2016-17 Audi Q5 2.0T AWD

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by The Critic

My customer with the 2013 A6 is the one who just had the thermostat issue when he was out of town.

idk, it could be an sporadic issue, but mid-2012 had major overhaul of those components.
Though, thermostat on German vehicles was ALWAYS regular item to replace.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted by Ws6
Also, as regarding the OP's initial Q5 question, the 2017's at least, use a DCT. I hate DCT's and view them as high-maintenance items. Not something I have faith in lasting 150K miles, let alone 250K.

Again, no. The 2017 Q5 in the US still used the good old ZF8 HP trans.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by madRiver
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw

Compact engine design. 3.0T is very short engine since it hangs over the front axle Audi did everything possible to shorten it. Dynamics was more important than accessibility. However, it is not that big of a deal for a good Indy shop. Also, thermostat is resolved as of mid-2012.


I've just never been a fan of indy shops. Never found a good one. I'm sure they do exist, but I haven't seen it. They charge as much as the dealer, and then I have to come behind them and fix their work. I'd rather just snag an extended warranty and have the dealer fix it. Mine has always done exceptionally competent work.

However, you summed up my issue with German vehicles. This or that is always more important than reliability/accessibility. Japanese cars, reliability is #1, except in some rare cases like RX7, 300ZXTT, VR4, etc. For a CUV, I want as much fun as I can get without nipping into that reliability. For me, German cars have thus far been a bridge too far. Also, my sole experience with Audi was a 2016 A3. Terrible quality. 0/5 would not recommend.


I know you are here justifying your Mazda purchase.

You mention lack of reliability/accessibility in the sentence following
Quote
I'd rather just snag an extended warranty and have the dealer fix it. Mine has always done exceptionally competent work.


Why not just buy what you want since you don't work on it and also dump when not under warranty...... I think my JDM is better but need an extended warranty sort of contradicts a lot of things.....


Ideally, I'll keep it for 8 years/250k miles or so. However, an SQ5 and the extended warranty did cross my mind, problem is, good luck finding a 150k mile bumper to bumper warranty on one that's worth a darn.

Also, as regarding the OP's initial Q5 question, the 2017's at least, use a DCT. I hate DCT's and view them as high-maintenance items. Not something I have faith in lasting 150K miles, let alone 250K.

If I got an SQ5, it would totally be a lease...but I drive 30K miles a year...so...

Meh. At any point, the performance increase of the SQ5 would be nice, but the base Q5? Nah. Not interested in taking on all the foibles for a little better handling at 8/10 or more of the limit in the corners, as well as giving up a few luxury items I've become attached to (HUD/cooled seats).

I mean, I can explain why my choice was better than a Q5, but you call rational discussion "justifying", which I guess it is, technically, but the connotation is negative, when really, what it boils down to is: Yes, I picked a car with more features, more reliability, and less maintenance that is just as fast, but handles slightly worse when you push it really really hard.

I drove few months ago Audi S4 with 260k on the clock and DSG (not DCT, it is DSG). I had DSG and if you consider fluid change every 40-50k high maintenance item, well, you get what you pay for.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by edyvw

I drove few months ago Audi S4 with 260k on the clock and DSG (not DCT, it is DSG). I had DSG and if you consider fluid change every 40-50k high maintenance item, well, you get what you pay for.

Yeah, that's an annoying item. I fail to see the benefit of a DCT in this kind of vehicle (CUV's OP is looking at, not the S4). That's half your tires every time they're due, basically, presuming the fluid exchange is @$300ish?

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by Quattro Pete
Originally Posted by Ws6
Also, as regarding the OP's initial Q5 question, the 2017's at least, use a DCT. I hate DCT's and view them as high-maintenance items. Not something I have faith in lasting 150K miles, let alone 250K.

Again, no. The 2017 Q5 in the US still used the good old ZF8 HP trans.



Sounds like the last of a breed, then. Was the engine in t hat one any good, or was it the same mess VW went through with walnut blasting recommended every 40K mi?

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by edyvw

This topic is not about Mazda CX5, Bentley, Lamborghini, Rolls Royce and similar vehicles.



OP brought up the RX350 and "Luxo-SUV", which encompasses these, and more. Reading his post and all, that I quoted...

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw

This topic is not about Mazda CX5, Bentley, Lamborghini, Rolls Royce and similar vehicles.



OP brought up the RX350 and "Luxo-SUV", which encompasses these, and more. Reading his post and all, that I quoted...

Yeah, but I am not sure CX-5 is in that category. We are not talking super luxury vehicles.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted by Ws6
Sounds like the last of a breed, then. Was the engine in t hat one any good, or was it the same mess VW went through with walnut blasting recommended every 40K mi?

I believe this was already addressed earlier in this thread.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by UG_Passat
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by madRiver
My brother has outstanding service from a 2015 SQ5 with 110k miles bought with 20k a year old. He loves the vehicle.

No idea how the 2.0L fares compared to the supercharged v6 but only heard not as reliable.

Biggest problem on EA888 2.0 liter was timing chain tensioner which was resolved in mid 2012.
Except that, water pump can create issue (I made 116k on one before trading car in, never had leaking pump and on current Tiguan is original although there is recall so I will be doing that soon). CBU could be a problem, but choice of good oil and aggressive driving mitigate that issue.
Neglected PCV can lead to leaking rear main seal which serves kind of as fail safe if failed PCV is neglected.
However, Q5 is heafty vehicle with permanent AWD, so 3.0T, both 276hp or SQ5 with 333hp are better option.
Both 2.0T and 3.0T until mid 2012 in Audi specifically (not VW) had issues with piston rings.
2015 should be solid as a rock, especially 3.0T.


Wrong EA888 engine. That's the first gen Ea888, which the Q3 got.

The Q5 got the 2nd gen EA888, with VTEC aka Audi ValveLift.

Yeah I know it was second gen and with Valvelift. However issues I stated are the ones that are specific to Audi with Valvelift.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw

This topic is not about Mazda CX5, Bentley, Lamborghini, Rolls Royce and similar vehicles.



OP brought up the RX350 and "Luxo-SUV", which encompasses these, and more. Reading his post and all, that I quoted...

Yeah, but I am not sure CX-5 is in that category. We are not talking super luxury vehicles.

I'd easily put it equal or above an rx350, in the GTR and SG trims, for features and fit, but it is smaller by a small margin. The rx350 is kindof feature light, imo. I looked into a lightly used one before I got my cx5, and it was nice, but the feature list was short. More like "quality vehicle" vs. "Luxury". Of course, I view most of the SUVs under $50k or so as "nice" but not "luxury", as most of them are really just upper 20s/low 30s with options tacked on. That said, OP threw rx350 in, so that's where I set the bar for my recs of "luxo", reliable, and not looking like a minivan.

I really just dont think the glc300, Q5, x3, x1, etc. Are worth the extra money and maintenance in base trim. You go AMG, M, or S line, and the performance makes a compelling argument, though. Otherwise, the RDX, CX5 turbo, and possibly the new Rav4 prime if they can fix the rav current issues, just makes so much more sense to me. Fit and finish is equal or better, options are equal or better, and performance is super similar. So...why pay the entry fee as well as the extra maintenance? I see no reason except as a brand infatuation.

 

[KCJeep]

If you can't afford to properly maintain a vehicle per manufacturer's specified intervals, you can't afford the vehicle in the first place and shouldn't buy it. How many German vehicles get short cutted on proper maintenance and then blamed for unreliability?

The DSG transmission is a masterpiece and one of the favorite features of my current Passat. It is that fun to drive and worth every extra penny. You will find people on VW forums on their 3rd or 4th consecutive vehicle with a DSG.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by KCJeep
If you can't afford to properly maintain a vehicle per manufacturer's specified intervals, you can't afford the vehicle in the first place and shouldn't buy it. How many German vehicles get short cutted on proper maintenance and then blamed for unreliability?

The DSG transmission is a masterpiece and one of the favorite features of my current Passat. It is that fun to drive and worth every extra penny. You will find people on VW forums on their 3rd or 4th consecutive vehicle with a DSG.

Absolutely! That said, they sure do require a fair bit of it, and even when given, can still have issues. How do you maintain a thermostat or engine mount, etc for example?

I fail to see any functional advantage to a DSG other than "feel", though.

 

[Cdn17Sport6MT]

My sense is that DSG feel is super-fast shifts (particularly upshifts when accelerating), novel "[censored]" (f*rt) when it upshifts (particularly with aftermarket exh). I personally only would own one from new 'cuz I'd be reluctant to be over-exuberant in manually downshifting it. Having said this, if I get an automatic, one of the better-designed/rendered slushboxes for me would do yeoman's service for the long term (properly serviced, mind you).

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted by Ws6
I fail to see any functional advantage to a DSG other than "feel", though.

Better fuel economy, at least in theory.

For the most part, I think it's just more fun to drive, as is a vehicle with a larger/more powerful engine. How important that is in an SUV, that's for everyone to answer individually. Based on OP's responses, it sounds like reliability may be more important than fun to drive aspects.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by KCJeep
If you can't afford to properly maintain a vehicle per manufacturer's specified intervals, you can't afford the vehicle in the first place and shouldn't buy it. How many German vehicles get short cutted on proper maintenance and then blamed for unreliability?

The DSG transmission is a masterpiece and one of the favorite features of my current Passat. It is that fun to drive and worth every extra penny. You will find people on VW forums on their 3rd or 4th consecutive vehicle with a DSG.

Absolutely! That said, they sure do require a fair bit of it, and even when given, can still have issues. How do you maintain a thermostat or engine mount, etc for example?

I fail to see any functional advantage to a DSG other than "feel", though.

Like what?

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Quattro Pete
Originally Posted by Ws6
I fail to see any functional advantage to a DSG other than "feel", though.

Better fuel economy, at least in theory.

For the most part, I think it's just more fun to drive, as is a vehicle with a larger/more powerful engine. How important that is in an SUV, that's for everyone to answer individually. Based on OP's responses, it sounds like reliability may be more important than fun to drive aspects.

DSG came in time when automatics were seriously performance challenged. Today automatics are much better, but unless we are talking ZF8 and even than ZF8 with BMW, Audi, Alfa Romeo etc. programing, DSG's are still much better performers than anything Japanese, South Korean etc.
Of course, making dual clutch is no joke and can be easily messed up as Ford is prime example though they are getting DCT from company that makes DCT for Ferrari.
Considering that ZF8 today is the most reliable and best performing transmission, I am not sure why DSG in Audi Q5.

 

[Cdn17Sport6MT]

100% agree...

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Quattro Pete
Originally Posted by Ws6
I fail to see any functional advantage to a DSG other than "feel", though.

Better fuel economy, at least in theory.

For the most part, I think it's just more fun to drive, as is a vehicle with a larger/more powerful engine. How important that is in an SUV, that's for everyone to answer individually. Based on OP's responses, it sounds like reliability may be more important than fun to drive aspects.

DSG came in time when automatics were seriously performance challenged. Today automatics are much better, but unless we are talking ZF8 and even than ZF8 with BMW, Audi, Alfa Romeo etc. programing, DSG's are still much better performers than anything Japanese, South Korean etc.
Of course, making dual clutch is no joke and can be easily messed up as Ford is prime example though they are getting DCT from company that makes DCT for Ferrari.
Considering that ZF8 today is the most reliable and best performing transmission, I am not sure why DSG in Audi Q5.


I have no experience with ZF8, but Audi DCT vs. SkyActiv didn't really sway me. Especially when one needs frequent service and the other needs no service. I really think the SkyActiv transmission design is the best, if we are talking just "theory". Torque converter under 10mph, locked above that. You get smooth driving down low as the unlocked converter can absorb driveline shock, and fast shifts when driving faster along with a very direct feel of having the converter fully locked. Watching videos of Q5's with the DCT, seems super similar. The only thing the DCT has going for it is a "launch mode" that is more aggressive, but I'll sacrifice that for no maintenance required.

I think Mazda was right to redesign the automatic vs. going with a DCT/DSG/etc.

As to what breaks on German cars even properly maintained? I am unsure of all of the things, but enough so that their extended warranties (which can deny a claim due to neglect) sure are expensive, as is Edmunds True Cost To Own estimates, which assumes proper maintenance. You've also seen other things listed in this thread, already.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Quattro Pete
Originally Posted by Ws6
I fail to see any functional advantage to a DSG other than "feel", though.

Better fuel economy, at least in theory.

For the most part, I think it's just more fun to drive, as is a vehicle with a larger/more powerful engine. How important that is in an SUV, that's for everyone to answer individually. Based on OP's responses, it sounds like reliability may be more important than fun to drive aspects.

DSG came in time when automatics were seriously performance challenged. Today automatics are much better, but unless we are talking ZF8 and even than ZF8 with BMW, Audi, Alfa Romeo etc. programing, DSG's are still much better performers than anything Japanese, South Korean etc.
Of course, making dual clutch is no joke and can be easily messed up as Ford is prime example though they are getting DCT from company that makes DCT for Ferrari.
Considering that ZF8 today is the most reliable and best performing transmission, I am not sure why DSG in Audi Q5.


I have no experience with ZF8, but Audi DCT vs. SkyActiv didn't really sway me. Especially when one needs frequent service and the other needs no service. I really think the SkyActiv transmission design is the best, if we are talking just "theory". Torque converter under 10mph, locked above that. You get smooth driving down low as the unlocked converter can absorb driveline shock, and fast shifts when driving faster along with a very direct feel of having the converter fully locked. Watching videos of Q5's with the DCT, seems super similar. The only thing the DCT has going for it is a "launch mode" that is more aggressive, but I'll sacrifice that for no maintenance required.

I think Mazda was right to redesign the automatic vs. going with a DCT/DSG/etc.

As to what breaks on German cars even properly maintained? I am unsure of all of the things, but enough so that their extended warranties (which can deny a claim due to neglect) sure are expensive, as is Edmunds True Cost To Own estimates, which assumes proper maintenance. You've also seen other things listed in this thread, already.

Again, we are talking regular cars. When we have discussion about Lamborghini Gallardo or Ferrari etc. then we can talk SkyActiv.

 

[Ws6]

I'd rather a manual in a sports car. Yes I know its slower. Yes I know I'm not Ken Block. However, I do like to row my own in those kinds of cars.

That said, Skyactiv in my cx5 > the 7A in the 370z I test drove. By a huge margin.

You get into Ferrari though...yeah...I wont disagree. Different vehicle and dynamics by far though.