jeff968

Aren't the numbers:

Q5 3.2 17/23 mpg = avg 20
Q5 2.0T 20/27 mpg = avg 23.5

That's 3.5mpg difference, not 2mpg.

hmn4858

According to Audi the combined for the 2.0 is 22 and the 3.2 is 20. So I think that's where they got the 2mpg difference.

When I bought mine I didn't have a choice and I haven't been in a 2.0 but the mpg would not have swayed me in the least between the two. Your talking saving 8 bucks or so for a fill up. Not a big enough difference to me to make it a criteria for engine selection.

jeff968

Interesting math Audi uses then. I'll go with the EPA ratings. We're getting 23 mpg combined driving out of our 2.0T Q5.

Houstonmobilian

$8 per fill up and $3000 price tag difference off MSRP of the V6.

hmn4858

Based on cost alone I would have at least test drove a 2.0. Somehow though I always wind up with a bigger engine. When I went in to order an SLK 230, I took a friend who talked me into test driving the 320. Guess which one I ordered?

Avant2GoHome

I'm very happy with my Q5 2.0T - the 8-speed transmission is terrific.

The G Man

That $3000 difference is not just for the engine, it includes a lot of options as well. Also, you will be getting half of that back when you trade in your car, so the cost of the engine upgrade is a lot less than you think.

Houstonmobilian

Still, I will only loss $1500 but save $8 per fill up. Sadly, as you may have know, those extra options pretty much worth less than what one would hope when you trade in the vehicle. Different strokes for different folks man. And gotta love the 8-speed transmission, which you can't get that on the V6.

jeff968

Hmmm, well again we find my reality much different then your long term predictions (which you make a lot of I might add).

I just sold my 2002 MB ML320 which I purchased new so I'll use that as an example. MB also produced the 8 cylinder version of this SUV called the ML500. The list on the ML320 in 2002 was $36,300. The list on the ML500 was $44,950 with the bigger engine and the extra features. Now, 8 years later, MLs with the same mileage have less then $1000 difference in value ($8750 vs. $9734) according to TMV on Edmunds. So, using the ML as an example the ML 500 buyer has retained 11% of extra $8650 they spent, not quite the 50% (half) you predict.

The G Man

That 2 gallons difference or $6 you save every fill up is a trade off for powertrain smoothness, vibration, highway passing power and engine noise. Also those options are worth a lot more than you think at trade in time. I cannot get trade in numbers for the Q5 2.0T because it havent been out long enough, but lets use a 5 year old A4 for a closely matched example. When comparing a 2006 A4 2.0T to a 2006 A4 3.2L, both with 50000 miles, the 2.0T is worth $14800 at trade in according to KKB.com. While the A4 3.2L is worth $16800. Now let me ask you now, is that engine uprade, s-line exterior package, pano roof, stainless trunk edge and door sill, Stainless exhaust tips, headlight washers, folding side mirrors, heated side mirrors, auto dimming side mirrors, memory side mirrors, power tailgate, S-line exterior package, homelink, bluetooth, auto dimming rear view mirror, memory seats, six level heated seats, I-pod interface and 19" upgarde rims worth an extra $1000?