2.0T vs. 3.2 comparison graph.
05-01-2008, 09:08 PM
#1
AudiWorld Super User
Thread Starter
2.0T vs. 3.2 comparison graph.
This is based on best available information at the time. It's just a simple graph of the HP and torque numbers.
I figured I would share since I have not seen a graph for the new 2.0T and rarely ever see the two main engine choices for any given model overlapped for comparison.
<img src="http://pictureposter.audiworld.com/14154/b820vs32.jpg">
I've thrown in the '07 2.0T for grins, since that's what I currently drive. (green)
The 3.2 numbers are from the offical spec graphs on AudiWorld resources. (blue)
The new 2.0T is based on currently available information regarding the new 2.0T at 211HP and 258 lb-ft of torque. (red)
The numbers work out to the new 2.0T having an average 10% advantage below 4500 RPM and the 3.2 having a 20% advantage above 5000 RPM. (not counting that the 3.2 will likely be able to rev higher than the 2.0T.)
Now for the opinion part.
With the new 2.0T's extremely low torque plateau it looks like it will function similar to a diesel, and looks like it will fall off quickly above 4500 RPM. Coming extremely close to the torque characteristics of the B7 2.0T at 5000 RPMs and up.
On the flip side the 3.2 is at an unquestionable torque disadvantage up to 4500 RPM, but then continues to pull decent torque out to 6000+ RPM.
Overall I'm sure both cars will be extremely close in straight line performance since the 3.2 will likely weigh more than the 2.0T.
I'd certainly like to drive both before passing judgement. So far I can only compare the A5 3.2 to my current B7 2.0T whereby the 3.2 is the better engine choice for me.
I figured I would share since I have not seen a graph for the new 2.0T and rarely ever see the two main engine choices for any given model overlapped for comparison.
<img src="http://pictureposter.audiworld.com/14154/b820vs32.jpg">
I've thrown in the '07 2.0T for grins, since that's what I currently drive. (green)
The 3.2 numbers are from the offical spec graphs on AudiWorld resources. (blue)
The new 2.0T is based on currently available information regarding the new 2.0T at 211HP and 258 lb-ft of torque. (red)
The numbers work out to the new 2.0T having an average 10% advantage below 4500 RPM and the 3.2 having a 20% advantage above 5000 RPM. (not counting that the 3.2 will likely be able to rev higher than the 2.0T.)
Now for the opinion part.
With the new 2.0T's extremely low torque plateau it looks like it will function similar to a diesel, and looks like it will fall off quickly above 4500 RPM. Coming extremely close to the torque characteristics of the B7 2.0T at 5000 RPMs and up.
On the flip side the 3.2 is at an unquestionable torque disadvantage up to 4500 RPM, but then continues to pull decent torque out to 6000+ RPM.
Overall I'm sure both cars will be extremely close in straight line performance since the 3.2 will likely weigh more than the 2.0T.
I'd certainly like to drive both before passing judgement. So far I can only compare the A5 3.2 to my current B7 2.0T whereby the 3.2 is the better engine choice for me.
05-02-2008, 05:38 AM
#3
RPM & MPH?
At what RPM (manual & auto) will the engines turn at speed (MPH)?
60
70
80
90
When my wife had her 225HP 1.8T's TT's it seemed to me that 65MPH was around 2,350 in 6th (but my memory could be fading. . . )
I ordered the 4 due to the torque, thinking the 3.2 would not be significantly "better" for what will be about a $5,000+ premium.
60
70
80
90
When my wife had her 225HP 1.8T's TT's it seemed to me that 65MPH was around 2,350 in 6th (but my memory could be fading. . . )
I ordered the 4 due to the torque, thinking the 3.2 would not be significantly "better" for what will be about a $5,000+ premium.
05-02-2008, 05:47 AM
#4
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 8,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In short: The 3.2 costs $5000 more and only performs better at > 5000 RPM
The 3.2 is going to be 10% of their sales volume, if that, especially once you throw in the price of fuel now.
Trending Topics
05-02-2008, 06:24 AM
#8
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 8,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep, and for the first time it's bye-bye from the get go. Audi needs to ditch the NA V6 platform...
It's always been a poor value in terms of performance relative to its segment peers and the turbo I4 offerings, even more so now.
05-02-2008, 07:06 AM
#10
The heck of it is the T costs less and gets better MPG's while climbing the RPM's, too.
I love the 3.2 in my '05 A6, Audi needed to "mildly" bi-turbo this thing about 18-24 months ago.
A mild bi-turboing of the 3.2 would probably have yielded nearly 300HP and quite possibly OVER 300 foot pounds from under 2,000 RPM to perhaps over 5,500. BMW keeps putting that nifty little (?) "35" engine in every damn car they sell, practically.
I drove the X6 this weekend, already drove the 335 and 535, damn the 135 must be a friggin' rocket. Meanwhile the fine as wine 3.2L soldiers on, a great engine, but sadly outgunned. My wife's new X3 has the bumped 3.0 engine and it is now lazily putting out 260HP and 225 ft lbs. The only reason, I can think of for Audi to "lag" (no pun intended) behind in this one area is, uh, er, I can't think of one. The 2.7T in 2004 (I know it was thirsty and dirty, bla bla bla) was a delightful, powerful engine -- even in the end of the line 2004 A6 SLine 2.7T incarnation.
Of all the car companies that can claim deep skills in turbo charging, Audi has to be in the top tier -- so what's the deal with this new A4 2.0T and 3.2L -- it has to be marketing, not engineering prowess.
Hell, just buy a new A4, debadge it, "mildly" chip it, etc and don't tellanyone -- they'll never know you didn't pony up for the extra 2 cylinders.
Me -- I wouldn't even bother to chip the thing. Hopefully Audi will bring the 3.0TFSI or 3.0SFSI or twin-charged V6 to market as the A4, NOT the S4 with the accompanying bump in MSRP.
A mild bi-turboing of the 3.2 would probably have yielded nearly 300HP and quite possibly OVER 300 foot pounds from under 2,000 RPM to perhaps over 5,500. BMW keeps putting that nifty little (?) "35" engine in every damn car they sell, practically.
I drove the X6 this weekend, already drove the 335 and 535, damn the 135 must be a friggin' rocket. Meanwhile the fine as wine 3.2L soldiers on, a great engine, but sadly outgunned. My wife's new X3 has the bumped 3.0 engine and it is now lazily putting out 260HP and 225 ft lbs. The only reason, I can think of for Audi to "lag" (no pun intended) behind in this one area is, uh, er, I can't think of one. The 2.7T in 2004 (I know it was thirsty and dirty, bla bla bla) was a delightful, powerful engine -- even in the end of the line 2004 A6 SLine 2.7T incarnation.
Of all the car companies that can claim deep skills in turbo charging, Audi has to be in the top tier -- so what's the deal with this new A4 2.0T and 3.2L -- it has to be marketing, not engineering prowess.
Hell, just buy a new A4, debadge it, "mildly" chip it, etc and don't tellanyone -- they'll never know you didn't pony up for the extra 2 cylinders.
Me -- I wouldn't even bother to chip the thing. Hopefully Audi will bring the 3.0TFSI or 3.0SFSI or twin-charged V6 to market as the A4, NOT the S4 with the accompanying bump in MSRP.