2005-7 A6 - 2.0 tdi enough?

[Northern Munkee]

Simple question, I'm seeing loads of S line A6s which turn out to be (cos they are often debadged) 2.0 tdi, and wondering given that green bent goverment legislation is to give up my search for nice example 3.0 tdi Tip, and settling on 4 pot. But thinking of my 130 tdi golf, and size of the A6, it gets me wondering if the power will be anything other than adequate. Experiences? How much will the improved economy make up for the lack of shove? Plus should I get manual? Is the auto 2.0 a tip or multitronic?

[clonmult]

Can't comment on that model, but I've been driving around in a 51 plate A6 Avant 1.9 TDI for six months.

Its not exactly fast, but it can easily keep up with the traffic on the commute to/from work, on a longer journey it was happy cruising at 90 leptons with a boot full and all the family, yet still returning around 50mpg.

On the odd occasion that I give it the leaden foot treatment, its not a bad mover, corners quite nicely and relatively predictably with slight understeer.

[Dr G]

It's just about OK, the model is really there to be boring and trot along at 70-80.

If you've the option of a 3.0 quattro it is significantly nicer to drive and very saleable when you're finished with it.

[blueg33]

As a matter of interest what is your budget? I will be putting my 07 Le Mans 3.0tdi on sale shortly

[Raven Flyer]

I went through the same questions earlier this year.

There are loads of 2.0s out there as Audi UK did a deal with a car rental co and they were guaranteed buy-backs. The dealers were stuffed full of them six months ago and they were very reasonably priced.

I wanted more power though and ended up getting a 2.7 TDi Quattro tip S Line. Is a great car and I am really pleased with it. Unusually for me, I haven't regretted not getting a 3.0. The 2.7 does everything I need and if I do get an itch for 3.0 power, I can get it mapped for £500.

[JeffC]

Ive recently sold a 2.0tdi /2.7tdi and 3.0tdi A6s, 2.0tdi goes well enough imo, 3.0 is silky smooth but 4wd kills it both performance and economy for me, the 2.7 was obviously much smoother than the 4 pot 2.0tdi and much better on fuel than the 3.0 as 2.7tdis can come in 2 wheel drive and manual which imho is the one to go for, if you need 4wd go for the 3.0. and if you need an Auto buy a bmw or a merc .

Edited by JeffC on Friday 30th October 19:23

[Escort2dr]

Just bought one. Goes well enough though no flying machine. Had same engine in a Passat which was then mapped to 170bhp - well worth doing. Mapping cost me less than £300 from Shark Performance www.sharkperformance.co.uk

[gizlaroc]

I have just swapped with a friend for a week as he has the 2.0tdi and I have the 3.2 fsi petrol, mine is a fully loaded 2005 with 50k on it, his is a pretty basic 2007 with bluetooth and 40k miles on it, he was wanting more power and I was thinking newer and more frugal would be nice, however.....

After a week and 600 miles I got 32mpg from his, which is multitronic and I normally get 26mpg from mine, he also gets 32mpg from his as well and he got...........26mpg from mine.
To be honest the difference between the two in performance and refinement just wasn't worth the difference in MPG.

He was itching to swap, there was no way in the world I would.

I also had a 3.0tdi for a few days a while back and that ended up at 29mpg, about 3mpg behind the petrol, again just not worth it imho, it just didn't feel as good in any area.

I can get 34mpg quite easily on a run in my 3.2 petrol, the 2.0tdi was showing about 40mpg doing the same and the 3,0tdi was showing around 38mpg, difference is as soon as you push the 2.0tdi at all it gobbles fuel bringing the average right down, it is great if you can lay off the right pedal and waft, but I just can't.

[Escort2dr]

Strange. My 2.0tdi Avant will comfortably do 55mpg+ on a run. To get it down to 40mpg I'd have to do a very short journey with a cold engine.

[heightswitch]

Escort2dr said:

Strange. My 2.0tdi Avant will comfortably do 55mpg+ on a run. To get it down to 40mpg I'd have to do a very short journey with a cold engine.

I have an A4 2.0 TDi 140 and an A3 2.0Tdi Quattro

Back to back the A4 is smoother, quieter and better insulated from road and transmission noise. It also does between 50-55mpg everyday. (more if my wife drives it) the A3 quattro records between 43 and 46mpg. the quattro is definitely slower off the mark but quicker around the twisties.

The quattro does make the economy suffer but is necessary for us being on the 400m contour line in Northumberland.

If you are looking at an A6 though I thought that they were standardised on the 170hp version of the 2.0 tdi. having driven a matess old 1.9 a6 with 160hp I would say that it is more than up to the job and very quick mid range.

there is another post on here about Polo's and whether to go for a petrol or diesel.

All I can say is that the Diesel Audi's are much more refined to drive than the petrol version. My mate couldn't believe how tourqey the real world drive was compared to his wifes 2.0T A4, The turbo was undeniably quicker but so much more harsh in real world driving conditions.

All you are going to buy in comparison with a 3.0 car is the prospect of filling up at the pumps much more frequently!!

a 2.0 tdi is a 0-60 in 10-11 second and 130mph car, if you want more accelleration you can chip to 170hp without any loss of economy why would you want any more performance than that for a daily driver??

N.

Edited by heightswitch on Saturday 31st October 08:09

Edited by heightswitch on Saturday 31st October 08:13

[blueg33]

Interesting comments on fuel consumption. My 3.0tdi Quattro shows an average of 34.8 mpg on the trip for all driving and on motorway journeys I usually get 44-45 mpg cruising at 75-80 with air con on

[paoloh]

We are running an 07 2.0 TDi A6 Estate.

We had it rolling roaded and it was running 155 BHP standard and about 260Lb/Ft Torque.

It felt a little sluggish at low speeds.

After re map it is running 188 BHP and 316 Lb/Ft Torque and feels like a different beast.

Edited by paoloh on Saturday 31st October 10:22

[Dr G]

blueg33 said:

Interesting comments on fuel consumption. My 3.0tdi Quattro shows an average of 34.8 mpg on the trip for all driving and on motorway journeys I usually get 44-45 mpg cruising at 75-80 with air con on

I get about the same in these but have only managed a best of 41-42 ish.

[heightswitch]

blueg33 said:

Interesting comments on fuel consumption. My 3.0tdi Quattro shows an average of 34.8 mpg on the trip for all driving and on motorway journeys I usually get 44-45 mpg cruising at 75-80 with air con on

Yep thats about right. The 2.0 are 50-55 in all use on the computer. The figure rises on a motorway cruise. at the end of the day you have 2 more pots and 1 extra litre of discplacement to feed.

Unless you are towing a caravan or like being able to accellerate 2 seconds faster to 60 the 3.0 isn't worth it. That said I still fancy an S4 next year

N.

Edited by heightswitch on Saturday 31st October 11:01

[blueg33]

heightswitch said:

blueg33 said:

Interesting comments on fuel consumption. My 3.0tdi Quattro shows an average of 34.8 mpg on the trip for all driving and on motorway journeys I usually get 44-45 mpg cruising at 75-80 with air con on

Yep thats about right. The 2.0 are 50-55 in all use on the computer. The figure rises on a motorway cruise. at the end of the day you have 2 more pots and 1 extra litre of discplacement to feed.

Unless you are towing a caravan or like being able to accellerate 2 seconds faster to 60 the 3.0 isn't worth it. That said I still fancy an S4 next year

N.

Edited by heightswitch on Saturday 31st October 11:01

I think in reality its more than 2 seconds faster, but the real difference is overtaking say 40-70 mph. Plus the extra security of Quattro on a wet motorway wins it for me. I did try the 2.0 and found the difference very marked. So i guess its down to whether you want to pay for the extra fuel.

[Ordinary_Chap]

blueg33 said:

heightswitch said:

blueg33 said:

Interesting comments on fuel consumption. My 3.0tdi Quattro shows an average of 34.8 mpg on the trip for all driving and on motorway journeys I usually get 44-45 mpg cruising at 75-80 with air con on

Yep thats about right. The 2.0 are 50-55 in all use on the computer. The figure rises on a motorway cruise. at the end of the day you have 2 more pots and 1 extra litre of discplacement to feed.

Unless you are towing a caravan or like being able to accellerate 2 seconds faster to 60 the 3.0 isn't worth it. That said I still fancy an S4 next year

N.

Edited by heightswitch on Saturday 31st October 11:01

I think in reality its more than 2 seconds faster, but the real difference is overtaking say 40-70 mph. Plus the extra security of Quattro on a wet motorway wins it for me. I did try the 2.0 and found the difference very marked. So i guess its down to whether you want to pay for the extra fuel.

Extra security on the motorway of 4 wheel drive?

Can you explain that one to me please?

[Northern Munkee]

Interesting, thanks for the feedback, looks as though I'm really going to have to drive both.

Going to the pumps more often is not the issue, if motorway consumption is between the 1.8T Passat, I had, trundling at 65mph to try and get close to 38mpg, and my spirited Golf charging home (~50mpg) then 3.0 would do nicely, if it can do say mid 40s, for the shove and grip/smiles in the winter roads/twisties.

I keep seeing reviews referring to the weight of the A6, which is a concerns me, especially for 2.0, and in relation to fuel consumption. I need a bigger car for a really comfortable seat with plenty of support/adjustment, a long standing back condition, and plenty of room to travel 4 up plus loads of camera equipment.

Incidently the budget is £15-£18K (with the top end for the right car). Le Mans spec is what I really like, but the are only just coming into my budget range, which was why I was considering the "plainer" S Class, which the Le Mans appears to be an enhanced spec. I'm considering the Avant, as well as 5, 7 series and the A8.

Not in a mad rush, as the 4 up traveling UK far and wide won't commence until March, if it happens at all (waiting on a contract).

Edited by Northern Munkee on Saturday 31st October 13:00

[va1o]

What about the 2.0 TDI 170? Havent driven an A6 with it, but I'd guess it would be a good compramise between running costs, initial purchase price and performance.

[heightswitch]

Ordinary_Chap said:

blueg33 said:

heightswitch said:

blueg33 said:

Interesting comments on fuel consumption. My 3.0tdi Quattro shows an average of 34.8 mpg on the trip for all driving and on motorway journeys I usually get 44-45 mpg cruising at 75-80 with air con on

Yep thats about right. The 2.0 are 50-55 in all use on the computer. The figure rises on a motorway cruise. at the end of the day you have 2 more pots and 1 extra litre of discplacement to feed.

Unless you are towing a caravan or like being able to accellerate 2 seconds faster to 60 the 3.0 isn't worth it. That said I still fancy an S4 next year

N.

Edited by heightswitch on Saturday 31st October 11:01

I think in reality its more than 2 seconds faster, but the real difference is overtaking say 40-70 mph. Plus the extra security of Quattro on a wet motorway wins it for me. I did try the 2.0 and found the difference very marked. So i guess its down to whether you want to pay for the extra fuel.

Extra security on the motorway of 4 wheel drive?

Can you explain that one to me please?

Yes quite simply.

The A4 and above models have full time 4wd quattro with central torsen diff so on a motorway pushing on in heavy spray and surface water conditions you do not suffer the front end loosing traction and wandering like you do with a front wheel drive car.

The A3 quattro has the more inferior haldex system which is still pretty good and similarly planted. their is a slight hesitancy when front traction is lost compared with the Torsen permanent 4wd cars

but the planted feel is still far superior than a conventional front driver

I live up in the hills so in the winter months 4wd is pretty important on untreated severely frosty or water flooded roads caused by the leaf fall blocking the surface gulleys. The TC light on the 2wd car always comes on with the front nearside wheel loosing traction. This doesn't happen on a 4wd car

Quattro has many benefits if you can live with the penalty of fuel consumption.

N

[heightswitch]

va1o said:

What about the 2.0 TDI 170? Havent driven an A6 with it, but I'd guess it would be a good compramise between running costs, initial purchase price and performance.

That would be my choice in an a6 over the thirstier 3.0

Its funny though that Audi used the golf platform haldex system for the A3 quattro so they are plentiful. a 2.0 quattro A4 is a much rarer car to find. so if 4wd and a larger car is required then the compromise will likely have to be the bigger engined car.