Audi Quattro

Which Audi Quattro Version Should You Buy?

The Audi Quattro catalogue covers one Coupe generation produced from 1980 through 1991, including a restyling introduced in 1985. The choice comes down to eight listed versions: three from the original 1980–1985 range and five from the 1985–1991 restyling. Every version uses Gasoline, an Inline 5-cylinder engine and AWD, but outputs range from 200 hp to 300 hp.

The Audi Quattro catalogue covers one Coupe generation produced from 1980 through 1991, including a restyling introduced in 1985. The choice comes down to eight listed versions: three from the original 1980–1985 range and five from the 1985–1991 restyling. Every version uses Gasoline, an Inline 5-cylinder engine and AWD, but outputs range from 200 hp to 300 hp. The quickest measured option is the original 2.1 MT with 300 hp, while the restyled 2.2 MT with 220 hp combines the best measured performance in the later range with the lowest measured combined fuel consumption.

Audi Quattro generations: what changed?

The original 1 generation ran from 1980 to 1985 as a Coupe and contained three versions. Buyers could choose a 2.1 AT with 200 hp, a 2.1 MT with 200 hp or another 2.1 MT with 300 hp. The 200 hp engines displaced 2,144 cc, while the 300 hp engine displaced 2,134 cc. The Automatic had 4 gears, whereas both Manual versions had 5. All three used AWD.

The restyled 1 generation ran from 1985 to 1991, remained a Coupe and expanded the range to five versions. It retained 2.1 AT and 2.1 MT choices with 200 hp and added three 2.2-liter entries: a 2.2 AT with 200 hp, a 2.2 MT with 200 hp and a 2.2 MT with 220 hp. Each 2.2-liter engine displaced 2,226 cc. The restyled cars also used either a 4-speed Automatic or a 5-speed Manual gearbox, always with AWD.

The original and restyled 2.1 AT have identical listed engine outputs: 200 hp at 5,500 rpm and 285 Nm at 3,500 rpm. The two 200 hp 2.1 MT entries share those figures as well. The measurable difference between those Manual cars is acceleration: the restyled version reaches 100 km/h in 6.7 seconds, 0.4 seconds sooner than the original version’s 7.1 seconds.

Audi Quattro engine specs

The original 2.1 MT with 300 hp produces approximately 140.6 hp per liter, the highest specific output in the catalogue. The 2,144 cc versions produce approximately 93.3 hp per liter. Among the 2,226 cc cars, the 200 hp 2.2 MT and 2.2 AT produce approximately 89.8 hp per liter, while the 220 hp 2.2 MT produces approximately 98.8 hp per liter.

The restyled 2.2 MT with 220 hp adds 20 hp and 24 Nm over the 200 hp 2.2 MT. Its maximum torque also arrives at 1,950 rpm rather than 3,500 rpm. However, the database labels its boost as No, while the 200 hp 2.2 MT is labeled Turbo; these catalogue values are reported as supplied.

Audi Quattro performance and mpg

For outright measured performance, the original 2.1 MT with 300 hp is the clear choice. It reaches 100 km/h in 5.6 seconds and has a 250 km/h top speed. Compared with the restyled 2.2 MT with 220 hp, it is 0.7 seconds quicker to 100 km/h and 20 km/h faster at the top end.

Within the restyled range, the 2.2 MT with 220 hp is the performance leader. It reaches 100 km/h 0.4 seconds sooner than the 2.1 MT and 1 second sooner than the 200 hp 2.2 MT. Its top speed is 8 km/h above the 2.1 MT and 10 km/h above the 200 hp 2.2 MT.

For fuel consumption, the strongest measured comparison is between the restyled 2.1 MT and the 220 hp 2.2 MT. The latter uses 0.9 L/100 km less in the city and 0.3 L/100 km less on the combined cycle, although its highway figure is 0.1 L/100 km higher. Consumption for both Automatic versions and for the 200 hp restyled 2.2 MT was not measured.

Audi Quattro dimensions, weight and tank capacity

Exterior dimensions, wheel sizes and weight distribution were not measured for any listed version. Ground clearance is 130 mm where measured. Kerb weight varies substantially among versions with available figures, so it is important to compare the exact production range and output rather than relying only on the repeated engine names.

The original 300 hp 2.1 MT has the most favorable calculated weight-to-power figure at 3.33 kg/hp. It is 300 kg lighter and has 100 hp more than the original 200 hp 2.1 MT. The restyled 220 hp 2.2 MT weighs 90 kg more than the 200 hp 2.2 MT, but its extra 20 hp improves the calculated ratio from 6.45 to 6.27 kg/hp.

The restyling increased listed tank capacity from 70 L to 90 L, a difference of 20 L. That larger tank applies to every restyled version. Ground clearance did not change among the entries with available measurements.

Which Audi Quattro version should you choose?

Choose the original 2.1 MT with 300 hp if measured acceleration, top speed and weight-to-power ratio matter most. Its 5.6-second acceleration time, 250 km/h top speed and 3.33 kg/hp calculated ratio lead every listed version. Its city, highway and combined consumption figures were not measured, so the data cannot support an economy comparison for this version.

Choose the restyled 2.2 MT with 220 hp if you want the strongest all-round set of measured specifications from the later production range. It delivers 220 hp, 309 Nm, a 6.3-second acceleration time and a 230 km/h top speed. It also records the lowest measured city consumption at 14.5 L/100 km and the lowest measured combined consumption at 10.7 L/100 km.

Choose the restyled 2.1 MT if you prefer a 200 hp Manual with complete measured performance and consumption figures. It is 0.4 seconds quicker to 100 km/h than the original 200 hp 2.1 MT while matching its 222 km/h top speed and its measured consumption figures. It also carries 20 L more fuel.

The 200 hp restyled 2.2 MT offers a 10 kg lower kerb weight than the restyled 2.1 MT, but it is 0.6 seconds slower to 100 km/h and has a top speed lower by 2 km/h. On the supplied numbers, that makes the 2.1 MT the more convincing of these two 200 hp Manual choices unless the 2,226 cc engine is specifically preferred.

Choose a 2.1 AT or 2.2 AT only when the 4-speed Automatic gearbox is the deciding requirement. Their acceleration, top-speed and consumption figures were not measured, and their kerb weights were not measured either. Consequently, the data does not justify claiming that either Automatic is quicker, more economical or lighter than the other.

Price, sale availability, reliability and common problems are not measured in the supplied catalogue data. They therefore cannot decide this comparison. Based strictly on the recorded specifications, the original 300 hp 2.1 MT is the performance choice, the restyled 220 hp 2.2 MT is the best-balanced measured choice, and the restyled 200 hp 2.1 MT is the strongest lower-output Manual alternative.