FischerWausau

Live in relative flat area, is the MPG vs. Price difference worth the extra cash. Like to hear from owners of both.
Car will probably be an '11 or '12 both new. When did the 3.0 come on board? I have a '11 TT with the 2.0 and have no complains about power (obviously lighter car though). Roughly how much off sticker you folks been getting? Thx for all replys

stevedusa

If gas mileage is your concern AND you do a considerable amount of driving on the highway, then go with the 2.0T.

Let's face it, 8-speed and 2.0, highway driving can get you anywhere between 26 to even 30 MPG depends on how you drive.

I'm getting a minimum of 28 MPG in highway. City? Par to the 3.2, around 21 MPG.

mz3_2000

Steve,

Are you calculating this mileage or reading what the Audi is telling you. After 9K miles, our 2.0T often reads 26+mpg, but the manually calculated amount is closer to 22mpg...

Thanks,
--mz3_2000

stevedusa

Hand calculations. However my car reports about 1 MPG above my calculations.

JohnBoyToo

get the 2.0T,
we opted for it because of the turbo and nice 8 speed, but have been pleasantly surprised by the performance (especially now with the $400 revo tuning that got us about 50 to 60 more hp !!!)

cbr2885

We have the 3.2. Of course I test drove both and the 3.2 just feels more powerful (and heavier), which I wanted if we were going to buy an SUV. While the 2.0T is nice, have a 4cyl in an SUV doesn't quite make sense to me. Just personal experience.

bbetter

Can you explain how you did to get more hp? Did you do it at dealership? any issue with warranty? thx.

JohnBoyToo

aftermarket - there are four or five companies that will tune the 2.0T.

this is where I found mine:
https://www.audiworld.com/forums/sho...ight=revo+sale

Only issue with warranty is if you HAVE an engine issue that requires Audi's assistance...
our lil audi hasn't had a hiccup thus far and trusting it won't have one in the future...

let's say this, I've had 5 cars tuned right after they were purchased and never had an issue... but YRMV

TybeeJim

My Q5 2.0T has only 2300 miles on it. I drove 780 miles last week, mostly I-95/4/75 in GA & FL (all flat land). With the cruise control set ay 75 mph 90% of the time, i averaged 28mpg over the course of 3 days. That is based on the Audi trip computer, which based on my manual calculation when filling up, proved to be pretty accurate, e.g., within .2-.3. Now I haven't driven the Q5 fully loaded, but I'm coming from a Porsche Cayman S that I tracked and auto x'd and to me, the 2.0T is completely adequate if not more so. I don't get left at any light... pretty aggressive driver. I wouldn't hesitate to go with the 2.0T. It actually has more torque than the 3.2 plus the fine 8 speed trans (same as BMW, Bentley, etc.) while the 3.2 gets only a basic 6 speed. Check all the car mags/auto reviews online and you'll fine that all of them recommend the 2.0T. The only thing they want more is a 3.0T diesel that's only available in Europe for the Q5.

Cabo de Hornos

Very happy with the 2.0T so far. Plenty of power. After 7,800 miles, mostly in traffic, with 3 250-mile or so trips on interstates at speeds "within tolerances" shall we say, and using cruise control, I've seen trip display mpg of as high as a tad under 30, but typically ranging between 20 and 25. Cumulative display mode #2 has shown 22.4 for quite some time now. I'm calculating about 1 to 1.5 mpg less. Oil consumption has been normal.

See other threads re: carbon build-up issues affecting the 3.2 for the most part. (We had a 3.2 in our traded A6....sweetly powerful, but who knows if the build-up was lurking in the shadows).