# 1.8T vs 3.2



## skyspydude1 (Oct 4, 2011)

I've spent quite a bit of time looking at TTs and I've luckily found some 3.2 V6s in my range and I was wondering what everyone here thinks of them (power, reliability, etc) vs the 1.8T. The big thing I want to know is maintenance differences between the 1.8 and the 3.2.


----------



## ejg3855 (Sep 23, 2004)

*FV-QR*

lol low maintenance TT 

only sucks thing is lack of manual trans unless your over the pond.


----------



## skyspydude1 (Oct 4, 2011)

ejg3855 said:


> lol low maintenance TT
> 
> only sucks thing is lack of manual trans unless your over the pond.


The lack of a manual isn't that big of a deal, although the DSG does kinda worry me. Seems like there might be a lot of fiddly bits in there prone to break.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Depends on your goals? Stock weekend toy, autox, mild bolt ons, 600hp big turbo, show queen?


----------



## ttwsm (Feb 27, 2011)

I have a 225Q; have not driven a 3.2. I imagine, though, that they're *very very different* in character, I mean in truly fundamental ways. Turbo vs. NA is a big difference. Third pedal vs. not is a big difference. Any chance you could drive both?

You've probably already seen it, but just in case, there was a long-ish thread comparing the two a few years back, and a shorter one too.


----------



## skyspydude1 (Oct 4, 2011)

20v master said:


> Depends on your goals? Stock weekend toy, autox, mild bolt ons, 600hp big turbo, show queen?


I'm really just looking for a decent DD.


----------



## warranty225cpe (Dec 3, 2008)

skyspydude1 said:


> I'm really just looking for a decent DD.


Then get the 3.2. Especially if you don't mind the dsg. Put some wheels and exhaust on and be done with it.


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

3.2L is a dope motor. Wish I had one in my car.

Everytime I drive my friends R32 I have a blast. In a perfect world I'd have the money to buy a 3.2L DD.


----------



## The_RoadWarrior (Nov 21, 2011)

DougLoBue said:


> Wish I had one in my car.


No you don't!


----------



## SchmidTT (Aug 5, 2011)

How about an opinion from someone who owns both?

I own a 3.2(bone stock) and a 1.8t with frankenturbo, revo, front mount, exhaust, blah blah blah.

The 3.2 mated to a DSG is the most fun i've had in years. I love my 1.8ts, but nothing compares to the big boy noises the VR6 makes, add a DSG and it's like driving a ****ing Playstation. I LOVE IT.


If you want a solid DD,
3.2
DSG or Manual, you can't go wrong. :beer:

hope that helps, remember opinions are like *******s, mine included.


photos for proof


----------



## Neb (Jan 25, 2005)

3.2 in a heartbeat.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

The_RoadWarrior said:


> No you don't!


:laugh:


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

The_RoadWarrior said:


> No you don't!



Don't you guys worry... it would had a 6262 hanging off the back of it and E85 in the tank :laugh:

In my :screwy: world we don't fvck around!


----------



## rodhotter (Dec 24, 2003)

*1.8T all the way*

it does not take much tuning to pass the VR6, had a jetta 1.8 turbo 5 manual, just purchased a 37,000 TT roadster 6 manual, turbo's + real shifters forever IMHO, more fun, and a modified 1.8 still gets better MPG, at 285 tq 265 hp my dub averaged 28mpg!!!


----------



## Arnolds64 (Nov 13, 2009)

*1.8 vs.3.2*

Six bangers are always nice in regard to low grunt torque. Naturally aspirated also makes for quick throttle response versus the lag with the turbo cars. Even though it is an Automatic the new DSG transmission narrows the gap in performance now a days and in some cases they are faster in some cars. With the 225 Turbo however for about 750.00 you can get more hp out of the 1.8 T. I would imagine they would both handle about the same. Drive them both and decide.


----------



## netabuse (Nov 10, 2008)

*As a 3.2 driver*

I've owned a 1.8t fwd and the 3.2, and while the 3.2 is a good solid car, I can also see a case for a well-kept 1.8t 225hp quattro. 

For the 3.2:

Pros:
Timing chain vs Timing belt
No turbo lag
DSG Press-and-go acceleration (for your wash-and-go lifestyle)*
Usually in better shape than used 1.8t engined TTs
Engine less prone to go all splody because the plumbing gets messed up

Cons:
The 3.2s are more thirsty
If the DSG breaks, it's expensive (though these days, more indie shops do repair)
You might miss the the turbo kick; it's kind of fun (when it "kicks in, yo!")
it's heavier by 200lb than the 225q

For me the big one is that almost every 1.8t you'll find has been chipped and has had who-knows-what done by the previous owner, whereas the 3.2 represents less risk, overall. Heck, you might even magically find a 3.2 that still has some portion of its extended warranty on it. 

If you find a bone-stock perfect 1.8t maintained by someone who kept it under a cover in a garage and isn't secretly selling the previously-installed coilovers and giving you old stock parts, then buy that and don't buy a 3.2. Otherwise, buy a 3.2.


*("... in the _world_", if you watch Top Gear)


----------



## dale55 (May 28, 2007)

Have a 2005 3.2. Lowered it 25mm and put a vibrant racing resonator in place of the stock. What a ride! Handles, looks and sounds the bomb. NO issues either. Just my .02 but i love it!

dale


----------



## audiguy01 (Aug 12, 2008)

I have owned both, if you want to build a monster track day car and dump most of your retirement dollars into it then deffinately the 1.8.

Ok, in all seriousness I think the stock 1.8 is quicker than the 3.2 though the 3.2 is faster and with the DSG was far better as a DD car. It is far better to drive in traffic and when put into sport mode will put a big smile on your face as it blips the throttle on down shifts.

I currently have a 1.8 big turbo car and have a 1.8 DD though I would trade my 1.8 DD for a 3.2 DD in a second.


----------

