3.0 TDi worth the extra to the 2.0?

H

Hesl

Registered User
Joined
Jul 6, 2012
Messages
43
Reaction score
2
Points
6
Location
NULL
Hi all,

Those of you with a 3.0, do you think the extra performance is worth the ££?

Those with a 2.0, is 177 enough for you?

Discuss
 
I found the 177 perfectly adequate in terms of performance.

What is noticeable about the 3.0 is how smooth and how wide the power band is.
The engine is noticeably heavier though.
I ended up choosing the 3.0 and it is doesn't half make you smile when you give it some beans.
I would be happy with a 2.0 but the 3.0 is the more satisfying.
 
I got my 2.0 mapped as it has lots more to give than stock and it will show any 3.0 it's tail pipes.
 
I've had my 2012 A4 Avant 177 black edition quattro for a month now & I'm very happy with it.

I've added a DTUK box and it makes a big difference to performance.
I was happy enough with the standard car but thought the box was worth a try for the cost.
According to the website it increases power to 217hp and torque to 470Nm.
The extra power is very noticeable above 1800rpm and it pushes the car forward plenty quick enough for me.

There have been quite a few that have been disappointed with the economy but I've seen 45mpg on a run and 40mpg on my normal 6 mile commute to work.
 
Really though, I agree with hmy7k. It's a much smoother engine and even with a re-mapped 177 I'd be surprised if it could pull away from a stock 3.0 since it's still got more power and torque.

And since I wanted a DSG quattro diesel it was the only option! ;)
 
Daggerit said:
Really though, I agree with hmy7k. It's a much smoother engine and even with a re-mapped 177 I'd be surprised if it could pull away from a stock 3.0 since it's still got more power and torque.

And since I wanted a DSG quattro diesel it was the only option! ;)
Click to expand...


With the lighter engine and the lack of extra losses from the Quattro mine pulls easly from 3.0's
 
Bracer said:
With the lighter engine and the lack of extra losses from the Quattro mine pulls easly from 3.0's
Click to expand...

Pulls easily?! Only one way to solve this... FIGHT!!! Or a 1/4 mile drag would sort it too... ;)
 
Bracer said:
I'm always up for a challenge but as we are at opposite ends of the country how about a vid pull-off ?
Click to expand...

Deal. Haha. I'm sure that I can find a bit of dual carriageway to pump out a 0-62 and video it for you. :) I'll wait until I hit a thousand miles or so to let it run in a bit... Then I'll do one after with the DTUK fitted and see the difference. ;)
 
If you can afford the 3.0TDI i would go for it.

I ran a manual A5 Sportback 240ps lasy year, one a run from Newquay to Durham (in less than 6 hours) the car produced 48mpg.

this was with a DTUK CRDT ;)

Ive owned BMW 335D's and a Merc 350CDI 265PS and i would say that the Audi 3.0 is the best of the bunch.

Ive been out in a couple of Q7s with the new 245PS engine, and thats better again. Which is one of the reasons for my recent purchase.

So if you can afford the 3.0, then go for it.

Oh, and if youre in the market for a new Audi, have a word with Chris and Hayley at Harrogate Audi as they will look after you
 
Hesl said:
Hi all,

Those of you with a 3.0, do you think the extra performance is worth the ££?

Those with a 2.0, is 177 enough for you?


Discuss
Click to expand...

Without a shadow of a doubt, get the 3.0.Its a V6 for starters.I have a 170 and its a slug.Even mapped to 200 its still slow.I wouldnt say that the engines rough, but its not as refined as the 3.Its a no brainer if i had the choice again.Dont waste your dough on a 2.
 
Hesl said:
Hi all,

Those of you with a 3.0, do you think the extra performance is worth the ££?

Those with a 2.0, is 177 enough for you?

Discuss
Click to expand...


Silly question really.

Why have a 2ltr if you can have a 3ltr. Its a bit like...................."Daddy or Chip's"

I have a 2.7 and love it. I will be ordering a new A4 avant in about 4 months and will go for the 3ltr and I will be keeping the 1 I have already as it only has 40k on the clock and the misses wants it as her daily.

The 2ltr is just not man enough for a A4, the car is just to big and heavy. I would think the A6 with the 2ltr is just crap.

Anybody who thinks a remapped 2ltr will show its tail pipes to a standard 3ltr is just mad.

I'm about to fit a 3ltr turbo to mine, DPF delete,race nozzels and fit a full 2.7" turbo back exhaust with Milltek cat back. It should, fingers crossed, make over 300 bhp easy and 550lbft +.
 
  • Like
Reactions: aphill24
I've driven an A6 with the 2ltr engine and it's a good drive for most people.

I laugh when folk start the old a 2 ltr isn't man enough for the A4....what a lot of ******** ;-)

If I needed speed that much I'd buy an RS5 like the brother in law...but the 9mpg stops me in my tracks.

I'm going to have a go in a 3 litre next time. I have driven a 3 litre jaguar xf and you only notice the difference at silly speeds.
 
Smartpod said:
I've driven an A6 with the 2ltr engine and it's a good drive for most people.

I laugh when folk start the old a 2 ltr isn't man enough for the A4....what a lot of ******** ;-)

If I needed speed that much I'd buy an RS5 like the brother in law...but the 9mpg stops me in my tracks.

I'm going to have a go in a 3 litre next time. I have driven a 3 litre jaguar xf and you only notice the difference at silly speeds.
Click to expand...

I have lived with my 2.0 tdi for three years now, and it is a pleasantish drive, but certainly not exciting.I wouldnt say its not man enough, more pubecent, in that it thinks it knows what its about.Except when its up against a 320 or even a 318.The 2.0tdi in an A6 reminds me of an old 1100 escort...pointless.And i wouldnt call 0-60 silly speeds either!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pyeman
Each to there own...my 177/217 is fast enough for me but Im definitely going to consider the 3ltr next time.

I'm not interested in 0-60 times or racing Bmw's II expect the petrol boys will be along shortly telling us all diesels are **** ;-)
 
Smartpod said:
Each to there own...my 177/217 is fast enough for me but Im definitely going to consider the 3ltr next time.

I'm not interested in 0-60 times or racing Bmw's II expect the petrol boys will be along shortly telling us all diesels are **** ;-)
Click to expand...

Lol.My neighbours micra is fast enough for her, but that doesnt make it an interesting ride.Just out of interest, what would you call a silly speed?
 
Silly speeds to me are in 3 figures....I was testing my DTUK box on a private road last week and I was pretty impressed with performance from 40-120 in 6th gear. Acceleration from 50-100 is good. Things slow down after 120 at 3500rpm but eventually reached an indicated 145 before I got bored watching the fuel gauge move. The engine has only done 5500 miles so it's still tight and I had my bike roof bars on which wouldn't help.

I don't normally drive above 80 as there are too many cameras!

The 3ltr jag xf had plenty grunt right up to 150 no probs ;-)
I would imagine a 3litre Audi would be similar.
 
I guess the real figures that count in driving terms are those that you can do on a day to day basis, ie:0-70/90.I found that the 2.7 and the 3.0 were so smooth that you got to 70/80 very quick with no effort, whilst you have to push the 2.0 and know its trying to get there.Thats the differance between a 6 and a 4 pot.And yes, im careful about my speed too, been done by two cameras in three months after 32 years of driving how I wanted.
 
Daggerit said:
Yup, try keeping up with 287bhp and 640Nm (DTUK figures) though. ;)
Click to expand...

I'll take my chance as this is about the same peak figures of a 335D of which I only loose 2 car lengths too from a 50mph to 100+ roll and the 3.0 will suffer much more crank to wheel losses.
 
Bracer said:
I'll take my chance as this is about the same peak figures of a 335D of which I only loose 2 car lengths too from a 50mph to 100+ roll and the 3.0 will suffer much more crank to wheel losses.
Click to expand...



Why will the 3Ltr suffer more crank to wheel loses??? Loses from crank to wheels on both cars will be minimal to each other. All dyno's work to about 23 - 25% losses inc 4wd on all cars. Wheel bhp and torque is what you are after not crank. My Evo 9 has 25% loses with the Clutch being the main problem.

You really can't compare a BMW 335d to a A4 3Ltr. BMW HAD to make the 335d to beat the A4 3ltr as its so good!!!
 
Last edited:
Before anyone else says it... The 335D is still a three litre but is a twin turbo (IIRC). That said, the new Audi 3.0 BiTdi is the equivalent of the 335D and would destroy it!
 
Daggerit said:
Before anyone else says it... The 335D is still a three litre but is a twin turbo (IIRC). That said, the new Audi 3.0 BiTdi is the equivalent of the 335D and would destroy it!
Click to expand...


Edited!! :whistle2:
 
Daggerit said:
Before anyone else says it... The 335D is still a three litre but is a twin turbo (IIRC). That said, the new Audi 3.0 BiTdi is the equivalent of the 335D and would destroy it!
Click to expand...

alright if you want to pay 50k+ for an A6
 
Bracer said:
I'll take my chance as this is about the same peak figures of a 335D of which I only loose 2 car lengths too from a 50mph to 100+ roll and the 3.0 will suffer much more crank to wheel losses.
Click to expand...

No chance! Am I right in saying yours is the 143 mapped? I had a mapped Leon Fr tdi which is lighter and would have been more powerful than your car and my mate totally destroyed me in his mapped 3.0 tdi. Even against a standard 3.0 I find it hard to believe that he'd be looking down your tailpipes.
 
Daggerit said:
Really though, I agree with hmy7k. It's a much smoother engine and even with a re-mapped 177 I'd be surprised if it could pull away from a stock 3.0 since it's still got more power and torque.

And since I wanted a DSG quattro diesel it was the only option! ;)
Click to expand...
My lill 12 year old 1.8t A3 mapped (safe 203 bhp) has kicked a few 3.0TDI ****'s :) sowwie.


Keep thinking power to weight :) and its not how big it is, its how you use it :)
 
I tried a couple of 2.0, petrol and diesel, plus an S4. I also had a 2.0T quattro B7 for 18 months. Apart from the S4 the 3.0TDI s-tronic quattro by far the best and I could not justify the S4 fuel consumption.

I did over 400 miles in one day five up recently, nearly 40mpg, the other half does not seem to realise if I'm going a bit quicker and everyone comfortable. The high gearing makes it very relaxing. You need the S-line for good seats. Not as quick as my S3 was, but not too far off.
 
I've driven quite a few 177's and I am not really that impressed. Modifying it may give you better performance, but I don't recon it will be as smooth as the V6. The 2.0's don't do anything to convert me to diesel, but I am seriously considering a 3.0 as my next purchase.
 
Well the 3.0 TDi near enough stayed with a stage one S3 on a straight section of road (he very slightly started pulling away at high speed) so I'd be amazed if a mapped 2.0 170 could pull away easily from, or even keep up with, a stage one S3. Sorry, just don't see it happening...
 
No chance.The 170 cant even keep up with astras.Off from a standing start is a joke...as soon as youve selected 1st its time for second.Pulls nice in third and fourth though, but id NEVER buy a 2.0 again.By the way, hows your new car!!!!
 
johnnythepie said:
No chance.The 170 cant even keep up with astras.Off from a standing start is a joke...as soon as youve selected 1st its time for second.Pulls nice in third and fourth though, but id NEVER buy a 2.0 again.By the way, hows your new car!!!!
Click to expand...

It's awesome. :) I had the 2.0 in my MY10 A3 and really glad I went for the 3.0/S-Tronic combo, I like it so much better!
 
We were considering an S5 when we changed our car last year (the 4.2 V8). We went out for a test drive in it and when I got back it really hadn't stirred my soul performance wise. The salesman asked me to consider trying the A5 3.0TDI Quattro which they had on the forecourt, so I tried that and I was astonished how good an engine it was. In gear it was so close to the S5, and as the A5 is such a big car the smoother 3.0 engine really suited the car.

I have nothing against diesels, I just don't do the sort of mileage where they offer me any tangible benefit, but IF I'd decided to buy an a5 derivative car instead of another S3 I would have bought the 3.0TDI over the S5. Of course it didn't sound as good, but with a remap and nothing more it would have been every bit as much fun. A great engine, and I can only begin to imagine what the new twin turbo version much be like.
 
warren_S3 said:
We were considering an S5 when we changed our car last year (the 4.2 V8). We went out for a test drive in it and when I got back it really hadn't stirred my soul performance wise. The salesman asked me to consider trying the A5 3.0TDI Quattro which they had on the forecourt, so I tried that and I was astonished how good an engine it was. In gear it was so close to the S5, and as the A5 is such a big car the smoother 3.0 engine really suited the car.

I have nothing against diesels, I just don't do the sort of mileage where they offer me any tangible benefit, but IF I'd decided to buy an a5 derivative car instead of another S3 I would have bought the 3.0TDI over the S5. Of course it didn't sound as good, but with a remap and nothing more it would have been every bit as much fun. A great engine, and I can only begin to imagine what the new twin turbo version much be like.
Click to expand...

The twin turbo version is great - we have a A6 Sline avant with it in. 0-60 in 5sec dead and it feels so refined compared to the previous 245 3.0Tdi - which was a lovely engine, but this makes it sound positively agricultural...
 
Having previously owned a:-
2.0TDi (143), 2.0TDi quattro (170 - absolute rubbish!)
I would go with my 3.0TDi every time
Its great - if you can afford the 3.0 S-tronic then do it
you won’t regret it!
 
the 3.0Tdi is a completely different kettle of fish. The right amount of power for the size. It gives the B8 a nice balance too. A set of S4 brakes and a remap is all you need.
 
From what I've observed, the 3.0s come with the s4 brakes but smaller carriers. The yanks just swap out the carriers and discs to achieve the s4 setup

3.0
ab065d5eb900c0cbe64d25db3b7830dd.jpg


2.0
d09ca644c6e5ed9b12275ab622e738c3.jpg



Audi B8 A4 Quattro V6 3.2L > Braking > Big Brake OEM > ES#2215359 OEM Big Brake Kit - Plain Rotors (345x30) - 8K06983BBK
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

phatAvant
2.7/3.0 TDI exhaust on 2.0 TDI ?
Replies
4
Views
770
Bulldog
Bulldog
Marky007
Help Please The 2.0 tdi 143bhp
Replies
19
Views
3K
Booboo
Booboo
phatAvant
Any cons to mount 2.7/3.0 TDI exhaust on a 2.0 TDI?
Replies
2
Views
1K
SI-W85
SI-W85
monkeytrousers
How to drive the 3.0 TDI for best performance?
Replies
3
Views
2K
BillTheButcher
BillTheButcher
Wiggy_
2.0 diesel to 3.0 Quattro
Replies
1
Views
576
Wiggy_
Wiggy_
Top
Back