Last post on Oct 23, 2013 at 3:46 PM
You are in the Audi A6
What is this discussion about?
Audi A6, Sedan
#2699 of 6921 3.0 vs. 2.7t, for Max....
Apr 29, 2002 (2:31 pm)
This is an important comparison, which has had far too little discussion. We all seem to get wrapped up in the 4.2 and 2.7t; that is understandable, as they represent the current pinnacle of A6 performance.
The 3.0, as compared to it predecessor, the 2.8, is a revelation: much better torque, top end power, etc. The seat of the pants feel is even more remarkable: this engine, if marketed against the BMW in line 6's of a few years ago, would have compared more than favorably. However, your question relates to the 2.7t.
The 2.7t still has the edge in torque, especially below 3000 rpm. On the other hand, the difference is not dramatic. This would be even more valid if manual transmissions were utilized in each car; I would choose the non turbo 3.0, in that case. My expectation is that Audi is well aware that the turbo requires a greater measure of performance to justify its price and, to some extent, the lesser fuel economy. Accordingly, we all expect the next incarnation of the turbo to be at least 10% up scale as regards both horsepower and torque. The bottom line: the 3.0 is underrated by many; it has the added advantage of forcing Audi to increase performance of both the turbo and 4.2.
As to your suspension inquiry: this is very subjective. While I have been to a few driving schools, I have never driven an Audi any place other than the street. Few of us have had Mark's experience on the track. Further, suspension evaluations are a function of both how and where you drive. In my case, the latter is New England. Consequently, how a vehicle handles mediocre roads is important to yours truly. That being said, my opinion is:
The 2002 3.0 is much closer to the suspension of the 2.7t than was its predecessor ( in our case a 1999). However, one must factor in the single biggest change that can be made to a car's ride and handling: tires. Stock, the 3.0 came with 55 series profile (16"), as opposed to the 45's (17") that are on the 2.7t. While still a capable handler, the 3.0, so equipped, was less responsive than the 2.7t. In order to compare apples to apples (love those fruity comparisons), I switched wheels and tires to 45 series Michelin Pilots. Since I am not Mario Andretti (I am taller), I literally cannot discern a difference in the handling capabilities of the two cars.
In the past, I have experimented, with brands other than Audi, with shorter springs and higher performance shocks. I have found that the advantage gained was not equal to the detriment to ride and handling on poor roads. While others on this board seem to have had a degree of success with such alterations, I would caution anyone to proceed with caution; make one change at a time, starting with tires. If it is of any interest, a Porsche factory rep told me that the suggested handling upgrade for the non turbo 911's was a switch to 18 inch wheels and tires; customers who went the full route (springs, shocks, etc) were largely dissatisfied. A larger percentage actually switched back, at a significant cost. The prime complaint: lousy ride, even for a sports car, and poor handling around bumpy curves.
In any event (sorry to digress), I contend that the 3.0 is a genuine alternative for the A6 buyer. It has good acceleration and fuel economy, reasonable weight, and, while a capable handler in its stock configuration, is easily upgraded via the wheel and tire route.
One last thing and, arguably, the most important: my wife really likes it.
Apr 30, 2002 (9:00 am)
Morphie... Thanks for the comparison opinions between the 2 models. My impression is that they are close cousins in most categories. It sounds like the cost of the cars, ( I paid 42,500 for the '002.7T) could also be about the same. Thanks again for your thoughts-Max
#2701 of 6921 Wrong forum but...
Apr 30, 2002 (11:34 am)
Mark: have you checked out the VW Touareg on vwvortex ?
in Germany a v10 bi-turbo diesel with 313 HP and 551 lbs ft torque from 1800 rpm!!! yowzza ...
Even though i dont care for the honda crv look , i think its quite nicer than the Porsche Cayenne. How come we never get the good stuff ??
#2702 of 6921 This unofficially just in. . .
Apr 30, 2002 (12:19 pm)
For those of you hoping for an A6 Avant -- not allroad, not S6 -- with a 2.7T engine -- ta da:
"inside information" has it that the 2003 A6 Avant will be "available" with a 2.7T engine. I do not know if this means it will ONLY be available with this engine. And although I got this information from a reliable source, it remains unofficial.
Assuming for one instant that this IS true -- this would appear to be evidence that the 2.7T lives on (at least for another year). In these days of more HP, more torque, more more more -- I wonder if the "unknowing" public will be impressed by a smallish engine with "only" 250 HP (although I know they will be if they drive one!)
What's really got me wondering -- what's coming in 2004 model year?
#2703 of 6921 Tiptronic Transmission
Apr 30, 2002 (1:03 pm)
Does any one know if driving in "tip" in , say, 5th gear on a freeway trip, is any more fuel efficient than leaving the shift selector in "D"?
Apr 30, 2002 (8:43 pm)
Assuming you are going at a steady speed there would be no difference whatsoever - they would both be in 5th gear and stay there.
May 01, 2002 (10:09 am)
I have not driven the 2.7T but I own the '02 3.0 with the CVT transmission. I turned in my 99 A4 1.8T Q for the A6 and while there is a difference without the quattro the CVT transmission is absolutely amazing. Shifts are imperceptible and it as fast if not faster than a manual (they have done extensive testing in Europe that validates this). If you do not need Quattro or can wait untill next year(when quattro's get the CVT) I would highly recommend this car. THis is the first time in 15 years I have not had at least one manual car in the family and with this transmission I do not miss it. If you put it in the tiptronic mode it will take each gear to the redline and hold it in the gear you are in. Absolutely fantastic. This is the future of transmissions!!
#2706 of 6921 Multitronic Transmission
May 01, 2002 (3:09 pm)
It sounds like cncarlson is positive about the "multitronic" tranny. Have you noticed any initial "hesitation" when you step on the gas w/ the CVT?
May 02, 2002 (6:57 am)
I only notice hesitation first thing in the morning when I make the first turn at the end of the street, after that it doesn't happen, since the transmission has no "permenant" gears, the computer wants to know how you want to drive that day, I think that explains the initial hesitation. Of course if you slide the lever over to tiptronic, no hesitation ever.
#2708 of 6921 2.7T vs.'02 3.0
May 02, 2002 (8:04 am)
Currently replacing 99Exploder Limited (JUNK) w/some german iron. Have '91 MB300E, have owned 2 BMW'S. Looking at a leftover 01 A62.7T (only 145Miles) vs. a new '02 A6 3.0 CVT. Like both cars. Lots of room, good handling, excellent interior fit and finish. Can anyone offer insight as to pros and cons of one vs. the other. Looks like pricing will be about the same. I'm am more than willing to give Audi a try as my overall german ownership has been positive. Dont want to do the domestic shuffle again. THOUGHTS?