Test drive impressions of an A3 3.2

I went and test drove a private sale 2006 A3 3.2 today.
 
I must say I was disappointed.  It seemed to have a hiccup or lag when starting from zero.  Also, it was unable to aggressively get up to speed when needing to pass other vehicles in the 35mph range.  Don't get me wrong, it had good power but was not meet my expectations.  A little slower, a little more sluggish than I would have expected.
 
Rear seat room was less than I remembered.  I have two girls (4 and 7) who will need to sit back there and I think it may be too tight.  Also, this car was black and had noticable swirl marks on the hood and a couple of scratches in the rear.  Not to mention, he'd scraped a few of his wheels.  Interior was immaculate.
 
Anyways, based on that, I think I'm going to continue my focus on a 330 or 335 BMW.

I havent driven the 3.2 but when I drove the 2.0T I was thoroughly impressed with ever aspect of the engine. The engine pulled hard when passing and from a dig it usually spun the tires. Overall it had a smooth power band and I loved it.
 
If you look at the 3 series I would imagine you would like the A4 more than the A3 mainly because the 3 series and the A4's are competitors. The A4 is also a little bigger than the A3 so the back seat space might meet your fancy.

Anyone have 30-50 or in-gear passing times comparing the 3.2 to the 2.0T DSGs?
 
I'm thinking that the 2.0T, though down 50 hp, probably has very close or maybe better in-gear speeds.
 
If you are looking to move up from the A3, and want to stay used in the Bimmers look for a E90 325i or 328i. 

I actually drove the A3 3.2 around the track the other day and, other than the Quattro, I was kinda disappointed compared to the 2.0T.   But, I'm so used to the modified 2.0T now, I might have been a little more harsh of a critic.   FWIW, if you chip the A3 2.0T, it will be much quicker, in all aspects, to any of the bimmers, other than the 335i or M series.   So as far as value is concerned, the 2.0T is definitely the best bet.
 
Having said all of that, I tote around 3 kids in mine without a problem and they range in age from 6-9.   I wouldn't want to go on a driving vacation with everyone in this car, but no problems moving around town.
 
The bimmer's are very nice cars, but I think you might have not looked at the correct Audi.   Just my thoughts.
 
 
 
Cheers!

I'm looking at a e90 335i, close to pulling the trigger on it.
 
I'm not a big A4 fan.  They seem to depreciate quite a bit more than the A3 and the bimmers.  They're all over the place also.  I prefer cars a little more rare, partly because I like driving something that not everyone else has and they seem to sell better as well when I get ready to sell.  That's one reason why I like the A3.

The 335i is a hot car.   I don't think you'd be disappointed with that choice at all.
 
 
Good luck!
 
 
 
Cheers!

With the 3.2, if you don't floor it, it will take its time from a dig.  The haldex doesn't engage unless it sense slip or a need for acceleration.  If you WOT from a stop, it will feel different.  Of course, with the haldex controller upgade, it will make it even better.  Having said that, 335 is definitely a nice car.  If there wasn't one on every corner around here, that would have been my choice.  Then again, can't wait till the B8 S4... return of the twin turbo.

Mine has the DSG and the only hic cup I noticed is that the tranny sometimes has a lag when you quickly goose it from a stop. If you want to launch without any problems, either gently engage the throttle while in the auto mood or switch to manual mode to ensure instant response for the launch. The computer programming is very good, but probably not programmed for every possible human action. 
 
When underway, the response is the best of any car I have owned, including the great 2001 330i and the noisy 2005 WRX. I think the WRX might have been slightly quicker, but the torque and response of the 3.2 outweigh that IMHO. I have not taken any of these cars on the track. I think track driving and street driving are two different worlds.

I have no problems launching my A3....just give it some gas, drop the clutch and off it goes...

With extensive mods, you need only tach around 3k rpm's before releasing the clutch, or you'll end up with too much wheel spin.   As is, you'll need very sticky tires and a sensitive enough right foot to keep traction through first and second gears.
 
 
The manual tranny is much quicker than the DSG in our A3 if you have a little talent.   At least, until the A3 gets launch control.
 
 
 
Cheers!

I still may actually go with the A3 3.2.  He is really coming down on price, so much that it may just make it too difficult to pass up.  He's moving to Hawaii and must sell.  :)
 
I feel a little better after reading your posts about the launch and overall ability for it to get going.  Remember, it's a 3.2 DGS, so there's no manual clutch (someone mentioned just let the clutch go...).

quote:

ORIGINAL: uwhusky

I still may actually go with the A3 3.2.  He is really coming down on price, so much that it may just make it too difficult to pass up.  He's moving to Hawaii and must sell.  :)

I feel a little better after reading your posts about the launch and overall ability for it to get going.  Remember, it's a 3.2 DGS, so there's no manual clutch (someone mentioned just let the clutch go...).

 
He's probably from Euro.  All 3.2  A3/R32 in US/CA are DSG.

quote:

The A4 is also a little bigger than the A3 so the back seat space might meet your fancy.

Actually, by my measurements and those in Road & Track, the A3 has more rear knee/leg room then an A4 - enough so that I can sit "behind myself" (I have very long legs for my 6'1" height) in the A3, but the A4 was impossible.  The latest E90 3-series may be better yet, but the E46 is probably pretty close in rear leg room to an A3.
 
I improved my comfort and the leg room behind me by adding spacers under the front bolts of the driver seat rails on the A3 Sport seats (non-power in 2006), so that my legs aren't as straight.
 

quote:

A little slower, a little more sluggish than I would have expected.

There is nothing sluggish about my 2.0T (unmodded) with DSG. Definitely much more mid-range then my previous '93 325i (chipped), and the DSG adds by making the power much more accessible.  I'm quite happy to NOT have quattro with its extra weight, drag and the effects on performance and gas mileage.

quote:

ORIGINAL: uwhusky

I went and test drove a private sale 2006 A3 3.2 today.

I must say I was disappointed.  It seemed to have a hiccup or lag when starting from zero.  Also, it was unable to aggressively get up to speed when needing to pass other vehicles in the 35mph range.  Don't get me wrong, it had good power but was not meet my expectations.  A little slower, a little more sluggish than I would have expected.

Rear seat room was less than I remembered.  I have two girls (4 and 7) who will need to sit back there and I think it may be too tight.  Also, this car was black and had noticable swirl marks on the hood and a couple of scratches in the rear.  Not to mention, he'd scraped a few of his wheels.  Interior was immaculate.

Anyways, based on that, I think I'm going to continue my focus on a 330 or 335 BMW.

Im gonna have to disagree! I feel my 3.2 is fastest from the range of 20-40 to 60-70mph.
It is more satisfying than i expected. That is where i feel the car is fastest. But if you choose a 335i BMW, which is alot more money, you will be more satisfied with that car, I'm not gonna lie. That there is a fast car, but you will pay more for it.
I wish you luck in your choice!!

I test drove a 2004 330i ZHP before I got my A3 3.2...

BMW's 3-liter straight six is much more dynamic and sporty than Audi/VW's 3.2, but it's not as torquey.  For 5th and 6th gear passing at low speeds, it's wondful to have that torque on hand.  But, if you want to drop it down to 2nd or 3rd, the BMW's engine shines.

If you're looking for a performer, you can't really get much better than a BMW, that's my opinion.  For someone not hell-bent on performance, but still wanting more-than-decent power, handling, and performance, Audi really fits the bill.

But I see where you're dissapointment is coming from.  I test drove an A3 2.0t before the 3.2Q, and I was happy with the little four-bangers amazing torque and excellet power-band.  Then I got into the 3.2Q and expected to be much, much faster (50 more horses, 36 more torques), and when I mashed it, I was a little dissapointed.  Then I learned that the 3.2Q is heavy-as-hell, 3800 lbs, and that the Quattro sucks a lot of power.  The dynamics of the 3.2 were much better than the turbo 4, but it just didn't feel any faster. 

As with the DSG, the off-the-line "sluggishness" is the transmission letting out the clutch smoothly like you would in a real manual car.  It's not going to drop the clutch and let you break something like you could in a real manual.  I like to think of it as an automatic version of the perfect manual launch, perfecting meaning most acceleration with no damage whatsoever.  If any acceleration is lost from starting, it is defentially made up during the upcoming shifts.  Overall it's faster than a manual, just not as fun.

Anyways, the 3.2Q has, in my opinion, better characteristcs for every-day driving than BMWs 3 liter straight-6.

Great post, cookies!
 
I completely get what you're saying.  Having owned several BMWs, I really like their low end torque.  The 335 is a twin turbo, clearly the A3 can not compete with it but I know that.  That said, the 3.2Q is nothing to turn your nose up to.  My headache is over pricing and going with the cheaper option (A3) over the more expensive (335) and the incremental difference in "joy" between the two.
 
Honestly, I think I'm going to end up with the 3.2Q.  The difference in price is now at $10k or more.  I'm not sure I can pass on the 3.2Q for in the high $20k range.  We'll see and I really appreciate all the responses.

Yes, great post cookies!

You are dead on with those cars. The A3 3.2Q is very jumpy with its torque. I really enjoy that aspect, and as for the BMW, (which i have never driven but a friend owns) agrees with you that the engine just about shines in every catagory, but in the end the two are very different cars. I just wish Audi could do something about the weight of my 3.2 : (
It would really eat the road up if it were just like 1000lbs lighter, i can just imagine the car being that much more powerful.
Great discussion, no biased opinions, love it!

Just went and test drove the 335i, again.  All I can say is Holy ****! 

You keep driving that 335i and you'll end up taking it home.   Be careful!   LOL
 
BTW, have you test driven the S5 yet?   I had it around the track last week and it is fun as hell!   It might be an option if you're looking to drop that kind of change?
 
Cheers!

I think the S5 is way out of my range.  I'm looking at used 335i's in the neighborhood of $40k.  Isn't the S5 more like $60k?  Also, I need 4 doors.

quote:

ORIGINAL: uwhusky

Just went and test drove the 335i, again.  All I can say is Holy ****! 

+1. I test drove a 335i this afternoon. I currently drive an 03 BMW 330i. Its better than the 328i but the 335i is so much better. I was going to get an A3 3.2Q/DSG or an A4 3.2Q MT  but I think I may stay BMW and get the 335i.

I had a chipped 01 330ci (ex-wife got it ). It was fast & stuck like glue, but my 2.0T is more fun to drive.

My objections to the current BMW's:  iDrive, run-flat tires and no spare, no dipstick, no temperature gauge, and deletion of other simple items like the differential drain plug - after all it is a "lifetime fill"! 
 
The design philosophy seems to be moving far away philosophically from the Ultimate Driving Machine, and back the dreaded days of "yuppie cars".
 
I loved my '72 2002tii and the chipped '93 325i that preceded my A3 2.0T, and would have been happy with an E46 (previous generation 3-series) 325i wagon if I could have found one with stick and Sports package in the right colors.  But like Driver8, the A3 is noticeably more fun to drive then those (or all the other cars I had between them), and definitely more practical, too.