More Trunk Space That You Might Think - 2015 Audi A3 Long-Term Road Test

Edmunds.com

More Trunk Space That You Might Think - 2015 Audi A3 Long-Term Road Test

On paper our 2015 Audi A3 doesn't have much cargo space, but the trunk doesn't seem nearly that small in person.

Read the full story here

se_riously

Title should be "More Trunk Space THAN You Might Think".

fordson1

Yeah, and "huge amount of bags" should be "huge NUMBER of bags." You guys are all English majors, right? Um, right...?

It's very popular to make fun of English majors, I know, but I'll never do it AS LONG AS THEY ACTUALLY KNOW ENGLISH.

chol92594

I'd be curious to see a comparison between trunk space on the 1.8T and 2.0T models. The 1.8 has a listed capacity of 12 cubic feet (if I recall correctly), which I'm assuming is because there's no need to accommodate the extra AWD components that are on the 2.0. My Civic has 12 cu ft of trunk space (although the opening isn't quite as wide as the A3), which makes me wonder if the A3 would be a practical next car. Sure, the shape of the trunk and its opening does play a part in how usable the actual measured space is, but I've found myself wishing for a larger trunk on a few occasions, which makes me think that 12 cu ft is just too small.

I know Audi is bringing the A3 hatchback over to the states in TDI and e-tron trim, but they really should offer one if not both of the gas powertrains as well. Some people want a small car like the A3, but need more cargo space than a typical small sedan can offer. In that case, it's hard to justify an A3 over a Mk 7 Golf unless AWD is a necessity.

vvk

It is the "curse of the cubic foot" again. Just like BMW 3-series, A3 trunk volume does not translate correctly. In Europe the sedan's "boot capacity" is listed as "425 litres." That mathematically translates to 15 cubic feet. NASA engineers must have done the conversion for Edmunds because instead they are quoting 10 ft3.

fordson1

chol92594 said:

I'd be curious to see a comparison between trunk space on the 1.8T and 2.0T models. The 1.8 has a listed capacity of 12 cubic feet (if I recall correctly), which I'm assuming is because there's no need to accommodate the extra AWD components that are on the 2.0. My Civic has 12 cu ft of trunk space (although the opening isn't quite as wide as the A3), which makes me wonder if the A3 would be a practical next car. Sure, the shape of the trunk and its opening does play a part in how usable the actual measured space is, but I've found myself wishing for a larger trunk on a few occasions, which makes me think that 12 cu ft is just too small.

I know Audi is bringing the A3 hatchback over to the states in TDI and e-tron trim, but they really should offer one if not both of the gas powertrains as well. Some people want a small car like the A3, but need more cargo space than a typical small sedan can offer. In that case, it's hard to justify an A3 over a Mk 7 Golf unless AWD is a necessity.

Well, you could wait for the A3 hatch or get a Golf R.

bc1960

@vvk, there's no conversion; the DIN and SAE procedures for measuring trunk volume are different. DIN looks at how many 5x10x20cm (1l) volumes can be stuffed in--1l isn't that big, so this fills out the trunk's envelope fairly well, but not all that volume may be useful for larger, rigid-sided objects. SAE considers how many suitcase-like objects (3-suiter, 2-suiter, 1-suiter, small case, etc., with a certain number of each available) can be placed inside, starting with the largest first and only moving to next size when there are no more of the current size available, or no more of that size will fit. Only the volume within the objects is counted. This may be in a sense a more realistic case, but there will be voids around the outside that are conceivably useful if you have some loose or compressible cargo. Also, there are conceivably certain trunk dimensions and proportions that will fare poorly because of the procedure--e. g., suppose that only 2 XL "cases" fit, and no others, while one XL, one L, and 2 Ms might also fit and fill more volume, but that's not a permissible packing. I suspect the A3 may fit the last scenario, because the trunk doesn't look that much smaller than some other cars that measure larger, but it has different proportions.