Hi everyone:<p>I got turned onto this very cool site by a friend who owns a '98 1.8T with a chip. After riding in his car, I'm keen on the idea of getting an A4 myself, but I'm torn between the smooth, quiet V-6 and the spunky Turbo 4 with a chip. Both deliver about the same horsepower (if you believe the chipmaker's claims of 40 additional horsepower on the 1.8), but I'm having a difficult time making up my mind. Checking out the specs on this page, I didn't notice a huge difference in the std. equipment levels of 1.8 vs. 2.8. So, my question is, is a V-6 model worth the extra few grand over a 1.8T with a chip - and if so, why? I believe it might be worth it for me, as most of my driving is on long (120+ miles) freeway commutes, and I'd like the car to be as quiet and smooth as possible. Please share your opinions!!! -MKL '98 Harley XL1200C / '97 Honda Civic EX

 

This has come up many times before. I know I am going to get flamed for this, but most A4 owners (including many 1.8T owners, I would guess) would likely opt for the 2.8, if money were no object.<p>As you pointed out yourself, the 1.8 and 2.8 produce about the same output (after chipping the 1.8). In stock form, however, the 2.8 is definitely the more powerful and faster ride. <p>If the power can be considered roughly equal, why get the 2.8? Well, its not really the power, but the manner it generated its power. The 2.8 is smoother and quieter, and generally goes about its business without making much of a fuss.<p>Moreover, the 2.8 generates considerably more torque than the 1.8T in stock form (and I would wager in chipped form as well, although I don't know the numbers). This means that you have to work less to use the power (like passing vehicles without downshifting).<p>And lastly, since the 1.8 is making its power with about 1000cc of less displacement, it is pretty much always working harder to make that power. There have been several reports of blown turbos, stuck wastgates, and the like. Granted these are probably the exception rather than the rule, but why risk it (and you still have to worry about whether the dealership will still honor the warranty after finding out about your chip).<p>Otherwise, your assessment is pretty much correct. Both cars differ very little in equipment. Purists might deride the extra weight and fuel consumption of the 2.8, but I think that its other qualities more than make up for this. <p>The 2.8 has a few extra luxury goodies (like power seat, wood trim, and available leather) which gives it the (mistaken) impression of being a luxury cruiser around here, but it is every bit the sport sedan the 1.8 is.<p>Tom Halter<br>98.5 2.8 QM Pearl/Onyx

 

IMHO: Smoother/Quiter != More Fun

 

Here is my opinion (many others' opinions will differ). I got the 1.8T because the extra $3500 for the 2.8 was simply out of my budget. If I could afford it, I would go with the 2.8. More power than the base 1.8T and a smoother/quieter engine. Price differential has come down a bit since metallic paint is now standard on both.<p>The only problem I have with my car has been something with the turbo (which was fixed). Many others have had problems with the turbo (particularly the wastegate). I have not heard of a single problem with the 2.8 engine. DISCLAIMER: I'm not saying that most 1.8T turbos have problems or anything like that, just that I read more about turbo problems than I do about 2.8 engine problems.<p>Chipping is an option on the 1.8T if you want to take some measure of risk for more pep.<p>Bottom line - they're both good values in my opinion. Let your budget and your test drives of both decide. Good luck.<p>Tom<br>1.8TQMS Silver/Ecru

 

If you're a Tiptronic buyer, I would definitely go for the 2.8. If you really prefer and enjoy a stick, then either car will satisfy you, with the 1.8T probably being a bit more "fun" if you define fun as having to learn to use the powerband, shift more often, etc. I'm very happy with the 1.8T and find its power quite adequate (I'm not much of a street racer anymore, though).<p> Doug G<br> 98 1.8TQM

 

I went for the 1.8 because it is 200+ lbs lighter, gets about 12 mpg better mileage, and it is very smooth. With the stock exhaust you can barely hear it and I certainly don't feel any roughness. I couldn't see paying $4000 for wood and chromed plastic trim.

 

Don't forget long term insurance costs....Depending on your age, most insurance companies really jack-up the rates for ANY car that has a turbo. Get a quote from your agent for a 1.8 and a 2.8 and check the difference.

 

If you want QUIET and SMOOTH, get the 2.8. I have a 1.8t and it is NEITHER.

 

Only you can decide. Spend lots of time with both and drive them back to back. I'd echo one caveat, if you must have the Tip and you don't want to chip, go for the 2.8. <p>My choice was a manual 1.8T for a number of reasons. Most important was price. I simply could not justify the extra thousands for 2 cylinders. Second was availability; when I bought, 2.8's were tough to find. Third, maybe it's just the altitude, but I find the 1.8 to be a much more potent engine at low revs, even without a chip. The torque curve is completely flat and you hit the meat of the curve by 2K. The 1.8 also offers some peripheral benefits like better gas mileage, improved balance and less complexity. For a 4, the 1.8 is remarkably smooth and well mannered, from the first time I drove it, I was hooked. I know I'm in the minority here, but V-6's really don't do anything for me. I much prefer inline engines, my favorites being BMW sixes and a variety of 4's. Of course, I don't mind V-8's and V-12's. <p>Yes, the V6 is marginally smoother and more powerful in stock form. The real question is whether or not the purported 40 hp is worth the 4000 bucks. You'll get lots of different opinions here and nobody's really wrong.<p>Andy

 

If your 1.8T is "very smooth", and I don't doubt that it is, then I would say that the 2.8 is "extraordinarily smooth". And as little "roughness" as you feel in the 1.8T, there is even less in the 2.8.<p>Does the 1.8T really get 12 MPG better mileage? That seems like a lot. If it does, more power to you. I think the 200 lbs and gas mileage are negligible. I wouldn't buy either of these cars for the criteria of weight or gas mileage. That's not their best features.<p>Now let's be fair: 2.8 buyers are not paying $4000 for wood and chromed plastic trim. Did you forget that the engine is different? Also, I found out recently that the 1.8T (at least up to 1998) does not have the power driver's seat. Moshe started this thread and mentioned that they drive 120-mile trips regularly. Moshe, you will want the 2.8 just for the power driver's seat alone! I wish my passenger seat was as good. I might let other people drive my car more often if I had a power passenger seat. The passenger seat just doesn't have the same adjustments as the driver's seat in the 2.8. Also, the 2.8 has 16" wheels as standard equipment. I realize most 1.8T buyers will opt for the sports package and thus, get 16" wheels, but I'm just trying to be fair in the comparisons here.<p>Moshe, you seem like a perfect candidate for the 2.8. Your routine of driving many highway miles will be much more enjoyable (IMHO) in the 2.8 with the power adjustable driver's seat with adjustable lumbar support. But, don't take my word for it - drive them both!<p>Drew S.<br>