UrbanExtant

Currently, we have an A4 2.0T and a Q5 3.2, and we both prefer the 3.2 in the Q5. The 2.0T is a great little engine, but it is just that, a little engine. The turbo lag, and constant shifting with the 8 speed transmission are no joke. We both dislike it enough that we are planning to replace it later this year. When pushed hard, the 2.0T reminds me of the clicking and whining sound my grandmother's Singer Sewing Machine would make when she'd be zooming along sewing a quilt. There is a noticeable difference in power on the highway, too. Living around Philly, where people drive like jerks, spur of the moment speed and power are a necessity. I can't name the amount of times I've pushed the pedal in on the A4, and waited for it to do something, all the while being scared to death I'm going to get creamed on the highway by someone. I do tip my hat to the A4 and its 2.0T engine when driving around town. The low end torque is great, and certainly is fun, once you've learned to finesse around the turbo lag.

Something that is really important to point out is that the gas mileage claim people make of the 2.0T far exceeding the 3.2 is not totally accurate. We keep track of our gas mileage in an app called GasCubby, and the cumulative average for gas mileage for the 3.2 Q5 is 18.5 MPG and the average for the A4 2.0T is 19.8. Not quite what one would expect. It should be noted that the daily driver of the 2.0T is a much more conservative driver than I am in the Q5.

It really comes down to what one is looking for in a vehicle/engine. When someone on here said to drive both, and pick the one you like, they hit the nail right on the head. My one added suggestion to that is pay close attention to the noise the engine makes, how much shifting each transmission does, and if there is any lag when pushing down on the gas pedal. Those are probably the things that will bother one down the line, if they don't notice them upfront, and accept them for what they are.

AudiByNature

I have no idea why I'm jumping into the middle of this, but I thought I'd offer my $.02.

Price was NOT an issue when deciding whether to purchase the 3.2 or 2.0T last month. We had an incredible amount of equity in our 2009 Q5 3.2 PP, which we had owned for close to 3 years. We drove the 2012 3.2 and 2.0T and preferred the way the 2.0T drove, other than the sound - no question that the 3.2 sounds better.

Yes, the 2.0T PP is $4100 less than the 3.2. For that money, you get the V6, 19" wheels, Advance Key and the S-Line exterior. Decent deal. Figure the wheels are worth $750 more, Advance Key $550, the engine $1400 and the S-Line $1400 (not that it costs Audi anywhere near this to produce these differences).

Since it is the wife's daily driver, she did want better gas mileage, but didn't want to give up performance.

The gas mileage difference between the two, after 1 month of owning the 2.0T, if SIGNIFICANTLY better. Granted, my wife probably drives a little less aggressively than those of us on this forum, but even she punches it every now and then.

She has commented that she really has to press down the accelerator to get the 2.0T moving. However, the "seat-of-the-pants" meter seems to indicate that if you do floor it, it seems to compare nicely to the 3.2, with the exception of punching it at 75mph (where the 3.2 seemed stronger).

IMO, neither engine makes the car any more or any less of a luxury vehicle.

Quite frankly, I wish we would have waited for the 3.0T, but the dealer couldn't tell us when it would arrive and the wife was anxious for a new car. I also wish we held out for the 19" wheels and Advance Key, but we're still really happy.

Obviously, we like the Q5, as it's our second one. Glad we got the Navigation this time - the MMI adds a little more luxury look and feel to the car, IMHO. My Q7 was more luxurious inside, but it should have been if you consider the difference in price.

The 2.0T absolutely feels more nimble, perhaps because of a little weight savings vs. the 3.2. The 2.0T is a better match for OUR driving style and OUR traffic. I think the performance is better and the gas mileage is definitely better, again for US.

Peerblock - glad you love your vehicle. I've owned a similar vehicle and also liked it very much.

Keep in mind that some comments/opinions are objective and some are subjective. There are a LOT of smart people here who have owned MANY vehicles and are simply sharing their thoughts. Let's keep this forum productive and not attack one another.

Happy Memorial Day!!

ThunderDent

I do plan on driving my car for quite a while. And when facing the decision of the 2.0T vs. the 3.2, I definitely wanted the 2.0T. Just my personal choice.

If I had waited 2 years, yes, I would have probably chosen the 3.0T to get the S/C and the increase in power. But I wouldn't switch now to get only that.

I'm making my car the way I want it, and several years down the road, IF Audi ever decides to offer a 3.0T (S/C) in a 6-spd manual tranny and a TDI, with the S-line+ pkg with sports (alcantara/nappa leather/double-stitching) seats in the US ... if I'm in the mood for another Q5, I'll get one of those in a heartbeat. Wouldn't mind a choice of an "S" or "RS" either, of course.

Imagine I'll be in the mood for another one because the only car I'd like better would be the 500hp Cayenne Turbo, and I seriously doubt I ever drop $130K on a car. $50K I'm cool with though.

Basically I wouldn't upgrade soon just to get a little bigger engine, but I would if the options were there of things we can't get stateside right now.

As for the ongoing fight here, I don't really see why we are having it. We all are Q5 owners, and we are all enthusiasts. I do see why some are taking offense to their $45K luxury car being called an econo-banger however. But I think we all have thicker skin than that.

Both cars are the essentially the same and very nice. Is Audi a luxury vehicle? IMO, yes it is. In comparison to a Chevy or Honda, absolutely. And it is viewed by the general public that way as well. Is it a Bentley? No, of course not. So, this question is really in the eye of the beholder. It is a very, very nice vehicle for the price point we are in.

Both engines are good. Both have good and bad qualities about them. Some live in higher elevations, some at sea level. Some live in the city and do a lot of stop and go driving. Some (like me) live in an area where we do a lot of driving over hills and mountains. I'm not in the high Rockys by an means, but I live at about 600 feet, and take my car on rides weekly over 3000 feet, and occasionally 6000 feet. Some people tow a lot. Others don't. Some love the low end torque, others like a bit smoother shifting ride. Again, all this is in the eye of the beholder and we should be glad we have options out there to choose from. I'll be the first to admit, I'd like a throatier sounding engine over the whine. But I think my car sounds pretty throaty in "S" mode when I step on the pedal too.

This is a forum, where we can all express our own opinions. Hopefully no one will intentionally flame just to make others mad on either side of whatever issue we might be discussing. Discussion, and differing opinions, are good because they always lead to more knowledge, and that is never a bad thing. Let's all be glad and thankful today that we live in a world where we are able to have these discussions and opinions, and a lifestyle that supports the opportunity to drive the vehicles we enjoy.

PeerBlock

If the Q5 is not a "luxury vehicle" then it would be the same as any other vehicle in its category and should be priced accordingly...but it's not, it's 1.5-2x more.

It's not a "matter of opinion" that the Audi has superior workmanship, better quality materials and better overall ride quality than something like a ford escape or mazda cx7...plus the Audi brand holds value better than any of the cheaper brands.

It's not a matter of right or wrong. You're welcome to choose the 2.0T that's why the option is there. I wouldn't do it and I told you why I wouldn't.

The problem I have with your comments is that you're still trying to put the 2.0T on a pedestal because of potential advantages it may offer in very specific and isolated situations...and these potential advantages are limited at best.

Maybe the 2.0T is slightly better once you're 3,000 ft above sea level, but it's still an econo-banger that diminishes the overall ride quality of a very nice luxury vehicle.

With the 2.0T you are paying less for less - nothing wrong with that but it is what it is. If saving a little money on the purchase price and getting slightly better avg fuel economy are more important to you than having a smooth, comfortable ride and an extra 60 HP on tap - go for it!

NABS4

Where did I imply anywhere that the 2.0T is a better engine than the 3.2? In my situation, the 2.0T will be the better engine. That hardly qualifies as putting the engine on a pedestal, as you put it.

How will you defend the 3.2 against the 3.0T when it becomes available in the Q5?

AudiByNature

LOL - no wonder everyone is flaming you.

Please let all of us poor, poor, clueless people enjoy our lowly "econo-bangers". I'm going to huddle up into a corner with a blanket and wonder why I'm so unfortunate.

Unlike YOU, I've owned this vehicle with both engines, so that probably gives me a little more perspective on the discussion. You can choose to ignore every other comment here, since you're clearly smarter....

Do you even own a Q5? As of late April, you were supposedly looking for an S-Line. Sounds like you maybe picked up one up in the past 4-5 days. If so, I hope you enjoy it.

Basically, your opinion, which is based on your VAST experience of a week, is worth more than every other opinion on here (including those of us who have had a Q5 since 2009, and including those of us who have had BOTH engines). If we're all idiots, please join another forum.

FYI - Your V6 is an "econo-banger" compared to my X5. That term doesn't bother me in the least - happy to get better mileage. Don't Evos have econo-bangers? Why would you have ever owned such a lowly vehicle?

- Some people REALLY like the 2.0T, including me, whether you want to believe it or not.

- Some people REALLY like the 3.2, including you - and you don't hear me questioning your choice, do you?

You simply like to argue. Practically ever post you make is arguing. This is not the place.

AudiByNature

NABS4 - just let him be right.....that's clearly the most important thing to him.

Kingby

You do realize that the 3.2 has 60+ hp more than the 2.0T at only one single RPM value. From about 1000 to 4000 (about the rev range that most people spend most of their time driving in) the 2.0T actually out HP's the 3.2 AND it significantly out TQ's the 3.2 (with a the largest difference in this 1000 to 4000 rev range).

Also altitude is significantly overcome by the FI of the 2.0T. It is really not so "specific" as the entire left side of the continent spends a good amount of time driving at elevation.

I believe it has been discussed at length before: https://www.audiworld.com/forums/sho....php?t=2725295

PeerBlock

Why would I? If both the 3.2 and 3.0T were available, it would be a matter of choosing better performance or not. The 3.0T should be about as smooth as the 3.2 so opting for one or the other would not be a compromise aside from power.

I don't think anyone is "flaming" me and since my comments are aimed at prospective buyers it shouldn't be making anyone with an econo-banger mad.

Absolutely...I mean, if I didn't it would be an odd car to pretend to have. I've had it for a while now.

There's that inferiority complex that seems to go hand-in-hand with 2.0T Q5 owners.

No, it's really not. The 3.2 V6 is an excellent engine by any measure. It was not designed from the ground-up to be the economical option as the 2.0T was. I am sure you are enjoying your 3 MPG average over the V6 as you shake, rattle and roll down the road.

The 4G63 in the Evo is a 2.0 4-cyl engine but, like the V6, it was designed for high performance and it delivers.

That's great, but we have yet to hear a compelling reason as to why (aside from price).

You can question my choice if you want, but I already made it and I do not question my decision. I'm not questioning your choice either which makes me wonder why you're so defensive.

This isn't a forum dedicated to talking about the Q5? Ok my bad.

Sidenote- it's not an argument. I am simply responding to people who disagree with what I said. Why do you feel the need to whine about that like it's a bad thing? Nobody is forcing you to read this thread or post in it.

When you floor it, the engine revs to its optimal power level and stays around there. The marginal advantage of low RPM TQ and Power that the econo-banger provides evaporates immediately when both cars are at full throttle. Floor yours and watch the tach.

Both engines produce more than enough torque at low RPM to move the Q5 and up to 4,400 lbs of cargo in tow - there is no real advantage to having low end torque on the econo-banger because as anyone who drives one will tell you, you really need to push that accelerator to get it going even when it's not towing anything.


The Prius has all of its torque available from 0 RPM because of its electric motor - but you don't see anyone touting that as some kind of advantage because it really isn't.

There is a limitation to this, and that limit is the actual capacity of the turbo to pressurize air to compensate for the lower atmospheric pressure. Since the 2.0T is an econo engine and not a high-performance turbo, it has a small turbo that gives up boost capacity for reduced lag and higher low-end torque...as well as keeping costs down.

The atmospheric pressure at sea level is 14.7 PSI and the 2.0T in the Q5 is boosting around 7 PSI. That's where the boost holds - it may spike as high as 20 PSI but the turbo cannot sustain that level of boost pressure reliably.

Let's figure that the turbo has at least 50% of its average boost as "headroom" for changes in air density. That would be 3.5 PSI, meaning that 10-11 PSI would be the max you can gain 'safely'.

You lose about 0.5 PSI of air pressure for every 1,000 feet above sea level, so over 7,000 ft above sea level and beyond, the turbo engine will start losing power at a similar rate as an NA engine.

The NA engine will lose about 4% of its rated power per 1,000 feet in elevation, which means at 7,000 feet the 3.2 V6 would be giving up 28% of its rated power, leaving it with 194 HP. The 2.0T maintains 211 HP, giving it a whole 17 HP advantage - or about 10% more. This is not a "significant" advantage and it's not really something to get excited about.

AudiByNature

I have yet to give YOU a compelling reason why I picked the 2.0T over the 3.2. I've given a number of compelling reasons for me (as have a number of other users on this forum), they're simply not good enough. Your opinions are simply too important to you.

So, rather than listen, objectively, you'd rather make condescending comments to others on this forum to make yourself feel superior - and THAT is textbook for an inferiority complex. Perfect examples:

"I am sure you are enjoying your 3 MPG average over the V6 as you shake, rattle and roll down the road."

"The 2.0T really shouldn't be in any Audi IMO but they're probably trying to meet the tougher CAFE standards."

"Oh really? Are you towing a lot with your Q5? So much so that it's a major consideration? If yes, you bought the wrong car. You should have gotten an F-150. If no then you're just trying to validate the econo-banger. Boatloads of torque mean nothing without the power to apply it and the warranty >>> APR tune. "

"If you're shopping for a Q5 make sure you test drive both. I can say quite confidently that 9 out of 10 people who try both prefer the 3.2 V6 over the econo-banger."

"I would say that the Q5s with the 2.0T being $10K cheaper than their 3.2 counterparts has a lot to do with the sales figures. It IS an econo engine, that's why it's cheap. Don't delude yourself into believing it's anything other than an econo-banger and the people who buy it are the same people who are impressed by Kias and Hyundais.

I really doubt that all cars are going to be stuck with underwhelming econo-bangers. Anything less than a V6 engine in a luxury car is pretty much sacrilege. It not only is cheap, it looks and sounds cheap. Why would you pay so much money for a car that has the same engine you can get in a $20K VW?"

"...but once you're at the A5/Q5 level you should not even be thinking about the 2.0T because it's like wearing a tuxedo with the sleeves cut off."

"the tinny plinking sound the 2.0T makes combined with is constant wheezing gets old fast and it does cheapen the driving experience of the Q5"

"which is a contradiction in this context because you don't buy an Audi if you are trying to be practical."

"there isn't much reason to go for the 2.0T in a Q5 unless you can't afford the V6 version, because it is a pretty big bump in price. Cost is really the only legit reason for choosing the 2.0T over the 3.2."

"If you can afford the premium for a luxury car you can probably afford to shell out a little extra for gas. If you are one of those tree-huggers who thinks humans caused global warming and want to drive a "green" car then just get a bike or a moto-scooter."

"Someone who knows about Q5s and sees you opted for the 2.0T over the 3.2 will think "Oh, he got the cheap one. lolz""

"As for consumers making their own decisions - I'm all for that, but most consumers are idiots what want to be told what to think. Why do you think Apple products are so popular and who do you think voted Obama into office? It's no secret that the average intelligence of Americans is pretty low when compared to Europe or Asia."

"I get that; they bought the 2.0T and want to validate their decision by getting other people to make the same choice...but not everyone has low standards and not everyone wants to drive a Q5 powered by an econo-banger that is dropped into $20K VW Golfs.

If you can't afford the 3.2, at least you can still enjoy a Q5 with the 2.0T."

"The 2.0T isn't the wrong choice, but the 3.2 is the better choice...SO, if you choose the 2.0T accept that you chose the lesser of the two and don't try to pretend like it's more than it is."

"There is no S-Line 2.0T in the USA. I live in the USA, hence my statement is valid."

Phew - after re-reading those and laughing....a few final thoughts:

I buy cars for me and not to impress you.

You've had the Q5 for less than a month and now you're the authority on what we should all be buying. What did we ever do without you on this forum before you joined?!?

Perhaps adjust your attitude and tone. You have the gift of debate, but your condescending attitude really isn't necessary or appreciated. It IS an open forum, but we tend to respect one another. If my examples don't illustrate your arrogance, you're simply in denial.

The 3.2 is a really nice engine (remember, I owned one) - but whether you want to admit it or not, the majority of Q5s are sold with 2.0T engines. You really think that majority of owners can't afford a few thousand more? Are you that arrogant? Do you really think that most owners didn't test drive both models?

My 2012 2.0T PP was more expensive than the 2009 3.2 PP I owned and more than a base 2012 3.2 PP. So, I clearly made the decision based on driving experience, not cost.

You, as well as a few others here, gave the best advice: DRIVE BOTH and buy what you like.

I think I speak for all of us here when I say "We are so happy for you that you like your 3.2 Q5 S-Line". When are you going to post pics?