richie_b Posted January 28, 2007 Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 Im looking to get a new car in the next few months, and natuarlly assumed i go for the new S3 (being an old S3 driver :- and i love it). However, im very tempted with the 3.2 V6, mainly as ideally i would prefer the practicallity of the sportback - and im sure it cant be that much slower?!?!?! What do people think on here, is the S3 that much better and faster than the previous range topping 3.2 ? ... i was also tempted with the 2TFSI also for better fuel economy and cheaper?!?!?! help, advise and opinions required! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calm Chris Posted January 28, 2007 Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 The 3.2 will cost 25% more fuel each year, that is based on not using the S3 loud pedal 100% of the time. The 3.2 will average 20-23 mpg as a CONSTANT, hopefully the S3 will be 26-29 mpg constant. If you were going down the less money road the dilema is that the S3 will have to be a new £30k spend, I understand that 1 y.o. 3.2 with full kit is now circa £20k, saving £10k for getting the keys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordie1973 Posted January 28, 2007 Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 I had a similar issue with the 2TFSI vs the 3.2, but was won over by the noise of the V6 - Also I liked the fact I could have the DSG and Quattro wih the 3.2. Yes the 3.2 is a bit thirstier - But think of the money you save vs little or no discount of the S3.(I got 12% of the price by bringing a web offer printout!) My car came loaded with the bits I wanted it, for around £3K below the STANDARD price of an S3! Yes I'll get to 60 in 1 sec more, and may have a bit more weight over the nose - but I'm not one for hooning around tracks anyway... One other need I had was to look a bit stealthy - The car had to be left on the road overnight, so I didn't wish any little oiks paying it special attention - hence the debadge and non S line spec. For an S3 you may need an armed guard in my pervious post code.... So in summary for me: 2T vs V6 = V6 due to noise and DSG and Quattro. V6 vs S3 = V6 due to cost, noise, DSG availability and nickability (in my area anyway!) Hope this sort of helps..... Let us know how you get on! G Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cupramax Posted January 28, 2007 Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 I'd be very woried about what the chancellor is going to do about high emissions cars at the next budget. Am getting very twitchy about mine, the S3 engine is still below the top threshold so that would be my choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamiekip Posted January 28, 2007 Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 [ QUOTE ] I'd be very woried about what the chancellor is going to do about high emissions cars at the next budget. Am getting very twitchy about mine, the S3 engine is still below the top threshold so that would be my choice. [/ QUOTE ] That's exactly what made me cancel my order on a new 3.2TT and switch to the S3. These green taxes are going to start crippling high emissions vehicles.... at least around London! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richie_b Posted January 28, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 cheers guys for your views... Its company money so will be brand new, for my own personal penies i think i would stick with my old S3, nothing really wrong with it - shame to see it go really... but you cant knock a new car Looks like a toss up between the s3 or the 2tfsi sportback then i guess, speed vs practicality Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woppum Posted January 28, 2007 Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 What about the R32? That would easily get my vote over all the cars listed and that comes in a 5 door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_d Posted January 28, 2007 Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 [ QUOTE ] What about the R32? That would easily get my vote over all the cars listed and that comes in a 5 door. [/ QUOTE ] IMHO, budget depending, the Audi is streets ahead of the Golf. I suffered a lot with mine (hence selling it so quickly), but then I was unlucky... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oli Posted January 28, 2007 Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 [ QUOTE ] the Audi is streets ahead of the Golf. [/ QUOTE ] How do you work that out, I think that you were just unlucky with yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_d Posted January 28, 2007 Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] the Audi is streets ahead of the Golf. [/ QUOTE ] How do you work that out, I think that you were just unlucky with yours. [/ QUOTE ] Sorry, should have qualified that a bit more. IMHO the steering and "fun" factor with the GTI was better than the Audi. However, the build quality of the Audi is much better. On my Golf I could push the dash in by about 1cm (around the a/c controls) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oli Posted January 28, 2007 Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 Ah ha, I see what you mean, the cabin on the Audi does seem to oooooze a bit more quality than the Golf, but I have been more than happy with both of my MKV's. My R32 has been back to the dealer for; steering rack, gearbox, discs and pads, rear wiper motor, ski hatch latch, n/ seatbelt, tailgate alignment and osf drop link - Not good I know, but just jumping back behind the wheel gives me a maasive grin. This is why I buy a car under warranty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_d Posted January 28, 2007 Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 Just realised that I didn't actually answer the original question... Obviously I'm biased, but I would go for the S3. However, it's very subjective, bit like the GTI vs R32 debate. Obviously the V6 will sound better, but I think the extra differences (suspension, brakes etc) make the S3 the "better" car... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gizze Posted January 28, 2007 Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 S3, take both out and you will soon decide. Also you need to look at residuals after 3 years to compare real costs, on a £30k car you will get around £17k selling the S3 privately I would guess and £12, maybe £13k selling the 3.2, so not only does it cost more to run, but you loose an extra £4-5k over 3 years on the car as well. If you are financing it this will add £150 a month to the repayments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vertigo1 Posted January 28, 2007 Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 [ QUOTE ] Its company money so will be brand new [/ QUOTE ] You're going to run an S3 as a company car!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamiekip Posted January 28, 2007 Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Its company money so will be brand new [/ QUOTE ] You're going to run an S3 as a company car!? [/ QUOTE ] Why not.... I am! Company car doesn't always mean 30k miles a year! So with average mileage, I might as well enjoy what I drive! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S3Rob Posted January 28, 2007 Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 [ QUOTE ] Im looking to get a new car in the next few months, and natuarlly assumed i go for the new S3 (being an old S3 driver :- and i love it). However, im very tempted with the 3.2 V6, mainly as ideally i would prefer the practicallity of the sportback - and im sure it cant be that much slower?!?!?! What do people think on here, is the S3 that much better and faster than the previous range topping 3.2 ? ... i was also tempted with the 2TFSI also for better fuel economy and cheaper?!?!?! help, advise and opinions required! [/ QUOTE ] If you really want the 3.2 get an R32. It's a much better resolved package than the 3.2 Sportback IMO. But I wouldn't personally buy a 3.2 now. It's MPG is bad, no FSI, due to be dropped soon according to reports, heavy, susceptible to potential green taxes. That leaves the 2.0 TFSI. Depends how much you want to spend but have you looked at the new Cupra? Great car by all accounts. Having said that if you can afford an S3 it's the best thing for the money IMO. It's very rapid and COMFORTABLY quicker than the 3.2. My long term average is up to 27mpg and that's not driving slowly. Downside is the anodyne noise coming from the engine although it's good at revs. Remember the S3 is the halo model for VAG hatches for a reason. It's the best of them all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gizze Posted January 28, 2007 Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 I think a company car makes more sense if you are doing high mileage. If it is a company car I would definitely go S3, better car all round and easier on yoru pocket personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooker Posted January 29, 2007 Report Share Posted January 29, 2007 [ QUOTE ] S3, take both out and you will soon decide. Also you need to look at residuals after 3 years to compare real costs, on a £30k car you will get around £17k selling the S3 privately I would guess and £12, maybe £13k selling the 3.2, so not only does it cost more to run, but you loose an extra £4-5k over 3 years on the car as well. If you are financing it this will add £150 a month to the repayments. [/ QUOTE ] Gizze, Do you think the S3 will still be worth £17K after 3 years? If it was to hold up that well then I may reconsider. Would be interested in your thoughts, Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livall Posted January 29, 2007 Report Share Posted January 29, 2007 How about an ED30 golf? From what I can see it has all the engine upgrades of the S3 but is just mapped to 230 BHP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallachie Posted January 29, 2007 Report Share Posted January 29, 2007 Go for the S3, it's a totally different beast than the 3.2Q and will hold it's money much better than a 3.2Q. Just have a look on Autotrader and you will see just how dire the 3.2 residuals are..... I bought my last 8L S3 off a fella I know, it had only covered about 9k and was less than a year old, but the 8P A3 came out and he simply had to have one. He bought a 3.2Q S-line and he now says it was the worst mistake he ever made, both from a financial point of view and driving. He says the 3.2 is very boring, soft, too progressive (no turbo shove which he missed) and it liked a drink too!! The 8P S3 is huge fun, IMO it is miles ahead of the 3.2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edo Posted January 29, 2007 Report Share Posted January 29, 2007 I dont think anyone can answer this question except yourself. It is all down to the type of driving you do, and what you are after from the car. Drive them both, make your own decsion. Both cars have +/-'s... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gizze Posted January 29, 2007 Report Share Posted January 29, 2007 [ QUOTE ] Gizze, Do you think the S3 will still be worth £17K after 3 years? If it was to hold up that well then I may reconsider. Would be interested in your thoughts, Thanks. [/ QUOTE ] I am not sure? But looking at the fact that 2 year old 2.0T quattros are £17k still I would say the S3 had to be worth this in a private sale at a year older. If you look on autotrader you can get a 3.2 for the same money as the 2.0T and the 3.2 is £4000 more new, so just shows you that peopel are put off by bigger engines. The only thing that will kill S3 residuals is if an RS3 appears, and the fact that they have not put flared arches etc. on the S3, and the fact there are cars coming from the competition, like the 135ti with 330bhp and sub 5 second 0-60mph times, makes me think this may happen. If the RS3 does appear then S3 residuals will plummet, just look at the S4, when there was no RS4 a 2 year old car was around £33k, a 2 year old S4 now the RS4 is about and a few on the used market is around £25k, big difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooker Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Gizze, Do you think the S3 will still be worth £17K after 3 years? If it was to hold up that well then I may reconsider. Would be interested in your thoughts, Thanks. [/ QUOTE ] I am not sure? But looking at the fact that 2 year old 2.0T quattros are £17k still I would say the S3 had to be worth this in a private sale at a year older. If you look on autotrader you can get a 3.2 for the same money as the 2.0T and the 3.2 is £4000 more new, so just shows you that peopel are put off by bigger engines. The only thing that will kill S3 residuals is if an RS3 appears, and the fact that they have not put flared arches etc. on the S3, and the fact there are cars coming from the competition, like the 135ti with 330bhp and sub 5 second 0-60mph times, makes me think this may happen. If the RS3 does appear then S3 residuals will plummet, just look at the S4, when there was no RS4 a 2 year old car was around £33k, a 2 year old S4 now the RS4 is about and a few on the used market is around £25k, big difference. [/ QUOTE ] Thank You for your comments. Had a good look at Autotrader and the like, as you say the 2.0T's are holding up well, can't see a RS3 coming but you never know. I've decided not to go for the S3, can't justify spending that on what would be our 2nd car, however if it was made as a five door then then it could have been our main car. Never mind. Been trying to get a road test in a R32, apparently not an easy task. I think I'll stick with the TT for now as I can't think of what to change it with. 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