I'm wondering what the OP was driving before the getting into the Z4? I know when I was looking at a BRZ I was blown away by how flexible the engine felt after getting out of an Golf 1.2 TFSI. But on a second visit to the dealership in my 120d I was left feeling that the car was feeling flat until it was wound past 5krpm. Of course my 120d has a hell of a lot more torque than the Golf.
Is the 2.5 really so gutless?
- Thread starter Ilogik
- Start date
I ll be honest drove all 2.0 2.5 3.0. I have a 3.0 but feel like the 2.5 was a fine trade off. If you drive normally think the 2.5 is pretty much the same. I liked it and only bought the 3.0 because I found one with 40000 with everything on it. The 2.0 was a real let down though drove it after getting out of my TT and it was naff (may just be the one I drove). It had better feel than Ithe audi but just that. Where as the 2.5and 3.0 are better than the tt in every way.
Longtallhowie said:I've seen quite a few different performance specs but the majority say the 2.5si manual does 0-60 in 6.5 secs and 149mph top speed. so in the real world not much different to the 3.0si!
3.0si gets from 0-60 in 5.7 secs, so that's getting on for a whole second faster than the 2.5 model
It's also more than the difference between the 3.0si & the M model, which most people on here describe as a considerable difference.
Regards
Actually it's about the same difference because you have to look at the percentage of each time. For both it's 14% difference. (5.0 sec vs 5,7 sec and 5,7sec vs 6,5 sec)
For example the difference between 3 and 6 sec is twice as big acceleration wise whereas the time difference is just as big as cars accelerating 10 vs 13 sec.
For example the difference between 3 and 6 sec is twice as big acceleration wise whereas the time difference is just as big as cars accelerating 10 vs 13 sec.
