Howdy, Stranger!

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





Audi A3

15657596162109

Comments

  • Hey, go buy your legacy gt waton, but its not and audi and not build anything like and Audi. Slam the door on and Audi and slam the door on the legacy and see which one sounds more solid. This is a lot of car for the money. You get 50 more horsepower and more torque out of the 3.2L. think of it as a TT 3.2 with a hatchback body. Going to a great car, and I think dealers will have a hard time keeping them in stock. And it will be a while before we see a 2.0T in quattro. Too close of a price gap between the 3.2 and 2.0T. Only about 4k different and you get quattro and a better engine and DSG that is a no brainer.
  • Too close of a price gap between the 3.2 and 2.0T. Only about 4k different and you get quattro and a better engine and DSG that is a no brainer.

    But you also get a lot of worthless garbage on the 3.2 - automatic, heavier enginer (and less powerful than a chipped 2.0), bunch of silly S-line parts. All told the 3.2 seems like a massive rip off. Configured with just a sky roof and xenons the darned thing is more exepensive than a 330i with sport, leather, moon, xenons via euro delivery. I can't fathom paying 35-36k for an A3. That's too much for a car of that caliber. 31-32k is reasonable LOADED.
  • wale_bate1wale_bate1 Posts: 1,986
    "I can't fathom paying 35-36k for an A3..."

    I can. But we all know about my priorities, eh?

    I can see it, though. I want the Quattro, or else I might as well shop Acura or VW, and I'm taking DSG anyway (zoom, zoom), I'm not likely to chip anything, though I like the idea of the petit plant with bigger bang. S-line bits? The appearance package junk you can keep, but I'm opting for a sport suspension anyway. Sky roof yes, HIDs only if they're packaged with something I really want.

    They've still got my attention, but if the lease rates from Audi remain as they have been, that could tear the transaction...
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Posts: 1,652
    Throw in a nice European Delivery like…MB, BMW, Volvo, and you may have something there.

    I’d prefer the Turbo Quattro as well…
  • Hey, go buy your legacy gt waton, but its not and audi and not build anything like and Audi.

    I think I would go and buy the AWD Legacy GT 2.5T if I didn't already have a largeish AWD wagon. Subarus are very reliable, but, unfortunately, their real world mileage is often not as great as you would expect from a turbo 4. At any rate, that's just one AWD competitor of the A3 - everyone has their own priorities and as a result, it is at times amazing which cars are cross-shopped. I think I have pretty much given up on the idea of a Forester XT, but for the longest time that one was for example in the running for me.

    This is a lot of car for the money. You get 50 more horsepower and more torque out of the 3.2L.

    My point was that you don't get all of that because of the added drive train loss of the AWD. Also, numerous dynos have shown that the 2.0TFSI stock produces quite a bit more hp than listed (with the argument that a smaller number helps Audi justify the price difference to the 3.2). The real world difference to the wheels is likely no more than 20hp - for a car that is substantially (nose-) heavier and guzzles a lot more gas.

    And it will be a while before we see a 2.0T in quattro.

    If you are right, and many people buy the 3.2, that could very well be. And vice versa.

    Too close of a price gap between the 3.2 and 2.0T. Only about 4k different and you get quattro and a better engine and DSG that is a no brainer.

    If my math is right there is a $6000.00 difference between the base 3.2 and the 2.0TSFI with DSG and sports package (which includes leather and other things). The street price difference is likely even more, since the 2.0TFSI can be bought at least $1000 below MSRP, and it will be a while before the same is true for the 3.2. $7K for AWD (a $1500-$2000 value), the marginally better V6, and some little doodads I don't need...
  • I may close on an Audi A3 without Bluetooth. My question is like 'bouldermax' had: is there any point in ordering a cradle for an A3 without Bluetooth prep?

    What I am asking is better understood if I explain. I know that in my area, the Bluetooth A3s have not yet arrived. Soon, but I have a chance to get one at a fair price that is already on a lot and marked a little down. I have decided not to wait. I really would not mind having a *nice* *integrated* cradle for my phone if it gave me many of the same features as the wireless, cradle-less Bluetooth would.

    So, does it? If I get an Audi phone cradle, will my nav and my dash display tell me it's the phone? Etc?

    Thank you for your responses. Quite frankly, my dealer(s) do not know if it will or if it will not.

    Regards,
    AudiAble3
  • I would advise you not to mess with a phone with a cradle. if you want a phone to work in the car get a bluetooth car and phone. The only phone that will work with the car with just the cradle and no bluetooth in the car is the v60 audi motorola, which they are having major problems with because the phone does not have the E-911 progaming. I guess all new phones that are new activation have to have this, and nothing audi has right now would do that. So unless you have bluetooth car and phone nothing is going to work for you. Hope this will help you.
  • A3 2.0T with DSG and sport is $29k, A3 3.2L with about the same type of equipment is $33,940 base price which includes(17" all season tires, front fog lights, sline front and rear bumper, sport suspension, power sports seat for driver, bose sound system with 6 cd changer, convience package). The A3 2.0T with DSG and the same equipment is a 31k car, even at at a 1000 off sticker its a 30k, so a 4k gap. I would rather have quattro an a front wheel drive. Of course I live in the northeast so that makes a big difference. If I lived down south might be a different story. But still think the 3.2 is a great buy for the money
  • dc_davedc_dave Posts: 51
    Anyone catch the live chat today? I missed it but was wondering if there was any talk about the A-3 S-line, S3 or RS3?

    Dave in VA
  • That's intersting that those problems occured (sorry for jumping backward and replying to a post from Oct. 11th, guys) since the Treo and Audi are supposed to be working together to sync car/mobile phone.

    Side question... what city are you in where your dealer had an RS4? I understand that it was preproduction... I'm still curious to know what city.
  • rjlaerorjlaero Posts: 659
    +1 on that note.

    Audi has a few pics of the new 3.2 DSG on their website right now. Considering the 3.2 DSG model will have the upgraded S Line package as standard equiptment (which is a $2750 - $3000 option on the A4 and A6's) that makes the 3.2 DSG quattro a pretty good value in my book.

    The Edmuds crowd is full of nitpickers who analyze prices to death. Cars are getting more expensive every day as front wheel drive V6 hondas and toyotas are pushing 30 grand. A loaded up 2WD 150hp Jetta can hit 27 grand. You people need to get real on prices and production costs.
  • wale_bate1wale_bate1 Posts: 1,986
    Somone tell me how a 3.2Q A3 will be on sale here in CA, and yet a 2006 TT 3.2 doesn't meet emissions standards?

    Me no get it. :confuse:
  • I don't think what some of us are doing here is nit-picking. Truth is, people have different priorities when shopping for cars. Like blueguy, I could care less about an S-line package. Sports suspension? Yes. Others love cosmetic details that set a model or special edition apart from the standard look and are willing to pay a lot of money for that.

    Right now, Audi is going full out towards shoppers who like to max out their cars --- engine, AWD, DSG, looks, features --- with the 3.2 A3.

    I am more a guy who looks at the specs, performance, and what I get for the money. If the 2.0TFSI A3 does not receive quattro within the next 9 months or so, I may not buy the A3 but go for the 4-door GTI instead, or buy an entirely different make.

    Time will tell which way Audi can sell more cars, and whether the entire 3.2 thing was worth the effort on this model. Sure, if you don't offer the 2.0quattro initially, you can sell a few more 3.2s initially. In the long run, playing with customers like that leaves nothing but bad taste and may not bring in a penny more to Audi.

    The California emissions questions is interesting in the context that no one has confirmed or denied at this point whether the 3.2 will be FSI - to my knowledge. The new 3.2 in the European Passat (which is also transversely mounted) is FSI.
  • We're in the same boat. I just saw pics of an Aussie guy's Lava Grey A3 2.0T Quattro at Vortex and I'm green with envy. Until that moment I wasn't sure that was exactly the car I'd like to replace my 330i. It is!

    Room, style, a great engine, a good drive system, 4 year warranty...the complete package.

    And totally unattainable in the USA. Yet Australia, a nation with rampant unemployment, a horrid economy and fewer than 25 million people gets this car?! Something is definitely screwy at Audi's HQ.
  • sure sending a letter to Lexus complaining didn't change anything but I'd rather have my voice heard. So Audi got a letter from me requesting they release a 2.0T Quattro. If Australia can get it, why can't we?
  • A Speed Shop, located near my home, has offered to design, build, and install an exhaust system for my 5 week old A3......FREE OF CHARGE!!! The new system would then be a prototype and allow the Shop to duplicate and market it to other A3 owners throughout the region/nation. My dilemma: What effect will the new Exhaust system have on my Factory Warranty? I've called 3 Service Managers from 3 different Dealers. Two Mgrs. advised that an exhaust mod COULD negate my Warranty if engine problems developed. A third ( from a distant Dealer] advised that 'Exhaust mods are very commonplace on Audis and do not present a Warranty problem'. He further stated ' It sounds like you've got a great deal'.
    I would appreciate any experience based comments. Bill H.
  • Well I think all of us would like to see the 2.0 in quattro. Especially at the dealer level here in the northeast. Don't get my wrong the front trac is great and does a good job in the snow and wet conditions. But the main problems here is that Audi wants to have a Sub 30k in their line up that will bring a new segment to the market that they have never had, and the 2.0T does that right now. If you Add quattro 1500-2000 to the car it puts it over that and puts it to close to the 3.2 quattro. And I see people talking about add weight, well no matter what car you add quattro to you are going to be adding weight. The 2.0T is not going to be here any time within the next year. I work for a dealer and we have a whole years worth of productions dates and releases and the 2.0T quattro is not one of them. So don't hold your bearth but do give the 3.2 a fair try, I know you will love the engine especially fitted with the DSG. To any of you who have question out there let me know and I will see what I can do to get answers for you.
  • Where did you see the photos of the new 3.2 Quattro, I only see one small photo on the A3 main page?

    Dave in VA :confuse:
  • If you Add quattro 1500-2000 to the car it puts it over that and puts it to close to the 3.2 quattro

    Quattro would make the car cost 27-28k. That's a far cry from the 34k of the 3.2. Add in sport and you're still under 30k. xenons and it's 31k.
    And I see people talking about add weight, well no matter what car you add quattro to you are going to be adding weight.

    The quattro system adds 150-200 lbs. A hit no doubt but the benefits are immediately obvious...the car will no longer suffer from FWD.

    he 2.0T is not going to be here any time within the next year. I work for a dealer and we have a whole years worth of productions dates and releases and the 2.0T quattro is not one of them. So don't hold your bearth but do give the 3.2 a fair try, I know you will love the engine especially fitted with the DSG. To any of you who have question out there let me know and I will see what I can do to get answers for you.

    The 3.2 is added weight and it's less powerful than a chipped 2.0 so it's a lose, lose. You now have a snout that's more unbalanced, plus the car has less power and worse handling than a 2.0T Quattro. This reminds me of the old VR6/1.8T issue. Drive the cars back to back and you feel that bigger engine as if someone were sitting on the hood. mix a chip into the mix and the V6 becomes just an albatross.
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Posts: 1,652
    Plus, as I always like to point out, if you take either to higher altitudes the 2.0T will deliver the same amount of power, 200hp. At 5280 feet the 3.2 will only be making 215hp (at 7000 it makes around 200hp). Not to suggest everybody is at 5280 feet above sea level.

    If I lived in Denver the only reason I would go for the 3.2 is perhaps it would be more refined (stretching here).
Sign In or Register to comment.