jeandelli

Hello,
Am in the US and looking for a CPO Q5 with low miles, either 2009,2010 or 2011 for about $30,000 and have a few questions
1) Is it worth is to pay extra and get the newer 2.0 engine vs the 6 cylinder? Will the annual gas savings be that tangible? any other benefits of the 4 cylinder engine?
2) What does each year have the older year did not have?
Thanks

GeeT

According to fueleconomy.gov, difference between 2.0T and 3.2 in average fuel cost per year is $300 ($2,650 vs $2,950) Claimed combined MPG is 22MPG vs 20MPG. Thus it is very marginal and unless driven 30k miles/year or something like that, fuel savings will be very small. Your maintenance cost could potentially be less, i.e oil change, but not by much again.

Model year changes are marginal at best. In 2010, MMI Nav was updated to include 3D map and slightly tweaked control. Also gone from 2010 is 6-disc CD changer replaced by single CD and SD slots for Nav equipped cars.

Also as you may know already, 3.2 was the only option through 2010MY. 2.0T became available starting 2011MY in Premium and Premium Plus trim, and starting trim for 3.2 became Premium Plus.

Other than that, just minor option changes and grouping, but Q5 through 2012 are basically the same without any major mechanical or cosmetic changes, to my knowledge.

Hope it helps. Others that know more should give you more info.

tomaszp72

3.2 has a big carbon buildup headache.

mhousealum

Not mine so far...plus Audi dealer has assured me Audi USA will cover the repairs even if out of warranty.

tomaszp72

Good for you, I would still stay away from that engine.

jbbarrette

Get that in writing!

ThunderDent

Don't mess with 3.2L. Carbon issues (which may get u at high miles).

Plus if you ever decide to tune, not much you're gonna get out of a NA engine.

Stick with 2.0T engine, MY 2011 or newer. If you want the bigger engine, go 3.0T with a new 2013 or 14.

hookooehoo

Hi,

my wife and i bought a use 2010 Q5 back in Nov. Its a Premium Plus, as far as we know it has pretty much all the features and options that came for the Premium Plus for 2010. It is also a 3.2. We test drove a couple Q5's with the 2.0 Turbo and (strictly out opinion, everyone is different)we felt like the 2.0 was too small and under powered for the Q5. The ones we drove with a 3.2 seemed to not 'work' as hard and seemed to move the Q5 more effortlessly. I had read about the carbon build up thing, but figured, we would deal with that when or if we ever had to cross that bridge. As for MPG our collective according to the computer is about 21.3 mpg, we are happy with that considering my wife drives the back roads through the hills everyday to work vs the freeway. If she was freeway 100% of the time, it might be a little higher. If you are really worried about MPG there are always little things you can tweak to squeeze a little more MPG out of the car.

As for cost, I am not sure where you are, but we are in CA and my wife had a heck of a time finding a used 2010/2011 for only 30k. Most were always in the 36k-40k range and most had 85k-100k miles on them. Granted she was looking for a very specific one. she wanted black on black and fully loaded. So it kinda limited our options. But I will say after only about 6 weeks of stocking all car sites online we found one. And we feel we got a steal and were lucky. Got the Premium Plus, Black on Black, all the options, plus roof rack and all weather mats and it had 52k miles on her. We ended up paying 32k for her. My wife still looks around online from time to time and she says she has not found another in CA with the same options as ours for that price. A CPO rig will also cost you a little extra, but you will have some type of warranty with the purchase. We bought ours from a local dealer. Granted I do all my own work, so I am not worried about needing to do repairs. (already did brakes and did it for half of what Audi wants and that included the RT cable.)

Good Lucky with your search.

tomaszp72

>>we felt like the 2.0 was too small and under powered for the Q5.>>

It's funny when people say that compering 2.0T with the 3.2. 2.0T has more then enough power and with a small tune it can smoke 3.2. If you want to go crazy with that engine you can make it a rocket. Just so we cut off all the comments that I'm, defending what I have, I have a 3.0T and had 2.0T for a year so I know how it drives.

idale

Some people probably wouldn't be happy unless Audi stuck the 4.0T in the Q5. I test drove the 2.0T and thought it was plenty quick (and here in Austin you need to pull out fast or risk getting creamed); 0-60 in 7.0 is a lot faster than my 1.8T Passat had been and that got around decently enough.

I'm going TDI, and extra power is always welcome, but the 2.0T never seemed like a risky proposition (possibly when it gets older and starts to slow down some, but a tune can easily -- and cheaply -- fix that). Between a 2.0L turbo and a 3.2L NA, I'd definitely lean toward the turbo since it moved around well and has extra overhead for tuning if you really want more power (not really much to do with NA setups).