martin275 Posted September 19, 2006 Report Share Posted September 19, 2006 It's still too expensive for a 3 door hatchback with a '2.0 4-pot' though, whichever way you dress it up. This is a thread criticising the S3 and everyone is entitled to their opinion (in my opinion!). Do you have to own a certain car to be interested in the S3 and therefore be allowed to have an opinion??? You really have to have severe Audi blindness to think the S3 is worth this sort of money. I agree that it would make a lot of sense at £23-24k as an S Line+, but I can think of a number of cars I’d rather have for £30k. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leave1 Posted September 19, 2006 Report Share Posted September 19, 2006 You can buy a low mileage M3 for the price of a new S3. I know what I'd rather have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A2ULP Posted September 19, 2006 Report Share Posted September 19, 2006 [ QUOTE ] I think you're missing my point, you have no interest in the S3 so why don't you go and discuss A2's or Smart cars, and leave us who are genuinely interested in the S3 to discuss it. [/ QUOTE ] Ha ha, my Dad's bigger than your Dad etc. etc. I am interested in the concept of a hatchback with a great engine, fluent chassis and a wonderful sense of occassion... ...perhaps you're right, I shouldn't be discussing an over-tarted shopper hopper with an agricultural engine* and image over substance *Yes, I do have experience of the 2.0T in 200PS format and to describe it as a tedious pile of junk is not being unfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamD Posted September 19, 2006 Report Share Posted September 19, 2006 [ QUOTE ] *Yes, I do have experience of the 2.0T in 200PS format and to describe it as a tedious pile of junk is not being unfair. [/ QUOTE ] I think a fair few mkv GTI owners would disagree with that remark, myself included (as an ex-owner). I never found the engine to be remotely tedious, it always delivered when I asked it too, both in terms of performance and economy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallachie Posted September 19, 2006 Report Share Posted September 19, 2006 [ QUOTE ] It's still too expensive for a 3 door hatchback with a '2.0 4-pot' though, whichever way you dress it up. This is a thread criticising the S3 and everyone is entitled to their opinion (in my opinion!). Do you have to own a certain car to be interested in the S3 and therefore be allowed to have an opinion??? You really have to have severe Audi blindness to think the S3 is worth this sort of money. I agree that it would make a lot of sense at £23-24k as an S Line+, but I can think of a number of cars I’d rather have for £30k. [/ QUOTE ] I'd rather have a £30k S3, than a 130i M Sport mate. They are over priced for what you get, spec up a new 130i M Sport to that of a standard S3 and you'll realise it's not that expensive after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martin275 Posted September 19, 2006 Report Share Posted September 19, 2006 [ QUOTE ] I'd rather have a £30k S3, than a 130i M Sport mate. They are over priced for what you get, spec up a new 130i M Sport to that of a standard S3 and you'll realise it's not that expensive after all. [/ QUOTE ] Now who doesn't know what he's talking about I could go and buy our 130 now (leather, pro stereo etc) for about £25k and all I'd really need to add to get to S3 spec would be Xenons. I'm not completely familiar with the S3 spec, but you would need to add (at least) parking sensors, armrest, interior light pack and load (storage?)pack to get it up to 130i M Sport spec. So less than £26k for a 5 door hatchback with a 3.0 litre straight 6.....how exactly is that overpriced compared to an S3????? I wouldn't choose an S3 if they were exactly the same price if I'm honest, because I think it looks dull and the sound it makes wouldn’t even compare. Seriously, the 'feel good factor' you get from a nice engine shouldn't be underestimated. However, don't get me wrong, I can see why people would prefer the S3...this is just my opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A2ULP Posted September 19, 2006 Report Share Posted September 19, 2006 [ QUOTE ] I think a fair few mkv GTI owners would disagree with that remark, myself included (as an ex-owner). I never found the engine to be remotely tedious, it always delivered when I asked it too, both in terms of performance and economy... [/ QUOTE ] I didn't have it long enough to get the economy side of things sorted, but I won't deny it was quick. But once I had given it the berries from 25 through to 60 in 2nd and 40 through to 90 in 3rd a few times I soon got bored. Sadly, I felt it to be a totally character-free zone which is how I 'enjoy' my engines - people will no doubt laugh at my puny 75bhp diesel but, like our smart, I never ever tire of the 3-pot thrum. To me, it always sounds great and that makes me feel good Character or ultra-smooth is the order of the day and I don't think the 2.0T does either especially well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallachie Posted September 19, 2006 Report Share Posted September 19, 2006 I like the 130i M Sport, don't get me wrong - I'm only winding you up with the ! However, if the new S3 handles like I hope it will, I would happily pay the extra £4k for a car with the Quattro system. With Northern Irish weather, Quattro is well worthwhile! My current S3 has a serious tendency to understeer, so I'm hoping the new one isn't as bad. The 130i argument is a valid one, but between the two it would have to be the Audi for me. Now if a 135i does appear, that will be a different story! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martin275 Posted September 19, 2006 Report Share Posted September 19, 2006 I don't have a problem with you preferring the S3 at all, horses for courses and all that! I'd happily pay an extra £4k for a decent engine, but thanks to BMW I can have that and save £4k!!! The only problem with the 135 is that the new twin turbo engine is based on the direct injection 3.0 litre, not the current engine, so doesn't sound as good (particularly on startup). However, if BMW do launch a 135i M Sport it should cost about the same as an S3 (based on the 3 series costs) and that will definately make the S3 look overpriced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallachie Posted September 19, 2006 Report Share Posted September 19, 2006 [ QUOTE ] However, if BMW do launch a 135i M Sport it should cost about the same as an S3 (based on the 3 series costs) and that will definately make the S3 look overpriced. [/ QUOTE ] At least we agree on something! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seadweller Posted September 19, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 19, 2006 [ QUOTE ] You can't really think it's "a sub-standard vehicle" though, do you? [/ QUOTE ] Sub standard vehicle no, sub standard S3 yes. But hey, I have not even seen or heard one. I am not even following events that much other than looking on here. But my gut instinct to date is that I would not want a new S3 on my drive, sitting next to my neighbours bog standard Nissan 350Z which looks and sounds awsome at a fraction of the cost. I had a lot of issues with my old S3, but I could have put them all right for 8-10k and be left with a car that at the moment I would prefer to a new S3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garypaul Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 [ QUOTE ] Character or ultra-smooth is the order of the day and I don't think the 2.0T does either especially well. [/ QUOTE ] Seems like a few folks disagree with you: - Engine of the Year Award for Turbo FSI unit A panel of 61 respected motoring journalists from 29 countries has honoured the Audi 2.0-litre Turbo FSI petrol engine with an ‘International Engine of The Year Award’ for the second successive year. The first series production engine to combine direct petrol injection and its positive impact on fuel efficiency with the performance-maximising benefits of turbo charging was praised in the judges’ summation for its ‘good economy, great sound and even better responsiveness’. It was described as ‘a fantastic all-round engine, delivering an excellent blend of performance, refinement and efficiency that is suitable for luxury sedans, sport coupes and everything else on four wheels”. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Character or ultra-smooth is the order of the day and I don't think the 2.0T does either especially well. [/ QUOTE ] Seems like a few folks disagree with you: - Engine of the Year Award for Turbo FSI unit A panel of 61 respected motoring journalists from 29 countries has honoured the Audi 2.0-litre Turbo FSI petrol engine with an ‘International Engine of The Year Award’ for the second successive year. The first series production engine to combine direct petrol injection and its positive impact on fuel efficiency with the performance-maximising benefits of turbo charging was praised in the judges’ summation for its ‘good economy, great sound and even better responsiveness’. It was described as ‘a fantastic all-round engine, delivering an excellent blend of performance, refinement and efficiency that is suitable for luxury sedans, sport coupes and everything else on four wheels”. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, it's great for a 4-cylinder but it's still only a 4-cylinder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blix Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 i feel like some people on this forum are hoping in desperation that all the negative reports the new s3 is getting will turn out to be untrue and by attacking anyone who dares to show their disapointment in audis latest incarnation will make it all a bad dream .the fact is the long awaited successor to an all time classic has fallen short of the mark because audi have not given it as much thought as other cars in there s range.the styling should hve made this car stand out from the a3 more and there choice of engine should have been the 3.2 and to make it nearly 3k dearer than an r32 makes the golf the bargain of the century Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarMad Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 I couldn't disagree more. Audi has change approach a lot from the days of the first S3. The relationship of the S4 to the RS4 shows that they aren't not making such a big song and dance about the S models anymore. As for the 3.2 - 2.0T debate. The 3.2 is a very old engine in car terms now and will soon be put out to pasture. Its heavy, not very economical but yes does play a good tune. I think going for a 2.0T 4cylinder gives the power and makes the car lighter to boot = better handling car if its set up right. The original S3 didn't have good reviews. I had a Lexus at the time and it beat the S3 in Performance car of the year when it was in the test. The S3 had plenty wrong with it at the time, yes it has turned out to be an iconic car but its far from perfect. For all those getting the new motor. Am sure it will be great, feed back when you have had a test drive. Interested to here what people say. Oh and to the person who said the 2.0T is not smooth or has charachter .. rubbish. Read my review below for my views. No its no straight 6 but for a 4 cylinder is a cracker of an engine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark88 Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 [ QUOTE ] i feel like some people on this forum are hoping in desperation that all the negative reports the new s3 is getting will turn out to be untrue and by attacking anyone who dares to show their disapointment in audis latest incarnation will make it all a bad dream .the fact is the long awaited successor to an all time classic has fallen short of the mark because audi have not given it as much thought as other cars in there s range.the styling should hve made this car stand out from the a3 more and there choice of engine should have been the 3.2 [/ QUOTE ] S4 has even lazier styling than the S3. They didn't even bother to change the front bumper on that one did they? I was hoping for big arches etc etc but I guess when you look at the other current S cars, none of which have differed that much from their A models brothers. The engine is another matter. But to me the performance of 0-60 in 5.7 secs is pretty good. Still haven't made my mind up yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blix Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 [ QUOTE ] Audi has change approach a lot from the days of the first S3. The relationship of the S4 to the RS4 shows that they aren't not making such a big song and dance about the S models anymore. exactly my point if audi arent making a song and dance about their s range why should we pay a premium to buy one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallachie Posted September 21, 2006 Report Share Posted September 21, 2006 [ QUOTE ] exactly my point if audi arent making a song and dance about their s range why should we pay a premium to buy one [/ QUOTE ] It's not exactly much more expensive that the current top of the range A3 3.2 S-line....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickfrog Posted September 21, 2006 Report Share Posted September 21, 2006 " I had a Lexus at the time and it beat the S3 in Performance car of the year when it was in the test. The S3 had plenty wrong with it at the time, yes it has turned out to be an iconic car but its far from perfect." Performance car of the year ? Lexus ? Was it "The Chippenham Echo performance car of the year" award ? The S3 had plenty wrong with it at the time = what exactly apart from big understeer ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A2ULP Posted September 21, 2006 Report Share Posted September 21, 2006 [ QUOTE ] It's not exactly much more expensive that the current top of the range A3 3.2 S-line....... [/ QUOTE ] But it doesn't get a proper engine where as the 3.2...does [ QUOTE ] Seems like a few folks disagree with you: - Engine of the Year Award for Turbo FSI unit A panel of 61 respected motoring journalists from 29 countries has honoured the Audi 2.0-litre Turbo FSI petrol engine with an ‘International Engine of The Year Award’ for the second successive year. The first series production engine to combine direct petrol injection and its positive impact on fuel efficiency with the performance-maximising benefits of turbo charging was praised in the judges’ summation for its ‘good economy, great sound and even better responsiveness’. It was described as ‘a fantastic all-round engine, delivering an excellent blend of performance, refinement and efficiency that is suitable for luxury sedans , sport coupes and everything else on four wheels”. [/ QUOTE ] I was almost taken in until I saw the Americanism I'd like to re-iterate my personal experience of this engine is less than impressive. When Audi bring back the suggested 2.5 5-pot in N/A, turbo and twin turbo formats then I might be up for a bit of 5-pot loving, but you can keep the new S3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarMad Posted September 21, 2006 Report Share Posted September 21, 2006 [ QUOTE ] " I had a Lexus at the time and it beat the S3 in Performance car of the year when it was in the test. The S3 had plenty wrong with it at the time, yes it has turned out to be an iconic car but its far from perfect." Performance car of the year ? Lexus ? Was it "The Chippenham Echo performance car of the year" award ? The S3 had plenty wrong with it at the time = what exactly apart from big understeer ? [/ QUOTE ] Suggest you read again. At what point did I say that is won the Performance Car of the year Award. No it bead ... I'll repeat it again if you missed it beat the S3 in Performance Car of the Year magazine (Now the same team running EVO) in the yearly guess what Perfomance Car of the year shoot out. I've still got a copy if you want me to dig it out and tell you want it said but lapping Oulton Park the venue for the test that year it was 3/4 places higher score wise than the S3. Oh and what was wrong. Woolly steering, bad understeer, brakes that barely lasted a lap let alone a few, engine had no soul, car didn't excite... the list went on can't remember them all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam_S3 Posted September 21, 2006 Report Share Posted September 21, 2006 Now you added the word 'magazine' it makes more sense! But your original post sounds like it beat the S3 in 'Performance car of the year'... Which I think 99.9% of people would assume to be some kind of award! And as for the S3 engine having no soul?!!!! Ha! That discards that review then! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulyb Posted September 21, 2006 Report Share Posted September 21, 2006 S3 engines don't exactly sound great in all honesty though. Plenty of torque but unless you chip it, the power tails off at the top end of the rev band and starts sounding rough. Mine used to sound like a tractor when you started it as well - which used to confuse no end of people ;-) Now my old Accord Type R used to have character, if you didn't mind driving everywhere at 6000 revs that is... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billy2shots Posted September 21, 2006 Report Share Posted September 21, 2006 Guys i own a mkV GTI "2tfsi" and be under no illusion the S3 will sound like a tractor when its not going anywhere. It is a great flexible lump if not the be all and end all regards noise. Oh and its this engine in this form that won engine of the year, which will be a bit different to the S3. If you think about it most rice burners use the same engine in different states of tune and they are all very different. The new Leon has the GTI engine with 3 different outputs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blix Posted September 21, 2006 Report Share Posted September 21, 2006 [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] exactly my point if audi arent making a song and dance about their s range why should we pay a premium to buy one [/ QUOTE ] It's not exactly much more expensive that the current top of the range A3 3.2 S-line....... [/ QUOTE ] but it is as ive already said nearly 3k dearer than an r32 and the r32 has had rave reviews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now