Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Simonl

3.2 WHY OH WHY!!!!!

44 posts in this topic

I've just read Autocar and yet again the 3.2 Quattro has been shamed by the Likes of BMW (330), Suburu (Impreza), EVO, Vauxhall (Monaro) and wait for it (this is painfull) an MG ROVER!!!!!!

"They say it is not sporty enough".... i am somewhat confused

I have only driven a 3.2 once and thought it was amazing.

I have driven 330ci, 325ci and 320ci BMW's and came away underwhelmed from all of them. I thought the A3 went like a missile and stuck to the road like glue. So why does it get such bad press???

I would be interested to know what cars you have all SPANKED AND SHAMED whilst driving your 3.2's (especailly BM's), because I live in the real world and don't get to test my cars on the test circuit in Anglesea.

LONG LIVE THE 3.2!!!!!!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 3.2 may feel good on first aquaintance, but I guarantee that the more time you spend with the BM', the more you will find out and appreciate the greater depth of it's abilities.

The sad fact is that time and time again, Audi's come up short on driving dynamics, european motoring press illustrate this everytime they test a new Audi. This is interpreted by some as "BMW bias" but the fact is that of the major manufacturers, as a complete package, BMW's are nigh on unbeatable.

Audi is also hindered by being front wheel drive. Until VW invests in allowing Audi to develop bespoke RWD chassis, they will always be the bridesmaids.

Dont mistake grip for a good driving experience, you can put massive rubber on an average car and get lots of grip.

Audi's have very poor steering, brakes and do not have the fine balance of comfort and sportiness (usually being one or the other) that BM's have.

While recently, A4's, 6's and 8's have improved dramatically, the A3 is still saddled with a Golf chassis when it really should have better.

Wait 'till the 1 series comes out to see the response that gets with regards RWD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, the A3 3.2 is a good car, but I have to agree with what they say. I don't honestly think it's the car it could be (and before you say it, yes I have properly tested one). But maybe thats because Audi have plans for a good S3 & don't want the standard A3 3.2 to be too much of a spanker??

Ever driven an R32?? That (possibly frustratingly) shows the potential of the A3 3.2. I'm not trying to raise the whole Golf is better than the A3 debate, I for one as an R32 owner strongly believe the A3 is a better built & finished car, it should be, it's an Audi after all. I just don't think the A3 3.2 has been built to be as "Sporty" as people think. But then that beggars the question, why put the A3 up against the 330ci in a test??

Al.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

I have driven 330ci, 325ci and 320ci BMW's

[/ QUOTE ]

You need to try the 'Sport' models, they offer a much superior driving experience, I'm on my 3rd, nuff said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure I will get slated here but as a previous S3 owner then an A4 cabriolet. I tried the new A3 in sport guise and it was quite poor. I then tried my current car the SEAT Leon Cupra R and cant help thinking that the new Golf & A3 are lacking behind in the steering, brakes and chasis department, all very odd if SEAT can do it admittedly brand leading components on top of the VAG supplied parts.

I want to move back to Audi and have high hopes for the new S3

AZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you cant compare a hot hatch with a 330... they arent in the same group. a hatch back will never be as a good as coupes for overall sporty characteristics.

but if you wish to compare performance alone, im sure the A3 3.2 DSG with its quattro would win on a track happily.

oh and a 3.2 A3 is far cheaper than the BMW 330ci grin.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I owned a 325ci Sport for 8 months last year and just couldn't get on with it, I had to sell it and lost 6 grand!!!!!!ouch. Don't get me wrong, it could go round corners and had one hell of a chassis, but i found it slow, big and heavy and it felt like you had to thrash the arse off it to get it to go anywhere. My test drive in a 330ci was much the same, just found it heavy and the engine un-responsive below 4000 revs.

looked amazing though, which for me wasn't a good thing - i don't like drawing attention to myself.

The A3 3.2 i found fast, nimble, responsive and fun... and the chassis was well, stiff enough. But hey, each to their own. Looking forward to spanking the odd 330 though!!!! ;-)

xx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

The A3 3.2 i found fast, nimble, responsive and fun... and the chassis was well, stiff enough. But hey, each to their own. Looking forward to spanking the odd 330 though!!!! ;-)

xx

[/ QUOTE ]

Niether car is remotely 'fast'. I wouldn't bother racing anything in my BM' as I don't see the point, same with the A3, performance is average.

Drive a trully fast car and you put performance into perspective.

My P1 was a case in point, & I'm sure Bison and Lagoo would agree as (once) TVR owners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've driven a Carrera 2 and it was mega fast, but i still wouldn't call the 3.2 Quattro Average, it's a fast car as is a 330ci, as is an S3

M3's, Carrera's and Ferrari's are in a different league i admit, but that is the 'supercar' league.

A 3.2 Sport would certainly give a Boxster S a run for it's money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree with TYL. You can't compare the A3 (even the top of the range model) with an Impreza or an EVO. These are road going versions of rally cars! When was the last time AutoExpress saw an A3 in the welsh hills?!

"Oh it's got 4WD, lets lump it together with the Evo and Impreza"

I think it just shows a lack of knowledge on their part.

Chris

PS First post!! I ordered my 3.2 S-Line yesterday, but I'm still undecided about the colour! Look forward to contributing more soon!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

but i still wouldn't call the 3.2 Quattro Average, it's a fast car as is a 330ci, as is an S3

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately I would, your average hot hatch can now get to 60 in around 7 secs, so a 330ci is nothing special, as is the 3.2.

Peformance and my definition of 'fast' these days has moved on somewhat and I would certainly not describe my car as fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well i suppose that is your opinion and i'm sure all ferrari, porsche and TVR drivers would agree with you.

I on the other hand think any car that can make 60 in sub-7 seconds and has a 'limited' top speed of 155mph, constitutes fast.

god- i remember the days when I considered my Nova SR to be FAST!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with LeMan, as a daily driver I wouldn't want to go any faster than an S3, 3.2 or 330i...I'd be up a tree in next to no time. Just because there a more cars capable of doing low 0-60s doesn't necessarily mean that the cars are therefore then slow. If you are looking for the fastest sprint then yes but most of us just want to nip safely past slower cars on country lanes with a huge grin on our face. All of the above do that.

Just my £0.02 ices_blah.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read my post here Gutted

I was very dissapointed with the A3 3.2.. i hope it's better with dsg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree, I think a manual 3.2 Quattro Sport is an awesome car, especailly if you need space and seats for 4 arses

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had many fast audi's.. an S6, an RS6 and a V6 TT.. and seeing as my mate works for the local audi dealership I have driven just about everything they have made and make now...

The reason I wrote that piece as I did is because I was sooo dissapoined with the 3.2 V6.. it's not a BAD car, just a long way from what is COULD have been..

I was all ready to slap my money down and have one, but after driving it I knew that it wouldn't suit me.. I drive hard and fast and at speed I would go as far as to say the A3 is dangerous.. the back end steps out far to early beacuse of the lack of weight at the rear .. esp under braking..

I totally agree with the mags.. this car was supposed to be the S3 , but i reckon that Audi realised that they couldn't get away with branding that car 'S'.. so we still are having to wait!

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Dave - Got any jobs going in Newquay???

You lucky bastard!

Understand what you're saying, i drive fast, but not hard. Would love an Rs6, but there is price to consider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

Audi's have very poor steering, brakes and do not have the fine balance of comfort and sportiness (usually being one or the other) that BM's have.

[/ QUOTE ]

We've been there before, but that's a load of BS. Quattro surpasses BMW when it comes to handling (and I've had my share of BMW's). The Brembo brakes are superb, better than any std. BMW setup. Furthermore, my car still feels secure and planted at speeds where most cars have to let go. And as to a "fine balance of comfort and sportiness"; I just did over 6K kms throughout Europe, more often than not at very high speed. No BMW (or any other car) ever offered me this stunning combination of comfort and handling. After 8 or so hrs at the wheel I'd still feel fresh when I arrived.

If you confuse (easily correctable) oversteer with 'sportiness', then BMW is for you. If you want superb (high speed) handling without drama, get an Audi Quattro (S).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

If you confuse (easily correctable) oversteer with 'sportiness', then BMW is for you. If you want superb (high speed) handling without drama, get an Audi Quattro (S).

[/ QUOTE ]

Summed it up in one.. if you want lary sideways stuff then go for the rear wheel drive BMW...

If you want secure predictable handling then go for the audi..

My preference is the Audi everytime cool.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

I totally agree with the mags.. this car was supposed to be the S3 , but i reckon that Audi realised that they couldn't get away with branding that car 'S'.. so we still are having to wait!

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm afraid I totally disagree.

We all know that an S model is not just a normal model with more power. They enhance the car to give it a more sporting feel, better handling, braking etc.

The 3.2 A3 felt to me simply as an A3 with a V6...in fact what it is. It was never meant to be a S model.

If you want more proof consider the following. Have Audi ever launched an S derivative within the first 12 months of a new model?

S and RS are always reserved as a way to boost sales as the models get older. All manufacturers do this. The A3 3.2 is not or was never intended to be an S. The magazine may have thought it would be sporty as it followed on from the R32 featuring the same engine but I think this was there misunderstanding of the product placement rather than an Audi plan.

Not wishing to argue...just posting my thoughts. wink.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Sven but every motoring mag would dissagree, as has been proved time after time after time, but peoples opinions differ.

Me, I'll side with the mags going on my own experiences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the above posts from Dave and Sven-

The review is the usual story which is rehashed every time a fast Audi is compared to a fast BMW - sure the BMW has better 'handling' ie rear wheel drive based oversteer on demand coupled with more responsive steering as the front wheels are not hindered by also having to drive the car.

BUT - there is more to handling than that and there is much more to a complete car than just handling. Time after time car magazines rate a BMW higher than an Audi just because this small part of the repertoire is dealt with differently.

First handling - I have had a rwd BMW and fwd A3 1.8T and now an S3 so can comment from experience. The BMW has better steering granted , but the 'nice' oversteer handling is only nice on a track or if you deliberately provoke it - otherwise it is one of the most frightening things which can happen in a car , and I certainly wouldn't pretend to be a good enough driver to correct it fast enough every time. I much prefer the solid 'boring' Audi handling traits which will help keep you between the hedges much after a rwd BMW had gone thru' the hedge backwards because of its 'nice' handling. This is true in the dry but much more so in the wet.

Secondly , on to the complete package - the Audi has a much nicer interior than a 3 series , is arguably better built , is much newer - the 3 series is getting on now and the looks are becoming tired , whereas the A3 is new and fresh. The A3 gets a better evaluation in euro NCAP safety , and is a much less frequent sight on the roads. In terms of image , the Audi says different things about the driver than a 3 series - how often have you been cut up by an Audi driver as compared to a machiavellian BMW driver?

So in conclusion - apart from 'better' handling , the Audi wins every time , it is a pity the car magazines evaluate only handling!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's not just car mags, the press in general tends to adopt one point of view, and then stick to that no matter what. They want convince us their *opinion* is the be all and end all, and so they keep rehashing the same BS, with their very first lesson firmly in mind: "if you repeat something often enough people will start believing it"

I for one am not one to believe something just because it's printed. Call me a sceptic... wink.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would trust the view of someone who drives the majority of cars which come on sale.

I realise this site is geared towards Audi (remember where it came from) and therefore there will be a pro-Audi view, same on Scoobynet, RSOC etc.

I was always Audi biased as my S3 was the first car I bought that I had truly lusted after, after that, Audi was my favorite brand.

Over the years though, as I have driven and more exposure to different cars, I have formed my own opinions about the deficiencies of Audi's. This opinion has been formed independently of the views of motoring jounalists.

The fact that they have the same view merely says to me that there really is something in what I believe, and believe me, I have no biased opinion, only my own experiences.

Asfor the 4WD v's RWD, I WOULD prefer 4WD, but the driving experience of EVO's and in particlular, Subaru's, shows that 4WD cars can have excellent steering and fluid chassis, Audi has not managed to do this.

Drive a new STi and you'll see that the chassis manages brilliantly what Audi struggles to do time after time, to be sporty and supple at the same time.

Don't take my world for it, try it for yourself, I guarantee you'd feel the same way,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Audi A3 3.2 Quattro £24,350

BMW 330ci Sport £31,500

I would hardly call it a fair test. Lets wait for the £30k S3 shall we.

As for what the mags think, well for those of you who say they trust their judgement...

...the Rover V8 was the outright winner. (any takers)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0