# Audi A3 a bit pricey, isn't it?



## ed325i (Dec 20, 2001)

blueguydotcom said:


> ...A smaller engine? The 2.0T _is_ a small engine. It's only got 200 hp.


Well, that's more than the E46 322, 328, and 325. The Audi Canada site quotes a 0-100 Km time of less than 7 seconds. I would look at the DSG as a replacement for my E46. Still have to come up with cash and the test drive it, of course. 

I like the idea of a 5 door. I like the utility. DSG would allow my wife to drive it, while I can still enjoy controling the shift points.

Having stated all that, I would wait for the 3.2L before making any decisions.

Ed


----------



## pmoney (Jul 27, 2004)

Why do people consider the B7 A4 to be overpriced nowadays? Previously, it was a little cheaper than a comparable 3er...And now it appears to be of a similar price. An A4 2.0T competes directly with a 325i, though it lacks a little in the power department. I don't understand how 'the A4 is getting way overpriced'? The cars both have their merits so they should be priced similarly. Am I missing something here?


----------



## swchang (Oct 5, 2003)

pmoney said:


> Why do people consider the B7 A4 to be overpriced nowadays? Previously, it was a little cheaper than a comparable 3er...And now it appears to be of a similar price. An A4 2.0T competes directly with a 325i, though it lacks a little in the power department. I don't understand how 'the A4 is getting way overpriced'? The cars both have their merits so they should be priced similarly. Am I missing something here?


Audi < BMW.


----------



## pmoney (Jul 27, 2004)

swchang said:


> Audi < BMW.


Yes but Mercs are priced similarly as well. I think that Audis give 'solid, expensive out of warranty' german car experience just like BMW or Merc. Its not that I like Audis better than bimmers (maybe the interiors :eeps: ), but are audis like a step lower than a BMW or Merc? Is it that people still consider them more expensive VWs (which some of them definitely are)? :dunno:


----------



## swchang (Oct 5, 2003)

pmoney said:


> Yes but Mercs are priced similarly as well. I think that Audis give 'solid, expensive out of warranty' german car experience just like BMW or Merc. Its not that I like Audis better than bimmers (maybe the interiors :eeps: ), but are audis like a step lower than a BMW or Merc? Is it that people still consider them more expensive VWs (which some of them definitely are)? :dunno:


I said that as a play on their ">" commercials, but generally in the US, everything you said is how they're considered. A step lower then BMW and MB, more expensive VWs, etc. I personally like them, though.


----------



## brkf (May 26, 2003)

well, after driving the Audi A3 with DSG I must say I'm really, really impressed.

Today though, I got smacked upside the head with a new, somewhat annoying suckerpunch - some bastages bought out my company. So I hopped on the phone and pretty much secured a new job with a company I used to work for. The hitch - it's a 90 mile roundtrip daily commute. 

So I'm no longer disposing of my Protege - it's still a good commuter. And when my lease comes up on my 330i, I most definitely will not buy another BMW. Instead I'm heavily leaning toward the GTI 2.0 DSG. Everything I've read about it pleases me...

Great price - 25k or so
Good mileage - 30 mpg
DSG - manual for fun times, auto for horrid traffic
Low upkeep vis-a-vis BMW.
Great handling
Top notch interior and ergonomics.

The car sounds great for commuting and also good for around town fun. If I still feel the itch to have something powerful it's cheap enough that I could slap down for a used e46 or 05/06 Mustang GT. as I know from previous VW turbos, the tuners always find ways to squeeze more out of them.


----------



## Jeff_DML (Mar 13, 2002)

vw has low upkeep compared to a bmw 

gti sounds like a nice car though


----------



## brkf (May 26, 2003)

Jeff_DML said:


> vw has low upkeep compared to a bmw
> 
> gti sounds like a nice car though


Compared to a BMW, yes. If I'm putting 30k-40k a year on a BMW that's over 2k a year on just tires. I'll be out of warranty within 1.5 years too. Thus the expenses will start to roll in big time.


----------



## Jeff_DML (Mar 13, 2002)

blueguydotcom said:


> Compared to a BMW, yes. If I'm putting 30k-40k a year on a BMW that's over 2k a year on just tires. I'll be out of warranty within 1.5 years too. Thus the expenses will start to roll in big time.


guess low up keep and VW together threw me off


----------



## sunilsf (Sep 22, 2003)

GTI seems to be shaping up to be a winner... fwd is a downer, but the gas mileage and hatch aspect are definitely appealing (plus it'll be several $K cheaper than the A3).


----------



## swchang (Oct 5, 2003)

sunilsf said:


> GTI seems to be shaping up to be a winner... fwd is a downer, but the gas mileage and hatch aspect are definitely appealing (plus it'll be several $K cheaper than the A3).


Looks pretty gross, though.


----------



## brkf (May 26, 2003)

swchang said:


> Looks pretty gross, though.


Could not care less what it looks like.  I don't like the way any of my cars look, to be honest.


----------



## Chris90 (Apr 7, 2003)

I like the new GTI, and it got like 4 1/2 stars from EVO, that's speaks volumes. But the freaking delays (Spring 2006, you've got to be kidding) take it out of the running for me.


----------



## brkf (May 26, 2003)

Dawg90 said:


> I like the new GTI, and it got like 4 1/2 stars from EVO, that's speaks volumes. But the freaking delays (Spring 2006, you've got to be kidding) take it out of the running for me.


Is there an online version of Evo with that review?


----------



## Chris90 (Apr 7, 2003)

This one is a review of the DSG version - I have the magazine and it was 4 stars, because they didn't like the DSG as much as the manual. (the article online doesn't show the 4 stars though).

I couldn't find the 6 spd review, I think it was a comparison, which they don't post online.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/driven/archive/?id=53636


----------



## jstalin (Feb 15, 2005)

In canada, the a3 is 32K and the a4 is 34K... I'd much rather pony up the extra 2K for the sedan than having an overpriced hatch.

For the life of my I can't see why anyone would pay this kind of money for a FWD mazda-3 copy hatchback, when you could get a mazda 3/ford focus/gti for 10K less, or a 3-series for the same price... it's beyond me


----------



## brkf (May 26, 2003)

Dawg90 said:


> This one is a review of the DSG version - I have the magazine and it was 4 stars, because they didn't like the DSG as much as the manual. (the article online doesn't show the 4 stars though).
> 
> I couldn't find the 6 spd review, I think it was a comparison, which they don't post online.
> 
> http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/driven/archive/?id=53636


Thanks for the article. I'm a constant shifter with my 3 series so for me it was insanely fun to play with the dsg. Of course the constant torque of the 2.0 often made my shifts pointless. Having power fully on tap from 1800-5000 rpm is very odd for me to experience. That little A3 hit 110 in a blink.

Seems with the much lighter GTI that engine and tranny would be a scream. And then chipped...oh my.


----------



## swchang (Oct 5, 2003)

Did you wear pants for your test drive?


----------



## brkf (May 26, 2003)

swchang said:


> Did you wear pants for your test drive?


No. This is california, man. I rarely wear pants.


----------



## Chris90 (Apr 7, 2003)

jstalin said:


> In canada, the a3 is 32K and the a4 is 34K... I'd much rather pony up the extra 2K for the sedan than having an overpriced hatch.
> 
> For the life of my I can't see why anyone would pay this kind of money for a FWD mazda-3 copy hatchback, when you could get a mazda 3/ford focus/gti for 10K less, or a 3-series for the same price... it's beyond me


In the US it's only like $6k more than a Mazda 3, and it's $3-4k less than an A4, and faster and more sporty, and imo, better looking and more practical.

If there is a 4 door GTI coming, that'd be similar though.


----------



## ed325i (Dec 20, 2001)

blueguydotcom said:


> ...I believe the chips for the 2.0, if they follow the general 1.8T style, will be physically new ecus. I could be wrong.


I guess that's ok. You will have a "spare" ecu post "chipping".

Ed


----------



## brkf (May 26, 2003)

Ed328Ci said:


> Exactly. The price of an A4 2.0T in Canada, with sport package and the upgraded stereo, is the same as a base E90 330i. It's a no brainer, in favour of the 330i. Extend the search to include Infiniti, it would be the G35 leading the pack in terms of price / performance.
> 
> Ed


yeah if I could put up with the NVH and giant size of the G35, it'd be the car to buy. cheap, reliable, pretty quick, so-so handling - just lacks that german feel. I'd rather an A3 or GTI over the G35 at this point.


----------



## Chris90 (Apr 7, 2003)

PhilH said:


> :bustingup
> 
> We own a VW with the 1.8T. The 2.0T better be a friggin' big improvement if what you say is true. IMO, a rattly 4-banger ain't got _nothing_ on a BMW I-6.


Yeah, it's a big difference, the 1.8T sucks. I prefer the BMW inline six, it sounds better and feels more sporty, but the 2.0T is a great engine.


----------



## e46Christian (Feb 27, 2003)

Anyone have details on how big the injectors are (CC's) and the turbo specs? One thing to watch out when "chipping" a turbo car is fuel flow into the engine. Sure, you can move a lot more air just by increasing boost pressure, but if your injectors are maxed out it's only a matter of time til you hear BOOM!! The other danger is running the turbo and intercooler out of its efficiency range.


----------



## Jeff_DML (Mar 13, 2002)

e46Christian said:


> Anyone have details on how big the injectors are (CC's) and the turbo specs? One thing to watch out when "chipping" a turbo car is fuel flow into the engine. Sure, you can move a lot more air just by increasing boost pressure, but if your injectors are maxed out it's only a matter of time til you hear BOOM!! The other danger is running the turbo and intercooler out of its efficiency range.


I think the turbo is the K03 again, same as 1.8T. Not sure about the injectors


----------



## Jeff_DML (Mar 13, 2002)

my friend is interested in a A3 so we went and checked them out yesterday. First of the base A3 was pretty terrible on the inside, not worth 25k imho. Seats where unsupportive cloth ones, cheap a$$ plastic steering wheel, I wasnt the impressed. But with the added sport package it was much nicer car inside, decent steering wheel, sport seats with leather, for some reason just felt like a higher quality car. Could actually imagine buying one. 

but add the cost of the sport package and you are getting close to 30k. Parked right next to the A3 was a nice A4 Avant 2.0T which started at 30k. For that 30k you get a bigger car with quattro as standard so for me a no-brainer and would get the avant or sedan. Basically the A3 is priced too high. Need to knock a few k of the base price, maybe start the stripper one at 22k.


----------



## Chris90 (Apr 7, 2003)

Jeff_DML said:


> my friend is interested in a A3 so we went and checked them out yesterday. First of the base A3 was pretty terrible on the inside, not worth 25k imho. Seats where unsupportive cloth ones, cheap a$$ plastic steering wheel, I wasnt the impressed. But with the added sport package it was much nicer car inside, decent steering wheel, sport seats with leather, for some reason just felt like a higher quality car. Could actually imagine buying one.
> 
> but add the cost of the sport package and you are getting close to 30k. Parked right next to the A3 was a nice A4 Avant 2.0T which started at 30k. For that 30k you get a bigger car with quattro as standard so for me a no-brainer and would get the avant or sedan. Basically the A3 is priced too high. Need to knock a few k of the base price, maybe start the stripper one at 22k.


Would you pay more for your WRX if it was bigger?  The A3 is for people who want something compact, practical and sporty - the A4 Avant is only 1 of those 3 things.


----------



## Jeff_DML (Mar 13, 2002)

Dawg90 said:


> Would you pay more for your WRX if it was bigger?  The A3 is for people who want something compact, practical and sporty - the A4 Avant is only 1 of those 3 things.


yeah I guess bigger wasnt the proper word, something like more substantial :dunno: A3 is pretty portly for a fwd hatchback, ~3250 :yikes: Hey I still like it, would like it to succeed. You do get a lot of room for the exterior size of the a3

edit: oh my friend is also considering getting a 325iT so I compared the specs, A3 is slighltly wider and the 325 is about 8 inches longer.


----------



## Chris90 (Apr 7, 2003)

Jeff_DML said:


> yeah I guess bigger wasnt the proper word, something like more substantial :dunno: A3 is pretty portly for a fwd hatchback, ~3250 :yikes: Hey I still like it, would like it to succeed. You do get a lot of room for the exterior size of the a3
> 
> edit: oh my friend is also considering getting a 325iT so I compared the specs, A3 is slighltly wider and the 325 is about 8 inches longer.


Yeah, I wish it was lighter, but I did find it pretty roomy in front and back, especially for its size. My girlfriend still plans to buy one, but who knows when, maybe in 1-2 years?


----------



## brkf (May 26, 2003)

Dawg90 said:


> Yeah, I wish it was lighter, but I did find it pretty roomy in front and back, especially for its size. My girlfriend still plans to buy one, but who knows when, maybe in 1-2 years?


the weight is a major issue. why the blazes is everything so heavy now? I already miss my light little protege as it was so flingable in corners.


----------



## sunilsf (Sep 22, 2003)

Latest issue of Road & Track got 0.71g with the A3 (w/o sports pkg)-- they attributed it to the all-seasons and the weight.
Hopefully the GTI (if it ever gets here) will be more aggressive.


----------



## brkf (May 26, 2003)

sunilsf said:


> Latest issue of Road & Track got 0.71g with the A3 (w/o sports pkg)-- they attributed it to the all-seasons and the weight.
> Hopefully the GTI (if it ever gets here) will be more aggressive.


I still want to drive a sport package one. The one tested in MT sprinted to 60 in 6.3 or 6.2 seconds. Damn... Figure some light modding of the suspension and one chip and that car is a barn burner.


----------



## JonM (Jan 28, 2002)

Jeff_DML said:


> I think the turbo is the K03 again, same as 1.8T. Not sure about the injectors


It's a K03, but it is heavily revised from the current K03 and K03s. Borg Warner currently sells more than a dozen different K03s and they all flow differently. The first chip on the market today (Dahlback) increases power to 244hp and 265 ft-lbs at the crank. Chip only.


----------



## Jeff_DML (Mar 13, 2002)

JonM said:


> It's a K03, but it is heavily revised from the current K03 and K03s. Borg Warner currently sells more than a dozen different K03s and they all flow differently. The first chip on the market today (Dahlback) increases power to 244hp and 265 ft-lbs at the crank. Chip only.


not bad. With so little lag a lot larger turbo would still be very streetable, probably get over 300 pretty easy :thumbup: ( as long as tuners can deal with the FSI and the high compression)


----------



## Artslinger (Sep 2, 2002)

The 2006 Audi A3 2.0T is definitely on my list of cars to look at when I replace the e46 along with the e90 and Infiniti M. The price is right.

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=9631


----------



## Chris90 (Apr 7, 2003)

I think modifying a brand new Audi turbo is a very bad idea.


----------



## Artslinger (Sep 2, 2002)

Damn I like the Lexus 2006 IS. 

Now I have the 2006 Audi A3 2.0T, Infiniti M, E90 and the Lexus 2006 IS to test drive. 

The E90 will have some stiff competition in 2006.


----------



## wmndriver (Jun 3, 2003)

Artslinger said:


> Damn I like the Lexus 2006 IS.
> 
> Now I have the 2006 Audi A3 2.0T, Infiniti M, E90 and the Lexus 2006 IS to test drive.
> 
> The E90 will have some stiff competition in 2006.


Jason just emailed me today with the following re: the IS:

_This is an awesome car. The IS250 is out this fall in AWD, but I like the 350 with 300hp. Voice activated nav!! _


----------



## JonM (Jan 28, 2002)

Dawg90 said:


> I think modifying a brand new Audi turbo is a very bad idea.


I thought so too, but I modded mine anyway. About 7 days after I got it. I've flogged it pretty good for the last 5 years without any problems and perfect Blackstone oil reports.

I've had such good luck with my current VAG product, it will be difficult for me to consider a BMW for a daily driver. Especially after the S54 problems and the Z-series subframe issues.


----------

