Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Audi A3

1545557596073

Comments

  • ccd1ccd1 Posts: 140
    I'm not happy with Audi's pricing either, but let's be fair. In terms of price differences, you compare similarly equipped vehicles. It does not matter whether you value the equipment or not.

    Therefore you start with a 2.0 with DSG because the 3.2 is only available with DSG. While the comparison is not perfect because you cannot exactly duplicate the options on the 3.2 in the 2.0, the difference is approximately $4835. Your figures are off by over $2k!

    The standard leather seats are leather surfaces which means that the entire seat is not leather. And you are correct, the adaptive xenon lights turn in the direction of the front wheels. Probably a worthwhile feature for twisting roads and worthless for most highways.
  • ccd1ccd1 Posts: 140
    I think the option packages will be simplified for the 2.0. There isn't anything to simplify for the 3.2 as there are no packages for that car. I don't expect many changes for the 3.2 in 2007. If you are going to load the car with just about every option, you probably won't see many changes at all. But I'm told the factory switches over to 2007 models in April/May, so you might as well wait and see what changes there are. If you get the 2007 ordering/pricing info as soon as it is available, you might be able to choose between 2006 and 2007 models.

    Personally, I'm going to wait and see how many 3.2s are sitting on lots comes late Summer and Fall. I'm betting there will be a few with options close to what I want and dealers willing to discount. All the dealers in my area seem to order the same car: 3.2 in dark grey or silver, sky system, sat radio, bluetooth xenon lights and CWP. The only things they don't commonly order is the performance package (bigger wheels and perf tires)and navigation system.
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    "While the comparison is not perfect because you cannot exactly duplicate the options on the 3.2 in the 2.0, the difference is approximately $4835. Your figures are off by over $2k!"

    Forgetting for a moment the argument that I have about not paying for something that I do not want (something that I have an intense dislike for actually), I did post the following:

    "Admittedly the difference would shrink to $5,285 if I had optioned the DSG on the 2.0T..."

    The two cars that I configured that showed that difference were both like for like, ... Errr, wait a minute... Does the 3.2 come with the Premium Audio with the Bose and CD Changer? If it does then there is at least part of the difference because I didn't configure the 2.0T that way (don't want/need the changer and am not impressed with the Bose speakers).

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • wale_bate1wale_bate1 Posts: 1,986
    Did I miss the sport suspension in your 2.0T config? Standard on the 3.2. Don't know if you figger'd that in, Shipo. It's a must have for me.

    $2K over what it should be. I'm sticking with my story here... ;)
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    Yeah, it's the Sport Package (suspension included) that's the central point of my #^@&~, ummm, errr, issues with Audi. The sad fact is that if you opt for the SP, then you can either have Bluetooth OR Xenon headlights. :confuse:

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • wale_bate1wale_bate1 Posts: 1,986
    I know, I know, and I try to be sympathetic with your plight old bean, but since neither option is of any importance to me, my sympathy is soley that of a fellow generally-frustrated-with-the-industry shopper! ;)

    Audi certainly is an odd duck. Way cool, but odd.

    BTW, I believe the Mrs. is now firmly on track to pursue the A8 at the end of her "mini"van lease. Way the heck too big for my tastes, but I won't object to being chauffered in such a conveyance. A two Audi family? Perhaps.
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    "I know, I know, and I try to be sympathetic with your plight old bean, but since neither option is of any importance to me, my sympathy is soley that of a fellow generally-frustrated-with-the-industry shopper!"

    Is that sorta like me commiserating with a fellow enthusiast who would love to drive an S2000 only to be denied because it cannot be had with an automatic transmission? ;-)

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • ccd1ccd1 Posts: 140
    The 3.2 does come with Premium Radio and Bose speakers. The easiest way to do the comparison is to go to the Specs page and identify all the things that are standard on the 3.2 which are optional on the 2.0. Neither the Sports Package nor the Premium Package have everything that is on the 3.2. I chose the Premium Package for my comparison, but you could make an argument for the Sports Package. Opting for the Sports Package would raise the difference to around $5k.
  • dl7265dl7265 Posts: 1,381
    What would it cost for you to try the DSG ? Now a real automatic thats whats in your GDC ;)

    DL
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    Funny! :D

    The strange thing is that I don't actually mind the Automatic in the DGC, then again, it's a minivan which would kind of defeat the whole purpose of a manual gearbox anyway. :-/

    The problem is "Once a stick driver, always a stick driver." My 530i will have been gone a full year as of a week from tomorrow, and yet I'm still accidentally slamming on the brakes every now and again by hitting the brake pedal with my left foot whilst it's in search of a clutch pedal. The sad (well, not really) fact is that my body wants to shift, and if I was to even so much as step inside of a DSG equipped A3 I'm afraid that my left leg and right arm might could well leave me. ;-) Seriously though, I am not opposed to taking a test drive with the DSG just to get a feel for how far Automatic transmission technology has come, that having been said, ain't no way I'll order one built that way. :shades:

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • ccd1ccd1 Posts: 140
    I saw the sales data release by Audi for Jan/Feb. for a new model like the A3, there are no sales figures from the prior year. Does anyone know how A3 sales are doing against projections for both the 2.0 and 3.2???

    Just using AutoTrader thru this site, dealers appear to have a very good inventory of 2.0s and there is no problem locating 3.2s either. One local dealer has put a 3.2 on sale over a week ago and it still has not moved.

    I don't see any aggressive pricing in my area yet, but I'm beginning to wonder if that is on the horizon or whether it is still too soon to tell.
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,714
    Does the A3 sell better in specific regions of the USA?
    If so, which regions?
  • dl7265dl7265 Posts: 1,381
    I know what you mean. :( Driving 8 hours a day in my "company car" and switching back and forth im allways reaching in the wrong place for window lifts, clutch, havc control's ect...

    BTW, to stay on topic do you know if the A3 has that annoying delay valve on their manual's like the 3er has ?

    DL
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    I've never heard any reports of Audi using a CDV on any of their cars... Here's hoping! ;-)

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • dl7265dl7265 Posts: 1,381
    Great news ! Thanks !

    Dl
  • carquerycarquery Posts: 35
    I've been following this chat for awhile and am very interested in the A3 as my next car. I live in CT and have found the AWD to be very handy in the winter. The FWD A3 seems to get very respctable mileage, but I haven't read anything on the AWD model. If anyone has any real world results, that would be great. I do 70% of my driving in the city.

    Thanks!
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,714
    (and Audi owners feel free to correct me) many cars have adaptable transmissions and brakes that actually "learn" and self adjust themselves over a given period of driving. Gradual break-in gives these systems a better chance to do their job and make sure your vehicle will run trouble free.

    Take care of your car, and your car will take care of you!
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,714
    "Under the hood, a larger Oettinger turbocharger helps boost output of the 2.0-liter four-cylinder to 295 hp and 317 pound-feet of torque, which shaves 0-to-60-mph acceleration to less than 6 seconds."

    This is from a today's Edmunds article about a german Afterparts specialist, Oettinger, who has developed a bunch of performance, tuner add ons for A3's. The article did not say when those parts will be available in the USA.
  • spektrespektre Posts: 80
    I can see slapping that puppy into the quattro 2.0T, but that much power through just the front wheels on this side of the pond is going to be a bit much to handle :surprise:
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,714
    Dodge SRT-4, Chevrolet Impala SS, etc. are FWD and over 300 Hp. Biggest problem seems to be torque steer, which can be controlled with equal halfshafts and proper tire choice.

    As Audi builds race cars, they should have no trouble getting a High HP motor working in a FWD'er.

    But agreed an AWD platform would be better for the ever increasing HP many american Drivers and all auto journalists crave.

    Fantasy time; Would 500+ Hp be too much for an A3 Quattro? If Audi built it, would drivers buy it?
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    "Dodge SRT-4, Chevrolet Impala SS, etc. are FWD and over 300 Hp. Biggest problem seems to be torque steer, which can be controlled with equal halfshafts and proper tire choice."

    Don't believe it. Unless by "controlled" you mean slightly minimized, then torque steer is a fact of life with any front driver with any appreciable amount of horse power.

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • ccd1ccd1 Posts: 140
    Hope: AOA brings the S3 to the US. Question: as much as people (including me) have griped about the cost of the 3.2, how many people do you think will pay around $40k for the S3????

    Fantasy: AOA brings the RS3 to the US for even more money. How many will pay even more for that car???

    Best hope: German aftermarket maker Oettinger brings blower kit to US (raises power in the 2.0T to almost 300 ponies). Good luck on making use of that kind of power without quattro.

    Anyone even fantasizing about 500 ponies in the A3 needs to be committed. That is 150 more ponies than the RS3 and would only belong on a race track.
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,714
    Ever notice what all car mags including Edmunds __and_ the swelling Tuner market ask for? MORE POWER !!! Voila, the mfrs are obliging them!

    We already have a Pontiac Solstice making over 400 HP (via aftermarket house). GM's less muscled version at over 300 Hp is expected to be a sellout. Mercedes muscled AMG cars sell well too, despite their high price.

    How many USA'ed RS3 Quattros would Audi have to sell in order to make a profit (assuming all they need to do is drop the bigger engine and rugged-ized drivetrain into the USA A3 spec body)?

    Supposed Audi sold this RS3 Quattro at $49K but included __all__ the options _and_ tuned it so it blows off a Corvette Z06 or other similar_classed sports car? Would this now most powerful, luxurious compact hatchback on the planet sell? Yes, indeed.
  • ccd1ccd1 Posts: 140
    I disagree. The car is a hatch and the A3 is already the most expensive hatch on the US market. Americans have traditionally not liked hatches. The RS3 could blow away a Vette and people still wouldn't buy it. A Vette looks the part of a sports car and the A3 doesn't.

    Price this car at $49k and Audi's own S4 becomes a competitor as well as a bunch of other cars like the M3, etc The RS3 would not do well against those cars.
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,714
    But would that S4 have the 400 Hp+ motor I suggested for the super RS3 Quattro?
    Anyway, back to reality :shades: ;

    Seriously, cc1, you've a good point; I forgot America dislikes hatches (euros love them!). But maybe tide is turning; most people seeing my Maxx praised its looks, and it's uglier than A3!

    If Audi does bring over the "S's" and they sell well, then that's a victory of HP over hatch. We'll see! ;)
  • ccd1ccd1 Posts: 140
    The S4 get 340hp from its V-8, the RS4 gets 420hp. The V-8 barely fit into the A4 after a bunch of modifications to make it shorter. I doubt it would ever fit into the A3. Since the "RS" cars are Audi's stupidly fast cars, 350hp is probably close to the max hp you can get out of the 6 cylnder engine.

    The 3.2 will have to be a hit before we see any "S" version of the A3. If there aren't enough people to spring for the 3.2, then the S3 and RS3 will never get off the ground. The S3 is hitting european showrooms in the Fall, so figure on the 2008 model year as the 1st possible year of introduction into the US. But I wouldn't count on it.

    As a hatch, I think there will always be a limit on what Americans will pay for the car. However...make it a little larger and shape it like its Roadjet concept car and it begins to look like a CUV. You could break a few price barriers with a car like that. There are plenty of CUVs in the $30-40k range like the Nissan Murano and more on the way. The current A3 is too small to pull this off.

    I know this is mostly a matter of perception as the lines between a hatch, CUV and small wagon can get very blurry. But Americans will pay more for a CUV than either a small wagon or a hatch. Witness the Infinity FX.
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,714
    the Malibu Maxx, if Saab took it over and reworked it with premium interior, an OHV V6 with direct injection, and a more european ride/handling emphasis, could be a viable "Big Brother" to the A3. But it won't happen.

    Sadly, Audi's limited focus on the 3.2's market range may prove limiting for the number of buyers they get. A more touring oriented suspension would sell me, but it's not available, period.

    Is the current Audi A3 3.2 a hit? Are they flying off dealers lots?
  • ccd1ccd1 Posts: 140
    The 3.2s in my area are definitely not flying off dealer lots. My sense is that they move slowly, but is not a big deal since most dealers have only 1 or 2 at any given time.
    No one stocks a bunch of these cars. The 2.0s are MUCH more plentiful.

    The 3.2 is an S-line in Audi nomenclature which means its intended to be sporty. Hence the choice of suspension. As you go into the "S" and "RS" models, you get more performance that is less suited for daily driving. IOW, the focus becomes more limited as you go to the "S" and "RS". All the more reason not to bring these cars into the US without great demand for the 3.2. Even if these models make it to the US, you can bank on the suspension being as firm as the 3.2 or firmer.
  • wale_bate1wale_bate1 Posts: 1,986
    Firmer! Much.

    And lower. RS4s ride 1.2" lower than their S4 counterparts, which already ride 5mm lower (IIRC) than the A4 S-line brethren, which ride 10mm lower than their std A4 siblings. They also track a minimum of 2" wider than a typical A4. I'd expect the RS3 to be set up pretty much the same way.

    Makes me all sweaty just thinking about it.

    We won't see an RS3 here, I don't think. Too bad, says I.
  • ccd1ccd1 Posts: 140
    I agree that we won't see the RS3.

    Now if I was king err...head of AOA, I'd try to sell HQ on the idea of selling the A3 in the US as follows:

    A3 2.0

    A3 2.0 S-Line

    S3

    However the US, S3 would be a RS3 detuned to 300 hp, sort of halfway between the European S3 and RS3 and would come with no options, just loaded for around $40k (Hey, a guy can dream, can't he?). I'd use my S3 as a showcase for Audi technology and try to get people hooked on the options for purchases of future Audis. This car will never happen, but it would sure stop all complaints that there isn't enough difference between the 2.0 and 3.2 to justify the added cost.
Sign In or Register to comment.