http://www.caranddriver.com/shortroa...ro-s-line.html

We were a little skeptical when the Audi A3 2.0T arrived last summer. Why would another luxury automaker launch an entry-level hatchback when, in the past 10 years, BMW and Mercedes have proved it to be a lame-duck segment in the U.S.?

So we were surprised to find the A3 to be fantastic — even the $25,000 base model. Its virtues include a 200-hp, direct-injection turbo four, a sweet-shifting six-speed, a terrific ride-and-handling balance, and about as much passenger and cargo space as in the larger A4. Those merits later secured it a place on our 2006 10Best Cars list, among many well-established players.



We also eagerly awaited the more powerful V-6 version — the A3 3.2 S-line — that wasn’t available at the outset. This pumped-up A3 sports 250 horses and also comes with the excellent twin-clutch Direct Shift Gearbox (DSG) automated manual, which works just as well as a manual or automatic, and Quattro four-wheel drive.

On the downside, we also anticipated that the standard DSG and four-wheel drive would add thousands to the bottom line, but the V-6 model starts at a whopping $34,700, which is $9240 more than a base A3 2.0T. If you’re not shocked, consider that a 325i — yes, the 15-time 10Best-winning 3-series — is $3105 cheaper.

In fairness, that huge price includes much of the 2.0-liter model’s optional gear — leather seats and steering wheel, uplevel stereo, aluminum trim. But the 3.2’s price is still about a $4500 bump, and it seems as if a loaded $40,135 Audi should offer a power passenger seat. Our A3 did include a headroom-robbing $1100 sunroof and a $1950 navigation system, but if we were choosing, we might pop for the $800 xenon headlights, the $700 heated seats, and the $1000 18-inch summer tires.

Having choked down the bitter price pill, we found the driving experience to be top-notch. Despite being front-wheel-drive-based, the A3 resists understeer. If it starts to push, simply back off the throttle a smidge and the A3 tightens its line beautifully. The steering is predictable and has an accurate feel as you toy with the 0.81-g cornering threshold, although it gets overly light in parking lots. If that skidpad number seems a little low, it’s because our A3 3.2 wore all-season tires instead of the aforementioned summer tires we would have likely preferred.

The top-level A3 still rides reasonably well, but subjectively, it seems to have lost that light-on-its-feet feel we so like. That impression was cemented at the scales: The S-line’s weight has swelled almost 500 pounds over the 2.0T model’s, to 3718. That‘s even heavier than a BMW 5-series sedan, which is almost two feet longer.

That weight increase also explains why the performance gains weren’t impressive, prompting befuddled first impressions such as, “It didn’t feel as fast as I thought,� or “That was the 250-horsepower version, right?� The V-6 model does shed 0.7 second off the 0-to-60-mph dash, managing it in 5.8 seconds. However, the 5-to-60 and quarter-mile times only improved by 0.4 second. And the V-6’s noises aren’t that invigorating, either — it’s more drone than growl.

The biggest disappointment is a limp brake pedal that requires more travel than expected for an average slowdown. When hustling back roads, it’ll flirt with the floor. Stopping distance is a so-so 177 feet, again courtesy of the all-season rubber.

We still can appreciate the flexible packaging of a hatchback, and the tidy A3, with its wheels pushed out to the corners, shrugs off the long-rear-overhang wagon stigma. We love the A3’s clean lines, rich interior, and frisky moves. Just stick with the lighter, cheaper, and not-much-slower 2.0-liter version.


Vehicle type: front-engine, 4-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 5-door wagon
Price as tested: $40,135 (base price: $34,700)
Engine type: DOHC 24-valve V-6, iron block and aluminum head, port fuel injection
Displacement: 195 cu in, 3189cc
Power (SAE net): 250 bhp @ 6300 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 236 lb-ft @ 2800 rpm

Transmission: 6-speed manual with automated shifting and clutch
Wheelbase: 101.5 in
Length/width/height: 168.7/69.5/56.0 in
Curb weight: 3718 lb

Zero to 60 mph: 5.8 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 15.4 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 32.9 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 6.7 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.5 sec @ 97 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 132 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 177 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 g
EPA fuel economy, city driving: 21 mpg
C/D-observed fuel economy: 19 mpg


Highlighting was mine

Ok, I'll take the first shot:

The review is dead-on. C&D's stats tell me that the 3.2 is only marginally slower than my departed (and beloved) '98 E36 M3. Maybe so, but in butt-dyno terms, these cars are a world apart. The 3.2 feels pretty tame when the tach is under 4 grand.

The 3.2 is basically a good car and does many things well, but its performance is wanting, especially for the bucks. I keep trying to love my car, but its lackluster low-end performance has a chilling effect on my attraction to it. Give me 50 more ponies (or 300 fewer pounds) and I'd probably agree that the difference between the 2.0 and 3.2 was worth it.

Well, other than the Quattro I have all of that car, but lighter, faster, and cheaper. If you can stomach the extra $9k for the all wheel drive system then by all means, spend away. Otherwise do as I've done.

A3 2.0T M6 Lava Grey w/Sport Package, Open Sky, Bose, Sirrius, S3 Badging, Paint protection, etc. - $27,200
REVO Stage I - <$ 500

A beautifully equiped, 250+hp, 290+lb torque A3 for under $28k.

Can't beat it.

Chef

__________________
A3 NOOBS look HERE!



Bone Stock!!!

Hi All-

What are the likely longevity issues associated with a turbocharged powerplant versus a normally-aspirated powerplant? Even with proper oil change schedules, don't turbocharged engines die before regular powerplants? Perhaps one has to determine if they prefer to keep a car around for three or four years...or if they prefer to own it for a dozen years.

~ Blue Jays ~

A well maintained forced inducted car can last for a long time also. The reason they are considered less reliable than naturally aspirated cars is because instead of the air naturally flowing into the combustion chamber through a lack of pressure the air is crammed into the chamber by the turbo. This happens whether the motor likes it or not and it applies extra stress to the rods and pistons.

__________________
01 A4
05 A4

Several factors make turbo's more attractive now. Most use Synthetic oil that doesn't break down like regular oil. Transmissions are optimized against engine output to allow lower RPM's when cruising at freeway speeds. Part manufacturers are making stronger and tighter tolerance parts that wear better in engines. Auto manufacturers use appropriate intake and exhaust manifolds which allow better engine performance. The various cooling system components are more reliable and tied into a computer which detects out of tolerance engine conditions before you have a problem. The HP/torque of engines has increased noticeably resulting in a engine you have don't have to floor to get up to speed. BTW the 2.0T FSI engine used in the Audi/VW is one of the Top Ten Best Engines for the last two years.

When you consider how many old four cylinder small cars are out there still, versus V6 or V8 engines it gets to be a question of manufacturing quality of your powerplant, owner maintenance, and how you drive on how long the vechicle will last. Here in California a 12 year old car is quite common. [sm=type.gif]

__________________
2007 A3 2.0T S tronic Silver/Grey Premium, Audio, Cold Weather, Technology

See recent reports about the saab 900 turbo that passed 1,000,000 miles with the original engine and turbo.

__________________
base 2006 arctic white A3, gray int. DSG, AWE vent gauge, P-flow, alloy pedals, carbon fiber int. trim.