fizgig

Hi all, a newbie, car-lovin’ gal here! I’m hoping you kind and brilliant folks can help me out. Reading A LOT of pros & cons about the two engines in the Q5, and I gotta say, I still can’t decide which would be best for my driving conditions.

Me: mostly city driving on steep hills, warm weather, sea level, plan to keep the vehicle long term past warranty period, somewhat spirited driver.

I currently drive a turbo Subaru that is rated to get 18 mpg city, but real life is 13-15 mpg. My husband’s Mercedes CLK (NA, V6) gets much better gas mileage, up in the 20s, and it’s older. I’m wondering if that would be the same with the Q5 where the NA might offer equal or better mpg than the turbo under these conditions? I’m also concerned about long-term maintenance cost and longevity of the Audi turbo. Aren’t NA engines longer lasting, or is that old school thinking?

Price between the two is a non-issue since we keep our vehicles 8-10 years or so. Ordering: premium plus, deep sea blue, cinnamon, hitch (for bikes), rear bags (kids), engine???

DrV

Very good question and perhaps not that easy to answer. The 2.0T will give better mileage and torque and IMO would be the better choice. This particular engine has already proven itself in many other vehicles in the VW and Audi brands. If you want superior mileage, and a "green" vehicle, then you could order the Q5 hybrid soon to arrive.

sfq5

2.0T driver from San francisco here.

The torque on the 2.0 is actually higher than the 3.2, so even better for e hills. We've been impressed with the seemingly good fuel Economy and frankly driving around the bay, have not found the need for more power. Combined with the 8 sp tranny, works very well and engine quite quiet. Downshifting to pass more needed if doing a spirited pass, but takes care of passing slower traffic quite easily.

Not sure why anyone who is shopping for a crossover would need the six cylinder. Unless you're driving this car spiritedly, but find that the extra tipsiness does not make this a fun canyon carver. Bettere to have a different car for that purpose. But to enjoy driving the long distance on the highway, or take an overpass at speed, 2.0 works just fine.

This engine has also been around since the days of the 96 a4, so reliability seems acceptable.

CrustyNoodle

Are you sure about that? VAG have two 2.0 turbo engines that are in current models. The older model uses belt driven cam shafts and the newer one uses a chain. I don't know which engine the Q5 uses...

Quite a few Q5 2.0 TFSI owners have reported high oil consumption (as much as 1 litre per 2000 - 3000 km )

The G Man

fizgig, if you are concerned about gas mileage and drive a lot of city, then get the 2.0T, or like someone already said, wait for the Q5 hybrid which is suppose to get 30 MPG, but the thought of a 1st year German hybrid design will give me many sleepless nights The 2.0T feels the same in the city as the 3.2L accelaration wise , its only on highway passing situation that the 3.2L have a slight advantage. Please remember, the Q5 is still a SUV, it will never handle as nice as a sedan.

jeff968

We are approaching 5K miles with our 2.0T Q5. No issues and very happy with its performance. I'm on my 3rd Audi 4 cylinder turbo and have been very pleased with all of them. My first was a 1999 A4 1.8T which went 120K miles without issue. I then sold it for my current 2006 A4 2.0T (now at 62K miles) which is such a great motor we waited for it to show up in the Q5 before purchasing one.

fizgig

Many thanks to all for your responses. With the new hybrid coming soon, it makes the decision all the harder. I'm going to think on this a bit more, but I do agree with The G Man about losing sleep over a 1st year hybrid for Audi. Will be interesting to see what the 2012 lineup will bring in addition. An S-line for the 2.0T would be nice....

audihonda

I think you'll be happy with the fuel economy. There is no report of 3.2 beating the 2.0t on that issue. Expect at least 2-3 MPG better in the 2.0.

I also don't think there's any significant difference in power that you can feel in normal driving.

My only issue with the 2.0 motor is that it just doesn't sound as good as the v6. The sound doesn't bother my wife, but I'm very attuned to engine noise, and it bothers me. So, definitely drive them both and see what you think.

AmazonJohn

I don't think you can go wrong with either unless achieving the best possible gas mileage is your biggest priority. It would be helpful if there's someone on the board who has spent significant time with both engines and can give the pros and cons. Because the Q5 is such a strong performer with either engine you're generally going to see folks recommending the engine in whatever Q they own.

I have only had my 3.2 for two days so aside from babble about how much I love it I won't be of much help. I can tell you that I love the exhaust note but haven't driven the 2.0T so I don't know how it compares. I went for the 3.2 primarily because I wanted S-Line and some of the tech toys that are only available on the Prestige. Some would view these as a waste of $ but when I grab that S-Line steering wheel and feel the thickness and how perfect it is in my hands the smile it puts on my face far outweighs the extra cash. It's really a shame that Audi won't let you customize a 2.0 with Prestige and/or S-Line. I think that would be a winning combination.

ronyn78

I agree.. I too like the exhaust note on the 3.2 along with S-line exterior which is not offered on the 2.0T. I wish they did! The other day at the mall, I parked my Q next to a white 2.0 with 19's and my wife pointed out how the 3.2 looks more aggressive and clean looking with the s-line exterior. Even the steel exhaust tips makes it different which is not on the 2.0T I think. Minor things but makes a big deal on looks IMO.