewall and ttire tread on the edge of the tires, but now I must look at that more closely....
Hey, what do you think about the difference in front and rear track? I never really noticed, but now it makes sense that the tires on my co-worker's 2002 2.7T 6-speed sport look like they fill the fender better, even though we are running the same size tire (235 45 17) and the same offset wheel (ET43) and the same width rim (17x7.5"). I always thought it was an optical illusion because of the difference in the sidewall and ttire tread on the edge of the tires, but now I must look at that more closely....
08-26-2005, 07:25 AM
#20
I think it's partially due to the different rotor hat offsets and perhaps some slight geometry
changes resulting from the updated alloy components.
You know that you and I have slightly differing opinions about wheel size fitment, and I think this is part of it. Certainly the rotor hats would account for tires rubbing vs. not.
I have not, however, gone through and compared part numbers for all the underpinnings between the years. From what I can recall from the aftermarket/tuning shop offerings, though, no one mentions any changes except for the rotors -- aside from the 5/00 build date, that is. But that date is outside of what we're talking about.
You know that you and I have slightly differing opinions about wheel size fitment, and I think this is part of it. Certainly the rotor hats would account for tires rubbing vs. not.
I have not, however, gone through and compared part numbers for all the underpinnings between the years. From what I can recall from the aftermarket/tuning shop offerings, though, no one mentions any changes except for the rotors -- aside from the 5/00 build date, that is. But that date is outside of what we're talking about.