4.2 VS 2.7
12-03-2002, 03:32 PM
#33
Member
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 3,703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Why is 100mph the magical number where smaller engines suddenly lose all races to bigger engines
Not really magic but I drove both pretty hard and noted that at higher speeds the 4.2 felt a tad stronger than my chipped 2.7. But the 4.2 "came on the pipe" around 4800-52000 where as the 2.7 was flat, more linear.Is this enough to really outrun one or the other? I think its difficult to compare. My chipped six speed was much faster 0-80ish then the S6. The 2.7 in the allroad due to gearing runs out of real steam at 130-140. The S6 pulled very well at 6000 rpm in the 100+mph test I took. 160 in S6 is quite possible. 160 in an allroad is destined for mechanical mayhem due to gearing. The 4.2 allroad will have the 300 horse version, now what the gearing in the final drive and the lower horse power is likely to be like actually driving is open to conjecture, but no likely to be worth the $5-7000 premium. Now 340-360 horse version HMMMMMM. But this the kills the S6 and 4.2 A6 sales wise due to very similar interiors and the same or better performance. Now your preference of body styling, that's a question only you can answer for yourself.
12-03-2002, 05:44 PM
#35
New Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Geez, there's no "right" answer folks...
No amount of debating is going to lead to a definitive answer. It's different strokes for different folks.
I'm a 2002 allroad owner who is seriously thinking about making the move to a 2003 allroad 4.2. I really don't give a hoot about 0 - 60 times (as long as it feels fast that's fine with me). To me what's more important is refinement at highway speeds and long-term reliability. I would also guess that the 4.2 will hold it's value better over time, though if I was looking for resale value I certainly wouldn't be buying an allroad.
Other people have totally different priorities and for them the 2.7T is a better choice. The beauty here is that we now have a choice -- something that we seem to be losing sight of here.
I'm a 2002 allroad owner who is seriously thinking about making the move to a 2003 allroad 4.2. I really don't give a hoot about 0 - 60 times (as long as it feels fast that's fine with me). To me what's more important is refinement at highway speeds and long-term reliability. I would also guess that the 4.2 will hold it's value better over time, though if I was looking for resale value I certainly wouldn't be buying an allroad.
Other people have totally different priorities and for them the 2.7T is a better choice. The beauty here is that we now have a choice -- something that we seem to be losing sight of here.
12-04-2002, 04:42 AM
#37
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
allroad front end
I believe the rounded, less protruding, allroad front-end is designed this way so that the car has less overhang thus more offroad capable. Sorry if I'm stating the obvious.
12-04-2002, 06:27 AM
#38
Re: even more confused -- dazed and confused, that is.
I got my new allroad after a string of 4 Audis all with automatic transmissions: 1997 A8, 1999 A6 (2.8), 2000 & 2001 A6 4.2's. I test drove an A6 2.7T with a 6spd, an allroad 6spd and an A4 (both engines) 6spd.
I ordered an allroad 2.7T w/6spd in May 02, delivered Nov 02.
I had no intention of "off roading" although the ability to do so is at least "nice to know!"
I picked the allroad because it had a stick shift, seemed to ride better than an A6 2.7T and because it is "quieter" (due to the 20% thicker floor pan, I presume). Moreover, coming off of an A6 4.2 (0-100kph 6.7 mfg data) to an allroad (6.8 mfg data) seemed like I would be giving up very little in quickness.
I did not care how fast the cars were -- I have taken my 4.2 to 110mph perhaps once or twice in 30,000 miles -- the freeways around southern Ohio rarely permit a safe speed higher than 80mph.
The allroad is both quick and "fast enough" to feel no real sacrifice under my right foot or at the small of my back. The A6 4.2 w/sport does handle better, but the use of 245 x 50 x 17" Pilot A/S on the allroad mitigates this, somewhat.
Now, finally, I went through the configurator and found that the A6 saloon 2.7T w/6spd "comparably equipped" to the allroad was more money? I actually believe the "content" of a 2003 allroad maxed out is higher than an A6 2.7T maxed out -- and it costs less (bi-xenon lights notwithstanding).
What I really wanted was a new S4 or an S6 or even A6 4.2 w/ a 6spd manual or a 6spd tip. No amount of money can make this happen, practically speaking, here in North America.
The allroad 2.7T 6spd, is, for me, the swiss army knife of cars and is perhaps one of the last manual transmission cars that will be available. Remember I said this when the 2005's and 2006's come out with nary a stick shift among them (my opinion only, I have no direct bona fide inside information -- call it a hunch!)
I see no logic to bringing the 4.2 to the market (in an allroad) -- for who would buy a car this expensive (high high $50's) and slog it through the offroad crap? And the next step up (S6 avant) would be a relatively minor decision, once one had reached this price range, eh?
Especially, hot on the heels of the new Car and Driver article wherein 8 or 9 SUV-like vehicles (high buck ones) were tested and the new VW with the Audi 4.2 V8 (@ 310 HP) won and is able to be had for an MSRP (base) of $36+K?
Which brings me to another point/question: why in the hell wasn't the allroad included in this comparison -- the 2.7T would have been "a contender" based on the reviews I read -- perhaps the VW still would have trumped it, but it seems that the allroad coulda, shoulda oughta been #2!
I ordered an allroad 2.7T w/6spd in May 02, delivered Nov 02.
I had no intention of "off roading" although the ability to do so is at least "nice to know!"
I picked the allroad because it had a stick shift, seemed to ride better than an A6 2.7T and because it is "quieter" (due to the 20% thicker floor pan, I presume). Moreover, coming off of an A6 4.2 (0-100kph 6.7 mfg data) to an allroad (6.8 mfg data) seemed like I would be giving up very little in quickness.
I did not care how fast the cars were -- I have taken my 4.2 to 110mph perhaps once or twice in 30,000 miles -- the freeways around southern Ohio rarely permit a safe speed higher than 80mph.
The allroad is both quick and "fast enough" to feel no real sacrifice under my right foot or at the small of my back. The A6 4.2 w/sport does handle better, but the use of 245 x 50 x 17" Pilot A/S on the allroad mitigates this, somewhat.
Now, finally, I went through the configurator and found that the A6 saloon 2.7T w/6spd "comparably equipped" to the allroad was more money? I actually believe the "content" of a 2003 allroad maxed out is higher than an A6 2.7T maxed out -- and it costs less (bi-xenon lights notwithstanding).
What I really wanted was a new S4 or an S6 or even A6 4.2 w/ a 6spd manual or a 6spd tip. No amount of money can make this happen, practically speaking, here in North America.
The allroad 2.7T 6spd, is, for me, the swiss army knife of cars and is perhaps one of the last manual transmission cars that will be available. Remember I said this when the 2005's and 2006's come out with nary a stick shift among them (my opinion only, I have no direct bona fide inside information -- call it a hunch!)
I see no logic to bringing the 4.2 to the market (in an allroad) -- for who would buy a car this expensive (high high $50's) and slog it through the offroad crap? And the next step up (S6 avant) would be a relatively minor decision, once one had reached this price range, eh?
Especially, hot on the heels of the new Car and Driver article wherein 8 or 9 SUV-like vehicles (high buck ones) were tested and the new VW with the Audi 4.2 V8 (@ 310 HP) won and is able to be had for an MSRP (base) of $36+K?
Which brings me to another point/question: why in the hell wasn't the allroad included in this comparison -- the 2.7T would have been "a contender" based on the reviews I read -- perhaps the VW still would have trumped it, but it seems that the allroad coulda, shoulda oughta been #2!
12-04-2002, 12:25 PM
#40
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 12,697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it is just because that is the way the A6 was designed...
I don't believe there was any "intention" to design the front end to make it more offroad worthy...I believe they maintained the '98-'01 A6 front end style purely for financial reasons and because they could, due to the advent of the new-version of the 4.2 that they designed to fit in the new S4. The "new" ('02-'03) style grille for the A6 (similar to the style of all the 4.2s) does not protrude out any further than the old-style...although the front end of the 4.2 would have...