Hi every1,

Basically, I've got a 15-month old A3 1.6 Auto. Great car and everything but I kinda regret not getting something a bit more powerful. Now, because I'm fussy, Im considering looking at a new car. Firstly I was looking at the VW Golf R32, but because I like the look of the A3 so much, I was wondering how the 2.0T A3 and the 3.2 quattro A3 perform in comparison? I'm no good with manuals (stick shift), so ideally i'd have to get a DSG gearbox (which the R32 has). Which is why I'm not mentioning the new S3 either as thats stick shift only.

What are the main differences between the 2.0t and the 3.2 and how does it compare to the R32? Sorry for such newbie questions - I just want more power and I ain't gonna get it out of an auto 1.6! Comments and advice very much appreciated!

PS I'm talking about the 3-door version.. that's what I have at the moment

 

get a 2.0T and chip it! it'll outrun a stock R32 any day of the week and twice on sundays.

 

Agreed, 2.0T has way more potential than a boring ol' V6

 

Key word potential^^^^ if your even remotely thinking of modding the car on a performance level, the turbo will be the way to go.[8D]

 

The 2.0T FSI offers the flexability of chipping the engine to get more HP easily. The A3 3.2 or VW R32 (same engine 3.2 V6) have more HP along with quattro, but you will notice the immediate power with barely stepping on the accelerator with the 2.0T. There is almost no turbo lag with 2.0T A3. Here in the states we only get a five-door sportback, but it sure is nice looking. The 2.0T combined with DSG is very smooth. As a touring car the 2.0T is much more popular*. Speedwise stock is comparing 2.0T which does 0 - 100 km/h 6.7 secs versus 3.2 with 5.8 secs.

*EPA 2.0T = 25/32 3.2 = 21/29 Even though the ratings are close, the V6 drinks far more petrol then the 2.0T while doing city driving. I easily get 25-26 in city, and get 32-33 on road after fully breaking in A3.

 

thanks for the help guys..

so JohnS1, you're saying the 2.0T does 0 - 100 km/h in 6.7 secs and the 3.2 in 5.8 secs stock? What kind of figures are people getting with a chipped 2.0T??

Better than 12.7 secs for my auto 1.6 lol!

I would buy brand new under warranty, so wouldnt want to void that if I'm chipping it??

As for petrol - I live in the middle east, so I don't really mind the mpg figures!

Oh, and the 2.0T has a DSG option i assume??

 

Yes the 2.0T FSI model has a S Tronic (DSG) option.

Speed wise a modded A3 2.0T easily matches or beats a 3.2 V6 in performance. I'm sure there are a lot of members here that can quote you their performance numbers.

 

Where do you get 5.8 secs for the 3.2? everywhere I look, it says 6 seconds +

 

Per Audi A3 3.2 online spec's

Acceleration 0-100 km/h 5.9 seconds (I was off by .1 sec) and this is a conservative spec. BTW I have seen the 2.0T vary from 6.3 to 6.8 sec's on reviews/ tests, so the 3.2 ought to do better then 6 seconds.

 

This is odd.

The numbers in my (UK, 2006 model year) A3 owner's manual read:

2.0T (147kW) with DSG 0-100km/h in 7.0 seconds
3.2 (184kW) with DSG and Quattro 0-100km/h in 6.3 (There's no number for a FWD 3.2)

The manual equivalents are each a bit slower. The UK website agrees (more or less) with the owner's manual, but are completely different than the US web site. The power and torque numbers are the same for the V6 - 250hp/236lb/ft and yet the performanace figures are completely different... The US site claims 5.9 and the UK one, 6.4. The UK car is limited to 155 as opposed to 130 and supposedly does an extra 10mpg although this is would be explained by the difference in US/Imperial gallons, if it weren't for the urban consumption figures, which are the same....

The numbers for the 2.0T with DSG are pretty much the same at 6.7 (US) vs 6.9 (UK). I;d love to know why the US version is slightly quicker as the power outputs are the same on both web sites.

Audi UK Web site

Audi's USA web site also appears be a bit broken - the back-end database field names are displayed instead of the descriptions, but only on the 3.2 etch specs page.... So - who knows how quick they are - manufacturers are known for being conservative these days with the perfromance figures, but my 2.0T/DSG did feel like about 7.0 seconds before I uploaded the Superchips map.

Worth noting that the 3.2 is 155kg heavier at a kerb weight of 1640kg. This will affect braking and cornering too.

I found my 2.0T/DSG very smooth with almost no turbo lag, until I changed the map for the Superchips one. Now it has bags of torque, but there's quite a bit of lag on WOT runs through the gears. On balance, I prefer the extra shove