RobA3 Posted March 17, 2007 Report Share Posted March 17, 2007 This may have been probaly asked already, but out of the engines above is their a real differance in performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahaydock Posted March 17, 2007 Report Share Posted March 17, 2007 I didnt think the engines were different just the introduction of the quattro? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d3fy Posted March 17, 2007 Report Share Posted March 17, 2007 No difference other than, the boot floor is higher in the quattro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPLiiX Posted March 17, 2007 Report Share Posted March 17, 2007 QUATTRO!! My mother has a 2.0T FWD Sline DSG! Wheel spins like mad! And she only goes down to the shops once a week (oh and gets her hair done every Friday! ) If it was Quattro it would be one of the best cars I have driven!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russk Posted March 17, 2007 Report Share Posted March 17, 2007 Or, get the 2 wheel drive version and modulate the engine output with the throttle. Sorry. Quattro obviously gives superior traction but it's more money, it's more weight, and it blunts straight line performance in probably the majority of situations. It will also return lower MPG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dblanc Posted March 17, 2007 Report Share Posted March 17, 2007 [ QUOTE ] Or, get the 2 wheel drive version and modulate the engine output with the throttle. Sorry. Quattro obviously gives superior traction but it's more money, it's more weight, and it blunts straight line performance in probably the majority of situations. It will also return lower MPG. [/ QUOTE ] At last a someone with the same point of view as me on Quattro. I have the 2.0T non-Quattro in my A4 Cab and I use this funny black pedal shaped thing to control whether the car wheelspins or not. If Audi didn't think the car could handle 200bhp through 2 wheels they wouldn't sell it and VW would sell the Golf GTI with 4 wheel drive. Of course Quattro has its place, but I think the car needs to be putting out far more than 200bhp to make it "essential" and make the drawbacks of it worthwhile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xedos Posted March 17, 2007 Report Share Posted March 17, 2007 This is true, though its not that much slower, its predominantly 2wd anyway. Consumption? not that much in it. I get 35mpg in the quattro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xedos Posted March 17, 2007 Report Share Posted March 17, 2007 [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Or, get the 2 wheel drive version and modulate the engine output with the throttle. Sorry. Quattro obviously gives superior traction but it's more money, it's more weight, and it blunts straight line performance in probably the majority of situations. It will also return lower MPG. [/ QUOTE ] At last a someone with the same point of view as me on Quattro. I have the 2.0T non-Quattro in my A4 Cab and I use this funny black pedal shaped thing to control whether the car wheelspins or not. If Audi didn't think the car could handle 200bhp through 2 wheels they wouldn't sell it and VW would sell the Golf GTI with 4 wheel drive. Of course Quattro has its place, but I think the car needs to be putting out far more than 200bhp to make it "essential" and make the drawbacks of it worthwhile. [/ QUOTE ] Quattro vs FWD isnt about feathering the throttle for the traffic light grand prix though is it. Its about grip in general. Rain / greasy roads, dangerous conditions etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dblanc Posted March 17, 2007 Report Share Posted March 17, 2007 Oh I see. I must stop taking my FWD drive car out in the rain as I keep ending up pointing the wrong way round. As I said above Quattro has its place, but not at 200bhp, look at number of 200bhp FWD cars on the market, loads of them. There is no need for 4WD at this power level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the911sc Posted March 17, 2007 Report Share Posted March 17, 2007 I think I kind of agree; 200 ps is about the limit for good traction. I chipped my 190ps 2wd A4 to 231 bhp and it went from ok to a wheel spinner!. I specced Q in my 220ps special edition and it is much more controlled around corners and out of junctions but not necessarily in a straight line on a dry day. Residual is better in Q also so you do get some of your money back. 2.0T 2wd is a nice car tho.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xedos Posted March 17, 2007 Report Share Posted March 17, 2007 [ QUOTE ] Oh I see. I must stop taking my FWD drive car out in the rain as I keep ending up pointing the wrong way round. As I said above Quattro has its place, but not at 200bhp, look at number of 200bhp FWD cars on the market, loads of them. There is no need for 4WD at this power level. [/ QUOTE ] The FWD 200hp FSI, even the 1.8 160hp engine wheel spins easily in 1st, 2nd, 3rd which isnt that safe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baldrick Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 [ QUOTE ] The FWD 200hp FSI, even the 1.8 160hp engine wheel spins easily in 1st, 2nd, 3rd which isnt that safe. [/ QUOTE ]I guess it depends what you were bought up on. A 100bhp Talbot Sunbeam TI could easily spin its rear wheels on its standard 175/70s even in the dry way before ASR was a glint in engineers eyes. My current drive, a 192bhp FWD Alfa is a far easier proposition even with ASR turned off. In my view mastering throttle control of a performance vehicle is part of the fun rather than an issue to be resolved by more technology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashleywater Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 IMHO 200ps is the max for FWD on a dry road. Jumped in an A3 170 oil burner from my 265ps S3 and was appalled at the wheelspin,got thoroughly p*ss*d off with it after a while, I think torque outputs obviously have a major impact on this. As for "feathering" the pedal, I dont believe this really is a safe option in some circumstances,as it is rather "hit & miss" at times, we have all been there I was brought up on on RWD usually powered by an alloy V8, the difference with FWD is not only traction issues but steering control. I have fond memories of my fwd sri cavalier with 130hp trying to torque steer me into anything I tried to overtake,much like the Focus RS. 200ps FWD cars in certain situations are down right dangerous no matter how good your throttle technique or driving skills, CTR in the wet springs to mind. If you want anything with a reasonable ps & torque output, LSD or Quattro is the way to go. LSD in FWD format is a strange beast, I have tried the new R26 and while better than the Focus RS,it still has that strange feel to it, of it almost "taking over" a lot of the time. I think the S3 is a truly under rated car, performance and drive wise, it really is a well rounded performance package, which retains a real level of "point & shoot" something that was missing in the R32,mainly due to all the weight up front. All I can say is after coming down the M4 tonight in dreadful conditions with loads of standing water, I know what I prefer to be driving.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xedos Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 People seem to take on the mind set that quattro is for crap drivers and FWD is a macho thing that any good driver can handle it as quattro is heavy and slow. Well, its not like that. 4WD even with any power is going to be more useful than front or rear wheel drive in terms of just gripping the road in the UK. 4WD isnt solving an issue with technology, its a common sense thing 4 driven wheels are better than two, simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baldrick Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 [ QUOTE ] People seem to take on the mind set that quattro is for crap drivers and FWD is a macho thing that any good driver can handle it as quattro is heavy and slow. [/ QUOTE ]The responses here were to the 2.0T FSI FWD being described as virtually uncontrollable and *needing* 4WD. There is little doubt 4WD has significant benefits over the FWD version but it doesn't render the latter obsolete as a fun performance car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPLiiX Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 If you do not believe Quattro is better - you should do the Audi driving Experiance course at Silverstone!!!!! But hey, I know what you mean about being heavier (its 80KG morE) woopty doo. Imagine you are at a junction. Turning left or right with a bit of an incline in the wet (damp). In a two wheel drive 2.0T you would need to control the throttle so you would not get the ESP light on (I.E the traction control) as if that happened it would cut the power and you loose speed. And if you are being technical, you would lose control too. As you are not in control of the traction control.... However in Quattro in the same circumstances you can put the foot to the floor, have peace of mind that the ESP light (traction control in these circumstances) would not come on and be faster to get away. Having full control of your car. Or should I say Quattro giving you full control. I am not saying you must have Quattro or anything. I actaully had a post in the A4 forum "do I really NEED Quattro?" The the answer is no you don't need quattro - your car just has better grip because the power is split to whichever wheel can get the most grip. I am not saying you should buy quattro just saying that there are benifits. And I am sure Audi would say for Saftey too! Whatever - the 2.0T engine is fab! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baldrick Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 [ QUOTE ] 200ps FWD cars in certain situations are down right dangerous no matter how good your throttle technique or driving skills, CTR in the wet springs to mind. [/ QUOTE ]Maybe I am just getting old and not pushing so hard these days. Sounding really old my early days of driving were in much harsher winters, I even did some rallying on ice and snow so lack of grip was a common issue to deal with. Modern cars, even with 200bhp seem to have so much grip in comparison but like I say maybe my concept of performance driving doesn't match others. Having driven competitively and witnessed first hand just how fast the really quick guys go, to be anywhere near that committed on public roads would be lunacy and performance driving is about enjoyment rather than outright speed. Though thinking about it, when I was into rallying a certain Audi Quattro rendered the 2WDs uncompetitive! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xedos Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] People seem to take on the mind set that quattro is for crap drivers and FWD is a macho thing that any good driver can handle it as quattro is heavy and slow. [/ QUOTE ]The responses here were to the 2.0T FSI FWD being described as virtually uncontrollable and *needing* 4WD. There is little doubt 4WD has significant benefits over the FWD version but it doesn't render the latter obsolete as a fun performance car. [/ QUOTE ] In that case, sure its not a 100% must have. FWD is fine. They just do like to try and spin a lot. 'performance car' we are talking about the A3 right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baldrick Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 [ QUOTE ] 'performance car' we are talking about the A3 right? [/ QUOTE ]"fun performance" - whatever that means to the marketing guys Inevitably an A3 is a compromise that has to achieve many different functions - so is the S3 come to that. I.e. a family car, a business car, a shopping car etc. A variant that does 0-60 in 7 seconds with decent handling for the genre is a reasonable "Sport" or "GTI" variant worthy of the badge rather than just some stick on spoilers. Though I take your point it ain't no Ferrari or 911... I will choose my words more carefully around here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baldrick Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 [ QUOTE ] However in Quattro in the same circumstances you can put the foot to the floor, have peace of mind that the ESP light (traction control in these circumstances) would not come on and be faster to get away. Having full control of your car. Or should I say Quattro giving you full control. [/ QUOTE ]I think that is a very good description. 4WD being far more preferable than ESP to give the driver ultimate control. However, for various reasons 4WD is not an option, be it due to cost, maybe the car won't be driven so enthusiastically and FWD is ample, maybe it is a company car in which case 4WDs are in too high a CO2 band. Maybe the buyer wants the DSG box and can't have both. My earlier comments referred to the fact I think the A3 FWD is quite acceptable as a "sporty" hatchback, however I wouldn't argue that the 4WD has advantages and is better. Horses for courses and all that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarMad Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 Wow isn't this a black and white thread. I've had Quattro in the past and currently drive a 2.0T DSG so non Quattro. So do I miss it and what do I things best ? Well Quattro is great if your planting your foot to the floor and need that instant getaway but for me it never feels as agile and at times was down right scary under braking. We all seem to be obsessed with the traction it provides but nobody seems to mention that the car still needs to stop and Quattros extra weight can be quite telling in my experience. 200bhp is a lot of power to put through the front wheels and no if you plant the throttle in the wet when your having a blast it will struggle alot at times. But turn the tables and have a nice smooth dry back road and I'm willing to bet a 2.0T DSG will be far quicker over the same road than a 2.0T Quattro. The traction advantage is minimal at best but the extra weight and lack of that extra element of handling finesse will be telling. Others who have driven the two back to back have said that the 2.0T DSG feels like a nicer drive. Oh and then you have the economy or tax issues. Mines a company car and the 2.0T Q would have cost me far more money is tax than the DSG as well. Each to their own but I don't feel second best for having 2wd, its a cracking car to drive with a great engine and its quick. What more do you want oh and its pretty darn frugal for a 200bhp petrol as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xedos Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 For me the A3 is a comfortable-ish (prefer A4 for ride) hatchback to drive to work in. Its got a nice interior, is good on fuel and is well built. I am to drive it >100000 miles. Its 4WD for grip etc. Re the weight factor, add a passenger in the FWD and hows that scary unless its your wife, you might get hit. For fun, RWD is best. Add a tub, a mid engine layout. poo Im describing an Elise again Theyre fun and cheaper than an F40. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fazzzman Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 This is a fascinating thread - I'm amazed to see some defence from the FWDers before the Quatro drivers reminded us how undriveable FWD A3s are... ... personally never have a problem with spinning the wheels - doesn't even enter my mind as I leave all the traffic standing at every set of lights on the East Lancs Road @ 6:30 each morning. And my tyres make 20k+ too! On paper a Focus ST should have had me the other morning but his problem was that he had to do his own gear-changes! The wheels spin too easily on a works pool car - VW Passat 140 Diesel - perhaps its a diesel thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarMad Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 I think your right ... the diesel can be much more difficult. Shame the east lancs isn't the grand prix it once was.. well not with those namby pamby limits anyway. Spose its safer now. Just did a 250mile round trip in mine in the cold, wet oh and snow and not once would Quattro have made a difference. I don't know how I managed. I've had both and 200bhp + Quattro or RWD is required, at 200bhp, the lighter car is more fun but then maybe I'm biased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tunbridge Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 Each to their own I say. I managed fine for the last 10 years with front wheel drive and had plenty of fun. Now I have Quattro I tend to struggle when I get back in a FWD car. I think it is just what you get used to, my right foot has adapted to the extra grip available and I know the grip it there to exploit. When you get back into FWD cars you just need to adapt your style to suit. At the end of the day I love my Quattro but there are plenty of entertaining FWD cars on the market at the moment that could persuade me to change me mind… 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