Coolieman1220

After owning a 2009 3.2 Q5 Premium Plus since June of 2009 when they first came out, I've grown to love and appreciate my Q5 like many owners. The 3.2 IMO is a great sounding engine but a little underpowered for a 4200lbs SUV, yes it gets it going but sacrifices gas mileage. During cold winters in NYC traffic, I get 16mpg, during summers in NYC city w/ less traffic I get 19-20mpg. On the highway I've gotten as high as 26mpg, usually around 23-24 and doing high speed w/ load I've gotten 21.5mpg. Respectable figures.

My Uncle recently purchased a 2011 2.0T Q5 Premium Plus here in San Antonio Texas. He was impressed with how well it drove having driven ours and also how well it did in the snow and other conditions as he was here for our past december blizzard in NYC.

Contenders:

2009 Audi Q5 3.2 Premium Plus w/ 21,000 Miles

2011 Audi Q5 2.0T Premium Plus w/ Technology package, 5,000 miles.

First off let me start with the 2.0T, I test drove one in July of 2010 when they first came out and I disliked it. I had 2 A4 loaners w/ the same engine and I disliked them too. I drove an A6 2.0T with the old 6 speed unit and it wasn't so bad. Never really cared for turbo 4 cylinders. To me they felt rough like a 4 cylinder motor. The same goes for the Q5. The exhaust note sucks too. What I hate the most is the 8 speed transmission. Although it may get great highway mileage and keep the revs down on the highway, I hate how when you're going slow and you tap on the gas and it needs power it just downshifts and jumps at you. It just takes off. There's no low end below 1500rpm. I dont want to go fast, I just want to get moving, like a slow turn. The car should be in the right gear but with 8 to choose its constantly in the wrong gear and its constantly shifting. I hate it. I hate when I'm on the highway and need some passing power and it just starts downshifting. It's like you vary how many gears it drops by tapping the throttle. Then in manual mode if you want to over take and you're in 8th gear, you really need 3rd, that's 5 gears away. Another gripe is the power steering. Did audi go with electronic power steering? It doesn't have as much feel as mine, nor is it as stiff. Maybe the pump is different if its not electronic? Just a gripe about it. Now there were some things I liked, the Bang & Olufsen system is truly amazing. It sonds phenomenal. I enjoyed it. The MMI interface is a bit complicated to use. I'm used to BMW's iDrive which I find much more intuitive and easier to use. The buttons are closer and easier to press. The screen is a bit confusing too. Not terrible though.

The 3.2 is not the best V6 i've ever driven but it is a good unit. I like the sound of it and even the bit of low end grunt it has. It pulls well and I've never had an issue with it. The transmission is beautiful, great shifts and it's always on point. The steering is heavy but feels good for a heavy vehicle, especially one that is nose heavy. (Maybe the steering difference because the 2.0T is considerably less heavier in the front than the V6?) I wish I had the B&O although the stock unit is not bad.

All in all, they both have the same ride and quality that I like. Of course this is my personal view and in no way can the 2.0T replace the 3.2 V6 unit. I actually raced a woman driving a 2.0T on the highway. She wouldn't move out the left lane so I went to take her on the right and she sped up, so I said ok, lets go I got room to take her and she takes off so i follow suit and ended up pulling away from her. I think the 2.0T would be much better mated to the 7speed DSG unit, faster shifts for acceleration but better ratios and the 3.2 w/ the new Supercharged 3.0 would be quite the beast. Or a diesel? hmm We'll see what Audi does.

So guys, agree or disagree?

cprg2011

Hey coolieman.

There has been no lack of commentary about the 8- versus 6-speed and I have a feeling you are going to get everyone with a 3.2 agreeing with you and those with 2.0T saying that the advantages of the T4 outweigh the downsides of the transmission.

I myself won't bother—the 8-speed has not filled me with the same rage as you—but I will be interested to see how a Stasis ECU tune might change the balance of the discussion. Won't change the transmission of course (I certainly don't disagree about your 7DSG comment, BTW), or the exhaust note—unless you spring for the exhaust upgrade too—but take the 6 vs 4 performance aspect out of the discussion and I think I can live quite happily with the 8-speed.

I will know in 3 weeks.

TIME89

Great Review!
I would really interested in 3.0 TDI engine on Q5 or latest A6/A7 engine.

jeff968

Where do you get your MPG figures? From the trip computer or real world usage calcualtions? The trip computer is always over by a MPG or 2. That said, I love my 2.0T. We get 23-24 mpg real world average on our combo driving. Thanks for the review.

whyjay91

Love the 8 spd. It's super fast and keeps the 2.0t in its sweet spot. The 6spd auto felt too rough for me. If the 3.2 was more up to date with direct injection among other enhancements found in newer v6's we'd have better power and improved gas mileage. Just couldn't do the v6 in its current legacy state. 3.0T in the q5 would be awesome.

JohnBoyToo

That's why the mfg's offer different colors, because everyone has a different opinion of what is best....

and, so far, we can each still get what we each want....

You sure the other car knew it was a race ?

Any number of threads where this was discussed:
https://www.audiworld.com/forums/sho....php?t=2808144
https://www.audiworld.com/forums/sho...2797624&page=2
https://www.audiworld.com/forums/sho....php?t=2795838
https://www.audiworld.com/forums/sho....php?t=2787438

the reason's you listed for not liking the 2 are the exact reasons I liked it !


And having diesels in my garage, would love to consider a torque monster in a Q
8 speed means there's always a gear handy...
and shifts so smooth I can't tell when it does,..
2.0T moves out quite well given that it has more torque at a lower rpm than the 3.2
2.0 TFSI® Specs 211 hp @ 4300 rpm 258 lbs. ft. @ 1500 rpm
3.2 FSI® Specs 270 hp @ 6500 rpm 243 lbs. ft. @ 3000 rpm

how many times are you at 1500 rpm versus 3000?

So enjoy your engine and I'll love mine.... cheaper, better mpg, better tune-ability, not affected by altitude nearly as much as a NA engine....

g8tor20

I test drove both back to back. I reeeeally wanted the 3.2 only because I wanted the blind assist with the Prestige package. In the end, I actually liked the 2.0t engine better. Better pep for around town (90% of my usage) and better gas mileage. I just couldn't justify the Prestige price after liking the 2.0 better.

With that said, to each their own. They are both fine engines and you cant go wrong with either.

Marley's Ghost

I don't have enough kilometers yet to write a real review (and I can't compare to either the 2.0 or 3.2 gasoline engines), but I'll share a few preliminary thoughts (all subject to change).

Here the 3.0 TDI is rated at 240-245 HP (4,000-4,500 RPM) and 500 ft/lb torque (over a 1,500-3,000 RPM band). As I've not yet taken this out on the autopista and most (though not all) driving has been in my local village it it pretty hard to talk about performance. It does not seem to have the same punch as my 270 HP Acura, but that may be due to my inexperience with driving a diesel and a turbocharged car. OTOH, the TDI does allow the transmission to stay in 7th (the TDI is matched with the 7-speed S Tronic transmission) going up inclines where my 5-speed Acura downshifts to 4th). Pretty much the engine seems to loaf at about 1,200 to 1,300 RPM under most conditions, but there seems (so far) plenty in reserve to pass at high speeds (more when I hit a road trip on the autopistas).

I love the S Tronic transmission! It seems to always be in the right gear, so much so that I don't use the shift paddles at all (except for my natural desire to experiment) and the shifting is so smooth and quick that I don't really notice the changes at all. And (probably due to the TDI) not much downshifting except when really slowing down or when passing.

As I live at over 5,000 feet and have a trip to the coast upcoming, I'll be in a better position to comment on gearing and power in the future.

Love the advanced key.

The ride is pretty rough around town (all cobblestones), making me wish I'd spent the money for the drive select.

I really like the side assist, finding it very useful the few times I've driven to Guadalajara on a divided highway (and in the city).

The ground clearance here is a big deal (of course I'd get that with any SUV)

I find the MMI system quite intuitive I know that I'm in a minority in liking the nav system. My Acura's nav system has no Mexico map and I can't get one. I've added the latest Mexico map to my Garmin and I know that there a roads over 5 years old that don't appear on it, so I find the lack of complete current map data on the Audi to be not so frustrating as those of you in the States and Canada (sort of used to everything not being up to date here).

Love, love, love the B&O, especially when playing non-MP3 music.

I've not had John's experience, but the Q5 sticks like glue on the mountain curves. Actually quite a bit better than my Acura TL which has reasonably good suspension.

More when I've had more experience.

eppoh7

I also have the 3.2 and my mileage is very similar to the coolieman's. The majority of my driving is around downtown Chicago, where I get 18-19 mpg in the summer and 15-16 in the winter (worst tank was in the 14's last January, ouch!). On the highway, the best tank I have turned in was 24.5 mpg (90% hwy driving). Overall, my lifetime mileage is at 19.8. I track this all on Fuelly.com.

Audi makes a great turbo 4, I had the 1.8t in my '01 A4 and it was a great engine. Before we got the Q5, we were actually looking at the '10 A4, BMW 3 series and MB C300. I drove 3 different A4's and just couldn't sell myself on the 2.0T. It was after one of these test drives that my wife said lets try the Q5. After 10 minutes of driving, we returned to the dealership and placed our order.

At the time, the only engine available was the 3.2, so there was no decision between engines to be made. If I had it to do over today with the current engine choices, it would be a hard decision. I really like the 3.2, but the 2.0 is much better suited to my daily drives around town. I have driven my sister in-law's 2.0T Q5 and was actually surprised at how much I didn't hate it! However, on the Highway, I would take my 3.2 any day. I just dont get do do too much open road driving

With all of that said, if Audi decides to offer the Q5 with the 3.0T, I will get it in a heartbeat!

tridentnyc

Totally agree with your assessments of the 2.0T's powertrain. Have had mine admittedly only three weeks but am starting to think I should've gone 3.2 for all the reasons you point out here.

One are I completely disagree with you is the B&O, I think it pretty much sucks and I'm a 24 year audio engineer professional. My Bose system in my previous vehicle, Nissan Rogue SL, blows this sorry system out of the water. The only reason I got it was no one near me had any test vehicles with it and I could only preview the stock system, which I now think is actually better. The $800 was money wasted in my opinion.

I should have remembered the take on B&O in my industry: Great flashy looking stuff to show off in your living room alongside your Apple products, crap sound. Crap sound indeed.