By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Another Audi model arriving in dealerships in November also will have iPod integration, the new 2006 A3 3.2 quattro S-line. This newest version of the A3 model line comes with a powerful narrow-angle V6 engine firing 250 horsepower combined with Audi’s DSG transmission featuring TiptronicÒ controls and paddle shifters behind the steering wheel, and quattroÒ all-wheel drive. An aggressive appearance and wheel package also differentiate the A3 3.2 quattro S-line from other A3 models, and will start around $34,000.
Now I have to decide on the A3 3.2 Quattro or the new Saab 9-3 Sportcombi Aero?
Thanks for the price info.
than I did. :sick:
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
S-Line is suppose to be equipped pretty well right? Are they going to give you the DSG paddle shifters without you having to buy the Sport or Premium packages?
Does it include the bi Xenons?
No such thing in the US as a 2.0 Quattro. Even if there were one it should only start at 26-27k.
34000 is outrageous for the quattro v6. That's almost 10k more than the 2.0T. And it pits it without some basic features (moonroof, xenons) against the likes of the TL, G35, 330i. Sorry all those cars are far superior to the A3.
If they price it that high, Audi's essentially saying they don't want the A3 Quattro to sell. Because it won't without serious incentives.
If they offered Quattro and DSG on the 2.0T model, figure about $28,500 base... A spread of $5K for the V-6 option seems like a lot.... but, is pretty typical for Audi or BMW.. Usually they throw in some extra content for that money... It isn't all just engine...
But, you'd have to want all of those options... Usually, the buyer of the upgraded engine model isn't as price sensitive... But, I think the A3 is fairly high-priced already.....
I think they are really screwing up by not offering Quattro on the base model... By all accounts, the 2.0T engine is up to the task..
regards,
kyfdx
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
They seem to behave like there was a competitive vacuum. Sure, not many cars in this "type", but cast a net wider to include other body types and you get for aexample a new 06 WRX wagon with sweet 2.5 turbo AWD AND premium for $28K sticker (probably street price of $26.5). Sure, not as nice interior, but all those complaining about the lag on the previous 2.0 sure be silenced now.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
I'm just not surprised at $34K for DSG 3.2 V-6 Quattro... Disappointed, but not surprised....
regards,
kyfdx
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Give that man a cigar.
I agree. This seems a mistake. OTOH, their sales figures thus far appear to be ahead of goal (however low). Assuming interest in the 3.2Q in January (I know I'm interested), it only helps things along.
Now let's assume they add Quattro for the 2.0T next year. I think that nets a new audience for yesterday's wunderkind, kind of. ;-]
A) I think it may be just a tad high
Even so, I still agree they are missing an audience by not going Quattro on the 2.0t...
Yes, we want a 2.0T Quattro. Give us the lighter, easily modified engine and the ability to accelerate without our front tires screaming.
I wish to own a A3 2.0T MT(spare me the DSG) Quattro that is not priced more then 2-3K over the current A3 2.0T! I have no desire to own a VW GTI with 4 doors and 4 circles on the grill.
Dewey in his jammies reading his copy of R&T just before dozing off: "I wish to own an A3 2.0 T Quattro MT that is not priced more then 2-3K over the current A3 2.0T."
He closes his eyes. Just then a small, pudgy bald man in lederhosen but with a pocket protector, thick rimmed glasses and wings, swings clumsily in from out of nowhere: "Vish gronted!" [poof]
Dewey is driving along in his A3 with a perma-grin on, still in his jammies...
"What can the Quattro Fairy do for you?"
;-]
Quattro Fairy wish #2: sporty cloth seats---please keep it simple!
So, the base A3 2.0T Quattro 6-speed should be right around $27,300 including destination...
I think we need the Michael and Elliott ad agency from thirtysomething....
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
In the market for a unique, luxury, and sporty hatchback.......thought the A3 was the perfect answer until I read about the upcoming redesign of the Mni 2007!
Does anyone think the 2007 Mini Wagon Concept will be stiff competition for the A3? More at:
http://www.motoringfile.com/2005/09/13/the_mini_wagon_concept_-_in_depth
Reports say it will be available in early 2007. Worth the wait or go wtih A3 now?
chip pluses:
more power
better gas mileage
minuses:
possible shorter engine/turbo life
MAF sensor will probably fail more than once
could maybe damage the dsg tranny - unknown right now for longterm
audi could void aspects of the warranty (not all the warranty but things that break and they can attribute to the chipping)
what not to believe:
that the flash reprogramming can't be detected by audi techs. not true. it can.
For me the life duration of an engine is critical, especially since I
keeps cars not in terms of years but decades.(my family still owns a 83MB300D)
In my case I will stick with non-chips and non-RX herbs.
Thanks for your time, Justin
Best Regards,
Shipo
The horsepower difference to the 2005 WRX is marginal, and when you take its more than noticeable turbo lag and lack of low-end torque into account, the WRX's power is not all that usable in daily driving. The 2006 WRX or current Forester XT are a different story - but lose pretty much any price advantage.
As to interior room, numbers can be misleading. Check them out, they are not all that different. The rear space of the A3 may even be better in some areas. I find elbow and shoulder space in Subarus tight.
And what Shipo said.
While I am simply a coward when it comes to such things, if you are a risk taker and can back it up financially, chipping is the best and least expensive way to upgrade performance in your turbo-charged car. And, if you only make use of the extra power occasionally, chances are that you won't experience any problems whatsoever.
MAF sensor will probably fail more than once
I strongly believe the jury is out, on that one. A large number of MAF sensors have failed seemingly at random, unrelated to car usage or chipping. Then there was a batch of sensors that had a very high failure rate, a few years back. MAFs are continuously changing, so pinning down causes is as difficult as trying to assemble statistics on the causes of some types of cancer. What we do know, however, is that since most modern MAFs don't have a hot-burn mode, they are susceptible to contamination by dirt and oil. Now, owners of chipped cars are also a group that is more likely to use after-market air filters, many of which deposit oil on MAFs and let larger-diameter particles pass than OEM filters (mostly without any independently proven benefit regarding air flow, by the way). So, while I am a coward w/r to chipping (and given my 10-year drivetrain warranty I have a long time to wait...), MAF sensors is not what I would be worried about - unless I fell for the advertisement of increased flow air filters....
Dave in VA
I know that many folks might disagree with me, however, with two turbocharged cars under my belt, my experience is that if you simply make sure that you are using a very high quality synthetic oil in the crank case (Mobil 1 or German -not American- Castrol Syntec), and follow the manufacturers OCI, then there should be no more maintenance then on any other car.
"Aslo [sic] does it matter what grade of gasoline does and car with turbo need."
Yes. Did I say that emphatically enough? YES! For a somewhat better post as to what is going on in a turbocharged engine, please see a recent post of mine over on the A6 board: shipo, "Audi A6" #5866, 28 Sep 2005 11:21 pm
Best Regards,
Shipo
1. do not rev cold engine (let the engine oil heat first before pressing the accelerator). Turbine works at 5-10 times speed of the engine so it needs good lubrication.
2. do no shut off the engine just after you made that run from the stop light. Wait a minute. Otherwise, you may end up running turbine on "dry".
If you adhere to those basic rules like that, turbo should serve you long enough.
If you load WRX with premium package (leather, moonroof), it is about 28K sticker with street price close 26.5 soon. A3 with leather and sunroof is more. '06 WRX will be much faster (it is not only HP, but also gearing and power delivery) and have somewhat better handling (AWD beats FWD), A3 is much nicer inside (just gorgeus), have better gas mileage, more options available, but you surely pay for them. Expensive.
It is a matter of priorities rather anything else. Try both before making final decision. If you wait a little, there will be '06 Saab 9-2X, which is Impreza with different sheetmetal (same interior though) and possibly some extra premium options (xenons). Try it, too.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
BTW, have you guys heard about electric turbos? not kidding. there's talk of using electric - or using electricity to power a turbine - at low rpm to give cars a kick instantly and thus no lag. intriguing ideas. mix that with supercharger/turbocharger and maybe diesel you could get one efficient, complex engine. small size but big, big power.
In this case the advantage belongs to Subaru with their upcoming TPH system(I guess there are advantages to being owned bya battery manufacturer, Fuji Heavy Industries):
TPH system places a thin, 10-kW motor generator between a vehicle's engine and its automatic transmission. The combination of the motor generator and the turbo-charged Subaru Boxer engine, which adopts the Miller cycle, creates a system that not only provides power in the mid-speed ranges when the turbocharger is active, as with conventional turbo models, but it also delivers excellent acceleration and fuel economy for practical use. This superb, all-range performance has been enabled by motor assist, a feature that is designed to boost engine torque at low revolutions.
For more riveting details check out the link below.
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050907/phw053.html?.v=11
What technology am I referring to? Glad you asked. During early high altitude experiments with blown engines, it was discovered that up to the 15K-20K foot levels of altitude, there wasn't a significant performance difference between supercharged engines and turbosupercharged engines (as they were known back then). When I first came across this little factoid I didn't believe it simply because it was so counter intuitive. It turns out that in a turbocharged engine, the turbocharger has a tendency to equalize the pressure between the exhaust and intake manifolds, and as such, a very effective technique for cylinder scavenging known as valve overlap was only usable in the supercharged engines.
In a supercharged engine that had its exhaust system venting directly to the low pressure atmosphere surrounding the engine, the exhaust valve would open a little before the intake valve would close. This in turn would allow the high pressure intake charge to effectively help push out the remaining exhaust gasses, resulting in much better volumetric efficiency (greater amounts of the air and fuel mixture in the combustion chamber). In the case of a turbocharged engine, because of the equalization of the pressures, like as not, if valve overlap was used, some of the hot exhaust gasses (some of which could still be burning) would escape up into the intake manifold where it would routinely ignite the intake charge. Not a good thing.
To solve this problem (and also to give better low RPM power) a small supercharger was installed between the turbocharger and the engine. What was discovered is that with only about a one PSI boost of the intake charge, valve overlap would work just as well as it worked in supercharged engines, regardless of altitude. In fact, once 18K-20K feet MSL was passed, those sequentially turbocharged and supercharged engines dramatically out performed any other engine configuration, and were easily capable of attaining altitudes well in excess of 40,000' MSL (assuming the ignition system was properly pressurized, but that's another story).
So, long story short, I think that the perfect high output small displacement engine should have BOTH a supercharger and a turbocharger where the supercharger would mechanically gear itself down to a very low level of boost once the turbocharger was spooled up. In the case of the 2.0T, which already has a full head of torque at something like 1,800 RPMS and peaks at 200 HP, I would think that the 1,800 number could be reduced to more like 1,200-1,400, and the peak HP numbers could be increased to more like 220+ without an increase in boost pressure. Of course a variable rate supercharger could just as easily be an electrically powered turbocharger. Works for me. ;-)
Best Regards,
Shipo
In fact a big drawback for all electrically powered turbochargers would be weight. There is nothing that kills the handling dynamics of a car than weight and unfortunately electrical hybrid systems add a lot of pounds to a vehicle.
you assume that all of Subaru's customers are willing to drive automatic transmissions
True and I think the majority of Subaru drivers do choose to drive automatics(though I am among the few on the endangered species list that would never commute without a stick)
Yeah, you and I are in what seems to be an ever shrinking group of folks who actually LIKE having three pedals to choose from. ;-)
Best Regards,
Shipo
2018 430i Gran Coupe
2001 Prelude Type SH, 2022 Highlander XLE AWD, 2025 Camry SE AWD
this is, as always, a good source of information.
With regards to Shipo, yes, it would be interesting to find out if these engines (which, supposedly, are planned to go up through the 1.6 all the way to the current 2.0) use the exhaust valve timing idea. At any rate, these engines create an incredible amount of low-down usable torque --- 148lb ft available from 1250rpm for the 1.4 --- while getting great mileage.
Please note that in many international publications, if not otherwise indicated, the Imperial gallon is used, which is about 17% larger than the US gallon. In other words, miles/gallon numbers given are typically 20% larger than US numbers. For some strange reason, VW refuses to acknowledge that miles/gallon is not a standardized unit, and does not indicate the well-known difference between US and Imperial gallons.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
Regarding the valve overlap for these engines... Hmmm, the language of the article that you posted a link to says, "The combination of exhaust turbocharging with an automatically switched, high-speed mechanical compressor develops the same torque as a high volume naturally aspirated engine at the same time as achieving lower consumption values." The question in my mind is, "Does 'switched' mean two state On/Off or two state Fast/Slow?" If it's the former, then there probably isn't much valve overlap, if any at all. However, if it's the latter then valve overlap could prove to be quite viable. Either way, these new engines look to be quite potent for their relative physical size.
Best Regards,
Shipo
Anyway.....as tuned for the US the 2.0T doesn't implement lean burn mode while cruising like it does in Europe, due to our crappy fuel creating NOX, I'm wondering if APR or whomever else will be implementing lean burn on their programs that can improve efficiency, I'm willing to trade a bit of soot for 20% better mileage in cruise. Any help would be greatly appreciated
dave
2001 Prelude Type SH, 2022 Highlander XLE AWD, 2025 Camry SE AWD
Sorry - the lean-burn mode is more of a hardware solution than a software upgrade, and is not available for turbocharged engines anyway - not even in Europe. It's not such a great thing in the first place, since it only saves gas when you don't use much, in the first place. Moreover, it requires a specially designed piston head that helps shape the charge flow (such that the combustible mixture is surrounded by insulating air), and a special catalyzer that burns the ensuing NOx (but which would get destroyed by US gas' sulfur content). In the European version, there is actually enhanced gas consumption under full throttle to cool the catalyzer. To make a long story short, this is not much to write home about, VW/Audi are turning away from it, and the much more important part of the technology - the direct injection - is indeed implemented in the 2.0 TFSI.
I am sure the TFSI can be driven with reasonable mileage in the city, if you learn how to. WOT at low rpm, but early shifting, and try not to use your brakes. Shifting manually or a sports mode that locks the torque converter (or better yet, DSG) are required, for this. 6-cyl. cars are hard to drive frugally in the city, not the least because of their weight. Perhaps consider a Passat/Jetta/Golf Diesel (not your father's Diesel!) if you drive a lot, perhaps more than 20K miles a year, or wait until the new super-frugal twin-charged gas engines make it over here...
There is no such thing as traditionally when it comes to the 3.2. However, I can tell you anecdotally that my 2.8 V6 has had not a single MAF sensor failure in more than 5 years. Perhaps the turbo somehow used to contribute to the failures. At any rate, this is a long time ago in engine history times, and I would not be particularly worried about MAFs in the 2.0TFSI - which has been around in Europe long enough to show problems, if they existed.