A6 2.0 vs. A6 3.0
10-08-2014, 03:59 AM
#1
AudiWorld Super User
Thread Starter
A6 2.0 vs. A6 3.0
My 3.0T is in for a service and I have a 2.0T loaner. Here are a few observations but first I would like to mention that my first loaner was an A3 and I was not impressed at all. It was too small, sparse interior, horrible round vents, average in every way.
The first test that I did was to check mileage. I tried as best I could to duplicate my normal 41 mile round trip using approx. 75% cruise at 62MPH.
My 3.0 could get 34 but the 2.0 only got 36 so that is not enough, at least for me, to even consider a 2.0. Needless to say, the 2.0 was much coarser in execution with additional engine noise that was not the kind of noise that I wanted to hear.
The 2.0 had 18's with Conti's and I was impressed with the ride, firm but controlled. My 3.0 has the 20's with the sport suspension and it is jarring over most concrete joints and downright uncomfortable on most roads here in So Cal. Obviously, handling is not as good in the 2.0 but the kind of handling that the 20/sport allows is more conducive to the track than for normal roads. The 18/Conti's were also much quieter.
I like the 4 spoke wheel for the position of the 5 and 7 o'clock spokes but the flappy paddles and the contouring of the 3 spoke is better. Audi could save some production costs if they just made a flat bottom, 4 spoke with the contouring of the 4 spoke. Take the best of all three designs and go with it, the A6 is a "sport" sedan so build it as such.
The 2.0 is white with a black interior, black headliner and A pillars. The white surround of the mirrors stand out like big ears on a small head. The view is focused on the outside with everything surrounding being black except for the white mirrors. It looks very odd and distracting.
My 3.0 has LED headlights and the 2.0 has HID and with respect to illumination I can see very little difference. The HID's are a bit warmer with a harder cut-off. The HID's also have a smoother light whereas the LED's show hot-spots for each of the many lenses. The LED's main attribute would be for the "Matrix" system but the USA is not allowed to market it so we have a compromise that is hardly an advantage except that the LED's use less energy and, subjectively, look more impressive.
The front seats in the 2.0 are not ventilated or perforated but they are more comfortable than the "sport" seats. Audi's idea of a sport seat is to give you thigh bolsters that are too narrow and too hard. I like ventilated seats but I am also disappointed that the test dummy that they used for fitment was not one of typical human dimensions nor could he complain about the thigh bolsters.
The trick in making a good handling sport sedan is not to reduce comfort but to augment the drivers ability to perform at higher levels. Audi has taken a crude approach by simply stiffening the suspension and forcing you into an uncomfortable driving position. Sport and comfort are not mutually exclusive.
BTW - did I mention that I love my A6 and I miss it. I also miss the features of the Prestige, the power of the Chipwerke and the additional customization allowed by VCDS. It feels like "my" car. If I tested the 2.0 that I presently am driving as the loaner maybe I would have moved on to one of the competitors. The A6 is the starting point from which you can create a great sedan, you just need to keep throwing money at it until it surpasses the competition, a base A6 2.0 is not competitive.
The first test that I did was to check mileage. I tried as best I could to duplicate my normal 41 mile round trip using approx. 75% cruise at 62MPH.
My 3.0 could get 34 but the 2.0 only got 36 so that is not enough, at least for me, to even consider a 2.0. Needless to say, the 2.0 was much coarser in execution with additional engine noise that was not the kind of noise that I wanted to hear.
The 2.0 had 18's with Conti's and I was impressed with the ride, firm but controlled. My 3.0 has the 20's with the sport suspension and it is jarring over most concrete joints and downright uncomfortable on most roads here in So Cal. Obviously, handling is not as good in the 2.0 but the kind of handling that the 20/sport allows is more conducive to the track than for normal roads. The 18/Conti's were also much quieter.
I like the 4 spoke wheel for the position of the 5 and 7 o'clock spokes but the flappy paddles and the contouring of the 3 spoke is better. Audi could save some production costs if they just made a flat bottom, 4 spoke with the contouring of the 4 spoke. Take the best of all three designs and go with it, the A6 is a "sport" sedan so build it as such.
The 2.0 is white with a black interior, black headliner and A pillars. The white surround of the mirrors stand out like big ears on a small head. The view is focused on the outside with everything surrounding being black except for the white mirrors. It looks very odd and distracting.
My 3.0 has LED headlights and the 2.0 has HID and with respect to illumination I can see very little difference. The HID's are a bit warmer with a harder cut-off. The HID's also have a smoother light whereas the LED's show hot-spots for each of the many lenses. The LED's main attribute would be for the "Matrix" system but the USA is not allowed to market it so we have a compromise that is hardly an advantage except that the LED's use less energy and, subjectively, look more impressive.
The front seats in the 2.0 are not ventilated or perforated but they are more comfortable than the "sport" seats. Audi's idea of a sport seat is to give you thigh bolsters that are too narrow and too hard. I like ventilated seats but I am also disappointed that the test dummy that they used for fitment was not one of typical human dimensions nor could he complain about the thigh bolsters.
The trick in making a good handling sport sedan is not to reduce comfort but to augment the drivers ability to perform at higher levels. Audi has taken a crude approach by simply stiffening the suspension and forcing you into an uncomfortable driving position. Sport and comfort are not mutually exclusive.
BTW - did I mention that I love my A6 and I miss it. I also miss the features of the Prestige, the power of the Chipwerke and the additional customization allowed by VCDS. It feels like "my" car. If I tested the 2.0 that I presently am driving as the loaner maybe I would have moved on to one of the competitors. The A6 is the starting point from which you can create a great sedan, you just need to keep throwing money at it until it surpasses the competition, a base A6 2.0 is not competitive.
10-08-2014, 06:18 AM
#3
AudiWorld Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nicee. Question, how long does it take for Audi to to do a full maintenance? I have 70k miles on mine and am going in to do full maintenance on it. Does it take that long to do maintenance on it for them to give you a loaner car?
10-08-2014, 07:52 AM
#4
AudiWorld Super User
Thread Starter
I got the pre-paid and it's in for the 15K. I don't know if the loaner is for all warranty work or because I got the pre-paid or if it's up to the dealer. I always drop mine off around midday and it usually takes 2 days but I had to wait for parts to come in (fans for the cooled seats) so I have no idea how long a 70K service would take.
10-08-2014, 09:32 AM
#5
AudiWorld Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I got the pre-paid and it's in for the 15K. I don't know if the loaner is for all warranty work or because I got the pre-paid or if it's up to the dealer. I always drop mine off around midday and it usually takes 2 days but I had to wait for parts to come in (fans for the cooled seats) so I have no idea how long a 70K service would take.
10-09-2014, 04:14 AM
#7
AudiWorld Super User
Thread Starter
Another difference is that my 3.0 has a camera with various views (front, top, sides, etc.) and the 2.0 only has the rear view. The 2.0 is significantly clearer with much better rear vision at night. Interesting that they would use different cameras with different specifications.
The DIS has less selectable menus with the cruise control showing large font MPH. The next menu down is the same display of large font displayed MPH but with a green small font "cruise" added. What a waste of time having two digital readouts AND the main speedometer. I keep getting told by every authority and every newscast that "speed kills" so I guess that Audi really wanted us to be able to read our speed.
Oh, and BTW - speed doesn't kill, stupidity kills.
The DIS has less selectable menus with the cruise control showing large font MPH. The next menu down is the same display of large font displayed MPH but with a green small font "cruise" added. What a waste of time having two digital readouts AND the main speedometer. I keep getting told by every authority and every newscast that "speed kills" so I guess that Audi really wanted us to be able to read our speed.
Oh, and BTW - speed doesn't kill, stupidity kills.
Trending Topics
10-09-2014, 09:26 AM
#9
AudiWorld Super User
Thread Starter
The advantage of the Chipwerke is its easy removal and I'm not going to tempt fait so I will remove it every time I take it in for warranty work.
10-09-2014, 07:01 PM
#10
Interesting write-up. I agree that the 2.0 is not significantly more economical than the 3.0 (my calc’s come to about 2.5 mpg better). However, I am surprised you found the 2.0 to be a coarser engine. I had a 2010 A6 with the 3.0 supercharged six and found that it idled very roughly, so much so that the passenger seat would vibrate and co-pilots would comment. Likewise the steering wheel – which was OK in that it was like a massage. When I test drove a 2013 A6 2.0 in December 2012 I decided to get it since overall the engine was much smoother and quieter. Maybe my 2010 was a lemon, though every time I complained about NVH to the dealer they said it was normal for that engine/transmission.