# VR6 vs. 2.0T



## dmdillon (Oct 15, 2012)

This is sure to stir the pot... ;-)

Which engine is better, the 3.6L VR6 or the 2.0T? I have a VR6 because I traded out an Audi A6 Quattro for my CC and really wanted the 4MOTION AWD. I have been very pleased with the performance of my CC, but I notice that there seem to be a LOT more cars that are running the 2.0T. Is this purely a dollars and cents issue (the VR6 is a lot more expensive), or is the 2.0T a better engine?

Also, has anyone been able to find cold air intakes or performance chips for the VR6? I've been all over K&N's website and all they offer is a filter, but not the cold air intake (they only offer one for the 2.0T).


----------



## CCLarry (Apr 21, 2011)

The v6 has a lot more power and torque, but if you get it, it makes getting the AWD more important to spread that power around, which pushes the price of the car into the $40K's. In that price range, there are other cars to consider.

IMO, that's what makes the 2.0T so good.... it just fits the cc perfectly, for a price under $30K. Also, it's relatively cheap to squeeze more power out of it, making the V6 even less sensible. 

That being said, the Hyundai 2.0T makes 270HP on regular gas so VW needs to step up thier game.


----------



## AZ_CC (May 25, 2012)

I think the 2.0 is more cost friendly, and easily more mod friendly with the turbo....being able to up the boost or even run a bigger turbo makes it capable of putting out some serious power....it would be awesome if the 2.0 came Awd though


----------



## dmdillon (Oct 15, 2012)

AZ_CC said:


> I think the 2.0 is more cost friendly, and easily more mod friendly with the turbo....being able to up the boost or even run a bigger turbo makes it capable of putting out some serious power....it would be awesome if the 2.0 came Awd though


I hear ya. If the 2.0T was offered with the AWD, it'd be a no-brainer. The TDI would be nice too! Dang EPA!


----------



## Fuk (Mar 16, 2012)

What kind of automatic transmission is in the vr6 I know it's not dsg right? Is t possible to swap one from a Mkv r32?


----------



## jspirate (Jan 15, 2011)

The 2.0T is very nice engine. Take the relatively low drive train loss of a FWD and a k04 (or stage 2 tune) and you have an incredible value from a pounds of torq per dollar standpoint.

I've owned and driven alot of cars in my life and a k04'd CC has the most soul of any of em.


----------



## Curt941 (Feb 28, 2008)

It's odd how the Audi 2.0T is rated higher, do they just give it a more aggressive tune?


----------



## 1slow1.8t (Sep 15, 2009)

Curt941 said:


> It's odd how the Audi 2.0T is rated higher, do they just give it a more aggressive tune?


valve timing is different giving it +10hp


----------



## 1slow1.8t (Sep 15, 2009)

if your asking which one is faster 3.6 or 2.0

they are about the time QT time stock. the 3.6 is a bit faster 

2.0t with a good tune (Non APR) blows the doors off a 3.6 

2.0t with a good tune (GIAC, UNI) is still faster then a 3.6 with a tune. but not by much


----------



## CCelia2012 (Apr 13, 2012)

jspirate said:


> The 2.0T is very nice engine. Take the relatively low drive train loss of a FWD and a k04 (or stage 2 tune) and you have an incredible value from a pounds of torq per dollar standpoint.
> 
> I've owned and driven alot of cars in my life and a k04'd CC has the most soul of any of em.


Ditto that!!

What rubber do you use? I spin my procontacts with stock engine..in wet forget about it.


----------



## milan187 (Mar 15, 2009)

CCLarry said:


> That being said, the Hyundai 2.0T makes 270HP on regular gas so VW needs to step up thier game.


They put that on paper but that engine drives like crap. VW 2.0T is easily faster and better tuned.


----------



## mswlogo (Jan 30, 2009)

I used to own a Quatro and liked it a lot.

With the Stock Wheels it was a Joke in snow.

I HAD to put snows on it.

Once I put snows on it, it was a tank.

You can't stop any faster with AWD in snow.

You can't turn much harder with AWD in snow.

I admit an AWD will hold a turn better in any condition.

And if you do loose control in AWD, I find it much harder to regain control than with FWD.

So now I put snows on my FWD VW's. It's 90% as good in the "normal" snow conditions.

My "normal" includes going up to the montains in NH.

The FWD Traction Control in VW's is amazing too.

I feel just as safe in a FWD with snows as I did in my Quatro.

Also the cars are so low, they can't do very deep snow (AWD or FWD), period. My Jeep in RWD mode could handle deeper snow than the Quarto.

You pay every day for AWD in lower MPG as well as a huge amount at the dealer for not all that much more performance in practical snow conditions.

Now, if you want to go ICE Racing, the AWD will tromp the FWD.

That said, our 2.8 V6 (not a VR6, longitudinal mounted) in our 99 Passat was the best VW engine I've ever owned (I've had 5 VW's over the years). The VR6 in 1999 (available in Jetta's) was junk in my opinion and the 2.0 Turbo at that time was not the best either. The VR6 and 2.0 Turbo are much better engines today, but neither can touch that old 1999 V6.


----------



## YellowRubi (Apr 12, 2009)

I wanted the VR6 but decided the 2.0 would be enough and if not for $1500 I can have about same HP or more. Plus the 2.0 will blow the VR6 away in gas mileage.


----------



## Matt.B (May 22, 2012)

I've had both engines in the two CCs I've owned. Both are great, but here are a few of my takeaways:

Sound: The VR6 sounds better. Hands down. The 2.0 isn't bad, but the 3.6 is one of the all time great sounds in my opinion.

Power: The 3.6 has more power, but especially when paired with 4Motion makes the car much heavier and not tremendously faster than the 2.0T/FWD car. If straight-line speed is your concern, the Passat 3.6/DSG combination is the way to go.

Fuel economy: The 2.0T returned substantially better gas mileage than the 3.6 in my experience, sometimes as much as 10MPG better. The 3.6 is a bit thirsty to say the least.

I didn't modify either of my cars, but the 2.0T is going to be easier to modify for obvious reasons. It all comes down to preference and whether you feel like paying the premium for the VR6.


----------



## usaf-lt-g (May 16, 2012)

Matt.B said:


> I've had both engines in the two CCs I've owned. Both are great, but here are a few of my takeaways:
> 
> Sound: The VR6 sounds better. Hands down. The 2.0 isn't bad, but the 3.6 is one of the all time great sounds in my opinion.
> 
> ...


I have the 3.6 4-Motion...... IMO.... the 3.6 with 4-Motion + All the added bells and whistles you get with it is worth it. More speed, Good in both snow and summer (depending where you live).

Gas Mileage I beg to differ.... I know the 2.0s are around 500 - 550 per tank. My gas mileage is between 400 - 450 per tank which is still pretty good, and I give her the occassional "pedal to the metal."

Most people on this forum will probably argue against the 3.6 4-Motion, that being that more than 75% of the people on this forum have the 2.0 and most of the articles written concern the 2.0. 

I would also tend to say that the VR6 4Motion guys "seem" (although I can not prove this) to have less issues (engine / tranny and electrical issues). And I would dare say that the 3.6 offers a smoother ride.

In addition... the VR6 4Motion comes with HIDs / projector headlights already with auto-balancing, turn coordination, etc. Put some 6000K philips bulb in place of the 4500K stock philips bulbs + the Achtuning LED DRLs, and you've got yourself a pretty flash / ballsy luxury car. 

Or you can go the other route, get a 2.0.... buy and install an RNS-510, HID bulb kit and aftermarket projectors, homelink system, tune-up for your engine, wood interior, performance stock sound, different suspension, etc. etc. etc....... $$$$$$$$$....... or just pony up for the 3.6 4-Motion and have some small things to do :thumbup:

Depends on what kind of a person you are. Do you care more about luxury / flashiness with all the bells and whistles already on the car? Or are you the kind that likes to take the engine apart, put in a forged crank and domed pistons, aftermarket regulator, larger turbo, new exhaust, etc. etc.????

My .02 :wave:


----------



## boogiedownberlin (Sep 3, 2012)

I would have gone for the V6, which sells for $46k out here. 
A fully loaded 2.0T (without the lane departure and the adaptive CC) costs $41k

I got mine for an amazing deal and only paid $34k, saving $7k. 

IMO a car like the CC needs a V6 and AWD. A four cylinder doesn't fit its image properly (esp. when you hit the gas pedal and you hear the sound of a 4 cylinder small engine). Also I love the dual exhausts on the V6. 

I didn't mind the the the 2.0T in my 2006 Audi A4 though, but in the CC I sometimes wish I had the V6


----------



## usaf-lt-g (May 16, 2012)

boogiedownberlin said:


> I would have gone for the V6, which sells for $46k out here.
> A fully loaded 2.0T (without the lane departure and the adaptive CC) costs $41k


BTW.... Despite popular belief here in the States... you CAN do a swap out for the ACC (Adapative Crusie Control) which isn't offered on USA spec cars. I'm working on it right now. In the end, the feature add will be somewhere around the $1000 - $1500 range, despite the normal full price parts cost being around $3500 - $4000. If you know where to find the parts.... that's half the battle.

That's about the one feature I wish I had, which I'm embarking on now, that was never offered on US spec models (albeit it's not for the meak of heart.... Radar + different ABS module + different stalk + special brackets + a special VCDS setup).


----------



## stevegasm (Sep 26, 2012)

Going from a 3.2 A4 to a 2.0T CC, I'd say I'm happier with the CC. I don't have quattro anymore but the DSG makes up for it, and with the reduced drivetrain loss it feels quicker than my A4. There is a TON of aftermarket for the 2.0T, and that is another reason why I'm happier with the CC.


----------



## greek bandit (Sep 29, 2004)

Alright im jumping in on this one. I have the 3.6 with unitronic software and the resonator cut out and the sound is one you will never get out of any 4 banger. Ive ran up against the 2.0's on the track and have yet to lose to one. Main reason the 4motion launches and just takes off where as the 2.0 modded or stock has to try n launch and not just spin and once im off the line im gone. Yea the car is heavier compared but just like any heavy german car once you get their fat asses off the line there is no stopping em. As said above in previous posts i agree that in the cc the 2.0 isnt per say a fitting motor, not thats its bad and not that i havent seen some nasty k04'd cc's thatll gimme a hell of a run or roast me at H20 but the cc demands i think a bigger engine then a 2.0 for the base or lower trims....maybe atleast a 2.4T or 2.5T. With my driving mainly highway i average 26mpg which really isnt that bad for a 4100 lb car and my lead foot, compared to the 2.0 yea its not as good but its not like we are driving 6.3L mercs getting maybe 12-16mpg either. Now comparing to other germans aside from the 2.0 cc the 3.6 is a better bang for the buck. This is my 3rd vw but previous to the cc i had an 08 merc E350 4matic. The merc is 51k and doesnt come with hids or real leather seats or as much power or for that matter the engine is .1L smaller. Doesnt have parking sensors or a camera and deff not as good looking as any trim cc. The 3.6 4motion i have was 43k. My whole point with this is i preffer the 3.6 4motion over the 2.0 but i also preffer the cc compared to spending 51k for less features and a name......and now the people who will gimme crap for the novel i just wrote lol, go ahead im ready

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## old guy2 (May 30, 2010)

If you want to buy it and drive it as is VR6 hands down. If you enjoy mods and tweaks then the 2.0T for sure.


----------



## Kvn22 (Apr 1, 2009)

greek bandit said:


> Alright im jumping in on this one. I have the 3.6 with unitronic software and the resonator cut out and the sound is one you will never get out of any 4 banger. Ive ran up against the 2.0's on the track and have yet to lose to one. Main reason the 4motion launches and just takes off where as the 2.0 modded or stock has to try n launch and not just spin and once im off the line im gone. Yea the car is heavier compared but just like any heavy german car once you get their fat asses off the line there is no stopping em. As said above in previous posts i agree that in the cc the 2.0 isnt per say a fitting motor, not thats its bad and not that i havent seen some nasty k04'd cc's thatll gimme a hell of a run or roast me at H20 but the cc demands i think a bigger engine then a 2.0 for the base or lower trims....maybe atleast a 2.4T or 2.5T. With my driving mainly highway i average 26mpg which really isnt that bad for a 4100 lb car and my lead foot, compared to the 2.0 yea its not as good but its not like we are driving 6.3L mercs getting maybe 12-16mpg either. Now comparing to other germans aside from the 2.0 cc the 3.6 is a better bang for the buck. This is my 3rd vw but previous to the cc i had an 08 merc E350 4matic. The merc is 51k and doesnt come with hids or real leather seats or as much power or for that matter the engine is .1L smaller. Doesnt have parking sensors or a camera and deff not as good looking as any trim cc. The 3.6 4motion i have was 43k. My whole point with this is i preffer the 3.6 4motion over the 2.0 but i also preffer the cc compared to spending 51k for less features and a name......and now the people who will gimme crap for the novel i just wrote lol, go ahead im ready
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2


:thumbup:


----------



## AsianDude (Sep 17, 2007)

The 2.0 even though a nice engine is still a 4cyl engine
The vr6 in fwd models is nose heavy
The vr6 4 motion is a whole different feeling car altogether. Start with that and work your way down to see what you are willing to compromise at each price point.


----------



## greek bandit (Sep 29, 2004)

AsianDude said:


> The 2.0 even though a nice engine is still a 4cyl engine
> The vr6 in fwd models is nose heavy
> The vr6 4 motion is a whole different feeling car altogether. Start with that and work your way down to see what you are willing to compromise at each price point.


:thumbup:

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## pkeelan (Jan 17, 2011)

we never win this argument, but i much prefer the 3.6L to the 2.0 more power, much better exhaust note and i did want all the bells and whistles, and for 43 grand you are not really going to find a whole lot better package unless you buy japanese


----------



## Tsquared (Dec 9, 2011)

Drove both, bought the 4Motion. No contest for me.


----------



## boneshop (Aug 30, 2009)

i bought my 4motion new 2009. not one second of mechanical, electrical or any other problems.


----------



## BsickPassat (May 10, 2010)

1slow1.8t said:


> valve timing is different giving it +10hp


it's more than that... they have VTEC powah (aka Audi ValveLift)


----------



## Logical (Apr 30, 2012)

ahh the old NA V6 vs 4 banger turbo debate. I ran into a similar debate when i had my 1.8t A4 and thought going the V6 would have been better. It all depends on if the owner wants to mod their car and if they do then getting the 2.0t is a no brainer. While others feel the V6 is a better fit for the CC or need the AWD. Im glad i got the 2.0t because it leaves room for future tuning and i love getting 36 MPG+ on the highway


----------



## mswlogo (Jan 30, 2009)

Not to mention you can only get a Manual Transmission on the 2.0T. So that settles that question


----------



## puggs_dub (Apr 15, 2005)

@greek bandit.
Im buying a 4Motion next week... does the Uni tune make that much difference?


----------



## Bill6211789 (Dec 11, 2009)

puggs_dub said:


> @greek bandit.
> Im buying a 4Motion next week... does the Uni tune make that much difference?


I rode in a buddies car with it and it definitely helped the throttle response and gave the car a little more pep


----------



## greek bandit (Sep 29, 2004)

puggs_dub said:


> @greek bandit.
> Im buying a 4Motion next week... does the Uni tune make that much difference?


Once the ecu re adapted after 200 miles it feels like a whole other car. Not saying it blazing faster but off the line,throttle responce and acceleration have changed and was worth the $500. Also i advise cutting the resonator out of the exhaust. Beats spending $2400 for a supersprint exhaust

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## boogiedownberlin (Sep 3, 2012)

mswlogo said:


> Not to mention you can only get a Manual Transmission on the 2.0T. So that settles that question


Wait a sec, they don't sell the 2.0T with DSG in the States????!?!


----------



## Bill6211789 (Dec 11, 2009)

boogiedownberlin said:


> Wait a sec, they don't sell the 2.0T with DSG in the States????!?!


2.0t came in the 2010+ CC's he ment you cant get a manual tranny int he 3.6l at all


----------



## boogiedownberlin (Sep 3, 2012)

Bill6211789 said:


> 2.0t came in the 2010+ CC's he ment you cant get a manual tranny int he 3.6l at all


Aaaah, I get it now.

Stick shift on CC? I wouldn't want one. It's meant to be a stylish executive car, not a sports car. Hell even sports cars rarely come with the stick option these days


----------



## jbcc (Feb 11, 2011)

Are all the VR6 owners done jerking off to the sound of their own engines? Then i can say the only reason i got the 2.0t was because i wanted a manual tranny. Period.


----------



## jspirate (Jan 15, 2011)

boogiedownberlin said:


> Aaaah, I get it now.
> 
> Stick shift on CC? I wouldn't want one. It's meant to be a stylish executive car, not a sports car. Hell even sports cars rarely come with the stick option these days


You do know that CC stands for "comfort coupe" right? I know, I know, I know... the term "comfort coupe" is not a very respected car term. I am just not sure that I agree with your assessment about an executive's car vs a sports car/sedan.

I've got mine lowered on springs and k04'd and this dad is one happy camper. It serves as a back up to the wife's minivan for picking up my boys; yet, it has more soul than any of the sporty sedans I've owned or driven.

As for a straight drive transmission.... the automatics have proven to be higher performers and will one day be the only option. That said, given the choice I will pick straight drive every time. As such, I wouldn't be a CC owner if the option wasn't there.

- peace out


----------



## puggs_dub (Apr 15, 2005)

greek bandit said:


> Once the ecu re adapted after 200 miles it feels like a whole other car. Not saying it blazing faster but off the line,throttle responce and acceleration have changed and was worth the $500. Also i advise cutting the resonator out of the exhaust. Beats spending $2400 for a supersprint exhaust
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2


Is there alot more drone in the car with the resonator removed? I have a MK$ Jetta APR Stage 3+ and although I love me car, I am so ready for a smoother quieter drive.


----------



## BsickPassat (May 10, 2010)

jspirate said:


> You do know that CC stands for "comfort coupe" right? I know, I know, I know... the term "comfort coupe" is not a very respected car term. I am just not sure that I agree with your assessment about an executive's car vs a sports car/sedan.
> - peace out


While you're at it... why does the CC have sports seats? why does it have a sports suspension?

It could have emphasized the "Comfort" part better with a softer suspension, "Komfort" seats, etc... at least in europe.. why would it have the DCC option ???


----------



## greek bandit (Sep 29, 2004)

puggs_dub said:


> Is there alot more drone in the car with the resonator removed? I have a MK$ Jetta APR Stage 3+ and although I love me car, I am so ready for a smoother quieter drive.


same hear but the difference in sound in the cabin is minimal and most of your sound difference is when you are behind the car, ill get you a sound clip of mine


----------



## puggs_dub (Apr 15, 2005)

greek bandit said:


> same hear but the difference in sound in the cabin is minimal and most of your sound difference is when you are behind the car, ill get you a sound clip of mine


Very cool. I spoke with APR today and they are looking to release a 3.6 tune as well. I will be interesting to see what they will bring to the table.


----------



## pkeelan (Jan 17, 2011)

didn't APR take someones 3.6 4 motion to work on a few months ago? haven't heard anything since still very curious to hear


----------



## greek bandit (Sep 29, 2004)

puggs_dub said:


> Very cool. I spoke with APR today and they are looking to release a 3.6 tune as well. I will be interesting to see what they will bring to the table.


from what i understand apr did do such a thing but from what ive been told that the softwarefor the 3.6 is for the new ones 13+. only ones with software for the earlier 3.6's is unitronic. claims 308hp. like i said i have uni now but im very curious to see what apr puts down and a dyno sheet to all 4 wheels

heres the link 2nd page mid way down
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...-software-when-completed!/page2&highlight=apr


----------



## lasvegasjunkie (Jan 27, 2001)

With all the bells and whistles the VR6 4-MO comes with (many of these takes a fair amount of stress out of driving such as front & rear parking sensors; ventilated seats in the summertime; the AWD in bad weather) and priced at $43K the VR6 4-MO is an excellent value if you are looking for a luxury vehicle. A 3 series BMW or a Mercedes C350 with all the 3.6 4-MO features will end up being costing approx $51K; a 5 series BMW or E350 Mercedes equipped like a VR6 4-MO will cost approx $60K. Being that the VW CC VR-6 is already constructed very solidly, I find it kind of hard to justify paying so much more for any of the BMW or Mercedes models. One advantage to BMW and Mercedes is there is a 4 year bumper to bumper warranty (VW CC has a 3 year warranty). The Lexus ES350 is priced similarly to the VW CC VR-6 (actually a few percentage higher price on the Lexus ES350), but the Lexus ES350 is a fancy Toyota Camry. However, the Infiniti G37x AWD is good competition for the CC. I opted for the 2013 CC 3.6 4MO after much checking around of the different vehicles in $40K to $45K range.


----------



## RAMDUDE (Aug 22, 2012)

I bought the 2.0T due to buying small mods and getting power out of it.

I am coming from a srt-10 8.3 v-10 to a 2.0 4 cylinder 

It's all good tho, least the mods dont rape me in prices, like 7000.00 for heads


----------

