2.0 or 3.2?
05-29-2012, 09:47 AM
#121
Audiworld Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
b) What opinions? All the things I said about the 2.0T I've backed up.
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."
Stuffing a 2.0T into the Q5 was a corporate cop-out that should not have happened, but did happen because it was cheaper and easier to do. Business is, after all, about the bottom line.
The part about the CAFE standards is not an opinion. It is a fact, and it affects all automakers not just Audi.
"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."
This was a response to someone suggesting that the 2.0T is a better engine for towing than the V6 because it has more torque...but it ignores the fact the weight of the Q5 plus 4,400 in tow more than adequately handled by either engine - thus making this an false justification.
"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.
Cheap Audi vs Expensive Hyundai - also true.
"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."
As a rule of thumb, you should choose the highest model that you can afford at or near its top-line trim. If you cannot afford a loaded Q5 with the 3.2, consider something else rather go with an econo-banger compromised Audi.
This is just my advice - people can choose whether or not to apply it.
"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."
Other indicators would be people calling someone a "genius" for having common sense - and this happens quite a bit.
"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."
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."
Notice how there isn't a single 2.0T owner who stepped up and told the truth - that they chose the 2.0T because of the price. Instead they try to invent "benefits" for it and try to pitch it as being THE best choice for the Q5.
"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?
This is good and bad for Audi, because now they're selling more cars but in doing so they're cheapening the brand. Remember when the S4 was available with a pretty sweet twin-turbo V6? I don't think we'll see an engine like that again any time soon.
It's like what WalMart did to the average product quality in America - by driving the prices so low and forcing manufacturers to outsource to China, quality dropped harder than Greece's economy.
I'm glad we can agree that the 3.2 is a nice engine, and for anyone considering a Q5 I maintain that it is worth the extra patience and cost to get a 3.2 rather than getting a "deal" on a 2.0T that is on the lot.
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.
The fact is that most 2.0s and 3.2s are ordered by the dealer with common option packages so unless you specifically order one yourself, you are not going to get any of them at base price.
I was not questioning your decision to go with the 2.0T instead of the 3.2 - but strictly from my perspective it seems like you felt you were getting more car for the same price with the 2.0T than you would with the 3.2. I have a very hard time believing anyone who says they chose the 2.0T because it "drives better" than the 3.2...maybe, but without knowing you better personally I'm going to have to stick with what I can quantify.
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?
05-29-2012, 10:22 AM
#122
AudiWorld Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Huntington/Charleston, WV
Posts: 1,364
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I vote the mods lock this thread.
This pissing match has gone on long enough, and it's apparent that everyone on the entire board is wrong, save one lucky 3.2L Q5 owner.
I think his NA engine might stand for "Not Applicable" instead of "Naturally Aspirated" like everyone else's
I'll keep my forced induction engine tho thanks!
Sorry to stir the pot some more, it's just a joke and all in good fun PeerBlock.
I do vote the thread gets locked however. It will keep going until the end of time if not. I would stop reading it, but I am addicted to message boards, so that isn't an option for me .......
This pissing match has gone on long enough, and it's apparent that everyone on the entire board is wrong, save one lucky 3.2L Q5 owner.
I think his NA engine might stand for "Not Applicable" instead of "Naturally Aspirated" like everyone else's
I'll keep my forced induction engine tho thanks!
Sorry to stir the pot some more, it's just a joke and all in good fun PeerBlock.
I do vote the thread gets locked however. It will keep going until the end of time if not. I would stop reading it, but I am addicted to message boards, so that isn't an option for me .......
05-29-2012, 10:36 AM
#123
AudiWorld Senior Member
a) This thread isn't about defending the choice you already made, it's for people still shopping for one and trying to decide. You're already off on the wrong foot if you thought otherwise.
b) What opinions? All the things I said about the 2.0T I've backed up.
So basically you're saying that you want me to agree with you and not say anything that might make the 2.0T seem like a bad option, even if what I say is true?
This is true. The 2.0T vibrates a lot, is noisy and has a hollow steering feel when compared to the V6. It's average fuel economy advantage is 3 MPG. Are you telling us that this isn't true even though we've already established that it is?
While this is opinion, it is a technically sound opinion. For the type of car that the Q5 is, a 4-cyl engine is a poor option to offer customers. If they want attract buyers with fuel economy concerns they could haven offered the TDI V6 - and I would have chosen that if it was available.
Stuffing a 2.0T into the Q5 was a corporate cop-out that should not have happened, but did happen because it was cheaper and easier to do. Business is, after all, about the bottom line.
The part about the CAFE standards is not an opinion. It is a fact, and it affects all automakers not just Audi.
Fact: All vehicles have the ability to tow a certain amount of cargo, but not all vehicles are well-suited to the task. The Q5 has above-average towing abilities, but is a poor choice for someone who regularly tows cargo at or near the Q5's capacity.
This was a response to someone suggesting that the 2.0T is a better engine for towing than the V6 because it has more torque...but it ignores the fact the weight of the Q5 plus 4,400 in tow more than adequately handled by either engine - thus making this an false justification.
You absolutely should test drive both if you are considering a Q5.
It is a fact that the 3.2 has a price premium between $5K to $15K over the 2.0T and it is also true that the econo-banger was offered as a money-saving option. It's marketed along the lines of "The economy of a 4-cyl with the power of a V6". That is why you see so many VW and Audi cars with the 2.0T, and relatively few with more performance-oriented engines like the 3.2 or 3.0T.
Cheap Audi vs Expensive Hyundai - also true.
A response to someone who suggested that all V6 engines will be phased out in lieu of turbo econo-bangers - and it is a perfectly logical analysis. You are paying a hefty premium for anything Audi sells so it is not unreasonable to expect the vehicles they sell to be different from and better than vehicles from non-luxury brands. Audi should have its own version of engines specific to their lineup - not off-the-shelf VW parts and certainly not off-the-shelf econo parts.
Opinion, but also reasonable. If you're taking some kind of "bang for the buck" approach when shopping for luxury cars you are making a massive contradiction.
As a rule of thumb, you should choose the highest model that you can afford at or near its top-line trim. If you cannot afford a loaded Q5 with the 3.2, consider something else rather go with an econo-banger compromised Audi.
This is just my advice - people can choose whether or not to apply it.
Very true, and anyone saying otherwise is simply lying or deluding themselves.
This is 110% true.
Another nugget of truth shining in the rough.
A healthy dose of truth mixed in with sound logic.
This is how most people would think - but unlike most people I don't deny it. It is also true that the 2.0T is the "cheap one".
Opinion rooted in objective observations. Look at some of the consumer protection laws we have on the books here in the USA and it quickly becomes apparent that if a high number of people are dumb enough for us to require such laws, it's saying something.
Other indicators would be people calling someone a "genius" for having common sense - and this happens quite a bit.
Looks accurate to me.
True dat. Most of the pro-2.0 in this thread has consisted of overstating insignificant or irrelevant differences as "advantages", when the 3.2 provides a clear and undisputable improvement in performance and ride quality in ALL driving conditions.
Notice how there isn't a single 2.0T owner who stepped up and told the truth - that they chose the 2.0T because of the price. Instead they try to invent "benefits" for it and try to pitch it as being THE best choice for the Q5.
Also true.
Thanks for the summary but I noticed that you omitted anything I posted which contains technical information that dispels the misinformation being spread around here about the econo banger. I find it interesting that you skipped over those posts.
Don't think this was ever in question...
No, but I think I make some solid points that the pro econo-banger crowd hasn't been able to dispute, which is probably why you didn't address any of the technical posts I've made and only quote what you believed to be my opinion.
If I was someone considering a Q5 and I stumbled across this thread I would appreciate it. I'm not being arrogant or condescending, it's more like I am joking around. You're misinterpreting my comments and being overly sensitive to something you should be laid back about.
The dealer was willing to get me into a 2.0T Q5 for $32K and change. That would put the econo-banger Q5 into the same realm as a fully loaded Toyota or Honda. I think that a lot of the people springing for the 2.0T are people who would otherwise have purchased a cheaper car...and at $35K are nearing their purchase limit.
This is good and bad for Audi, because now they're selling more cars but in doing so they're cheapening the brand. Remember when the S4 was available with a pretty sweet twin-turbo V6? I don't think we'll see an engine like that again any time soon.
It's like what WalMart did to the average product quality in America - by driving the prices so low and forcing manufacturers to outsource to China, quality dropped harder than Greece's economy.
I'm glad we can agree that the 3.2 is a nice engine, and for anyone considering a Q5 I maintain that it is worth the extra patience and cost to get a 3.2 rather than getting a "deal" on a 2.0T that is on the lot.
Cars usually go up in price to keep pace with inflation as well as economic realities - some more than others. You can load up an econo-banger to make it more expensive than a base 3.2, but how many available 3.2s have no option packages included? When both have equal options, the 3.2 is going to cost more.
The fact is that most 2.0s and 3.2s are ordered by the dealer with common option packages so unless you specifically order one yourself, you are not going to get any of them at base price.
I was not questioning your decision to go with the 2.0T instead of the 3.2 - but strictly from my perspective it seems like you felt you were getting more car for the same price with the 2.0T than you would with the 3.2. I have a very hard time believing anyone who says they chose the 2.0T because it "drives better" than the 3.2...maybe, but without knowing you better personally I'm going to have to stick with what I can quantify.
I will soon.
b) What opinions? All the things I said about the 2.0T I've backed up.
So basically you're saying that you want me to agree with you and not say anything that might make the 2.0T seem like a bad option, even if what I say is true?
This is true. The 2.0T vibrates a lot, is noisy and has a hollow steering feel when compared to the V6. It's average fuel economy advantage is 3 MPG. Are you telling us that this isn't true even though we've already established that it is?
While this is opinion, it is a technically sound opinion. For the type of car that the Q5 is, a 4-cyl engine is a poor option to offer customers. If they want attract buyers with fuel economy concerns they could haven offered the TDI V6 - and I would have chosen that if it was available.
Stuffing a 2.0T into the Q5 was a corporate cop-out that should not have happened, but did happen because it was cheaper and easier to do. Business is, after all, about the bottom line.
The part about the CAFE standards is not an opinion. It is a fact, and it affects all automakers not just Audi.
Fact: All vehicles have the ability to tow a certain amount of cargo, but not all vehicles are well-suited to the task. The Q5 has above-average towing abilities, but is a poor choice for someone who regularly tows cargo at or near the Q5's capacity.
This was a response to someone suggesting that the 2.0T is a better engine for towing than the V6 because it has more torque...but it ignores the fact the weight of the Q5 plus 4,400 in tow more than adequately handled by either engine - thus making this an false justification.
You absolutely should test drive both if you are considering a Q5.
It is a fact that the 3.2 has a price premium between $5K to $15K over the 2.0T and it is also true that the econo-banger was offered as a money-saving option. It's marketed along the lines of "The economy of a 4-cyl with the power of a V6". That is why you see so many VW and Audi cars with the 2.0T, and relatively few with more performance-oriented engines like the 3.2 or 3.0T.
Cheap Audi vs Expensive Hyundai - also true.
A response to someone who suggested that all V6 engines will be phased out in lieu of turbo econo-bangers - and it is a perfectly logical analysis. You are paying a hefty premium for anything Audi sells so it is not unreasonable to expect the vehicles they sell to be different from and better than vehicles from non-luxury brands. Audi should have its own version of engines specific to their lineup - not off-the-shelf VW parts and certainly not off-the-shelf econo parts.
Opinion, but also reasonable. If you're taking some kind of "bang for the buck" approach when shopping for luxury cars you are making a massive contradiction.
As a rule of thumb, you should choose the highest model that you can afford at or near its top-line trim. If you cannot afford a loaded Q5 with the 3.2, consider something else rather go with an econo-banger compromised Audi.
This is just my advice - people can choose whether or not to apply it.
Very true, and anyone saying otherwise is simply lying or deluding themselves.
This is 110% true.
Another nugget of truth shining in the rough.
A healthy dose of truth mixed in with sound logic.
This is how most people would think - but unlike most people I don't deny it. It is also true that the 2.0T is the "cheap one".
Opinion rooted in objective observations. Look at some of the consumer protection laws we have on the books here in the USA and it quickly becomes apparent that if a high number of people are dumb enough for us to require such laws, it's saying something.
Other indicators would be people calling someone a "genius" for having common sense - and this happens quite a bit.
Looks accurate to me.
True dat. Most of the pro-2.0 in this thread has consisted of overstating insignificant or irrelevant differences as "advantages", when the 3.2 provides a clear and undisputable improvement in performance and ride quality in ALL driving conditions.
Notice how there isn't a single 2.0T owner who stepped up and told the truth - that they chose the 2.0T because of the price. Instead they try to invent "benefits" for it and try to pitch it as being THE best choice for the Q5.
Also true.
Thanks for the summary but I noticed that you omitted anything I posted which contains technical information that dispels the misinformation being spread around here about the econo banger. I find it interesting that you skipped over those posts.
Don't think this was ever in question...
No, but I think I make some solid points that the pro econo-banger crowd hasn't been able to dispute, which is probably why you didn't address any of the technical posts I've made and only quote what you believed to be my opinion.
If I was someone considering a Q5 and I stumbled across this thread I would appreciate it. I'm not being arrogant or condescending, it's more like I am joking around. You're misinterpreting my comments and being overly sensitive to something you should be laid back about.
The dealer was willing to get me into a 2.0T Q5 for $32K and change. That would put the econo-banger Q5 into the same realm as a fully loaded Toyota or Honda. I think that a lot of the people springing for the 2.0T are people who would otherwise have purchased a cheaper car...and at $35K are nearing their purchase limit.
This is good and bad for Audi, because now they're selling more cars but in doing so they're cheapening the brand. Remember when the S4 was available with a pretty sweet twin-turbo V6? I don't think we'll see an engine like that again any time soon.
It's like what WalMart did to the average product quality in America - by driving the prices so low and forcing manufacturers to outsource to China, quality dropped harder than Greece's economy.
I'm glad we can agree that the 3.2 is a nice engine, and for anyone considering a Q5 I maintain that it is worth the extra patience and cost to get a 3.2 rather than getting a "deal" on a 2.0T that is on the lot.
Cars usually go up in price to keep pace with inflation as well as economic realities - some more than others. You can load up an econo-banger to make it more expensive than a base 3.2, but how many available 3.2s have no option packages included? When both have equal options, the 3.2 is going to cost more.
The fact is that most 2.0s and 3.2s are ordered by the dealer with common option packages so unless you specifically order one yourself, you are not going to get any of them at base price.
I was not questioning your decision to go with the 2.0T instead of the 3.2 - but strictly from my perspective it seems like you felt you were getting more car for the same price with the 2.0T than you would with the 3.2. I have a very hard time believing anyone who says they chose the 2.0T because it "drives better" than the 3.2...maybe, but without knowing you better personally I'm going to have to stick with what I can quantify.
I will soon.
05-29-2012, 10:37 AM
#124
AudiWorld Member
I vote the mods lock this thread.
This pissing match has gone on long enough, and it's apparent that everyone on the entire board is wrong, save one lucky 3.2L Q5 owner.
I think his NA engine might stand for "Not Applicable" instead of "Naturally Aspirated" like everyone else's
I'll keep my forced induction engine tho thanks!
Sorry to stir the pot some more, it's just a joke and all in good fun PeerBlock.
I do vote the thread gets locked however. It will keep going until the end of time if not. I would stop reading it, but I am addicted to message boards, so that isn't an option for me .......
This pissing match has gone on long enough, and it's apparent that everyone on the entire board is wrong, save one lucky 3.2L Q5 owner.
I think his NA engine might stand for "Not Applicable" instead of "Naturally Aspirated" like everyone else's
I'll keep my forced induction engine tho thanks!
Sorry to stir the pot some more, it's just a joke and all in good fun PeerBlock.
I do vote the thread gets locked however. It will keep going until the end of time if not. I would stop reading it, but I am addicted to message boards, so that isn't an option for me .......
Oh and lock Peerblock too. LOL
J/K, no I'm not.
05-29-2012, 10:43 AM
#125
AudiWorld Senior Member
Moderators you are a very forgiving bunch...
MANY forums would have locked this ******* out by now....
his attitude is SO very conducive to growing your user community.
I will repeat what my wife says to put things in perspective:
"It's not what you say, but how you say it..."
because it's all relative - the 3.2 is an econo banger as compared to my daily driver.... but I'm not compensating - I need it:
MANY forums would have locked this ******* out by now....
his attitude is SO very conducive to growing your user community.
I will repeat what my wife says to put things in perspective:
"It's not what you say, but how you say it..."
because it's all relative - the 3.2 is an econo banger as compared to my daily driver.... but I'm not compensating - I need it:
Last edited by JohnBoyToo; 05-29-2012 at 10:47 AM.
05-29-2012, 01:21 PM
#126
Audiworld Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do vote the thread gets locked however. It will keep going until the end of time if not. I would stop reading it, but I am addicted to message boards, so that isn't an option for me .......
That is a good thing.
I will repeat what my wife says to put things in perspective:
"It's not what you say, but how you say it..."
"It's not what you say, but how you say it..."
What I said is true and if you can dispute it with fact you have had the opportunity to do that all along. A lot of people seem to be more comfortable living in delusion rather than accepting the truth as it is.
because it's all relative - the 3.2 is an econo banger as compared to my daily driver.... but I'm not compensating - I need it:
It's not "all relative". You currently have two engine choices with the Q5 - the 2.0T and the 3.2. Both engines work and provide sufficient power, yet one is better than the other in the context of the Q5 being a luxury SUV with emphasis on comfort, smoothness and performance.
The cheaper econo banger makes the Q5 accessible to people who would otherwise be stuck buying a Honda or Ford due to price considerations, but with the compromise of having 30% less power, being noisy/unrefined and cheapening the character of the Q5.
I think it's very unfortunate that people are so quick to try to lower the bar rather than strive to reach hire standards for themselves. That's a problem with America in general...people don't take pride in their work or their goals anymore - they just want quick, instant gratification and they want to call anyone who maintains higher standards and "elitist".
No need to hate on me for being honest with you. If you don't like the truth you have the ability to change it instead of complaining to me like I caused it. I'm just the messenger.
05-29-2012, 01:41 PM
#127
AudiWorld Senior Member
In before Lock
I have followed this thread on here and tried to give a good non arguemental response. I already made my point that over 12k miles a year at $4 a gallon the savings between engine choices given their gas mileage difference of 3mpg is $344 which is half of a monthly payment on this luxury vehicle.
The 2.0t does rattle and is not as smooth. I would prefer a slower diesel 4 banger because they are smoother, smae amount of noise and have a lot more torque giving the illusion of more acceleration (though they may be slower on paper due to running out of power and RPM)
The 2.0t, if you floor it it gets to a midrange RPM and just goes. It does move but doesn't slam your head back into the seat. I've gotten my old 3.2 to 120 much sooner than the 2.0t gets to that speed.
The 3.2 did have a much better stiffer steering and feels more solid on the highway due to the heavier motor up front. the 2.0t feels less solid on the highway but is more nimble around town.
After owning both, 2009 Premium Plus for 24k miles and a 2012 Premium Plus for 6k miles, I bring you this conclusion:
If you're urban and drive in the city a lot, the 2.0t is the way to go. better city mileage, low end torque is nice for around town and the 8 speed helps accleration as well.
If you are driving on highways, that 3.2 with instant tip in is a very smooth and powerful motor. Loads of power when you need it and a sweet sound. It still gets excellent highway mileage if driven nicely. I've gotten as much as 26-27mpg out of it on trips and that wasn't driving the speed limit.
Now I understand Audi has changed the prices,
My 2009 was a little over 42 grand, my 2012 is a little under 42 grand. Audi has upped the price of their model considerably and the quality has gone down which sucks.
The reason this thread has gotten so much attention is because when someone spends over 40 grand on a vehicle, they do not want anyone to say anything bad about it. So when you poke at the flaws of the 2.0t the owners get defensive because they feel they must defend their purchase. Then they also want to feel they got a better deal than the 3.2 so they attack for that reason as well.
Notice must of the defense comes from 2.0 owners and not much comes from 3.2 owners. Why, because the 3.2 owners don't care, they are happy with what they have, not saying 2.0 owners aren't happy but the way we see things is, the 3.2 is top notch despite an engine choice that is questionable.
Now before you start attacking me for saying this, I relate to this on the BMW forum I am on. The 328 drivers with their chepear N/A inline sixes relate to smoothness and reliability as a perk of their purhcase as well as cheaper costs. While the 335 drivers think their equally fuel effecient yet more powerful cars are that much better and the 328 drivers are idiots for spending that much money for an inferior complex.
It is indeed a napoleon complex. No one wants to feel that they spent all that money and got ripped off....
Honestly, I'm waiting to test drive a new Porsche Cayenne Diesel, may step into that. Audi's quality and cost may make me want something different. I don't love my 2.0t like I loved the 3.2, maybe a diesel and a refresh will change that...
I have followed this thread on here and tried to give a good non arguemental response. I already made my point that over 12k miles a year at $4 a gallon the savings between engine choices given their gas mileage difference of 3mpg is $344 which is half of a monthly payment on this luxury vehicle.
The 2.0t does rattle and is not as smooth. I would prefer a slower diesel 4 banger because they are smoother, smae amount of noise and have a lot more torque giving the illusion of more acceleration (though they may be slower on paper due to running out of power and RPM)
The 2.0t, if you floor it it gets to a midrange RPM and just goes. It does move but doesn't slam your head back into the seat. I've gotten my old 3.2 to 120 much sooner than the 2.0t gets to that speed.
The 3.2 did have a much better stiffer steering and feels more solid on the highway due to the heavier motor up front. the 2.0t feels less solid on the highway but is more nimble around town.
After owning both, 2009 Premium Plus for 24k miles and a 2012 Premium Plus for 6k miles, I bring you this conclusion:
If you're urban and drive in the city a lot, the 2.0t is the way to go. better city mileage, low end torque is nice for around town and the 8 speed helps accleration as well.
If you are driving on highways, that 3.2 with instant tip in is a very smooth and powerful motor. Loads of power when you need it and a sweet sound. It still gets excellent highway mileage if driven nicely. I've gotten as much as 26-27mpg out of it on trips and that wasn't driving the speed limit.
Now I understand Audi has changed the prices,
My 2009 was a little over 42 grand, my 2012 is a little under 42 grand. Audi has upped the price of their model considerably and the quality has gone down which sucks.
The reason this thread has gotten so much attention is because when someone spends over 40 grand on a vehicle, they do not want anyone to say anything bad about it. So when you poke at the flaws of the 2.0t the owners get defensive because they feel they must defend their purchase. Then they also want to feel they got a better deal than the 3.2 so they attack for that reason as well.
Notice must of the defense comes from 2.0 owners and not much comes from 3.2 owners. Why, because the 3.2 owners don't care, they are happy with what they have, not saying 2.0 owners aren't happy but the way we see things is, the 3.2 is top notch despite an engine choice that is questionable.
Now before you start attacking me for saying this, I relate to this on the BMW forum I am on. The 328 drivers with their chepear N/A inline sixes relate to smoothness and reliability as a perk of their purhcase as well as cheaper costs. While the 335 drivers think their equally fuel effecient yet more powerful cars are that much better and the 328 drivers are idiots for spending that much money for an inferior complex.
It is indeed a napoleon complex. No one wants to feel that they spent all that money and got ripped off....
Honestly, I'm waiting to test drive a new Porsche Cayenne Diesel, may step into that. Audi's quality and cost may make me want something different. I don't love my 2.0t like I loved the 3.2, maybe a diesel and a refresh will change that...
05-29-2012, 01:44 PM
#128
AudiWorld Senior Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Close this thread, delete it, burn it......
I was warned - the troll had been identified and I fell for it, hook, line and sinker.
My apologies to the rest of the gang here for prolonging it for another day.
I was warned - the troll had been identified and I fell for it, hook, line and sinker.
My apologies to the rest of the gang here for prolonging it for another day.
05-29-2012, 01:53 PM
#129
AudiWorld Senior Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Completely respect this, Coolieman.
In before Lock
I have followed this thread on here and tried to give a good non arguemental response. I already made my point that over 12k miles a year at $4 a gallon the savings between engine choices given their gas mileage difference of 3mpg is $344 which is half of a monthly payment on this luxury vehicle.
The 2.0t does rattle and is not as smooth. I would prefer a slower diesel 4 banger because they are smoother, smae amount of noise and have a lot more torque giving the illusion of more acceleration (though they may be slower on paper due to running out of power and RPM)
The 2.0t, if you floor it it gets to a midrange RPM and just goes. It does move but doesn't slam your head back into the seat. I've gotten my old 3.2 to 120 much sooner than the 2.0t gets to that speed.
The 3.2 did have a much better stiffer steering and feels more solid on the highway due to the heavier motor up front. the 2.0t feels less solid on the highway but is more nimble around town.
After owning both, 2009 Premium Plus for 24k miles and a 2012 Premium Plus for 6k miles, I bring you this conclusion:
If you're urban and drive in the city a lot, the 2.0t is the way to go. better city mileage, low end torque is nice for around town and the 8 speed helps accleration as well.
If you are driving on highways, that 3.2 with instant tip in is a very smooth and powerful motor. Loads of power when you need it and a sweet sound. It still gets excellent highway mileage if driven nicely. I've gotten as much as 26-27mpg out of it on trips and that wasn't driving the speed limit.
Now I understand Audi has changed the prices,
My 2009 was a little over 42 grand, my 2012 is a little under 42 grand. Audi has upped the price of their model considerably and the quality has gone down which sucks.
The reason this thread has gotten so much attention is because when someone spends over 40 grand on a vehicle, they do not want anyone to say anything bad about it. So when you poke at the flaws of the 2.0t the owners get defensive because they feel they must defend their purchase. Then they also want to feel they got a better deal than the 3.2 so they attack for that reason as well.
Notice must of the defense comes from 2.0 owners and not much comes from 3.2 owners. Why, because the 3.2 owners don't care, they are happy with what they have, not saying 2.0 owners aren't happy but the way we see things is, the 3.2 is top notch despite an engine choice that is questionable.
Now before you start attacking me for saying this, I relate to this on the BMW forum I am on. The 328 drivers with their chepear N/A inline sixes relate to smoothness and reliability as a perk of their purhcase as well as cheaper costs. While the 335 drivers think their equally fuel effecient yet more powerful cars are that much better and the 328 drivers are idiots for spending that much money for an inferior complex.
It is indeed a napoleon complex. No one wants to feel that they spent all that money and got ripped off....
Honestly, I'm waiting to test drive a new Porsche Cayenne Diesel, may step into that. Audi's quality and cost may make me want something different. I don't love my 2.0t like I loved the 3.2, maybe a diesel and a refresh will change that...
I have followed this thread on here and tried to give a good non arguemental response. I already made my point that over 12k miles a year at $4 a gallon the savings between engine choices given their gas mileage difference of 3mpg is $344 which is half of a monthly payment on this luxury vehicle.
The 2.0t does rattle and is not as smooth. I would prefer a slower diesel 4 banger because they are smoother, smae amount of noise and have a lot more torque giving the illusion of more acceleration (though they may be slower on paper due to running out of power and RPM)
The 2.0t, if you floor it it gets to a midrange RPM and just goes. It does move but doesn't slam your head back into the seat. I've gotten my old 3.2 to 120 much sooner than the 2.0t gets to that speed.
The 3.2 did have a much better stiffer steering and feels more solid on the highway due to the heavier motor up front. the 2.0t feels less solid on the highway but is more nimble around town.
After owning both, 2009 Premium Plus for 24k miles and a 2012 Premium Plus for 6k miles, I bring you this conclusion:
If you're urban and drive in the city a lot, the 2.0t is the way to go. better city mileage, low end torque is nice for around town and the 8 speed helps accleration as well.
If you are driving on highways, that 3.2 with instant tip in is a very smooth and powerful motor. Loads of power when you need it and a sweet sound. It still gets excellent highway mileage if driven nicely. I've gotten as much as 26-27mpg out of it on trips and that wasn't driving the speed limit.
Now I understand Audi has changed the prices,
My 2009 was a little over 42 grand, my 2012 is a little under 42 grand. Audi has upped the price of their model considerably and the quality has gone down which sucks.
The reason this thread has gotten so much attention is because when someone spends over 40 grand on a vehicle, they do not want anyone to say anything bad about it. So when you poke at the flaws of the 2.0t the owners get defensive because they feel they must defend their purchase. Then they also want to feel they got a better deal than the 3.2 so they attack for that reason as well.
Notice must of the defense comes from 2.0 owners and not much comes from 3.2 owners. Why, because the 3.2 owners don't care, they are happy with what they have, not saying 2.0 owners aren't happy but the way we see things is, the 3.2 is top notch despite an engine choice that is questionable.
Now before you start attacking me for saying this, I relate to this on the BMW forum I am on. The 328 drivers with their chepear N/A inline sixes relate to smoothness and reliability as a perk of their purhcase as well as cheaper costs. While the 335 drivers think their equally fuel effecient yet more powerful cars are that much better and the 328 drivers are idiots for spending that much money for an inferior complex.
It is indeed a napoleon complex. No one wants to feel that they spent all that money and got ripped off....
Honestly, I'm waiting to test drive a new Porsche Cayenne Diesel, may step into that. Audi's quality and cost may make me want something different. I don't love my 2.0t like I loved the 3.2, maybe a diesel and a refresh will change that...
Again, having owned both models, I'm actually thrilled and don't feel like I "settled" at all. We could have easily afforded $50k for the 3.2 S-Line. It's a 3rd vehicle and used for work commute. We purchased what we wanted. I do NOT like the way the 2.0T sounds. Other than that, we like the lighter steering and better gas mileage. Based on our driving patterns, we aren't experiencing a lack of performance vs the old 3.2 (other than the occasional stomp on the gas at 75mph, where the 3.2 has a definite advantage).
That's it. PLEASE, everyone....enjoy your respective Q5s.
05-29-2012, 02:13 PM
#130
In before Lock
I have followed this thread on here and tried to give a good non arguemental response. I already made my point that over 12k miles a year at $4 a gallon the savings between engine choices given their gas mileage difference of 3mpg is $344 which is half of a monthly payment on this luxury vehicle.
The 2.0t does rattle and is not as smooth. I would prefer a slower diesel 4 banger because they are smoother, smae amount of noise and have a lot more torque giving the illusion of more acceleration (though they may be slower on paper due to running out of power and RPM)
The 2.0t, if you floor it it gets to a midrange RPM and just goes. It does move but doesn't slam your head back into the seat. I've gotten my old 3.2 to 120 much sooner than the 2.0t gets to that speed.
The 3.2 did have a much better stiffer steering and feels more solid on the highway due to the heavier motor up front. the 2.0t feels less solid on the highway but is more nimble around town.
After owning both, 2009 Premium Plus for 24k miles and a 2012 Premium Plus for 6k miles, I bring you this conclusion:
If you're urban and drive in the city a lot, the 2.0t is the way to go. better city mileage, low end torque is nice for around town and the 8 speed helps accleration as well.
If you are driving on highways, that 3.2 with instant tip in is a very smooth and powerful motor. Loads of power when you need it and a sweet sound. It still gets excellent highway mileage if driven nicely. I've gotten as much as 26-27mpg out of it on trips and that wasn't driving the speed limit.
Now I understand Audi has changed the prices,
My 2009 was a little over 42 grand, my 2012 is a little under 42 grand. Audi has upped the price of their model considerably and the quality has gone down which sucks.
The reason this thread has gotten so much attention is because when someone spends over 40 grand on a vehicle, they do not want anyone to say anything bad about it. So when you poke at the flaws of the 2.0t the owners get defensive because they feel they must defend their purchase. Then they also want to feel they got a better deal than the 3.2 so they attack for that reason as well.
Notice must of the defense comes from 2.0 owners and not much comes from 3.2 owners. Why, because the 3.2 owners don't care, they are happy with what they have, not saying 2.0 owners aren't happy but the way we see things is, the 3.2 is top notch despite an engine choice that is questionable.
Now before you start attacking me for saying this, I relate to this on the BMW forum I am on. The 328 drivers with their chepear N/A inline sixes relate to smoothness and reliability as a perk of their purhcase as well as cheaper costs. While the 335 drivers think their equally fuel effecient yet more powerful cars are that much better and the 328 drivers are idiots for spending that much money for an inferior complex.
It is indeed a napoleon complex. No one wants to feel that they spent all that money and got ripped off....
Honestly, I'm waiting to test drive a new Porsche Cayenne Diesel, may step into that. Audi's quality and cost may make me want something different. I don't love my 2.0t like I loved the 3.2, maybe a diesel and a refresh will change that...
I have followed this thread on here and tried to give a good non arguemental response. I already made my point that over 12k miles a year at $4 a gallon the savings between engine choices given their gas mileage difference of 3mpg is $344 which is half of a monthly payment on this luxury vehicle.
The 2.0t does rattle and is not as smooth. I would prefer a slower diesel 4 banger because they are smoother, smae amount of noise and have a lot more torque giving the illusion of more acceleration (though they may be slower on paper due to running out of power and RPM)
The 2.0t, if you floor it it gets to a midrange RPM and just goes. It does move but doesn't slam your head back into the seat. I've gotten my old 3.2 to 120 much sooner than the 2.0t gets to that speed.
The 3.2 did have a much better stiffer steering and feels more solid on the highway due to the heavier motor up front. the 2.0t feels less solid on the highway but is more nimble around town.
After owning both, 2009 Premium Plus for 24k miles and a 2012 Premium Plus for 6k miles, I bring you this conclusion:
If you're urban and drive in the city a lot, the 2.0t is the way to go. better city mileage, low end torque is nice for around town and the 8 speed helps accleration as well.
If you are driving on highways, that 3.2 with instant tip in is a very smooth and powerful motor. Loads of power when you need it and a sweet sound. It still gets excellent highway mileage if driven nicely. I've gotten as much as 26-27mpg out of it on trips and that wasn't driving the speed limit.
Now I understand Audi has changed the prices,
My 2009 was a little over 42 grand, my 2012 is a little under 42 grand. Audi has upped the price of their model considerably and the quality has gone down which sucks.
The reason this thread has gotten so much attention is because when someone spends over 40 grand on a vehicle, they do not want anyone to say anything bad about it. So when you poke at the flaws of the 2.0t the owners get defensive because they feel they must defend their purchase. Then they also want to feel they got a better deal than the 3.2 so they attack for that reason as well.
Notice must of the defense comes from 2.0 owners and not much comes from 3.2 owners. Why, because the 3.2 owners don't care, they are happy with what they have, not saying 2.0 owners aren't happy but the way we see things is, the 3.2 is top notch despite an engine choice that is questionable.
Now before you start attacking me for saying this, I relate to this on the BMW forum I am on. The 328 drivers with their chepear N/A inline sixes relate to smoothness and reliability as a perk of their purhcase as well as cheaper costs. While the 335 drivers think their equally fuel effecient yet more powerful cars are that much better and the 328 drivers are idiots for spending that much money for an inferior complex.
It is indeed a napoleon complex. No one wants to feel that they spent all that money and got ripped off....
Honestly, I'm waiting to test drive a new Porsche Cayenne Diesel, may step into that. Audi's quality and cost may make me want something different. I don't love my 2.0t like I loved the 3.2, maybe a diesel and a refresh will change that...
I hope prospective Q5 buyers see this forum because they'll see how Audi owners are passionate about their wheels. And rest assured, someone will come on these forums, in the very near future and babble how great their 3.0T Q5 is over the 2.0T Q5. Get Ready for round two.