Options

Audi A3

1222325272844

Comments

  • dl7265dl7265 Member Posts: 1,381
    "I'd rather buy a 170hp Diesel" Me too!Maybe after the low sulfer fuel arrives, Oh no wait we are talking about AOA :mad:

    DL
  • allhorizonallhorizon Member Posts: 483
    Uh, no it's not. The WRX is a mid 6 second car.

    I think we went through this before, even the old WRX (2.0 instead of the new 2.5) consistently tested in the mid to high 5s. Agree with the looks and interior comments, though. At $23-24K it was a proposition, for the hatchback, but at $28K - no thanks. Also, at least in my opinion, the exterior looks have become worse over the years (and they didn't exactly start out at a good place).

    Suzuki Aerio , Matrix, Vibe, Element - while cheaper, they do offer AWD models. Which again shows you that all this certification cost stuff is bogus. My point was, so you have owned one of those, want to upgrade and are used to and need and/or like AWD, where do VW and Audi currently leave you? Passat 3.6AWD Wagon or A4 wagon or 3.2A3 at 35K to 40K? Where is the middle ground, if you want AWD, between 20K and 35K? My prediction: in a year or two we will see three more VW models in addition to the A3 with the 2.0TFSI Haldex AWD.

    Why they don't care to sell these cars now, that's what I don't get. I am sure lots of people would even be willing to pay a $500 low-volume penalty on 2.0TFSI quattros.
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,249
    Allhorizon,

    I've not seen results like that from a WRX. I've seen 6s. Regardless, I agree with the entirety of your post after that!

    VW's on some serious crack with their pricing lately. A 4motion Passat with just sport package and xenons runs 35k!! That's insane.

    They desperately need to get a 2.0 Quattro here.
  • spinzerospinzero Member Posts: 91
    I've not seen results like that from a WRX. I've seen 6s.

    Just from a single magazine

    http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=3615&page_number=3
    -> 5.4 sec
    http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=4&article_id=2588&page_number=3
    -> 5.9 sec
    http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=19&article_id=9975
    -> 5.8 sec

    Where in the world did you get "mid 6 sec"?

    I've been very interested in A3 mostly because my wife is interested in it, but one thing that surprises a lowly suby owner like myself is how image conscious some people are in the "premuim" car discussions. Why would anyone care what is a "proper" car to drive to Ritz Carlton? :confuse:
  • wale_bate1wale_bate1 Member Posts: 1,982
    It's not really an image thing. It's just that Subies are still damn ugly little pugs. Getting better, but still ugly :P ;)

    I driven up to the Ritz-Carlton in Pasadena in a Buick Regal GS, a Pontiac Grand Prix, a Chrysler Sebring and a Mitsu Eclipse Spyder, all courtesy of our friends at National (LAX), and was welcomed with open arms and palms each time, as I recall.

    No, it's just an ugly thing...
    ;)
  • dino001dino001 Member Posts: 6,191
    I guess it's all in eyes of the beholder. I really liked styling of my year ("bugeye" loathed by most), completely not care about 04/05 and quite like the 06 (although too much of Alfa Romeo in it - the guy should not carry his old designs that obvious). As Subaru put it once "it's what's inside that counts" (and they didn't mean the interior, obviously ;) ).

    Don't get me wrong: A3 is a beautiful, well thought vehicle. But option it to my taste/desire and it flyes over $30K fast and furious, and still is just a FWD. 3.2 - sweet, but why no true manual and the price is just insane with options.

    So - drop the base sticker by 2 grand or add quattro (even Haldex will do) for current price and you have a blockbuster, basically smoking out its potential competition. But they know better, apparently. Like VW, Jurgen decided that Americans don't deserve manual of 6-cyl or quattro on 4-cyl. Not to mention Jurgen wants to sell fully loaded only cause options are the biggest profit maker for the manufacturer (not necessarily the dealer).

    What do you get? A car of choice for characters from "Beverly Hills 90210". Definitely not "value-oriented" professionals, who make some $50-$70K before they are 35, i.e. having enough to buy something "nice", but still needing to justify anything above $30K and 2.5K premium package with homelink to home they don't have yet, is not a spare change (for those asking who they are, I give example: engineers working in Southeastern states). Which market is more important? It depends who you want to cater to: "legacy" or "carrier" people. Audi's choice is clear, IMHO.

    2018 430i Gran Coupe

  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,249
    Spin,

    Sorry i take C&D's results with a grain of salt. They tend to always gets numbers far different from everybody else.

    http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/do/vdp/articleId=46122/pageNumber=3
    0-60 in 6.3 seconds.

    I'm generally not image conscious but I do like my cars to at least feel like they're quality cars. The wrx feels to me like what it is - an economy car with a fast engine. When helping a friend look for a hatch last year she drove the WRX and called it fun but immediately said it felt like the kind of car a kid from orange county would drive. She ended up with the slower but more solid, refined, smoother Mazda3.

    I personally wouldn't want to take someone out in a Legacy or WRX. Both feel like cheaply made, downgraded, loud, unrefined cars. For me it'd be as embarassing as arriving to take a girl to dinner in a camaro/vette/mustang. The same goes for roadtrips as the din at 85-90 mph is way too intrusive, making the already uncomfortable interiors worse by the racket from the tires, poor aerodynamics and thrashy sewing machine engine.

    It's all a matter of taste. The WRX and all subaru products) are not at a level I would consider worthy of my money. If it's any consulation the same is true of every car made by ford, mopar and gm.
  • dino001dino001 Member Posts: 6,191
    This is '02 table. Some of changes since. 06 has different engine (how many time I said that already?). The discrepancies in 02-05 WRX 0-60 are actually wide, because this car's performance results will depend a lot on driver's skills. The difference can be attributed to number of things:
    1. Skilled drop clutch launch.
    2. Shifting. WRX has an optional short-throw shifter - fantastic "boy racer" thing that even and adult could enjoy a lot (he does, believe me ;) ). That in right hands will also take out some time. So - there it is the "lost second".
    3. Not to mention putting just a bit out of peak boost will do it, too.

    I don't think we will see such disparities in 06 - with reduced turbo lag, results should be more uniform.

    Blue Guy - your standards are obviously higher than mine (as is wallet, probably ;) ) , but still - Legacy GT looks cheaply made? :confuse: Did you try Limited trim (leather, sunroof and some other smal stuff) or "regular"?

    2018 430i Gran Coupe

  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,249
    Dino, I know they dropped the 2.0 for the 2.5. I drove the top line Legacy 2.5 GT manual with all the trimmings. Very bargain basement. Lots of hard plastics, only one one-touch window button, etc. I can live with that stuff. But it was the engine noise, bad seat/poor ergonomics and bad mileage that totally turned me off of the Legacy.

    The A3, flipside,is pretty comfy. The DSG is a delight. That engine is something I may build a shrine to.

    Dislikes on the A3: thick protruding firewall that gobbles up leg space, bad manual/clutch (typical of german makes), fwd, rather soft in the corners. A sport package A3 could help at least the cornering softness.
  • dino001dino001 Member Posts: 6,191
    Well, I guess I'm still learning to look at the right stuff. Hard plastics never bothered me, but again - like I ever had a choice before ... Similarly with engine - testing while driving a noisier car myself, I wouldn't know. Probably would need to test side to side with others.

    By the way - there is a lot of stuff I don't like in Legacy myself, mostly typical "Japanese" ergonomics, like no telescopic steering column or wrong design of armrest. I still considered them small irritations rather than dealbreakers. Probably that AWD combined with great performance made me "forgive" most of other deficiencies. Matter of priorities and resources, I guess...

    I can't get over Audi leaving me behind as I just thought I was getting into one of their cars. I feel like five-eight years ago with current status would afford me A4 with quattro, perhaps even V6 (stretch, but who knows). No more. A3 on the other hand - well, we already stated our positions. Nice, but too many "buts", mostly in "value of options" department.

    2018 430i Gran Coupe

  • spinzerospinzero Member Posts: 91
    Sorry i take C&D's results with a grain of salt. They tend to always gets numbers far different from everybody else.

    Well, let's get the facts right. Edmunds is the one that gets results different from everyone else. Look up Road and Track, Motortrend, or Automobile and find me a test where WRX tested in 6 sec range. Of course one can argue that Edmunds test is more "realistic", but unless you get to the limit of the car itself, how do you know whether you are measuring the car or the driver?

    But in any case, as long as you stick to a single source to compare different cars, I guess it's all good.

    I am rather surprised that you consider LGT to be "bargain basement" and still shopping for a car in under $30k range. I guess your only option will be VAG products then, as they do better than anyone else in the "perceived quality" department.

    Unfortunately they also have larger discrepancy between that and the actual reliability than anyone else, but as long as the door makes nice sound when you close it, who cares about the plastic window regulator inside of it? :P

    Finally, I love my Suby because I feel that it is a product that's driven by the engineers, not by the bean counters. Sure, there are parts of my car that are laughably unrefined, especially parts that may easily appeal to consumers. But everything that really matters to me is done with such integrity that is hard to find nowadays. To each his own.
  • dl7265dl7265 Member Posts: 1,381
    Long as they don't have to push it, and get their Coin ,They are going to be polite...

    My Supervisor still drives his Chocolate brown 1974 Nova to work, but you should see his Retirement portfolio.. Its all about priorities :)
  • wale_bate1wale_bate1 Member Posts: 1,982
    Portfolio be damned, I want new metal every 39 months, tops!

    What kind of [non-permissible content removed] ever looks to actually retire, anyway?

    ;)
  • jediknightjediknight Member Posts: 6
    not sure if this is the appropriate board but looking for advice...
    looking to buy a used 2006 A3.
    here are the specs that i know...

    5 months old.
    DSG
    open sky sunroof.
    tinted windows.
    custom installed pioneer mp3/cd player powered by subwoofer.
    14K miles (that's a lot of miles)

    for 22K.

    any thoughts?
  • wale_bate1wale_bate1 Member Posts: 1,982
    It's not from Louisiana, is it?

    Yeah, 14K miles in five months is quite a bit. Has it got any service docs included?
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    14K miles in 5 months would be similar to 1.5 hours EVERY DAY and AVERAGING 60 miles per hour (which is a high average).

    Seems like a lot of driving.
    So it was originally purchased in June?
  • jediknightjediknight Member Posts: 6
    the usual service docs.
    i haven't seen them as i'm in a different state.
    he wanted to sell for 24.5K and can't afford the payments anymore.

    i've been looking at the a3 but with the specs of that car + taxes in washington, you're basically looking at 30K just like that. buy it used, and i can take that home for 22K. granted, need to fly in and drive it up.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    Hmmm, 14K in 5 months (about 651 miles per week average) doesn't sound like all that much to me. I've driven 12K in 18 weeks which works out to about 666 miles per week on average. Of the 12,000 miles, most was accrued during my daily 96 mile commute (about 1.5 hours total) with the balance coming from a Boston-Chicago-New York-Boston trip taken last summer.

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    14K in 5 months is about 33K miles a year. It’s more than I drive...but $22K for an A3 2.0T DSG, I’d do it.
  • jediknightjediknight Member Posts: 6
    i know but that average of 666 miles per week sure sounds scary to me. :)

    sounds great a great price to me...
    if he faxes all the docs i'm looking for, i think i'll do it.
  • joe1s2playjoe1s2play Member Posts: 1
    Well loved my 02WRX would still have it if they would stand behind there cars. Trans went with 42thousand miles on it they fixed 3rd to 4th syncro and cluster gears. With less than another 20thousand miles on it syncro went again they new they had a problem with them thats why they were fixed for the 03 model got rid of the wrx for A3. I'm very happy with the A3 will fix performance with a chip moves hp and tq past my old WRX now I only wish I had the 4wheel drive LOL..
  • sellaturcicasellaturcica Member Posts: 145
    What are you guys doing? I'm sure it's a nice car, but a terribly overpriced, depreciating, likely extremely unreliable member of an imploding carmaker's family- what's the point? Depreciation alone probably makes this the most expensive car to buy in its class! A BMW priced 5K more is probably cheaper to own. Subarus are a steal given their excellent residuals (when GM was giving away Saab 9-2x Aeros over the summer, they were cheaper than used WRXs) Anyone have a counterpoint? And this is from a guy who really liked the GTI 4 years ago when I was looking to buy....
  • dl7265dl7265 Member Posts: 1,381
    What kind of [non-permissible content removed] ever looks to actually retire, anyway?

    Us Goverment schmucks ...You don't think a A3 towed by a Winnebago is cool ? :shades:

    DL
  • zcar3zcar3 Member Posts: 22
    I'm not sure what you mean when you say terribly overpriced. You can get it reasonably loaded for under 30k. It is also fairly roomy inside, comparable to the previous A4. The WRX may be a little cheaper today (can't talk about pricing that was a one-time deal and is no longer available), but it is strictly a performance vehicle - the interior, for example, cannot come close to the A3 interior (either in styling, size, quality or ergonomics). It seems like the fact that the A3 is a 5-door puts the thought of economy pricing in many peoples minds. Its not an econo box, either in performance or interior/exterior quality, and for under 30k it seems reasonably priced. I currently own an A4, and with the exception of the 5-door design, it seems closer to my car than the new A4 (and few if any called the older A4's overpriced!)

    It may be true, but I wonder about the terrible state of Audi you mentioned - what is their status these days?
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    Where are you seen that it is extremely unreliable? I thought it was released in Europe for a while, but have not seen any reliability results yet.

    I haven’t owned a car that didn’t depreciate…

    If you place an entertainment value on the auto, then maybe the depreciation will be less. If you spend $30 for a movie (conservative) for 1.5 hours of enjoyment, how much enjoyment will 1.5 hours in your A3 provide? Perhaps we should put $30 of the entertainment budget in a cookie jar very time we go for a “fun” 1.5 hour cruise…this would offset the depreciation…and provide entertainment.

    If I were just looking for transportation I’d probably get a KIA…or take the bus.
  • allhorizonallhorizon Member Posts: 483
    What are you guys doing?

    Perhaps buying a great car, like the A3.

    I'm sure it's a nice car, but a terribly overpriced

    Sitting right in there with its competition in the $25-30K range (a little higher, though, for the 3.2).

    depreciating

    Not any more than other cars. You can't look at lease rates (that, by the way, have recently improved) and infer depreciation from that. Rather, Audi is making leases unattractive in part to ensure that depreciation remains low.

    likely extremely unreliable

    Audi is slightly less reliable than the average, but improving. Look at actual numbers. "Extremely unreliable" would be having what - 5 times or 10 times as many incidences than average? That's not the case here. And believe it or not, to some people, having one more thing fixed per year (usually under warranty) than with another make is no big deal, at all. (For others, it is a deal-breaker. Consumers have different priorities).

    member of an imploding carmaker's family

    Audi is doing fairly well in the US, and is doing extremely well in Europe, currently. VW is one of the largest car makers in the world. Currently, Porsche is buying a 20% stake in VW. Would they do that if they thought VW is the next GM?

    - what's the point? Depreciation alone probably makes this the most expensive car to buy in its class!

    How do you know what the depreciation is going to be? I predict it to be very similar to A4s.

    A BMW priced 5K more is probably cheaper to own.

    Try buying a BMW for $30K, and if you find one, let's see about the true cost of ownership. O wait! Let's use Edmunds' nifty "True Cost To Own" feature. Since the A3 data are not available yet, let's start with the more expensive A4. What's that? It is $1800 cheaper after 5 years than the most basic 3-series, the 325i? It is 3 cents per mile cheaper to own? Based on the approximately $8,000 lower purchase price of the A3, could it be that the A3 is actually about $10,000 cheaper to own than the BMW, over 5 years? Who would have thought...

    Subarus are a steal given their excellent residuals (when GM was giving away Saab 9-2x Aeros over the summer, they were cheaper than used WRXs)

    A WRX is about $28K upward - so it may very well be more expensive, depending on how you configure each. It's a great performer, as discussed here numerous times, but many people don't cross-shop the two for reasons that are obvious to some, less so to others. Also, see my comment about GM above. You can only sell out to the point where you are getting bankrupt.

    Anyone have a counterpoint?

    More than one, see above.
  • sellaturcicasellaturcica Member Posts: 145
    It's an Audi, therefore it's reliability is suspect.
  • dino001dino001 Member Posts: 6,191
    I think the guy has legitimate concerns, just blew them a bit out of proportion:
    1. Overpriced - for me if they knocked the sticker by $1000-1500 and there would be a winner (or alternatively, added quattro for the current price, either way would be fine).
    2. Unreliable - well, data supports the past, it is not determinant of the future, but it is one of indicators. However, its main competitors do not seem to be much better (BMW, MB, Volvo and Saab's data are quite similar). They say they are improving so is MB or BMW, but just saying so does not make it.
    3. Company faultering - well, VAG is not in a good shape, overall. However, Audi is its best part, literally. They produced the entire profit of the group (being only very small part of it).
    4. Depreciation - it actually is a problem. However, it is often overblown by BMW group. Say you have $40K car with 55% residual. Cost before finance charges: $18K Compare it to $35K car with 50% residual - cost is $17.5K. However, finance charges, whether loan or lease will be higher on $40K with same rates. Audi often offers better rates than BMW, but it changes from month to month.

    So - it is more a matter of personal preference, local conditions, and a bit of luck, rather than "hard" scientific choice.

    My major grievance, probably most of us is no quattro on 2.0T. That shows they really should change their crack supplier at the headquarters ;)

    2018 430i Gran Coupe

  • shaolingolfershaolingolfer Member Posts: 28
    Yes, A3 is a very bad car. Sell it quick and drive down the used car market on it. ;)

    I will be sweeping it up in a year. He-he......
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    It's an Audi, therefore it's reliability is suspect.

    The one new Audi I’ve owned was reliable, the one used Audi I had was marginal (more to do with the used car dealership i.e. non-Audi parts installed).

    Going on personal experience, my new Honda had more problems than either Audi; and 75% (3 out of 4) people I know who have Honda trannies have had to have them replaced (mini-van)

    Until I experience otherwise, and I won’t since I’m not in the market for a new car right now, I’d feel as comfortable with Audi reliability as anything else.
  • wale_bate1wale_bate1 Member Posts: 1,982
    "I’d feel as comfortable with Audi reliability as anything else..."

    Well, statistically, I can't say the same; not "as anything else" that is. The point, to me, is that the discrepancy is extremely unlikely to be evident to the point I'd be uncomfortable with an Audi.

    IOW, the difference between the very best of reliable and the average of reliable in this day and age ain't enough to scare me off in the least, especially if it's CR's reporting that's used. And Audi's numbers have been on the rise anyway.

    I've got a Lexus that suffered complete electrical collapse on 5 July 2004. Made me suffer (I mean it) through two and a half weeks of skippering a RX330. I have significant doubts that Subie would be a better choice on such criteria... ;)
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    the difference between the very best of reliable and the average of reliable in this day and age ain't enough to scare me off in the least

    Yes...

    If you look at JD data where it lists problems per 100 vehicles…such as a Lexus with 90 problems per 100 vehicles or a different manufacturer with 150 problems per 100 vehicles…to me it doesn’t make a difference.

    Reasoning: You’ll have to make a trip to the dealership anyway to get a problem fixed, so instead of saying “fix this”, you say “fix this AND that”.

    Unless their problems per 100 vehicles is VERY low so you can basically say you don’t need to go into the dealer…well that would be a little different.

    Of course how the dealer treats you and their ability to quickly AND effectively resolve your problems could make a big difference in your perceived reliability (i.e. going back 5 times for the same problem)
  • sellaturcicasellaturcica Member Posts: 145
    They you are probably already used to suspect reliability, so it shouldn't be a big change.

    The only things that I find "suspect" in this thread are blanket statements like that.

    FWIW, I'm coming out of two consecutive BMWs, and I'm most likely heading into an A3.
  • truckasaurustruckasaurus Member Posts: 44
    Out of curiosity I went to the Audi UK site and priced the A3 configuration I'm interested in. 2.0T, DSG, Metallic Silver, Gray Leather, Premium package and Open sky. On the UK site the build your Audi is much more 'a la carte', so I picked all the stuff you get with the 'fixed course menu' we are served here in the US.
    It came to an astonishing 27,645 UK pounds including delivery. At the current exchange rate of 1.74 that is $48,102. :surprise: I did the same thing on the German site and It came to 35,400 Euros, which is $41595.
    The US price is $30,515. Looks like we get a sweet deal here is the US compared to our European friends. :)
  • wale_bate1wale_bate1 Member Posts: 1,982
    I tried pricing based on exchange rate once.

    It doesn't work. But then I think you now know that! ;)

    Don't you wish we could have the Brit menu here? I tried an A8 on that site, and they get all kinds of options to play with we don't here.

    Dang it.
  • dino001dino001 Member Posts: 6,191
    It is similar, perhaps a bit less than UK, but way more than US. I always laugh when I hear Americans complaining how expensive things are here. You guys don't know what expensive means! It is across the board that the European cars (all brands) are dirt cheap in US when compared with Europe. E.g. Volvo V50 2.4i with some options here $26-28K MSRP, Poland where I am from: over $40K easy pushing $50K :surprise: . More less almost twice the price, esp. on US lower models (entry-luxury). The difference diminishes for the most expensive ones, but it is still there. BTW, their warranties are often something like 2 years and forget free maintenance!

    Reasons: Socialist ripoff taxes on every stage of production and sale (e.g. VAT 15-25%), possible government export subsidies, significantly lower volumes of US-comparable trims (BMW 3-series starts as 316i with cloth seats, no cruise control and radio is optional), thus higher marginal unit cost, widespread use any conceivable anti-competitive practice that here would be sued by the first customer who runs into them here (sometimes trial lawyers can be useful, believe or not ;) ).

    2018 430i Gran Coupe

  • truckasaurustruckasaurus Member Posts: 44
    I don't know if I'd want it at those prices! Jeez.

    I tried it because the UK car review site www.whatcar.co.uk said the A3 was poor value. It is at those prices, but at the US prices its pretty decent value.
  • dhanleydhanley Member Posts: 1,531
    "They you are probably already used to suspect reliability, so it shouldn't be a big change."

    You know, i've read that sometimes companies pay people to do stealth PR in online forums. Sometimes i wonder if i'm seeing one or not... ;)
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    "They you are probably already used to suspect reliability, so it shouldn't be a big change."

    Are you the voice of experience or are you just spouting the bilge that you've read on the internet? As for my being used to suspect reliability, well, of the last four cars my wife and I have purchased over the last seven years (two Dodge 3.8 liter Grand Caravans (1998 & 2003), a 1999 328i and a 2002 530i), I've spent a whopping $285 in unscheduled maintenance outlined as follows:

    $1.00 - two burned out taillights for the 328i
    $150.00 - two Sears DieHards, one each for the two GCs
    $126.00 - vacuum battery tray for the 1998 GC
    $8.00 - door switch for the 1998 GC

    Hmmm, maybe I'm a little cracked, however, that sounds like those cars have been anything but "suspect" when it comes to their reliability. That and I would expect similar reliability from the potential A3 in my future.

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • wale_bate1wale_bate1 Member Posts: 1,982
    Troll alert!
  • billherrmannbillherrmann Member Posts: 108
    In recent years I have OWNED some fine cars. BMW 330XI, Acura TL, LEXIS IS300, Cadillac CTS & others. On Sept. 30 I took delivery of A3 DSG . A3 is, BY FAR, the most fun to drive, exelirating, nimble & quick car that I've ever owned. The term " fun to drive" was coined to describe this car. Reliability... so far, so good... everything works like its supposed to.
  • twmarktwmark Member Posts: 41
    I test drove both the A4 cvt and A3 DSG. The A4 drove poorly and handled worse. The A3 handled much better and had more road feel. The A4 suspension and steering were much softer and offered poor communcation (IMO) witht he driver.
  • allhorizonallhorizon Member Posts: 483
    Since some of us are still waffling between the A3 and the 5-door MkV GTI, it is good to know that we now have a February US release price - $22,350 for the 3-door. (Word-of-mouth has the 5-door GTI being released with the regular Golf in the summer). Adding $500 to $1,000 or so would make the 5-door GTI only marginally ($500 to $1,000) cheaper than the GLI.

    If everything develops in parallel, street prices for the package 1 and package 2 5-door GTI would be slightly below $25.5K and $26.5K, respectively --- add another $1K or so more for DSG. The car comes standard with a lot of goodies (multi-function computer display, ESP, Xenon, multi-function leather-wrapped steering wheel, aluminum accents, paddle-shifters etc.). Package 1 adds sun roof and satellite, package 2 adds heated sport leather seating, dual automatic climate control, and essentially a cold-weather package.

    I am still hoping for an A3 2.0TFSI quattro release at about the same time, but at those prices, I am leaning more towards the A3 in general. What's your take?
  • allhorizonallhorizon Member Posts: 483
    $25.5K and $26.5K, respectively

    Sorry, I meant $24.5K and $25.5K, respectively. :blush:;)
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,249
    GTI could have the edge for me. It's in the drive...
  • nowakj66nowakj66 Member Posts: 709
    I cannot seem to find a stat on how much rear seat legroom there is in the A3. I love the way it drives but am tall and need to fit 2 kids in the back seat in Brittax child seats.

    Anyone know the rear seat legroom in inches?
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    I would try it out...measurements may not show all.

    e.g In a G35 the rear seats are inclided...so fitting a seat requires you prop it up.
  • nowakj66nowakj66 Member Posts: 709
    A3 is great. I had a blast testing one. I just wish it had a bigger back seat. What I liked about it on my test drive was its handling, and its quick reflexes and the ability to go through a corner flat without beating you up the rest of the time. The DSG was a great automatic. I had a 1992 Honda Prelude which also had great handling. I'll take handling over power every time.

    But now with a family, I wonder, is there anything out there that has that quick handling, some decent cargo space, and a good sized rear seat for kids seats (given I will want the driver's seat ALL the way back).
  • dc_davedc_dave Member Posts: 52
    You might want to look at the new Saab 9-3 Sportcombi.

    Dave in VA
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    Not out yet...Passat Wagon

    or even A4 Avant.
Sign In or Register to comment.