I am buying a 2006 A4, after months of looking at cars, choosing between two at a dealership.

The one is a 3.2 V6, 31,000 miles, black leather interior, with the darker metallic gray exterior like Dolphin Gray.

The other one is a 2.0T 4-cylinder, 21,000 miles, light silver exterior and light gray leather interior.

I much prefer the driving experience of the V6, smoothness at idle, better acceleration and power. I do not really care for the steering wheel vibration feel of the 4-cylinder [every 4 I have driven had that].

I much prefer the light silver and gray combination of the 4-cylinder car over the dark gray and black of the other. The dark gray would show dirt much more [I drive a mile of gravel to get to the highway] and the black interior would be much hotter in the summer. There is 10,000 miles difference, and the two are priced within $500 of each other.

I am advised that the 3.2 powered cars are harder to sell now due to fuel prices. I am getting 1.9 interest from Audi finance as part of a promotional program to move lease cars. That is very nice and certainly applies to either car.

I am prone to over analysis at times. I drove each car twice, feeling that the power/vibration issue was my overriding issue. After coming home, I think that maybe subsequent ability to resell/trade later when I can afford going to an A6 would make the 2.0 car a better choice, with its 4-cylinder and lower miles.

I realize this is not a decision someone else can or should make for me, but I am wondering if anyone here sees some aspect of this that I am not aware of at this time.

I know that there has been the comment about chipping the 4-cylinder, but I imagine that does not take away the vibration.

The silver car is really beautiful, and would look beautiful more easily.

Discuss....

 

Honestly the best car for you should be based on two things:

1 - when you're in the driver's seat, in which car are you happier? By that I mean not only based on the driving experience, but the ergonomics as well. 99% of your experiences with your own car occur from the driver's seat, so that's where you should weigh the majority of your decision. Since you didn't specify transmissions, I'm assuming that each car has the same transmission (both tip autos, or both manuals), so that's probably a wash. I can tell you that in an Audi, a six-cylinder with a manual transmission is a great and fun combination.

2 - what are your intentions for the car, in terms of length of time you'll own it, number of miles you drive per year, any plans for modifying the car, etc? The turbo fours are known for oil sludge issues (the 1.8T for sure, although the newer 2.0T I don't know) and for having more mechanical issues (although that may be because most of the four cylinder owners mod their cars and stress them well beyond OEM spec). The sixes get great mileage and are smooth and (despite what all the turbo guys say) they aren't slow cars. They're not rockets, but they certainly acquit themselves very nicely. The sixes are more of a pain to work on than the fours are, due to less space underhood and more parts in there, but they seem to be fairly bulletproof. My 2.8 30v has 151k miles on it, pulls nice and smooth, and gets well over 30mpg on the highway.

Overall though, if you're just going to be cruising the car, driving distances, and not much into modifying for power, go with the 3.2 - it's still going to get good mileage on the highway, it'll have more power for passing (even in my 2.8, I rarely have to downshift to fourth to pass someone), and as you've already seen, it's smoother and silkier at idle and driving. The four is peakier and less powerful and the car will be working harder than the six in the same conditions. However, if you have plans to modify the car, the 2.0T can be made significantly more powerful very easily, and with some money invested, can surpass the power of the 3.2 without too much trouble. Just remember that when you mod, you open yourself up to problems that the engine in stock trim may not worry about. I'm also assuming that as part of your financing package, a warranty will be offered, and mods may void some or all of that.

 

Both cars are automatic transmissions, and they will be covered by the Audi certified used car warranty. I do intend to keep it a long time.

 

Sounds like your minds already made up on the 3.2 and you want someone to tell you to get it. I wouldnt even worry about resale valve. Id be willing to be they both will have about the same resale valvue 10 years from now.

 

No.



No.


By a long time, I don't mean ten years. I am meaning more like four to five years.

 

Go with the 3.2 because it probably has more options then the 2.0. Grey, l hate grey!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Everybody drives either a blk or grey car, it looks more like an Army.

Good Luck

 

if your leasing the car.. go with the 3.2... the only reason I see that you would get a 2.0 is if your going to mod it.. and if your leasing it, you can't... 3.2 is faster then a 2.0 at stock and a lot more reliable.

 

The two cars have identical features, except the 2.0 car has an opening in the back seat through which you could slide a pair of skis.

 

If you had the chance to drive a chipped 2.0T, youd pick that without a doubt. I promise. It would be amorespirited driving experience (boost) and it can be very economical too. Youd have so much more useable power at low/mid rpm's compared to the 3.2 while getting as good or most likely better mpg. As far as "options" they are about the same with an exception of a couple things like wood/aluminum trim and wheel style. Stock for stock, take the 3.2. A chip is only $500 though, or roughly $350 for a used chipped ECU. Totally worth it imo.

 

I am not leasing, I am buying.

My next comment is not directed at you, but at the sense I get from reading many threads here that the great thing about the 4-cylinder is that you can modify it to have as much power as the 6-cylinder. So....why not just buy the 6 and void the trouble? ...and if you can get more from a 4, then maybe the answer is to get the 8.

It reminds me of a comment I got years ago from a mason, as he compared block walls to poured walls. He said the advantage of block walls is that you can tuckpoint them. The reality is that block walls, by virtue of their nature, may require mortar joint repair, hence....require tuckpointing. It is irrelevant that you can't tuckpoint a poured wall because they don't require repair. It seemed a feeble thing to say about block walls.

I don't see what issue there is in a 6-cylinder that has few mods available when the 6-cylinder does not require them.


I am interested in your reliability remark. What further thoughts do you have on that? Thank you for your reply....again, the block wall thing is not at you. OK? :-)