One of the touted advantages of the 3.2 is better milage, but I wonder how many 3.2 drivers go around all the time in sport mode in order to get satisfactory performance? The higher shift points means you are not getting the maximum milage touted for the six.

On the other hand, there is no need for the sport mode when tooling around in the 4.2. Plenty of power/torque at your fingertips, which means you are getting the best milage the engine has to offer.

Of course, even in sport mode the 3.2 probably gets better milage than the 4.2 in normal mode, yet the difference will have shrunken, thus lessening the supposed benefit of the smaller engine.

Sounds like you are trying to convince yourself of something. I only drive in sport mode when I am going through a school zone and want the engine response to keep it slow. When I drive in "Real Sport Mode" I use the tiptronic in manual mode. Your logic on gas mileage may not work in real practice. You may be right in theory, but it is based on driving with a lead foot. If I wanted to do that, then I woulld have ignored mileage and purchased the 4.2 instead. I like my 3.2.

Each engine size suits a particular driving style or budget (otherwise why have two choices). This is a perpetual argument that will always have someone on one side or the other trying to rationalize their choice.

I consider the 4.2 a luxury that, fortunately, I can afford. So, I pampered myself and get rewarded every day with visceral pleasure.

No regrets here, my friend.

Barring of course extreme yearly mileage where a small difference in gas mileage can add up.

The 3.2 is only 1 mpg (6%) better in the city than the 4.2 and 2 mpg (8%) better on the highway.

It's not like comparing an A4 2.0TM to an RS4 where the difference is very signficant. (57% better mileage in the city and 48% better highway.)

i tried both and opted for the 3.2; if i desire real performance i drive a porsche or ferrari. there is just not enough performance difference between the 3.2 and the 4.2, even w/ the s-line, especially when braking and taking corners (the roll kills it), entry speed notwithstanding, to justify the price imho. i second the thought that in the end you can't be convinced either way.

even if it is only +2 MPG over the 4.2L V8. Something for the environment and the effect an individual can play for a potential buyer to consider.

As an added benefit, why pay a higher initial price and then pay more in operating costs, even if one personnaly can afford it? Unless a driver really needs the higher HP output of the V8 for your particular situation, I would go with the higher mileage 3.2L.

I bought it because it was selling significantly lower than the 4.2 which to me could not justify the $5-7K increase in price just for some more horse power yet the exact same car otherwise... (and see the post above where they purchased a 3.2 for over $9K off MSRP. Good luck getting a 4.2 for anything more than $1K off these days)

But this is a subjective topic. Others feel having the horse power, even if not using it much at all, is very important and worth every penny.

The 4.2 sounds better, is torquier, and it is way more !@#$ing cool! That's pretty much my rationale.

The real world difference in highway mileage between the 3.2 and 4.2 is probably much less than the EPA figures would indicate. I'm getting 28-30mpg consistently on the highway with my 4.2. Of course, there is a large real-world cost difference between the 3.2 and 4.2, and I could totally see that swaying many buyers.

let it influence deciding between the 6 and 8 cylinders

My wife will spew fire and brimstone if I drove at high speeds.

But really, how many people drives 130MPH - 150MPH. I only do 100-110 MPH everyday. Why even bother with a 4.2 if you're not driving more than 140MPH? If you like driving at high speed, that's fine.

A6 can do 6000-7000 RPMs at S-mode quickly. The 3.2 can overtake many cars on the road with ease and just pull away.

The $8000 difference - can't justify it when you're getting 28-30 MPG on the A6 3.2. Cars depreciate in value and I decided to invest that difference in price in building my dream vacation home, which I can rent out and make $$$ :) LOL.

<center><img src="http://files.conceptcarz.com/img/Audi/audi_leMans_chicago_04_dv_05.jpg"></center><p>If money's no object spending $60K on a 4.2. ... I'd go for $90K-$100K on this.

A6 4.2 with:
- RS4 engine
- DSG
- lightweight 19 inch rims
- bespoke lightweight suspension
- ceramic brakes
- 70:30 rear biased torque split
- remove all chrome except for the rings
- change unpainted exterior surfaces (i.e. front radiator surround and rear boot strip) to matt aluminium
- all black interior
- sports seats with alcantara inserts
- matt carbon fibre trim
- RS4 steering wheel
- open sky roof (available on the A3)

Are you listening quattro GmbH? Hopefully it will weigh only as much as an RS4.

Total stealth car except for the Misano red paint job :)

then you need to buy 2 Aston, coz' 1 will always be in the shop under repair...

I have the 4.2 and I have driven the 3.2 as a loaner from the dealerships when i have had te car in for service. There is a difference with the car and it isn't at 140+. I don't speed much, but I like having the power at my foot to get around someone when I am doing 70. The 4.2 has the power at that speed to put you back in your seat which means you are around that guy and quick.

As far as mileage is concerned, it really depends on your driving style, On all highway, I have gotten close to 600mi to a tank before the gas light has come on. The again, my normal driving mix of city streets and highway gets me about 400+/- to a tank. Either way, I did not get this car for the economy. I got it because it was a lot of fun to drive. I did not want to get a 3.2 and be the guy who is looking for ways to squeeze more power out of the motor with aftermarket parts.

Great car either one, it boils down to preference.