'Ski

I'm ready to spring for a new 2015 (2014 if the dealer can find exactly what we want) A6 Quattro Premium Plus for my wife.
Trying to decide between 2.0T and the 3.0T engines.
Wife does not want/need a super fast car, just one that can clearly get out of its own way from a start and passing - don't want to be sorry later. There is about a $5,000 price difference.

We test drove a 2.0T and it seemed to fit the bill, BUT, can you guys who have one let me know if you have been happy with it after driving it for a while?

Much appreciated!

wuk

welcome! you are going to get roughly 80% of the people telling you to get the 3.0 (me included, what a sweet, sweet engine), but in reality if the car is for my wife and I'd be driving it very very seldom, I'd go with the 2.0.

Maverick61

Yea, I agree with wuk. There is a reason the 3.0 has been on Wards 10 best engine list for something like 5 years in a row - virtually unheard of staying on that long. So I would not buy the A6 without the 3.0. But I also appreciate things like that, effortless power, etc.

If your wife is not into speed, and was happy with the test drive of the 2.0, and she will be the primary driver, while it pains me some to say it , then the 2.0 is the direction I would go

Glacier6

I had a 2.0T FrontTrak A6 and it definitely left more to be desired so I traded it in for a 3.0T A7.

If you do go 2.0T I would go Quattro, because the FrontTrak had tons of lag in it especially from a standstill, which in traffic, cut it very close a few times.

newmoon

I'm satisfied with the 2.0T. But I don't drive aggressively at all. I'm a very smooth and relaxed driver. Averaging over 31 mpg in combined city/hwy driving, but it's the CVT FWD.

As I explained in this post: https://www.audiworld.com/forums/sho...8&postcount=16

below 4000 rpm, the 2.0T produces about as much torque and hp as the naturally aspirated 3.5L V6s in cars like the Lexus GS 350 or Mercedes Benz E350, so the 2.0T is just fine for everyday driving.

wuk

good point newmoon....while I did just get the 3.0 (CPO 2013 chicago area) and am loving it more than i can express here, I do wish I got slightly better mpgs. Highway mileage is great (32+ mpg) but I rarely drive on the highway. It is those around the town miles that are really killing me.

irenesbob

I went from a 2010 A6 with the 3.0 supercharged engine to a 2013 with the 2.0 turbo engine. I would say that for me the 2.0 is totally adequate. I had an unusual (I am told) problem with the 2010 3.0 in that there was a lot of vibration transmitted to the seat, the steering wheel, etc. and the dealer always said it was normal, in spite of me mentioning it every time I was in. The first time I took my brother for a spin (he had a 2010 Honda Fit) he asked if there was a problem with the car because his seat was vibrating when we stopped at a light. He added that the engine seemed rougher than his Fit – I felt pretty bad.
My 2013 2.0 is much smoother idling, so to me that is a plus.
I would not recommend the 2.0 with the CVT for reasons stated here by others, also because the FWD CVT 2.0 is slower than the 2.0 Quattro with the 8-speed Tiptronic. Per the AoA site, the A6 P+ 2.0 Quattro goes 0-60 in 6.7 seconds, whereas the FWD CVT takes 7.4 seconds.
Surprisingly I find the 2.0 not much more economical than the 3.0 that I had. I keep an Excel spreadsheet for all the gas put into my cars since the first fill-up. I’ve done this for about the last 20 years. For my four recent Audi’s the mpg’s at 13,000 miles (where I am now with the 2013 A6 2.0) follow:
2006 A4 2.0 – 24.48 mpg
2008 A4 2.0 – 24.05 mpg
2010 A6 3.0 – 22.30 mpg
2013 A6 2.0 – 23.51 mpg

Some may argue that I should be getting better fuel economy, but I stand by my numbers. I am not a lead foot and don‘t drag my foot on the brakes or idle a lot. My numbers are overall, not just for a particular trip. In my numbers with the current car I had one 1,000+ mile trip from NYC to Watkins Glen NY, then to Montreal, then to Lakeville Ct and then home to Yonkers, NY and I got 29.7 mpg, yet the overall is 23.51 mpg. It is easy to get a good figure for a nice highway drive and then claim that is what your car gets. My overall number includes those kinds of trips, but also includes crawling along in super heavy traffic looking at the entrance to the Throggs Neck Bridge for 2 plus hours on Thanksgiving Day. On one recent fill-up to fill-up trip from Albany NY to Yonkers I got 33 mpg, but that is just one data point that goes into the overall average along with the Thanksgiving Day nightmare that produced something under 8 mpg for that fill-up.
In short, I have no issues with the 2.0 at this point.

snagitseven

My 3.0T is the smoothest (and most powerful) engine of four Audis owned I've (two 2.7 and a 3.2). I've averaged an actual 22.6 mpg with 42K miles of 65% suburban, 35% highway driving, the second best of the four (my 09 A4 3.2 averaged 23.5 mg). I'm not a road warrior but I like having the extra power when I need it (or want it). If the extra power is desired, the OP might also want to consider the A6 3.0TDI diesel - it has much of the real world performance of the 3.0T but with greater fuel efficiency. As I advise anyone asking the engine question, drive them all and compare as only you can determine what will work best.

u2jrmw

I test drove a 2.0T before ending up buying a 3.0T CPO. I was happy enough with the 2.0T in the test drive, I only got the 3.0T because I need Prestige to get the option for full LED headlights... (that makes them some expensive headlights).

My wife who mostly drives a minivan took the A6 out the other day and she commented how nice it was to drive a car with so much power in reserve.

Glacier6

The 3.0 just sounds so much better inside the car too. I can't imagine what the 4.0T is like.