RCM09

Sorry I'm going to be different. I have the 3.2 and love it. Gas mileage between the two isn't going to be much different. The 2.0 is a four banger and sounds like crap! In sport mode around town the 3.2's pick up is way better. Half the time with the 2.0 you'll feel the lag. The main reason people go with the 2.0 is because it's cheaper and then try to say how much better it is. I drive my wife's 2.0 A4 and I can't wait to get back into my 3.2. Sorry it's just my opinion.

Cabo de Hornos

No question, the "gutteral" sound of the 3.2 in the A6 we had when accelerating was inspiring, as was the delta V (once you got past the lag from a standing start). Hopefully, that's been eliminated now. But I've been pleasantly surprised with the pickup of the 2.0T and I wouldn't call the "engine noise" objectionable...it's a lot quieter than the I-4 we had in our '95 JGC, that's for sure. Also looking forward to the better MPG with the 2.0T, but I'm still on the first tank....no regrets here.

Is it "better"? It's often said that "beauty is in the ear (and wallet) of the driver." To each his own....enjoy it either way.

Cabo de Hornos

Sorry, I meant I-6 in the JGC.

araj82

This is what I am thinking about going with...

White, 3.2 Premium Plus, MMI, B&O, Audi Smart start key.

cprg2011

No offence RMC, but that was a rather dorky thing to say. There are many reasons to choose one engine over the other—it depends on one's driving needs and personal preference—and they're both great engines. I tested both before deciding, and money played no part in me choosing the 2.0T over the 3.2.

Wolfpack Fan

Both are fine engines but I chose the 3.2 for my 2011 Q5. I pay a little more for gas, of course, but the silky smoothness, sound, and power at any rpm make the extra cost worth it to me.

ELEVENS

265hp vs 211hp is anything but negligible. There's a reason the 3.2 is only offered in the high lux trim. It's smooth, powerful, and sounds the part. Can't really understand a 4 cylinder in a luxury SUV.

q5s

265hp @ 6500rpm
211hp @ 4300rpm
I guess you drive everywhere at 6500rpm?
Do you want me to post the more important torque figures?
Comparing peak bhp while comparing a normally aspirated engine to a turbocharged one?
This only leads me to one conclusion. The 2.0T is for people who can tell what the area under the curve actually means as opposed to those that know 3.2 is bigger than 2.0 (also 265 is bigger than 211)
Yes there is a reason why it only offered in the high lux trim...in the US (see above)
I also can't understand what a gutless (normally aspirated) 6 cylinder engine with half the hp is doing in a 4000lbs suv (cayenne turbo s driver speaking)
Q5 is sold with ~140hp in other markets, with your thinking I guess they exit the car and push it to get it moving?

As for a q5 3.2 being faster than a 2.0T a4 dream on, unless by better the poster means slower.

ELEVENS

If we don't stick to the facts than it's all just internet huffing and puffing. I'm not talking about feel or internet bench racing. I'm saying that mathematically, a 26% difference in HP is unquestionably significant.

You buy what you like, I buy what I like and everybody is happy. All the rest is subjective. BTW, I would have bought a TDI if it were available in 2010. But no way would I have bought the I4. But that's just me, and the OP DID ask for opinions. Opinions will differ. Mathematical significance does not.

gat821

With the 2.0's power max at 4300 rpm, it's not that hard to get the 3.2 revving higher than that to take advantage of it's higher power output. Granted, yes, you don't always drive past that rpm - just saying, it's not as if the 2.0's power max is at 5500 rpm or something. Then that would be a different story.