UBM Posted March 13, 2006 Report Share Posted March 13, 2006 Had a 3-door A3 2.0T FSI Quattro S-Line for the day as sooty was getting sorted. Great I thought! It was moro blue, looked quite small and nippy. It had just over 2000 miles on the clock and a full tank of fuel, predicting 315 miles till empty... Anyway, nice and quiet and start up. Pulled away from the stealers, avoiding the several A8's parked nearby. However, driving along, I was really not "blown away" by the "power". Needless to say, as is customary, one has to give it a good spanking! How disappointing. The acceleration was OK, but, for some reason, my sooty seemed as quick (although maybe I imagine it). The ride was great. It was firm and handled really well. The interior was woeful though. It did not seem as nice as the A4. the seats were leather, although I did have to smell them to check it wasn't cheap plastic. I'm sure it is a great car for most people, but I was glas to have sooty back! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonybaulch Posted March 13, 2006 Report Share Posted March 13, 2006 I get my new 5 door A3 2.0T FSI Quattro S-Line of Thursday to replace my chipped A4 1.9 Quattro Sport Avant I hope to be a bit more impressed than you though that might not come until it gets chipped too and the torque gets improved. The heart said A3 3.2 but the head said 2.0T FSI, i hope i don't regret my choice. Tony 2003 A4 1.9TDi Quattro Sport Avant (until Wednesday) 2006 A3 2.0T Sportback Quattro S-Line (from Thursday) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarMad Posted March 13, 2006 Report Share Posted March 13, 2006 Well I have to say I'm more than a bit suprised to read that UBM. I test drove the 2.0TDI rattly thing in an A3 DSG S-Line before I choose the 2.0T. My sister has the 2.0TDI A3 and mine is way way quicker than it. The 2.0T does need 5000+ miles before it starts to free up to show its full potential and Optimax makes it much more spritely in my view. But 2.0TDI as quick as the 2.0T ... in a word not a chance. And having had the A4 2.5TDI quattro before it I think the interior with the TT esk controls is easily as good. Each to their own hey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmmlmmam Posted March 13, 2006 Report Share Posted March 13, 2006 Can't comment on the engine having not experienced the 2.0TFSi. But UMB is definately right about the interior. The qualtiy of the A3 interior just doesn't match the A4. The A4 is a nicer more comfy place to be, although I would also say that the A3 has a more youthful sporting bias that the A4 couldn't (and wouldn't want to) match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UBM Posted March 13, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 13, 2006 I guess CarMad that you're right about it loosening up. It had only 2200 miles on the clock. I guess I was expecting GTI like performance, but maybe the quatttro didn't help. I'm not saying it wasn't nice, it's just I was expecting much better. Still, it's made me respect my sootie a lot more! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UBM Posted March 13, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 13, 2006 [ QUOTE ] Can't comment on the engine having not experienced the 2.0TFSi. But UMB is definately right about the interior. The qualtiy of the A3 interior just doesn't match the A4. The A4 is a nicer more comfy place to be, although I would also say that the A3 has a more youthful sporting bias that the A4 couldn't (and wouldn't want to) match. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, it just seemed a tad on the cheap side. Even the quattro badge wasn't in the right place! The controls seemed a bit noddy (the a/c etc)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmmlmmam Posted March 13, 2006 Report Share Posted March 13, 2006 The TT esque braces on the center console are laughable. Nice in alloy (TT), horrid in plastic (A3). Strange because other components (e.g. the vents) are just about as nice as those in the A4 Cab. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenjaminTDI Posted March 14, 2006 Report Share Posted March 14, 2006 [ QUOTE ] However, driving along, I was really not "blown away" by the "power". Needless to say, as is customary, one has to give it a good spanking! How disappointing. The acceleration was OK, but, for some reason, my sooty seemed as quick (although maybe I imagine it). [/ QUOTE ] This is exactly how I felt when I drove the 2.0T engine, as I tested both the 2.0T and 2.0TDI when I was buying mine and the 2.0TDI just felt better to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alastair_A3 Posted March 14, 2006 Report Share Posted March 14, 2006 ive test driven the 2.0 T and all i can say is comming from a previous petrol A3, it takes a while to get used to after been a diesel for a while. The diesel has that shove which makes it seem alot faster than it really is, struggles after 110 though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarMad Posted March 14, 2006 Report Share Posted March 14, 2006 When going from a Petrol to Diesel and vice versa you have to change your driving style to suit, if you expect a petrol to have the same shove low down as a diesel you will be dissapointed, in the same way a petrol driver might expect a diesel engine to pull all the way to the redline and enjoy that last little zing before it gets there, it just doesn't happen does it. The 2.0T has to be applauded to get close to the feel of the torque of the 2.0TDI, but it is also leagues better in refinement and character than the 4cylinder TDI could ever be. If I had the choice again I would deffo choose the 2.0T again over the 2.0TDI. If we all like the same things it might be a very boring world though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milo Posted March 14, 2006 Report Share Posted March 14, 2006 I rate the my 220PS 2.0T FSI a lot higher than the 130PS Tdi. It has more torque but delivers it sooooo much more smoothly. [ QUOTE ] The diesel has that shove which makes it seem alot faster than it really is [/ QUOTE ] I would agree; first impressions was the 2.0T was quicker than my Tdi but maybe not that much quicker. Then you look at the figures and realise there is 3 seconds between them in a 0-62 dash. The Tdi used really jerk you back in the seat sometimes but the performance was all or nothing. The 2.0T just keeps pulling right the way up the rev range (or as far as I've pushed it yet anyway which isn't very far ). It was easy to mistake the shove of the diesel for blistering performance Indeed when I drove P_G's S4 a while back I thought, hmmmm, where's that torque and shove that I got with my Tdi? I then realised it was there in bucketloads but the lazy, smooth delivery of the V8 was very deceptive. It was only when I reached 155 mph in a 30 did I realise it was quite nippy after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisfrances Posted March 14, 2006 Report Share Posted March 14, 2006 this is interesting stuff this debate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chav Posted March 14, 2006 Report Share Posted March 14, 2006 I thought the 2.0TDI was very nippy, and my 3.0 doesn't feel considerably quicker, but it must be according to the stats. Shame all Audi diesels sound like you've dropped a 1000 nuts and bolts in the engine though! - yuk! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenjaminTDI Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 [ QUOTE ] Shame all Audi diesels sound like you've dropped a 1000 nuts and bolts in the engine though! - yuk! [/ QUOTE ] I know, it's dreadful, they really need to sort it out, especially on cold starts, mine sounds like its about 15 years old! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danksy Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 No way the diesel is faster The feeling that you get is due to the turbo lag in the diesel, followed by a huge wallop of torque over a narrow rev band. By contrast the 2.OTFsi delivers its power more progressively, and over a wider rev band. Lined up next to each other there would be no context for a sprint from 0 - 60 etc. In real world situations the TDi torque is more accessible (you don't have to rev it) so it may feel quicker than the 2.0TFsi in overtaking situations. Unlike the petrol engine, the gears don't have to be changed for a few thousand revs more. Hang on to the revs and the engine will continue to deliver, and out accelerate the Diesel. At the end of the day the Tdi has more torque over a narrow band, the Fsi has less, but more BHP. Think of BHP at the rate that torque is delivered Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R32North Posted March 19, 2006 Report Share Posted March 19, 2006 Thing is, tune a 2.0 TDi to about 185hp and 300lbs and then you have a completely different car altogether!!!!! Granted you can tune the 2.0T FSi as well, but in tefms of fun factor / fuel economy, a tuned 2.0 TDi is going to be some fun without the dreadful mpgs!!!! 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