Audi A3

gogogodzilla

The Volvo C30 is a pretty nice concept car. The only thing that I really don't like about it is how flat the back is.

jason4004

Just go given a company car, no fuel left, no manual and I can't open the damn petrol cap can anyone help - urgent!!!

kyfdx

Isn't the fuel filler door spring-loaded? If it is, make sure car is unlocked with the remote, and press on one edge of the door... it should pop open...

Unless I am wrong..

vw79type2

I'm not sure a Toyota sport hatch would really be competition for the A3. The cars would likely appeal to two different demographics. Toyota doesn't carry much status other than quality for price. Their designs are far too bland. Though, in terms of reliability, the two would be evenly matched.

GM would be foolish to try and put a Maxx against an A3. Again they appeal to two different demographics not to mention that the driving characteristics and quality of the Chevy are far too unrefined.

vw79type2

Despite the fact that the A3 is a 5-door and the C30 is going to be a 3-door, they both are placed as entry level cars in their respective ranges in the U.S. Additionally, they essentially have the same utility. I think it is fair to consider them competitors.

vw79type2

Actually, I guesss the V50 and C30 both are competition for the A3 since the A3 is a mixture of both a hatchback and a wagon. :confuse:

wale_bate1

What Toyota hatch are we talking about?

If this is a reference to that Lexus concept based on the IS with the 250's V6, then I'd have to disagree and say Audi has somewhat to be concerned with, especially considering the drivetrain would be set up with power to the correct wheels! But I'll stand by my prediction that Toyota won't ship it west of Portugal. Just not enough volume opportunity here in the States for their ledger.

If a near-lux sport hatch is forthcoming from Toyota, I doubt it would carry the Toyota marque; doesn't fit in at all with their current branding strategy. It would be a Lexus I think.

On NAVs: I can't say I think they're a ripoff. Nobody's forcing anyone to take the option and there are many portables to choose from. Also, there are some folks who could get terrific bang for the buck from them; realtors come to mind immediately (having been one many years ago!). I do find the auto mfrs' pricing out of line personally, but then again, if people will pay the price (currently number 2 preferred option IIRC), then all's fair in love, war and car sales!

qbrozen

they both are placed as entry level cars in their respective ranges in the U.S. Additionally, they essentially have the same utility. I think it is fair to consider them competitors.

Well, as far as the first statement, that's not much of a reason to compare them. I mean, the Honda Element and Infinity G35 coupe are both entry level cars in their respective ranges, but far from competitors.

And, as to the 2nd point, I don't consider a 2-door and a 4-door as having the same utility.

This isn't to say YOU can't cross-shop them, but I don't see how a 2-door and 4-door are competitors. someone who wants 2 doors could step up to a 4-door, but someone who wants or needs 4 doors is not buying a 2-door.

kurtamaxxxguy

So why would a truly sport-ified Maxx be a HAHAHAHAHAH compared to the A3? I'm not counting their Maxx SS joke; tacked on huge tires and spoilers are bling bling and did little for sport performance.
The Maxx chassis __is__ from Europe (Opel/Saab use it too). What's missing is a aluminum direct-inject engine, AWD powertrain and a classier interior. __If__ it had these things, how would it then compare to an A3?

As for a 2.0T AWD A3, that sounds very interesting. But why would Audi USA bring one over if they are selling every A3 they now import (with backorders for some versions)? Perhaps VW, Audi's parent, feels a 2.0T AWD is better suited for the VW brand?

blueguydotcom

So why would a truly sport-ified Maxx be a HAHAHAHAHAH compared to the A3? I'm not counting their Maxx SS joke; tacked on huge tires and spoilers are bling bling and did little for sport performance.

1. Because it's a Chevy.
2. Because it's heinous looking.
3. Because it's a poor driving vehicle.
4. It's a Chevy.
5. Because it will have a lousy, low rent interior.
6. Did I mention it's a Chevy?

The Maxx chassis __is__ from Europe (Opel/Saab use it

Sooooo? Those are both lousy makes too.

too). What's missing is a aluminum direct-inject engine, AWD powertrain and a classier interior. __If__ it had these things, how would it then compare to an A3?

See above.

As for a 2.0T AWD A3, that sounds very interesting. But why would Audi USA bring one over if they are selling every A3 they now import (with backorders for some versions)? Perhaps VW, Audi's parent, feels a 2.0T AWD is better suited for the VW brand?

No, Audi sells a 2.0T Q in other places. They simply want to segment the market more. Passat 4motion with the 3.6. GTI R36 with AWD and 3.6. You can get an A4 2.0T Q Avant. So perhaps they feel the A3 2.0T Q would steal too many sales from the A4?

Hard to say for certain but we know Audi makes a 2.0T Q - there's a guy at vortex from Australia with one.

kurtamaxxxguy

"Because it's a Chevy"...
Is the __car__ any better because I pay extra for the name? What's important is what's __behind__ the name. Both Audi and Chevy stand for some pretty crummy cars, and both have improved dramatically.

"Because it's a poor driving Vehicle"
Visit Car and Driver & read their Maxx reviews - generally positive. However, I agree the A3 Quattro has a big advantage thanks to AWD.

"Low rent interior"
Maxx Interior is better than many cars (I've seen early Audis and GM products - both not so hot), but granted, Maxx interior's not up to A3 Quattro. Much less space in the Quattro, though, than the Maxx.

A3 Quattro is premium compact sport sedan with price to match - $38K or more. We may see a whole buncha these from other vendors (like Dodge, Toyota, etc.), at much lower price points within year or so. Whether they will be "good enuf" remains to be seen.

dino001

You can't be serious. There "crumminess" of Audi, even at its worst times was in a different galactic than that of Chevy. Of course, when you look at interiors of 1975-anything today, it looks "unsophisticated", but please...

Your "generally positive" review of Malibu in C&D was "within class", i.e. they filtered it through what one can expect from a car this size and price point. If you asked them what they think of comparing those two, I would really like to see looks on their faces!

Granted, Audi has its reliability and pricing issues. A3 is probably overpriced across the board, but when looking at loaded 3.2, the price approaches insanity. And reliabilty? Well, everybody is always pledging, but we shall see...

Everybody is also entitled to make any comparisons they please - I also cross shop price/size/type classes, to see what I get for what price and if the extra 5 grand is really worth it. However, there is no way they can be considered even remote competitors. Different demographics, different lifestyles, etc.

I could see Pontiac trying to build something competing with A3 (even based on that same Vectra/Malibu/9-3 platform), but only if they were not so tied to their bigger brother and got some real development money, not just changing body panels and few interior details (similarly with rest of their cars). But honestly, I do not see it really happening GM is too stupid to figure that out.

kurtamaxxguy

"Granted, Audi has its reliability and pricing issues. A3 is probably overpriced across the board, but when looking at loaded 3.2, the price approaches insanity. And reliability? Well, everybody is always pledging, but we shall see..."

Audi, like VW, has the highest vehicle manufacturing cost in the world. They will always be expensive compared to other cars. Is the Extra expense worth it? Depends what you are buying. Some people want I-M-A-G-E, which GM, MERCECES and others often mistake for vehicle design and quality - no thanks on that!

Audi is asking $38K MINIMUM for what is essentially a VW GOLF brought up to Audi specs and decked out with Quattro and nice interior and trim. It's a well executed vehicle, but remains a GOLF at heart. Start adding options (even metallic paint's an option!) and cost blows _way_ past $40K.

For all that extra $$$, I expect the A3 to be rock solid wrt reliability and supported by outstanding dealer service. VW-type electrics frizzing or clutches shredding, supported by form letters and a tiny dealer network, doesn't cut it!
When I see A3's with at least average reliability, I'll take it seriously!

GM is not as stupid as you think. Their back is to the wall and they're very much aware of the A3 and other sport hatches. As you say, they need to get serious, see what makes the A3 and C30 and others "good", and build/sell a true competitor. I agree they're not there yet - The Maxx SS is a lead footed, tire-burning clunk fest by comparison.

As for A3, it would be nice to see a simplified Quattro in the 2.0T for around $30K or so, but it will probably never happen. Affordable AWD in a sport hatch will come from another brand, like the upcoming Dodge Calibre.

blueguydotcom

s the __car__ any better because I pay extra for the name?

There's a baseline for automobiles: nissan/infiniti, mazda, honda/acura, toyota/lexus, bmw, MB, Audi/VW, hyundai.

Then there are cars that below the baseline: ford, gm, mopar.


Visit Car and Driver & read their Maxx reviews - generally positive. However, I agree the A3 Quattro has a big advantage thanks to AWD.

I've driven the malibu. It's a dog. Car mags quite simply can't tell me what I like. And having been stuck with numerous american cars for rentals during about 40 business trips the past two years, I can say without a doubt american car companies build lousy vehicles.


Maxx Interior is better than many cars

That doesn't make it good. That's like proudly declaring one is at the top of his summer school class.

A3 Quattro is premium compact sport sedan with price to match - $38K or more. We may see a whole buncha these from other vendors (like Dodge, Toyota, etc.), at much lower price points within year or so. Whether they will be "good enuf" remains to be seen.

They won't be. But I'm biased. If it's from an american car company, I'd rather see it burning than have dubious pleasure of riding it it.

esf

Ummm, do you live in the United States? The A3 2.0T FronTrak's base price (manual transmission) is roughly $24,800 not including the destination charge. The quattro should start at about $27,000 for the 2.0T- it's $33K for the 3.2.

I do not have any clue of how you got the idea that it would be $38,000 for the 2.0T quattro- the 3.2 is $5K less than that! And the A3 and Malibu are in completely different classes. The real competitor to the A3 is the Saab 9-2X, which is although not quite as nice, more luxurious than a crappy Malibu.

Oh and by the way, Chevrolet is by far much crummier than Audi, and Chevy has not made a "dramatic" turnaround like you said.

I happen to own an A3 which I bought on Monday for my second car. My wife has a Lexus RX330 and I have an Audi S4 Cabriolet. She uses the Lexus in the winter, and I do not want to put my S4 through that. The A3 is a fabulous little car, and it is a 2.0T FronTrak w/ DSG Transmission. More than adequate, with its 6.1 0-60 times.

shipo

"Ummm, do you live in the United States? The A3 2.0T FronTrak's base price (manual transmission) is roughly $24,800 not including the destination charge. The quattro should start at about $27,000 for the 2.0T- it's $33K for the 3.2."

Do you know something the rest of us don't know??? Last time the rest of us checked there was no such a thing as an A3 2.0T with the Quattro available in North America. As such, the only way to get Quattro is to opt for the 3.2 liter six, like it or don't. :-/

Regarding the $38,000 reference, I think that he was referring to a somewhat optioned up A3 3.2.

Best Regards,
Shipo

vw79type2

"Well, as far as the first statement, that's not much of a reason to compare them. I mean, the Honda Element and Infinity G35 coupe are both entry level cars in their respective ranges, but far from competitors."

Gee... Don't you think you kind of blew that just a tiny bit out of context? I guess I was relying too much on other people's common sense. Obviously the Infinity G35 luxury/performance car is not going to compete with the Honda Element small multipurpose/sport utility. Besides, Infinity is a luxury car manufacturer while Honda is your average Joe car company. Now don't you think the differences between these two cars are more extreme than what exists between the A3 and C30?

"And, as to the 2nd point, I don't consider a 2-door and a 4-door as having the same utility."

Really? Can you fit that much more into a 4-door VW Golf than a 2-door VW Golf? Obviously these are two different cars, but the A3 is a Hatchback/Wagon mix while the C30 is going to be a pure hatchback. So your half right there. It is likely hatchback enthusiasts will cross-shop between the A3 and C30 while the consumer looking for a 4-door wagon will cross-shop between the A3 and V50.

"This isn't to say YOU can't cross-shop them, but I don't see how a 2-door and 4-door are competitors. someone who wants 2 doors could step up to a 4-door, but someone who wants or needs 4 doors is not buying a 2-door."

I could see a person wanting a 4-door buying a 2-door to save some change, especially in the case of the Audi A3 and Volvo C30 given they are both entry-level, sporty offerings in ranges that compete fairly directly. I think the case that someone needing a 4-door wouldn't consider a 2-door is likely, but not so much between these two cars.

I understand your points but I kind of think you jumped the gun on the comparison.

vw79type2

"Audi, like VW, has the highest vehicle manufacturing cost in the world. They will always be expensive compared to other cars. Is the Extra expense worth it? Depends what you are buying. Some people want I-M-A-G-E, which GM, MERCECES and others often mistake for vehicle design and quality - no thanks on that!"

Interesting. Why are Audi and VW vehicle manufacturing costs the highest the world? I never knew that? What do you attribute it too?

"Audi is asking $38K MINIMUM for what is essentially a VW GOLF brought up to Audi specs and decked out with Quattro and nice interior and trim. It's a well executed vehicle, but remains a GOLF at heart. Start adding options (even metallic paint's an option!) and cost blows _way_ past $40K."

Couldn't agree more. Why can't people seem to realize this is the same relationship between Toyota and Lexus?

"GM is not as stupid as you think. Their back is to the wall and they're very much aware of the A3 and other sport hatches. As you say, they need to get serious, see what makes the A3 and C30 and others "good", and build/sell a true competitor. I agree they're not there yet - The Maxx SS is a lead footed, tire-burning clunk fest by comparison."

I too think GM has potential. The Solstice is evidence of that. Unfortunately, the stockholders and corporate executives aren't going to want to build better if it cuts into their profit margins.

"As for A3, it would be nice to see a simplified Quattro in the 2.0T for around $30K or so, but it will probably never happen. Affordable AWD in a sport hatch will come from another brand, like the upcoming Dodge Calibre."

Unfortunate, but true.

allhorizon

Audi is asking $38K MINIMUM for what is essentially a VW GOLF brought up to Audi specs and decked out with Quattro and nice interior and trim. It's a well executed vehicle, but remains a GOLF at heart. Start adding options (even metallic paint's an option!) and cost blows _way_ past $40K.

Your prices are a bit off, but if anything, this car would have to be compared to the R32 - but not the latest US version, rather the current (Mark V) European version, which has taken a lot of car comparisons by surprise. Just to let you know, the R32 probably tops most production vehicles in $ retention value. You pay a bit more up-front - but you don't lose much (if anything) over many years.

Also, for my taste, this Acura=Honda, Lexus=Toyota, Infinity=Nissan, Audi=VW argument is getting a bit long in the tooth.

For all that extra $$$, I expect the A3 to be rock solid wrt reliability and supported by outstanding dealer service.

I don't know why you would expect that. It surely would be nice, but it is not reality, nor a priority for many customers. Firstly, there is not much of a relation between car performance/desirability and reliability (think older Italian and UK cars). Secondly, differences in reliability often hover around a factor of two. Two things break over a certain period versus one thing breaks. For many people, that is not enough of a difference to freak out about. Reliability is important, but only to a point. YMMV.

kurtamaxxguy

Yes, I was referring to the A3 3.2T Quattro when I quoted around $38K. That's what I got from the Audi site, after adding in the estimated dealer packs & inevitable add-ons and other financial office hits that will go with the deal.
Yes there will be a few places that won't put you thru that, but not the dealers I know.

C&D claims the new VW GTI will be essentially the A3, minus fancy interior, but will have option of AWD. Reminds me of the VW R32 which sold very well but wasn't here long.

So how many VW parts is Audi using? Are window regulators, ignition system, lighting harnesses, etc. unique to Audi? Or shared with VW?

dino001

C&D claims the new VW GTI will be essentially the A3, minus fancy interior, but will have option of AWD.

GTI will be 2.0, not 3.2 and how much, do you think, will they ask for it? My wild guess is not much less then A3 2.0. Perhaps thousand - two less. Just look how much they ask for Jetta GLI and you get an idea.

So don't get too excited about big price differences. I bet when you start comparing option by option and factor in interior feel, A3 2.0 will turn to be a better deal than GTI. But, it won't have quattro, for which you'll have to buy V6 with 5 grand premium. Anyway - I see a logic in VAG conduct (as for why they do it), I just think it is a gross miscalculation on their part (as for, whether the're right). It may be same mistake as with early new Jettas that came all loaded with leather and autos and stickers higher than V6 Camrys :sick: .

For me it is clear - I have been eyeing Audis since forever, love the concept, technology and styling, hate the pricing structure and trends, and those pesky reliability statistics. So far Subaru wins overall (also function of my current financial abilities), but will see for how long - perhaps something will change in couple of years?

shipo

"Yes, I was referring to the A3 3.2T Quattro when I quoted around $38K. That's what I got from the Audi site, after adding in the estimated dealer packs & inevitable add-ons and other financial office hits that will go with the deal."

Come on, admit it, your argument is disingenuous at best. Go to the Edmunds TMV and put in a zip code, any zip code and you'll find that the A3 3.2 Quattro is selling for slightly below MSRP, meaning slightly below $34,000. Maybe it's just me but that's over $4,000 less than the $38K you were quoting, and spin in how you will, I'd wager that there hasn't been a single unadorned A3 3.2 that's sold anywhere in the U.S. for anywhere near $38K.

Best Regards,
Shipo

blueguydotcom

GTI will be 2.0, not 3.2 and how much, do you think, will they ask for it? My wild guess is not much less then A3 2.0. Perhaps thousand - two less. Just look how much they ask for Jetta GLI and you get an idea.

The GTI is out. It starts at 23k with Xenons standard (an option on the A3). For 26k you can get it with DSG, package one and 18s. About 27k with package 2 - leather and a few doodads. The GTI is a good 3-4k cheaper than a comparably equipped A3...BUT it's a two door for now (June for the 4 door), much taller, much worse weight distribution and a far more downscale car on every level, imho, from the A3. I'd take an A3 in a heartbeat. I'd trade a GTI without pause. Many probably wouldn't see the two cars as that different but in my drives in both I found the A3 more involving, more comfortable (lower driving position) far sexier inside and out.

dino001

All right, looks I don't keep up with VAG. They make it hard, though releasing cars completely at random (or so it seems), not to mention their "well thought" pricing/branding strategy.

esf

Yes I realize that... you noticed that I bought an A3 last week. They WILL, however, make a quattro-equipped model of the 2.0T. The 3.2 starts at about $33,000 like I said, and it maxes out at $40,000. The man I was replying to before thought that $38K was the base price of the 3.2, and he said that a fully-loaded one goes well over $40,000, and he had no idea what he was talking about.

The A3 fully loaded ends at about $40,000.

esf

"Despite the fact that the A3 is a 5-door and the C30 is going to be a 3-door..."

As for being competitors, especially in Europe (if they make the C30 there, which I'm sure they will because of Europe's love affair with hatchbacks). The A3 is also made as a 3-door (or "coupe" as Audi calls it) in Europe. Therefore they will be direct competitors.

esf

""Audi is asking $38K MINIMUM for what is essentially a VW GOLF brought up to Audi specs and decked out with Quattro and nice interior and trim. It's a well executed vehicle, but remains a GOLF at heart. Start adding options (even metallic paint's an option!) and cost blows _way_ past $40K."

Couldn't agree more. Why can't people seem to realize this is the same relationship between Toyota and Lexus?"

How can you think this way? Or believe this person? They stated that Audi is asking "$38K MINIMUM for what is essentially a VW GOLF brought up to Audi specs and decked out with Quattro". This is not at all true. The A3 2.0T is the "MINIMUM" A3, and it does not even COME with quattro, let alone being "decked-out" with it. It starts at $25,000, which is a good healthy difference of $13,000 compared to what kurtamaxxguy stated.

vw79type2

It's too bad we won't see the 3-door here. I like it but don't think many other Americans would.

allhorizon

They WILL, however, make a quattro-equipped model of the 2.0T.

Tell me more.

(I know that combination exists in the rest of the world - how about the US?)

I will test-drive the A3 against the 5-door GTI this summer, but I am still gravely disappointed about the lack of a Haldex 2.0TFSI. Without AWD on either one, I don't see enough of a difference to select the A3.

qbrozen

The A3 is also made as a 3-door (or "coupe" as Audi calls it) in Europe. Therefore they will be direct competitors.

yes, those 2 particular models will be direct competitors in Europe.

And, if Audi offers the 3-door here, they will be direct competitors here, too.

qbrozen

Now don't you think the differences between these two cars are more extreme than what exists between the A3 and C30?

Of course. That's why I wrote it. I was merely pointing out that comparing 2 vehicles based on just being entry level in their class is not a reliable way to go.

But, in any case, like you said, you understand the point. Of course, some people will cross-shop these, just like I cross-shopped a Honda Accord Coupe with a Mazda6 sedan, but that doesn't mean they are direct competitors.

kurtamaxxxguy

Dead wrong on MSRP. Go to Audi's USA web site and pick your A3 Quattro with ALL the options, the premium leather seats and metallic paint, and you will be hitting $43K, fully loaded. This is _before_ tax, license, dealer fees and packs.

Now you don't HAVE to pay that much. The A3 Quattro's BASE price on their site is aprox. $35K (with destination charge and no options _whatever_). You'll get that funky hinged seat with whacko heigth adjustment that drove Car and Driver and me crazy with its martini glass feel.

Don't get me wrong....The car does sounds nice! But I really, really, really fear VWA quality control and reliability. If Audi gets it right (and the A3 USA model isn't setting any JDPower or CU records yet - average or worse so far) they'll have a winner!

Incidently, where is this car __BUILT__? Mexico? Germany?

Lastly, the A3 2.0T Quattro isn't here. Why would Audi bother, given the 4-door VW GTI will fill that slot, when it gets here?

wale_bate1

Hold on a tic there Kurt. You're questioning VWA quality control, but exuding confidence in a Chevy?

I'm all for giving the domestics their due in climbing standards and approaching a level field, and I have my own previous Passat nightmare story, but stretching that is, and in a Fantastic 4 kind of way!

I can configure my A3 3.2Q for $37K, assuming no NAV, which after a great deal of thought I will not spec anyway. It's high, but includes a rash of yummies, many of which are sport options which are most worthy of consideration.

I don't think anybody here will disagree that pricing is a issue for the car, but not enough for me to consider taking two less doors, higher profile and lesser trim from the VW counterpart. Most certainly not enough to push me to a GM. To a Chrysler I might go, having happily been there before (ignorance is in fact bliss), but the Caliber isn't in the same realm regardless of doors and drivetrain options.

I have configured my A4 3.2Q at $41K. That may end up the winner, but I won't know for a month or so...

dbt

Don't get me wrong....The car does sounds nice! But I really, really, really fear VWA quality control and reliability. If Audi gets it right (and the A3 USA model isn't setting any JDPower or CU records yet - average or worse so far) they'll have a winner!

Where are you seeing the JDPower/CU reliability results? What I see (JD PowerA3
has "NO DATA" for their reports.

CU had a short report this month, but no reliability info that I saw.

nowakj66

Those with experience - does Audi USA really treat you better than VW?

kurtamaxxxguy

I fully agree that Chevy has had QA problems. Pre 2003 Chevys have bad electrical and brake reliability. However, Chevy is getting better - much better.

JDPower and Consumers Union, both highly reputable firms, rate Chevy quality and reliability much better than VW and Audi. VW is almost rock bottom by comparison, with Audi little better. Even Car and Driver bangs Audi for lack of reliability, though they _did_ praise their A3 as better built than expected (an MSN reporter had parts of their A3 interior fall apart).

Does AudiUSA __REALLY__ care about getting their vehicles better than Chevy wrt above? Their sending form letters to their owners (as posted in this forum) exudes no confidence whatsoever. Chevy at least responds to you by phone!

So does that leave issues with ones' A3 entirely up to the AUDI dealer you buy from?

vw79type2

"Of course. That's why I wrote it. I was merely pointing out that comparing 2 vehicles based on just being entry level in their class is not a reliable way to go."

Common sense should have told you that I was comparing two cars that have more in common than being entry level. But no harm done.

vw79type2

Here's my take on the Volkswagen reliability issue. It seems to me that the problems most customers experience with VW's and Audi's are minor/inconvienent electrical things (sometimes several in a short time). However, the main frustration arises once they go to the dealership and find that the problem is not being diagnosed or fixed correctly, the dealership takes forever to get parts in, or the dealer charges outrageous prices for the fix (in some cases even when the vehicle was apparently under warranty).

On the other hand, I don't think anyone is going to argue that major components of VW's and Audi's like engines, transmissions, and overall build quality are anything but excellent. These are things that seem more of an issue in American cars and I would suggest it is also a reason why sales of Ford's and GM products have been relatively poor and both company's have had so many layoffs recently.

I really wish America could come up with a car line that looked and performed as well as the Germans that was built entirely in the U.S. I'd rather my money go to American workers, but I'm not willing to spend thousand on something I can't get excited about. Pontiac's got some nice designs (G6 and Solstice), but it's way too little too late. The nail in Detroit's coffin might be the arrival of the Chinese.

blueguydotcom

http://www.thecarconnection.com/Vehicle_Reviews/Sports_Convertibles/2006_Audi_A3- _3_2_quattro_S-line.S184.A9908.html

Strange.

allhorizon

Lastly, the A3 2.0T Quattro isn't here. Why would Audi bother, given the 4-door VW GTI will fill that slot, when it gets here?

Not sure I understand. The only AWD GTI that is planned to come to the US is the "R" - probably in R36 version. That is, it would have the Passat 280+hp engine, it would not be the 2.0TFSI.

Having said that, I would of course love if VW would bridge the time before the arrival of the R32/36 with a, say 30th anniversary GTI (5-door, 2.0TFSI AWD). :shades:

allhorizon

Those with experience - does Audi USA really treat you better than VW?

From anecdotal stories, that seems like a very true statement on average. That is, most Audi dealers/service places are treating their customers with a lot more respect and courtesy, and seem to try harder to get things right than most VW dealers. You almost always get a loaner car without asking. Then, there are exceptions on both sides.

I frequented a combined Audi/VW dealer for more than 10 years. The difference to the VW-only dealers was remarkable. I always got a loaner if the repair took more than a day under warranty, or more than scheduled even if not under warranty. Everyone was friendly and easy to talk to. Again, from personal experience that is something you do not see with quite a number of VW dealers, although in my experience things are improving.

There is an internet list with user-contributed ratings of Audi and VW places. You can see immediately that, e.g., California has a lot of very poorly rated VW dealers.

allhorizon

Weird review of the s-line...he complains it's too solid

That Twomey guy is known for his SUV reviews (he actually likes Mitsubishi) and for the fact that he is a very daring character, having owned a motorcycle license for more than ... several months.

His reviews remind me of arm-chair racing. A few not-so-well-known facts sprinkled with extrapolations of what he thinks certain technologies can and should do, or don't do well.

It's like with movies. There are some good, competent reviewers out there - but even with those I don't agree with more than about half the time...

dbt

I asked, Where are you seeing the JDPower/CU reliability results? What I see (JD PowerA3
has "NO DATA" for their reports.

CU had a short report this month, but no reliability info that I saw.

You said, JDPower and Consumers Union, both highly reputable firms, rate Chevy quality and reliability much better than VW and Audi. VW is almost rock bottom by comparison, with Audi little better. Even Car and Driver bangs Audi for lack of reliability, though they _did_ praise their A3 as better built than expected (an MSN reporter had parts of their A3 interior fall apart).

Sorry, Kurt, but the overall marque reliability is not a sufficient statistic when talking about these cars. Too much variation is possible around different models (see hyundai for one example).

Too much overgeneralization is going on here, based on marques. Coming up with an opinion on the malibu maxx based on rentals of cavaliers and "old malibu / malibu classic", for instance. I've driven the malibu maxx and liked it a good bit (I do consider it a competitor with the A3, because it is a hatchback with 4 doors - fits my family needs; but I won't be going with it). I also drove a cobalt recently and was very impressed. GM products have changed a lot, and I would recommend people try them before basing their judgments on previous models.

On reliability data, my guess is that neither CU nor JDPower will be able to come up with reliability data for the A3, because Audi is selling too few of them to get sufficient sample size.

The bottom line is that Audi has decided to not bring many A3s over here. I don't see why Audi would go to the trouble of starting this offering without deciding to market the car harder, but then again, the guys behind these plans probably also came up with the Phaeton marketing plan.

qbrozen

Common sense should have told you that I was comparing two cars that have more in common than being entry level. But no harm done.

I guess maybe you shouldn't have stated it that way then, huh? I've tried to make it a habit not to assume anything on these boards.

So ... let's see... they are both imports ... both semi-lux ... they both have a hatch ... ummm... oh, both are smallest offered by their manufacturer? ... so, does that mean the Acura RSX is a competitor to the A3 wagon, as well?

Difference in the number of doors is key. That's why Acura could offer the CL and TL side by side. Why BMW offers coupe and sedan 3-series. Why Honda offers coupe and sedan Civics. The list goes on and on. Manufacturers know that 99% of buyers are not inclined to take 2 doors when they really want 4.

kurtamaxxxguy

There are trends for any car manufacturer, and variations within that brand. There are are enough Audis on the JDPOWER site with bad reliability ratings to make one wonder just how the A3 will fare.

Granted, the A3's not on JDPowers'or CU's radar yet. Perhaps it never will be. So I have _no_ idea if an A3 will be reliable.

Us folks working 12-14 hour days 6 days a week don't have the luxury to accomidate many repeat dealer visits for frizzing electrics and all the little glitches so many of the "Euro" brands offer in return for their excellent engines and good ride/handling balance.

As mentioned, do people owning Audis find the dealer relationship is more important than usual? Everything I have read about AudiUSA so far suggests they are "distant" to both consumers and dealers. Perhaps that's because Audis' parent is VW, which has been a mess for a long time. But perhaps Porsche can fix it up?

vw79type2

"I've tried to make it a habit not to assume anything on these boards."

Probably a good idea.

"So ... let's see... they are both imports ... both semi-lux ... they both have a hatch ... ummm... oh, both are smallest offered by their manufacturer? ... so, does that mean the Acura RSX is a competitor to the A3 wagon, as well?"

The Acura RSX is indeed a hatchback that meets the criteria you've outlined above. However, it's design incorporates a gentle slope from the roof line to the rear of the car making it almost appear as a notchback rather than a wagon-like hatchback like that of the C30 and A3. This makes it less of a competitor to the C30 and A3 from a utility standpoint. Now, if the Acura had a steep drop from the roof line to the back of the car, it would not only be uglier, but be more of a competitor to the C30 and A3.

But here we are just assuming the consumer is shopping based on utility. Let's say someone just wants a cheap sporty-luxury car. They are likely to consider all three regardless of how many doors.

"Difference in the number of doors is key. That's why Acura could offer the CL and TL side by side. Why BMW offers coupe and sedan 3-series. Why Honda offers coupe and sedan Civics. The list goes on and on. Manufacturers know that 99% of buyers are not inclined to take 2 doors when they really want 4."

Clearly, your conclusion has merit. However, that is not always the case in this anything goes car market. That is why we see so many cross-overs. Take for instance the 4-door coupe styled Mercedes CLS and the hardtop version of the BMW 6-Series. Many automobile publications have said these two will face off with each other in the market place. In fact, in the January 23, 2006 issue of Autoweek they specifically mention the C30 concept car that appeared in Detroit and said the production version will go up against the A3.

Let's also consider a Saturn Coupe with the third door (If they still make that, I don't know). Now obviously much more has to go into a car comparison (such as price, driving purpose, cargo room)than the number of doors or else this car would have had no competition.

That said, I still believe that you are correct in assuming some cars will compete against others with the same number of doors, but remember that is just one attribute. It doesn't always apply in any of the three examples I mentioned above. Single people as well as childless couples may not even give a damn about doors. It's no wonder we disagree on this point. I would argue acombination of pricing, the percieved level of luxury, and more general categories like car, van, truck, and SUV are the most key in determining what cars people will compare. Even the automobile press has trouble coming up with competitors to test some cars against. It's getting much more gray out there.

I still think the Audi A3 and Volvo C30 have more in common than not and there will be a considerable amount of cross-shopping between the two.

blueguydotcom

The CLS and 6 series will probably face off...they're both ugly as sin and tacky as all get out.

kurtamaxxguy

Is AUDI still offering a free maintanance with A3?

Or has it been dropped? (VW did the same thing recently).

And if so does anyone here have feedback on maintanance costs (12K mile, etc.)?

shipo

Hmmm, I'm surprised that you're interested, I thought you were getting a Maxx. ;-)

In answer to your question, yes, Audi covers the A3 with the Audi Advantage program which includes:

- 4 years or 50,000 miles, whichever comes first, no-charge scheduled maintenance
- Audi 24-hour Roadside Assistance for 4 years

So, in answer to your last question about maintenance costs, I guess that means $0.00 for the first 50,000 miles.

Best Regards,
Shipo

dino001

I would be careful with that $0, though. Dealers always find ways to talk you into "non-covered", but "recommended", or "strongly advised" services. Plus, there will be list of exclusions. Is the battery covered for full 50K, are wipers covered, etc.? Tires (if one gets summer performance tires they would expect to change them in couple of years)?

I heard/read some stories when "free maintenance" still meant $150 dropped here and there. For example, this great BMW program has a very reasonably priced extension for 5 years/100K. But boy - read the disclaimer of exclusions! Basically anything that wears, including piston rings (!) is not covered...