Why should I choose 2.0T over 3.2?

[AudiZ]

Dear current and future Audi owners,

This is going to be my first Audi purchase. I never drove a German vehicle before but I am looking forward to in September. I want the Audi A4 3.2FSI; however, my family want me to get the 2.0T for the sole reason of gas prices. I see lot of people going after the 2.0T than the 3.2... would one care to explain why people picking 2.0T over 3.2 since 3.2 got 265HP where as 2.0T got 211HP.
As you know I never had a Audi in the past and looking forward to it in the future, so I can really tell which one is better. From my prospective, I look at the Horse power and see that 3.2 got the advantage over 2.0T. Maybe some one with more knowledge care to explain why 2.0T is far better choice than 3.2?

Regards,
AJ [:)]

[Sammy7]

Because the 265 vs. 211 is stock. With mods, you can get a lot more power out of the 2.0T.

[AudiZ]

Because the 265 vs. 211 is stock. With mods, you can get a lot more power out of the 2.0T.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.. if you mods the 3.2, wouldn't you get more power out of the 3.2 over the 2.0T?

[m0nk89]

the 2.0t has a turbo, which has a lot of potential, while a 3.2 V6 has no turbo, so power upgrades are not as good. plus, most aftermarket engine/exhaust upgrades are all for the 2.0t, not the 3.2

[thenicholsterr]

it's very simple my friend. you can chip the 2.0t for starting at around $500 and you will get just as much horsepower or even more compared to the 3.2. thus since the 4 banger is lighter than the 6 and etc, it will technically be faster. However, since 3.2 has a V6, it would be smoother and faster stock. My first choice would be 3.2 quattro...however, that costs the most. the best bang for the buck would be 2.0t. hope this helps :]

[speedydragon]

adding to it..
after you chip your 2.0t, you'll have the quickness of a 3.2 + extreme torque, and the econ of a 4cly when you're being conservative.

[Jagaer]

My opinion, take it for what it is worth, since I own neither

Turbo:
+ Lighter
+ Fuel Efficient (off boost)
+ Modded to good power + torque
- Lower reliability
- Turbo lag

V6:
+ Smooth power
+ Higher reliability (Engine isn't as complex)
- Lower Fuel Efficiency (By no means bad, just not as good)
- More understeer

[thenicholsterr]

in addition, by chipping it you also eliminate the speed limiter :] it's a dilemma HAHA get the A3 or A6 jkjk

[marcus1701]

because turbos are cool....they sound good, and the combination of performance, reliability, 30mpg, in a neat 4cyl package is awesome!

[DeMOROlized]

Dear current and future Audi owners,

This is going to be my first Audi purchase. I never drove a German vehicle before but I am looking forward to in September. I want the Audi A4 3.2FSI; however, my family want me to get the 2.0T for the sole reason of gas prices. I see lot of people going after the 2.0T than the 3.2... would one care to explain why people picking 2.0T over 3.2 since 3.2 got 265HP where as 2.0T got 211HP.
As you know I never had a Audi in the past and looking forward to it in the future, so I can really tell which one is better. From my prospective, I look at the Horse power and see that 3.2 got the advantage over 2.0T. Maybe some one with more knowledge care to explain why 2.0T is far better choice than 3.2?

Regards,
AJ [:)]

Because people buy horsepower, but drive torque. Torque is what gives you fast acceleration. And the 2.0T has more torque than the 3.2.

And a turbo engine is much more mod friendly like everybody else says.

[AudiZ]

Cool... but how much more performance will you get if it is chipped? How much more HP will it increase...

[Jagaer]

This is for the A3, as it is the most recent product by Audi on the US market with APR mods available.

http://www.goapr.com/Audi/products/images/dyno_8pa3_s1_93_clean.jpg

[quattshot]

The NEW 2.0 Turbo motor will have ALOT MORE torque then previously.
265lbs of it STOCK!! Much better driveability for real world situations like ACCELERATING when you NEED TO!! :)

Yes, after a computer reflash the numbers should be really nice. I believe they are using a KO4 turbo this time around.

[4-tified]

The NEW 2.0 Turbo motor will have ALOT MORE torque then previously.
265lbs of it STOCK!! Much better driveability for real world situations like ACCELERATING when you NEED TO!! :)

Yes, after a computer reflash the numbers should be really nice. I believe they are using a KO4 turbo this time around.

If they are using a KO4 that would be excellent, considering there may be potential to actually get some top end torque.

However, this is a "new" 2.0 TFSI. Getting that much more torque could be due to already bumping the PSI in stock form. That could mean that getting that much more from the 2.0T may not be true.
Just because you could get, let's say, 90lb ft more with typical software updates from a stock 207lb ft, doesn't necessarily mean that if you start from 265lb ft you can then add the same 90lb ft to it.
It's more likely that Audi is simply extracting more stock power from some engine tweaking and internals, but software tuning may produce less overall power than before.

If there is a KO4 in there, I would expect the HP to be higher than 211 though. Since the FSI engine tends to produce very good low rpm torque, in part due to it's 'smallish' stock turbo, a larger turbo would tend to push the HP number higher.
That HUGE torque number could make the new 2.0 engine even more diesel like. I hope not. I hope there is a larger turbo in there so tuners can open up the top end and let it scream. [:D][up]

[B6driver]

If they are using a KO4 that would be excellent, considering there may be potential to actually get some top end torque.

However, this is a "new" 2.0 TFSI. Getting that much more torque could be due to already bumping the PSI in stock form. That could mean that getting that much more from the 2.0T may not be true.
Just because you could get, let's say, 90lb ft more with typical software updates from a stock 207lb ft, doesn't necessarily mean that if you start from 265lb ft you can then add the same 90lb ft to it.
It's more likely that Audi is simply extracting more stock power from some engine tweaking and internals, but software tuning may produce less overall power than before.

If there is a KO4 in there, I would expect the HP to be higher than 211 though. Since the FSI engine tends to produce very good low rpm torque, in part due to it's 'smallish' stock turbo, a larger turbo would tend to push the HP number higher.
That HUGE torque number could make the new 2.0 engine even more diesel like. I hope not. I hope there is a larger turbo in there so tuners can open up the top end and let it scream. [:D][up]

good theory, but i believe that auto manufacturers (especially Audi) would not risk just "pre-chipping" their car for more power and jeopardize reliability (i know that the current chips are reliable as hell)... but this is in the bigger picture. they would be safer running the K04 (or some turbo variance) with a traditional (ultra conservative) programming.

[quattro.it]

good theory, but i believe that auto manufacturers (especially Audi) would not risk just "pre-chipping" their car for more power and jeopardize reliability (i know that the current chips are reliable as hell)... but this is in the bigger picture. they would be safer running the K04 (or some turbo variance) with a traditional (ultra conservative) programming.

I agree with this theory that tuners will be able to bump up hp/torque the same relative % as they do with the current 2.0T. At least that would be the ideal situation wouldn't it?

[booch]

good theory, but i believe that auto manufacturers (especially Audi) would not risk just "pre-chipping" their car for more power and jeopardize reliability (i know that the current chips are reliable as hell)... but this is in the bigger picture. they would be safer running the K04 (or some turbo variance) with a traditional (ultra conservative) programming.

i understand the reliability argument, but going with a k04 (or like) v. a k03 would be kind of illogical given the goal of an earlier and flatter curve with a stronger low end.

[Jagaer]

Variable Vane turbo maybe?

[K1200GT]

From the July2008 MotorTrend:

Audi's latest four-cylinder gas direct-injection turbo engine is rated a turbodiesel-like 258 lb-ft of torque. The engine is called the 2.0 TFSI, with the T's slide to the right distinguishing it from the 200-hp, 207-lb-ft 2.0T FSI in the A3, TT and the outgoing A4. The new engine's torque even trumps the number for the naturally aspirated 265-hp, 3.2L FSI V-6 by 15 lb-ft. What's more, the new TFSI delivers that 258 lb-ft from 1500 to 4200 rpm, versus a range of 3000 to 5000 rpm for the V-6's 243. It's rated 211 hp, although it must be noted that torque and power for this engine are for the European model and each number could drop a bit before reaching the States.

And Audi expects a 15-percent increase in EPA fuel mileage, which would get the A4 Avant a 25-mpg combined average, up from 22 mpg for the 2008 A4 Avant quattro FSI automatic.

Audi calls the 2.0 TFSI all new, though certainly there are some parts left from the 2.0T FSI. The new engine has Audi's valvelift system added for variable control to the exhaust valves, plus new six-hole injectors and a new intercooler that Audi says combines high efficiency with low weight and small dimensions.


The only 2.0 TFSI Avants to test drive in Ibiza were front-drive models with six-speed manual transmissions, fun for us, not so much for you. Driving one back to back with a manual trans 3.2 FSI quatttro says something about the smaller engine, though: It's the way to go. Assuming it mates as nicely with that Tiptronic as with the six-speed manual and assuming quattro won't weigh it down too much. The 2.0 just pulls so easily from under 2000 rpm in any gear that it's the match, if not better than, the 3.2 for acceleration. The TFSI has all the buttery smoothness and minimal turbo lag of the 200-horse 2.0T, but even more so. When you get into the horsepower band, the car simply winds up more quickly than you'd expect and accelerates in what feels like a free-fall to redline. Audi claims a 6.7-second 0-to-62-mph run for a 2.0 TFSI quattro with six-speed manual (another car not available in Ibiza), while Audi in the U.S. claims a 6.3-second 0-60-mph time for the A4 V-6 quattro sedan. The TFSI's exhaust note is rortier than the old turbo's, with a high-speed, high-pitched braap. There's nothing this engine does in a 3700-lb wagon that will make you want more displacement. Count this as another soldier in the engine downsizing revolution.

Let this be a warning to those about to buy the A4 sedan. The 3.2 V-6 doesn't add much to the party versus the TFSI, except add weight, fuel consumption, and numbers to the sticker price.



http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/wagons/112_0807_2009_audi_a4_avant_first_drive/index.html


So AJ it looks like you need to forget all about that 3.2 motor, go for the 2.0 TFSI.[:)]

[JayyyyyC]

After reading up on the B8 A4 2.0t... I just might have to sell my Nogaro B5 S4 for a white B8 A4 in a year or two after college. The interior is money, and I LOVE... absolutely love the way the B8 body looks. Just with coilovers, TBE, and a chip would make the car perfect for me. On AZ's front page, the B8 A4 with the RS4 type wheels looks so fantastic.

[Noffy]

From the July2008 MotorTrend:

Audi's latest four-cylinder gas direct-injection turbo engine is rated a turbodiesel-like 258 lb-ft of torque. The engine is called the 2.0 TFSI, with the T's slide to the right distinguishing it from the 200-hp, 207-lb-ft 2.0T FSI in the A3, TT and the outgoing A4. The new engine's torque even trumps the number for the naturally aspirated 265-hp, 3.2L FSI V-6 by 15 lb-ft. What's more, the new TFSI delivers that 258 lb-ft from 1500 to 4200 rpm, versus a range of 3000 to 5000 rpm for the V-6's 243. It's rated 211 hp, although it must be noted that torque and power for this engine are for the European model and each number could drop a bit before reaching the States.

And Audi expects a 15-percent increase in EPA fuel mileage, which would get the A4 Avant a 25-mpg combined average, up from 22 mpg for the 2008 A4 Avant quattro FSI automatic.

Audi calls the 2.0 TFSI all new, though certainly there are some parts left from the 2.0T FSI. The new engine has Audi's valvelift system added for variable control to the exhaust valves, plus new six-hole injectors and a new intercooler that Audi says combines high efficiency with low weight and small dimensions.


The only 2.0 TFSI Avants to test drive in Ibiza were front-drive models with six-speed manual transmissions, fun for us, not so much for you. Driving one back to back with a manual trans 3.2 FSI quatttro says something about the smaller engine, though: It's the way to go. Assuming it mates as nicely with that Tiptronic as with the six-speed manual and assuming quattro won't weigh it down too much. The 2.0 just pulls so easily from under 2000 rpm in any gear that it's the match, if not better than, the 3.2 for acceleration. The TFSI has all the buttery smoothness and minimal turbo lag of the 200-horse 2.0T, but even more so. When you get into the horsepower band, the car simply winds up more quickly than you'd expect and accelerates in what feels like a free-fall to redline. Audi claims a 6.7-second 0-to-62-mph run for a 2.0 TFSI quattro with six-speed manual (another car not available in Ibiza), while Audi in the U.S. claims a 6.3-second 0-60-mph time for the A4 V-6 quattro sedan. The TFSI's exhaust note is rortier than the old turbo's, with a high-speed, high-pitched braap. There's nothing this engine does in a 3700-lb wagon that will make you want more displacement. Count this as another soldier in the engine downsizing revolution.

Let this be a warning to those about to buy the A4 sedan. The 3.2 V-6 doesn't add much to the party versus the TFSI, except add weight, fuel consumption, and numbers to the sticker price.



http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/wagons/112_0807_2009_audi_a4_avant_first_drive/index.html


So AJ it looks like you need to forget all about that 3.2 motor, go for the 2.0 TFSI.[:)]


Don't forget a sweet exhuast note!

[AudiZ]

Thanks guys, I really appreciate your comments... look like I'm going to be looking forward for the 2.0T in the future.

[AudiZ]

Also guys, why did Audi went with 2 exhaust pipes style on one side for the 2.0 versus 1 exhaust pipe style on each side for the 3.2----making the back of 3.2 looks more sportier.


http://www.fourtitude.com/gallery/albums//Audi/A4-S4-RS4%20(B5,%20B6,%20B7%20and%20B8)/A4%20Sedan%20(B8)/UK/007.jpg


http://www.fourtitude.com/gallery/albums//Audi/A4-S4-RS4%20(B5,%20B6,%20B7%20and%20B8)/A4%20Sedan%20(B8)/Exterior%20-%20EU/025.jpg

[DeMOROlized]

Also guys, why did Audi went with 2 exhaust pipes style on one side for the 2.0 versus 1 exhaust pipe style on each side for the 3.2----making the back of 3.2 looks more sportier.


http://www.fourtitude.com/gallery/albums//Audi/A4-S4-RS4%20(B5,%20B6,%20B7%20and%20B8)/A4%20Sedan%20(B8)/UK/007.jpg


http://www.fourtitude.com/gallery/albums//Audi/A4-S4-RS4%20(B5,%20B6,%20B7%20and%20B8)/A4%20Sedan%20(B8)/Exterior%20-%20EU/025.jpg

It could be a FWD vs. quattro thing rather than a 3.2 vs 2.0T thing.

[SFA4]

Also guys, why did Audi went with 2 exhaust pipes style on one side for the 2.0 versus 1 exhaust pipe style on each side for the 3.2----making the back of 3.2 looks more sportier.


Could it be because the 2.0 pictured is a diesel and the 3.2 is not?

[Noffy]

It could be a FWD vs. quattro thing rather than a 3.2 vs 2.0T thing.


Nope this is how it is going to look with the 2.0 T in the US and I am absolutely distraught over it. It is really sad they did away with the duel side exhaust. I will go with the 3.2 because of it. Or most likely go with an A5 or maybe the new TT.

[NVR STSFD]

Nope this is how it is going to look with the 2.0 T in the US and I am absolutely distraught over it. It is really sad they did away with the duel side exhaust. I will go with the 3.2 because of it. Or most likely go with an A5 or maybe the new TT.

If that is true, guess I will be going the same route.[:(]

[Tiesto]

I'm sick of Audi's chinsiness with the A4 line, I'll never buy an A4 again.

[A4orce]

For the new A4 B8 models, cars with 6/8 cylinders will have the twin exhaust (left - right) configuration. For the 4 cylinder models, it will be on the left hand side only. That is how Audi distinguishes between a 4 cylinder and 6/8 cylinder models, including the diesel models as well.

But you could change it to twin (left - right) exhaust if you want, just need to get the rear bumper diffuser/valance to accommodate that [:)]

[Obi_agent]

Nope this is how it is going to look with the 2.0 T in the US and I am absolutely distraught over it. It is really sad they did away with the duel side exhaust. I will go with the 3.2 because of it. Or most likely go with an A5 or maybe the new TT.

You can always buy a dual side exhaust. That is by the money you saved, by not buying a V6 engine. Wrenchin'

[DeMOROlized]

Nope this is how it is going to look with the 2.0 T in the US and I am absolutely distraught over it. It is really sad they did away with the duel side exhaust. I will go with the 3.2 because of it. Or most likely go with an A5 or maybe the new TT.

Can you state your source for this? The pics we've been seeing for US sitings are test mules, and they are not necessary equipped to US specs. Even the pictures you are showing are Euro spec cars. Not to mention that isn't a 2.0T, but a 2.0TDI. Even B7 TDI has always been single sided exhaust in Europe.

[Phoebusvh]

Go over to Audiworld. This has been confirmed for quite awhile now that the 2.0 A4 only get on sided exhaust.

[audiholix]

The new 2.0t motors can handle over 400hp on stock internals, and the stock DSG transmission on the gti and a3 can handle 400hp easy. If you're going for performance, there is absolutely 0 reason why you would go with the 3.2. the 3.2 costs more, will end up slower and eat more gas.

[Louis J.]

Because I just paid $6.02/gal to fill up and it's only going to get worst. That's a $100.03 fill up. I'm in Vancouver BTW.

[quattro.it]

^^That totally sucks. Vancouver BC I assume? I saw $4.53 at the Chevron today for premium. It has steadily gone up, up, up since when? What is Audi's problem? Why won't they bring TDI engines to North America?

[xslyx]

I was wondering, are the 2.0Ts coming in Sept only in fwd? or with awd too?

[quattro.it]

I was wondering, are the 2.0Ts coming in Sept only in fwd? or with awd too?

quattro 2.0T available in September.

[Noffy]

Can you state your source for this? The pics we've been seeing for US sitings are test mules, and they are not necessary equipped to US specs. Even the pictures you are showing are Euro spec cars. Not to mention that isn't a 2.0T, but a 2.0TDI. Even B7 TDI has always been single sided exhaust in Europe.


My source is..... the internet LOL . Seriously I have been following this quite closely and I have yet to see a 2.0T picture with dual sided exhuast. I hope I am wrong but I think its pretty common knowledge.

[BMWBig6]

The new 2.0t motors can handle over 400hp on stock internals, and the stock DSG transmission on the gti and a3 can handle 400hp easy.

Too bad we're not getting the DSG in the U.S.

[A4_Mike]

I would go with the 2.0T considering it's fuel economy and potential for modification if you ever feel the desire for more horsepower.

[4-tified]

Nope this is how it is going to look with the 2.0 T in the US and I am absolutely distraught over it. It is really sad they did away with the duel side exhaust. I will go with the 3.2 because of it. Or most likely go with an A5 or maybe the new TT.

And, another Audi oddity the
B8 Avant 2.0 TSFI has DUAL exhaust (tips at least).

I'm still betting that the 3.2 V6 is a stop-gap engine that will quickly be replaced with a version of the super-charged V6, to better compete with BMW's 335i, MB C350, IS350, G35, CTS, and maybe even Pontiacs G8.
All of those use larger displacement for smoother, more linear power.
MPG on a 2.0 should be good, but honestly, when you drive a small turbo engine and demand the higher output you still burn fuel at a good clip.
You can only get so much energy from a given amount of fuel.
Efficiency needs improving across the board, and its' been coming albeit slowly.

Overall, if a nicely equipped 2.0 TFSI comes to within $3-$4000 of a 335i, I'm going with the BMW. My S-Line A4 was about $3000 less than a similarly equipped 2006 330i, but I opted to try out quattro, and I preferred the A4's look. This time around I want better performance, even though the B8 A4 looks the best in this class of sedan.

I REALLY NEED the SC'd V6 B8 A4 to be priced close to the E90 335i.
If not, it's back to the propeller logo company. [:)]

[4-tified]

good theory, but i believe that auto manufacturers (especially Audi) would not risk just "pre-chipping" their car for more power and jeopardize reliability (i know that the current chips are reliable as hell)... but this is in the bigger picture. they would be safer running the K04 (or some turbo variance) with a traditional (ultra conservative) programming.

This wouldn't be anything like the "pre-chipping" idea you have.

The new engine is bumping power due to increased air pump ability, which is what an IC engine is. Still there are limits to how much an engine can be boosted before internals needs upgrading as well, or even things like fuel injectors, fuel pumps.

I do think that tuners will be able to boost power for sure.
Still, the question is how much boost, with requisite fuel, air, timing trim will be needed in order to bump hp/torque at the SAME % as before.

Torque is going from 207lb ft to 258lb ft. That's AMAZING.
Even with better breathing and IC's, boost must have been increased, and/or compression could have gone up. Either/or of those things still chew into the engines overall capability to increase power over stock with simply software and stay within safe margins.

So, I'm not disagreeing with you. I too hope that power can be boosted the same percentage as with the 2.0T FSI. We'll see in time. [:)]

A K04 would be MUCH more promising for that to happen. However, given the low rpm torque jump plus the claim that it occurs even LOWER in the rev band, and that fact that HP is only modestly increased, indicates that the turbo is still small. Maybe it will be slightly altered small KO3 like turbo with lower friction bearings, clipped turbines, or some such, but overall the power numbers indicate a small, fast spooling turbo.

[-Audi_tuning-]

Looks like, and knowing audi, the only difference between the exhausts will be the rear defuser, swap it out for a v6 model's and you shouldnt have a problem making it a duel again... it is a lil dissapointing though... but a cant be perfect, what would we mod?!

[QUIKnEZ]

Couple things to keep in mind... coming into an Audi forum that is crawling with four-circle enthusiats will give you a warped sense of what the average consumer thinks...

I have a 3.2 .... and the engine's responsivness, reliability and smoothness cannot be matched by a 3.2 wannabe. NA all the way as far as I'm concerned.

However, if you're worried about gas... go with the 2.0T... I just couldn't deal with majority of VW's having the same engine as I.

[4-tified]

Couple things to keep in mind... coming into an Audi forum that is crawling with four-circle enthusiats will give you a warped sense of what the average consumer thinks...

I have a 3.2 .... and the engine's responsivness, reliability and smoothness cannot be matched by a 3.2 wannabe. NA all the way as far as I'm concerned.

However, if you're worried about gas... go with the 2.0T... I just couldn't deal with majority of VW's having the same engine as I.

I understand your point on VW vs. Audi engine.
But, Audi/VW uses engines interchangeably, there are Audi products with VW VR6 engines.
The VW VR6 is a very smooth, nice sounding engine with great low rpm torque. It feels as if it has more torque at low rpm than Audi's V6.
The VR6 has more HP and it probably a better match with quattro in the heavy A4.

The 2.0T is no where a "wanna be" V6. It's a small displacement turbo engine that puts out excellent hp/torque or it's size while giving better MPG than the larger engine. It also lowers the weight over the front end and gives a more balanced front to rear weight ratio.

It's different, not a "wanna be".

[quattro.it]

And, another Audi oddity the
B8 Avant 2.0 TSFI has DUAL exhaust (tips at least).

I'm still betting that the 3.2 V6 is a stop-gap engine that will quickly be replaced with a version of the super-charged V6, to better compete with BMW's 335i, MB C350, IS350, G35, CTS, and maybe even Pontiacs G8.
All of those use larger displacement for smoother, more linear power.
MPG on a 2.0 should be good, but honestly, when you drive a small turbo engine and demand the higher output you still burn fuel at a good clip.
You can only get so much energy from a given amount of fuel.
Efficiency needs improving across the board, and its' been coming albeit slowly.

Overall, if a nicely equipped 2.0 TFSI comes to within $3-$4000 of a 335i, I'm going with the BMW. My S-Line A4 was about $3000 less than a similarly equipped 2006 330i, but I opted to try out quattro, and I preferred the A4's look. This time around I want better performance, even though the B8 A4 looks the best in this class of sedan.

I REALLY NEED the SC'd V6 B8 A4 to be priced close to the E90 335i.
If not, it's back to the propeller logo company. [:)]

I'm curious, if you get the BMW what will you drive in the winter in Chicago?

[QUIKnEZ]

I understand your point on VW vs. Audi engine.
But, Audi/VW uses engines interchangeably, there are Audi products with VW VR6 engines.
The VW VR6 is a very smooth, nice sounding engine with great low rpm torque. It feels as if it has more torque at low rpm than Audi's V6.
The VR6 has more HP and it probably a better match with quattro in the heavy A4.

The 2.0T is no where a "wanna be" V6. It's a small displacement turbo engine that puts out excellent hp/torque or it's size while giving better MPG than the larger engine. It also lowers the weight over the front end and gives a more balanced front to rear weight ratio.

It's different, not a "wanna be".

All Good points.... sorry for the wannabe comment... out of place.

If I were to buy brand new; it would be 2.0T... I just couldn't justify the modifications for the power band I wanted.

[a4rings]

Nope this is how it is going to look with the 2.0 T in the US and I am absolutely distraught over it. It is really sad they did away with the duel side exhaust. I will go with the 3.2 because of it. Or most likely go with an A5 or maybe the new TT.

thats a really stupid reason to chose one engine over another. its a godamn 4 cyclinder it doeant need more than one exhaust pipe. the duel is just a restriction

[4-tified]

I'm curious, if you get the BMW what will you drive in the winter in Chicago?

Before my A4 I had a 325i sport. I drove it in the winter and it was fine, even with all season tires.

That's not to say that quattro isn't better, IT IS. Quattro AWD makes the A4 feel extremely more capable than the 3 series RWD.
Still, a RWD BMW with the proper tires works just fine in the snow.
Modern traction controls, modern tires, and knowing how to use a manual trans in the snow make it "no big deal" to drive a RWD performance vehicle in the snow.
You have to realize the conditions and drive accordingly.

Also, the snow doesn't sit around long enough to worry about it.
We have maybe 1 or 2 big snowfalls where the snow may be on the ground for a day or 2, rarely more than that. Once the roads are clear, which is the majority of winter, you can enjoy your RWD or AWD as you please.

Just because you have quattro, that doesn't mean the car is invincible either. Braking is still sketchy with either drive format. Tires are VERY important.

I wouldn't get X drive from BMW. It takes away from the proper balance of BMW's RWD setup. Also, X drive models sit taller due to higher ride heights with X drive.

A "proper" A4 has quattro. A "proper" 3 series has RWD. [:D]

[Hamann]

Nope this is how it is going to look with the 2.0 T in the US and I am absolutely distraught over it. It is really sad they did away with the duel side exhaust. I will go with the 3.2 because of it. Or most likely go with an A5 or maybe the new TT.


I like the dual exhaust on one side...looks good.

[BNZ TOY]

I'm sick of Audi's chinsiness with the A4 line, I'll never buy an A4 again.

"Audi's chinsiness" [confused]

[B7 Projectile]

turbo end of story. After Stage II chip, exhaust, and Intake you would never look back, the car sounds and feels great. 6th gear pull always puts a grin on my face, I can finally run full AC with plenty of highway passing power left. Not to mention that you can get 30+ MPG on the highway.

[vjma]

Because I own a 3.2 that's why it is better than 2.0T...[:D]

Seriously, the 3.2 is also a great engine. I know many people here are kicking the 3.2 but I still believe that in terms of smoothness and drivability the 3.2 may still have the edge for someone like me who prefer to have things stock. The gas mileage is also a lot better than many people think. Having said that though, I am kicking myself for not waiting for the S4. Now that car will be almost perfect in my book.

[ray133]

Audi's 2.0T engine has won the "engine of the year" award for the last three years. Also for the extra $$$, you'd pay on a 3.2, you can get the 2.0T fully loaded (Prestige).

[yung turbo]

give me this anyday. TURBO FTMFW!!
http://www.audizine.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=372&pictureid=1562

[meowevil]

There only one thing i am wondering between 3.2 and 2.0T is the reliability. So far from what I heard 3.2 "tend" to be a little more reliable than 2.0T. Is that right? Or perhaps, because most of us "mod" rather mod 2.0T instead of 3.2, so the reliable of 2.0T is lower? ?

[dnyf21]

just curious is there anyone on the boards that has a 2.0T with close to 400hp? and if so how much $$ was needed to reach it...after purchasing supporting mods like suspension and BBK wouldnt it be better just to get an S4? (im assuming reaching 400 hp is going to take close to $6-10k supporting mods another 3-5k)

[marcus1701]

nope bc S4's are slow (for 340HP)....STG 3 cars still get 23mpg avg. vs 18mpg in S4.

[Militant-Grunt]

Im glad audi stopped doing a dual exhaust on the 2.0t. All this extra unnecessary weight for a car that only has exhaust coming from 1 bank. Makes perfect sense, there is no other reason for having two pipes out of one bank other than aesthetic reasons (even though I think single side dual looks better regardless)

[BMWBig6]

there is no other reason for having two pipes out of one bank other than aesthetic reasons

Actually there is one more reason: noise suppression. That's why Audi went with dual separate mufflers on the Avant only.

[quattro.it]

^^ The Avant has sound insulation material in the spare tire compartment area. The Sedan doesn't. The 3.2 is a proven engine and it is smoother and quieter than the 2.0T. People used to this driving experience coming over to Audi from other brands like these attributes. I'll bet it isn't long (MY2010?) before the 3.2 is replaced by the new 3.0 SC.

[bavaria75]

Please correct me if I'm wrong.. if you mods the 3.2, wouldn't you get more power out of the 3.2 over the 2.0T?

Correct you should be able to get more power out of a 3.2 than a 2.0. However the 2.0 is alreadt Turbo charged what pushes more air (energy so to say) through the smaller engine. With minor modifications on Software and bigger turbos you can get even more energy through the 2.0 engine.
You are correct you can do the smae with a 3.2 engine, but you will need to start adding the turbo and this will cost you, whereas the 2.0 has the headstart.
Audi offers a 3.0 Turbo called a S4 and it is a Supercharger.

And the game of extreme tuning will continue.