2.0 or 3.2?
05-14-2012, 07:55 AM
#21
AudiWorld Newcomer
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thanks everyone, a lot to think about. I did go to Oakland Audi yesterday and we test drove the A6 3.0T and it was quick! Problem was the salesman said it likely wouldn't be out until Dec 2013! Now I think he is full of it since the last salesman said fall 2012 and he just wants to make a sale now but I don't know if I even want to wait until later this year.
05-14-2012, 08:11 AM
#22
If so, then sounds like the US will be more in line with the reported Canadian scheduled release of the Q5 3.0T. (Q1 of 2013)
05-16-2012, 01:28 PM
#23
AudiWorld Newcomer
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I actually clarified it with him and he meant 2013. No matter though, I am sure he is full of it. Besides, it doesn't matter now...picked up my 2012 3.2 S-line yesterday and couldn't be happier!
05-16-2012, 04:12 PM
#24
AudiWorld Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Either way the car is amazing, so congrats on the new Q5, but sounds like your salesman either has really bad information or he's lying to persuade you to purchase sooner rather then later. It's already been announced that the US is getting the 3.0T engine for the 2013 model. So while the date hasn't been announced, so December 2012 is a possibility for that engine, 12/2013 would make that a 2014 model. Maybe you went to the same dealership I went to because Audi of Stevens Creek tried to pull the same crap, either way it makes the dealership seem either incompetent or shady. I know that's a rich neighborhood, so maybe these tactics make them a nice profit, but I didn't get a great impression from them.
05-21-2012, 07:44 AM
#25
AudiWorld Newcomer
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Either way the car is amazing, so congrats on the new Q5, but sounds like your salesman either has really bad information or he's lying to persuade you to purchase sooner rather then later. It's already been announced that the US is getting the 3.0T engine for the 2013 model. So while the date hasn't been announced, so December 2012 is a possibility for that engine, 12/2013 would make that a 2014 model. Maybe you went to the same dealership I went to because Audi of Stevens Creek tried to pull the same crap, either way it makes the dealership seem either incompetent or shady. I know that's a rich neighborhood, so maybe these tactics make them a nice profit, but I didn't get a great impression from them.
05-21-2012, 06:32 PM
#26
Audiworld Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 3.0T is a supercharged engine. It does not have a turbo anywhere in the mix.
There is some bad info floating around here with people suggesting that the 2.0T is a better engine for anything than the 3.2. It's not, and opting for it will make your nice Q5 sound like an econo-wheezer in addition to compromising power.
The 3.2 provides smoother acceleration and gains 69 HP over the 2.0T while giving up a mere 15 ft-lbs of torque. It is the better engine for towing as well as every day driving and fuel-economy wise there is very little difference. Even if you picked up another 50HP with a chip tune (and risk voiding you warranty), the 2.0T is still the lesser engine in a Q5.
The 2.0T has higher torque at lower RPM to make the cars feel more powerful than they are at low speeds, but if you look at a dyno chart you'll see that HP and torque and HP of the 2.0T nose-dive around 5,000 RPM while the V6 is reasonably flat up to the 6,900 RPM redline.
The V6 has smooth, linear power delivery that scales perfectly with RPM which is why the 3.2 is superior at higher engine speeds. Both engines will be revving high if you drop the hammer so the fixation on the low-end torque is a bit misguided.
Other benefits of the 3.2 include:
No turbo lag (easy to notice if you brake, then quickly hit the accelerator).
No dinky 4-banger sputtering exhaust note. It just sounds wrong in a $40K plus vehicle as nice as the Q5.
Much more solid feel in terms of handling; the 2.0 feels empty or hollow by comparison.
Much better performance across the entire RPM range...and in no way does the 3.2 feel "underpowered" at low engine speeds. It is very torque-y and since it is NA it has instantaneous throttle response.
There is some bad info floating around here with people suggesting that the 2.0T is a better engine for anything than the 3.2. It's not, and opting for it will make your nice Q5 sound like an econo-wheezer in addition to compromising power.
The 3.2 provides smoother acceleration and gains 69 HP over the 2.0T while giving up a mere 15 ft-lbs of torque. It is the better engine for towing as well as every day driving and fuel-economy wise there is very little difference. Even if you picked up another 50HP with a chip tune (and risk voiding you warranty), the 2.0T is still the lesser engine in a Q5.
The 2.0T has higher torque at lower RPM to make the cars feel more powerful than they are at low speeds, but if you look at a dyno chart you'll see that HP and torque and HP of the 2.0T nose-dive around 5,000 RPM while the V6 is reasonably flat up to the 6,900 RPM redline.
The V6 has smooth, linear power delivery that scales perfectly with RPM which is why the 3.2 is superior at higher engine speeds. Both engines will be revving high if you drop the hammer so the fixation on the low-end torque is a bit misguided.
Other benefits of the 3.2 include:
No turbo lag (easy to notice if you brake, then quickly hit the accelerator).
No dinky 4-banger sputtering exhaust note. It just sounds wrong in a $40K plus vehicle as nice as the Q5.
Much more solid feel in terms of handling; the 2.0 feels empty or hollow by comparison.
Much better performance across the entire RPM range...and in no way does the 3.2 feel "underpowered" at low engine speeds. It is very torque-y and since it is NA it has instantaneous throttle response.
05-21-2012, 06:55 PM
#27
AudiWorld Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Peerblock believe what you want, but it is almost universal acceptance industrywide that the smaller engine is superior. Better mpg, cheaper, more torque. Again to each their own, but id just wait for the 3.0t or just get the 2.0t
05-21-2012, 06:58 PM
#28
AudiWorld Super User
The 3.0T is a supercharged engine. It does not have a turbo anywhere in the mix.
There is some bad info floating around here with people suggesting that the 2.0T is a better engine for anything than the 3.2. It's not, and opting for it will make your nice Q5 sound like an econo-wheezer in addition to compromising power.
The 3.2 provides smoother acceleration and gains 69 HP over the 2.0T while giving up a mere 15 ft-lbs of torque. It is the better engine for towing as well as every day driving and fuel-economy wise there is very little difference. Even if you picked up another 50HP with a chip tune (and risk voiding you warranty), the 2.0T is still the lesser engine in a Q5.
The 2.0T has higher torque at lower RPM to make the cars feel more powerful than they are at low speeds, but if you look at a dyno chart you'll see that HP and torque and HP of the 2.0T nose-dive around 5,000 RPM while the V6 is reasonably flat up to the 6,900 RPM redline.
The V6 has smooth, linear power delivery that scales perfectly with RPM which is why the 3.2 is superior at higher engine speeds. Both engines will be revving high if you drop the hammer so the fixation on the low-end torque is a bit misguided.
Other benefits of the 3.2 include:
No turbo lag (easy to notice if you brake, then quickly hit the accelerator).
No dinky 4-banger sputtering exhaust note. It just sounds wrong in a $40K plus vehicle as nice as the Q5.
Much more solid feel in terms of handling; the 2.0 feels empty or hollow by comparison.
Much better performance across the entire RPM range...and in no way does the 3.2 feel "underpowered" at low engine speeds. It is very torque-y and since it is NA it has instantaneous throttle response.
There is some bad info floating around here with people suggesting that the 2.0T is a better engine for anything than the 3.2. It's not, and opting for it will make your nice Q5 sound like an econo-wheezer in addition to compromising power.
The 3.2 provides smoother acceleration and gains 69 HP over the 2.0T while giving up a mere 15 ft-lbs of torque. It is the better engine for towing as well as every day driving and fuel-economy wise there is very little difference. Even if you picked up another 50HP with a chip tune (and risk voiding you warranty), the 2.0T is still the lesser engine in a Q5.
The 2.0T has higher torque at lower RPM to make the cars feel more powerful than they are at low speeds, but if you look at a dyno chart you'll see that HP and torque and HP of the 2.0T nose-dive around 5,000 RPM while the V6 is reasonably flat up to the 6,900 RPM redline.
The V6 has smooth, linear power delivery that scales perfectly with RPM which is why the 3.2 is superior at higher engine speeds. Both engines will be revving high if you drop the hammer so the fixation on the low-end torque is a bit misguided.
Other benefits of the 3.2 include:
No turbo lag (easy to notice if you brake, then quickly hit the accelerator).
No dinky 4-banger sputtering exhaust note. It just sounds wrong in a $40K plus vehicle as nice as the Q5.
Much more solid feel in terms of handling; the 2.0 feels empty or hollow by comparison.
Much better performance across the entire RPM range...and in no way does the 3.2 feel "underpowered" at low engine speeds. It is very torque-y and since it is NA it has instantaneous throttle response.
05-21-2012, 11:05 PM
#29
Audiworld Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're giving up 15 ft-lbs of TQ to gain 70 HP with the V6. It's a no-brainer, so I hate to see someone being told the 2.0T is the "better" engine when it's really not. The V6 is smoother, quieter and has better overall performance. Real world fuel economy is about the same between both 2.0 and 3.2 so MPG isn't a worthwhile consideration.
More HP > Torque when you have enough torque to move the mass in question, and both engines have enough torque - you will really appreciate that additional 70 HP on the highway when passing or when accelerating from a stop.
The 2.0T really shouldn't be in any Audi IMO but they're probably trying to meet the tougher CAFE standards.
I personally would have liked to have the option of the 3.0 TDI V6 in the S-Line Q5 but I don't think that's going to happen with the 2013 model.
If you're shopping for a Q5 make sure you test drive both. I can say quite confidently that 9 out of 10 people who try both prefer the 3.2 V6 over the econo-banger.
Plus you get the added benefit of carbon build up on the intake valves with the 3.2.
05-22-2012, 04:06 AM
#30
AudiWorld Member
Gotta disagree with you on your engine preferences to. The 2.0TFSI is the choice for city work and towing where you want your torque early in the rev range. The 3.2 would have been the choice for the more sporty drive however that is not what the OP was asking for.