I'm considering purchasing a '09 A3. Coming from a Volvo S60R with ECU mod for about 330HP. I'm trying to decide between the 2.0T or the 3.2. With the 2.0T I would assume the corner is less nose heavy, gets better gas mileage, and an ECU remap will have a much bigger benefit than the 3.2. I believe I ran across one site where the ECU program takes it to 250HP and almost 300lbs torque. That's outstanding.

Maybe I answered my own question but a tweaked 2.0T is still going to give me a lower HP/weight ratio than I'm use to with less low-end torque going from a 2.5 5-cylinder to a 2.0 4-cylinder. My gut says the 2.0T is the better choice if indeed it gives a bit less understeer due to lighter front-end and it will be a nice benefit if gas prices go through the roof again?

Would love to hear from A3 owners who have driven both and/or who have done aftermarket performance mods to get more power.

Thanks and Happy New Year!

 

Surprised no one jumped on this with an easy quick answer. Over 300 lbs lighter, an ECU program puts it to ~250HP, and much better gas mileage - the 2.0T is a no brainer I think now.

 

I've never driven a Volvo of any variety, but I'm constantly amazed by the power ALWAYS available in my unchipped 2.0T. I rarely need to use full throttle because this thing has power RIGHT NOW everywhere in the rev band, while I used full throttle frequently with my previous BMW 325i that didn't make decent torque (chipped) until 3000 rpm. The DSG helps dramatically in making power available since it is so easy to shift with the paddles, but it is still plenty strong enough without a downshift. I am also amazed how the 2.0T+DSG achieve surprisingly good gas mileage.

Back when the A3 was new in the US, Road & Track tested A3s with both engines and the 2.0T was slightly quicker than the 3.2 Quattro. I believe their tested gas mileage was 4-5 mpg better for the 2.0T, much like the EPA estimates. Even with a rack for two kayaks on my car, the gas mileage is typically 23-25 mpg every tank. (I get almost 24 mpg on long drives with a 17' kayak!) Before I had the rack mounted full-time, I'd get 25-27/tank.

As far as understeer, a beefier rear anti-sway bar helps significantly, and the lighter weight of the FWD 2.0T gives an agile, fun feel. Quattro would be nice, but four Dunlop Wintersports on the FWD work extremely well for winter driving here in the Pacific NW.

 

Much of the power from the chipped 2.0T would be unusable on the FWD A3 given you will be spinning the wheels all the time.

The 3.2 provides better response, more even power delivery, which people might perceive as slower given it does not give you the surge feeling from the turbos (which is not actually faster).

 

Chirping in. I have an 06 2.0T DSG and I keep records of my mileage and fuel consumption. Over the past 3yrs 3 months I have had it the average gas mileage has been 28.6mpg I have had long drives that I actual got 36 and some were it was only 30. Also just to let you know I do not have a light foot. I have owned a VR6 (which is the 3.2) and I like my 2.0T better for its MPG's and tunning ability to give higher power torque numbers.

 

If you don't mind putting some serious coin into the car to make it go faster, get the 3.2. If you only want to spend a little bit of money for some improvements go for the 2.0T.

 

I just got the 2.0 and love it, there is no reason to get the 3.2 unless you can get if for the same price. You can mod the 2.0 to get it to 250HP for little money. True, the front wheel will spin from time to time, but that's usually only on unpaved road, or climbing a steep slope. I am amazed at my little 2.0 turbo, the things haul some major a$$ for a 4 banger. Unless you got tons of $$$ and drive constantly drive over 100mph, stick with the 2.0, you will be glad you did, you can always mod/customize it with the $12K you save in sticker price.

 

Congratulations! And yes the 2.0T FSI is a hard engine to beat. It was voted top engine 3 or 4 years in a row. The A3 is lighter than my A4 but I am still impressed with the acceleration and performance of this little 4 cyl. beast!

 

Remember, the FWD 2.0T was as quick as the 3.2 on paper. REMEMBER, that the 3.2 has QUATTRO which adds substantial amount of weight and the 2.0T's now have QUATTRO as well, the ones originally tested vs the 3.2 did not.

Personally, I don't like the 2.0T (having owned an A4 2.0T 2005.5). I much prefer the 3.2 for it's super smooth power delivery and engine sound. Plus, I needed AWD when I purchased so the 2.0T was not even an option.

Go for the 3.2 I promise you won't regret it. Plus, it has slightly nicer finishes and better standard features.

Remember, the 2.0T now w/ quattro is heavier and slower than the 2.0T everyone in this forum is always talking that was just FWD which in my opinion is a huge disadvantage. If you're buying an audi you should get AWD IMHO.

 

I went from a 2.0T to a 3.2 and haven't regretted it one bit. I prefer the smooth power delivery, low end grunt, and exhaust of the 3.2 with AWD. Not to mention, it came with a nicer package.

Edit: Note I say it "came" with a nicer package. The 3.2 A3 model is no longer available. So you'd probably have to find a used one, or an older new one still sitting on a lot somewhere.