Audi A4 or A5?

Luggs

Luggs

Luggs

Associate
Joined
7 Jun 2013
Posts
1,102
Location
Norniron
So I went to test drive a nice, sensible A4 on Saturday - 2011, 2.0ltr diesel with approx 68k miles. Had done a fair bit of research on A4/A6/BMW 3/5 series and this looked to be a good option for my £10k max budget.

Parked next to the A4 was a stunning black A5 for only £400 more! - 2011, 2.0ltr diesel but with approx 100k miles on it. Same engine so similar performance, mpg etc.

I guess what I wanted to ask is:
Anyone with experience of an A5? pro's & cons over an A4?
How important is that 30k extra miles, apparently they are all motorway miles?
What can I realistically expect a 2.0ltr diesel to do in terms of max mileage? you hear of people with 250-350k mileage but is this common or rare?

I'm clocking 20k miles per year myself, so am concerned that the A5 will have 200k miles in 4-5 years (how long I'd need the car to last), so my head says go with the lower mileage A4, but my heart...
 
I've had both for a decent amount of time as hire cars. They are both really much of muchness. The A5 was a bit heavier which stifled the performance a bit, but they both rode the same, they both had the same interior, both had the same engine and both did about the same fuel economy. Unfortunately they both had the same horrible steering feel also. Quite how Audi haven't been able to make a mainstream car with even vaguely good steering is beyond me. It just felt so light and disconnected with the wheels.

Oh and as for longevity - engines these days dont tend to explode. They normally become just too expensive to fix when parts fail Ie turbos/injectors
 
Luggs said:
Same engine so similar performance, mpg etc.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily, as there are 2 main variants of the 2.0 Diesel - 140bhp and and 170bhp. (2011 was also the changeover where the 177bhp version was introduced - so that's a possibility as well)


Luggs said:
What can I realistically expect a 2.0ltr diesel to do in terms of max mileage? you hear of people with 250-350k mileage but is this common or rare?
Click to expand...

Depends on how it was maintained before you got it - if it is a main dealer approved one you are looking at, I would suggest it has been probably better looked after (as in my experience with my A3 - Audi are always on the ball with suggesting work that will need doing soon - although are never too pushy about it).

Obviously if you aren't looking to spend any money looking after it, then don't count it on it lasting that long.

Whilst I imagine there are high mileage Audi's out there, it's unlikely you hear of many, as the people who buy them don't necessarily keep them to moon mileage, and as soon as they become cheap enough at the high mileage end of the market, they generally are too expensive to fix when something big does go wrong.



Gaygle said:
Oh and as for longevity - engines these days dont tend to explode. They normally become just too expensive to fix when parts fail Ie turbos/injectors
Click to expand...

Agree - especially in the context of the above "motorway miles" - the actual engine is still going to be as worn, although in theory other parts such as the clutch, brakes, suspension will have had an easier time.



Unless you absolutely have to have an Audi, then personally I would be looking at a Mondeo with much lower mileage.
 
Thanks for all the feedback, I guess I went to Audi/BMW on the presumption that as my daily commute is anywhere between 2-3 hours, I wanted a little 'luxury' in terms of equipment and the interior. Also due to high mileage, I was thinking German engineering etc would give me more reliability and mileage on the car. Quite possibly wrong presumptions?

Armageus - looks like the A5 is the 177bhp and the A4 is the 136bhp? So guess the A4 would have the better mpg there

[TW]Fox - the A5 has 4 doors, although only 4 seats rather than 5. That doesn't bother me as just means I can't run the kids around so much :)

Here are links to the 2 cars if anyone is interested:
http://www.lowesoflarne.co.uk/vehicle/2011/Audi/A5/1139
http://www.lowesoflarne.co.uk/vehicle/2011/Audi/A4/1171

But I will take a look at Mondeo's over lunch now!
 
The A5 is a 5 door, not 4

The perception of "German engineering" is pretty misguided really - it's not uncommon though. Just because the interior switches feel nice, doesnt mean the mechanicals are any better than other cars. Something like a Mondeo would probably be more reliable because you'll have something newer due to the lack of "prestige tax"
 
I've had the B8 A4 in both 143 BHP and 177 BHP (the 177 came with the B8.5 in the A4) forms and both were pretty terrible on fuel to be honest. Around 41 mpg average in the 143 and around 37 in the 177. Personally, I wouldn't get a VAG 2.0 TDI if you want good fuel consumption. BMW do better diesel engines at this age for sure.

For example, I changed my 177 for an e91 335d, and my fuel economy was 1 mpg better in the 335d over the 177 2.0 TDI (andf the 335d was 100 BHP better off as standard, I had mine mapped adding another 50 bhp or so).

Of course, Audi wanted nothing to do with it, and said it was "standard" for cars to get worse economy as stated (to which I agree, but not 40% worse). And ended up returning the car to move onto the BMW. As such I will NEVER buy a more modern VAG diesel than my current Seat (which incidentally is another 140 BHP 2.0 diesel, but does around the same 41-42 mpg but is much bigger and less aerodynamic than an A4).

That said, many people at least claim to get decent fuel economy out of their newer VAG diesels. So I might have just been very unlucky, twice in a row. But equally, I know many people who are disappointed.

These cars should easily swallow up the moon miles you are doing though. I do similar miles in my cars, and they cope fine, so long as you keep on top of servicing and stuff.

Agreed with above though. You will get a much newer Mondeo for your money, and will be more than good enough for your driving. Probably not that bad on the fuel either, but I haven't personally experienced the Ford diesel engines, so cannot comment on them (I can comment on the BMW 6 cylinder diesels though, and find them as economical as the VAG 4 cylinder diesels, my old mans 320d averages around 48 mpg over around 15k per year too, so I would imagine that being a better place to put your money, if fuel economy is a main concern).
 
xs2man said:
I've had the B8 A4 in both 143 BHP and 177 BHP forms and both were pretty terrible on fuel to be honest. Around 41 mpg average in the 143 and around 37 in the 177. Personally, I wouldn't get a VAG 2.0 TDI if you want good fuel consumption. BMW do better diesel engines at this age for sure.
Click to expand...

On the flip side, my lifetime average so far is 56.4MPG, and I mostly drive either through towns or A roads, hardly ever motorway.

If I do a motorway jaunt from Macclesfield to Barnstaple I tend to get close to (if not above, weather and temperature dependent) 70MPG.
 
As I said, not everyone claims to get terrible fuel economy.

My driving is mostly decent A roads (including dual carriageways), with few town miles (generally over a tank I will average 45+ mph). In general. And was worse on the motorways (I was once 36 mpg, at 70 mph, on cruise, from Dundee to Aberdeen). I personally think they are a bit of a lottery when it comes to mpg, which is why I will happily stay clear.
 
Ah, so the claimed 66mpg motorway / 52mpg average for the A4 is BS? I mean i'm not that naive to believe they would be completely accurate, but I thought they should be at least fairly close?

Initially I was preferring the BMW 3 series due to their "EfficientDynamics" engine claims of 80mpg motorway / 70mpg average - more BS?

Damn, looks like i'm back to square one...
 
What about a reasonably spec'd Mondeo or Octavia. Should get you a newer car and if a decent spec will be a pretty comfortable place to be for 20K miles per year. I think at this budget getting a BMW/Audi will get you fairly reasonable and older example, though I wouldnt discount other makes.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom