It oozes just enough power to keep up with most other 1.6 non turbo petrol cars.
Diesel owners are always a good laugh down the pub with quotes like "more torque than a Boxster", then they leave and drive home in their Passat TDi 130 which hits 0-60 in 10 seconds and can't even keep up with a 1.6 Fiesta Zetec.
I am sick and tired of diesel owners claiming to have fast cars, my Renault Clio 182 will murder any 2.0 Turbo Diesel car chipped or not.
330d? depends which model, I beleive the new shape one can keep up in a straight line, but the 2 lesser powered old shape models would struggle!
0-100mph in 17 seconds is the test for keeping up with a 182!
As we are talking 2.0 cars here, a fairer comparison is the latest 163BHP 320d, which crawls to 100mph in 22.8 seconds and will not keep up with any decent hot hatch!
The A3 2.0 TDi 138 BHP model takes 28 second to accelerate from 0-100mph.
In no way can this be considered a performance car.
Its 1.6 litre petrol car performance.
Nice looking car though, I like the S Line kit :)
The 2.0 TDI is nothing like the 1.6, why don't you guys go down and test drive one, and then eat your words.
If I were to test drive an A3 I wouldn't waste my time in the diesel or the 1.6, I d try the 2.0 197 BHP Turbo petrol or the 3.2 V6 Petrol, these are the only 2 worth testing unless I wanted a mundane family hatchback, then I would probably go for the diesel dog as it is the most economical.
The Audi A3 S-Line is a pretty nifty car performance wise.
As I'm sure you will all agree 140BHP is not going to set the world on fire, but take into account 230lb of torque and you have a fairly impressive car.
Basically you can keep your quirky French rubbish which will rot away around you. The audi is far superior and is indeed a very fast point to point car. To top it off it will average 45mpg!!
Noone doubts the quality of the Audi A3, but it is not a performance car, it has average performance for a hatchback.
Well, I doubt the quality of the A3. My friends have one and I can hear "creaking" when the car hits bumps and such. Not good for long term reliability. My BMWs never made sounds like that, even after 100K miles.
And their car has the 200 hp (or whatever the hp is) engine in the VW GTI, so the A3 goes fast and is amazingly stable on the freeway.
If it wasn't for its quality issues I would buy one myself.
Depends what you mean by a performance car.
I have just gotten rid of a 200BHP Nissan 200sx which was a pretty quick car. However on a twisty road my Audi A3 Tdi S-Line would murder it so it is subjective.
With regards to the build quality mine is top notch, very well bolted together and a good solid car. Plus a fact I don't look like a git as I would in a Beemer!
The only way an A3 Turbo Weasel will murder a 200SX is if it is fitted with heat seeking missiles.
The 200SX was a fast car in its day, but modern hot hatches are faster now, however the A3 Weasel is about as fast as an old 1.6 Sunny Coupe if you want a direct comparison.
Well I own a 1.6 litre petrol (102 HP) and I have test driven a 2.0 TDI (Diesel) engine (Seat Leon FR-170 HP). Of course diesel vs. petrol is a never ending story, but please stop comparing 1.6 L petrol engines to the 2.0 TDI. The 2.0 TDI will humiliate a 1.6 petrol in every conceivable situation, and that is without chip-tuning.
In a straight line, driven optimally, a diesel engine will be in first place until the speed is high enough so that an equivalent petrol engine reaches its optimal rev range and takes the first place. However, that is a very high speed situation and in normal traffic you don't get to see that sort of speed all that often, especially considering city traffic.
On a winding road a diesel will do better than a petrol engine because the rev range will be closer to the optimal range for diesel engines.
My conclusion is: lower revs used often, as in city traffic -> Diesels are better and more economic, albeit a lot noisier
High revs and speeds (highway) -> a petrol engine is better.
What a waste of a review!
OK so a Clio is a great hot hatch. But the Audi is a different type of car - both are good at different things.
Petrol's will always have higher peak power and less torque, diesels are the opposite!
There aren't many S-lines out there most are SE or sport at best so lets discuss the car in question.
Back to the s-line now...
Thanks to the previous comment.
A clio is a clio and an a3 is an a3 enough said.
They make a 170 BHP model now, and that's slow too!
The 2.0 TFSi Petrol is far superior in every way!
They also make an S3 which isn't very slow!
I would love to hear about the new Clio diesel! I've heard it is...
The 2.0T Petrol IS much faster than the 2.0T diesel version at any speed.
The diesel will only be faster if they are trying to accelerate in 6th gear at 20mph, but lets face it, nobody under 75 years of age drives like that! If that's your yardstick then turbodiesels rule the world, the Bugatti Veyron is slower than a Smart Fortwo diesel!
Test drove the 125kw 2.0 Audi A3 with the 6 sp DSG gearbox he other day. That thing absolutely hauls ass off the line; little to no lag on take off, which you get in turbo petrol.
Not to mention the fantastic fuel economy from the oil burner, with all that go on tap.
At the end of the day, the power/launch and 0-100 ability is better than the N/A 2 litre, put 5 people in the TFSI and the diesel will leave it in its smoke, because with all the torque they have the extra weight barely affects them. Don't try showing off to your mates in the turbo petrol up against a turbo diesel when your car's full (and the diesel is full of people also obviously)
Why not try enhancing the power and boost pressure of the diesel, you will still have better economy, I must admit I'm no whizz on working up cars, but I'm sure it's possible.
The diesel will also last a hell of a lot longer working under the turbo than any petrol will; at the end of the day that's what turbo's were built for.
But I also like the diesel, because in Australia we have higher insurance premiums for turbo petrol cars, but not turbo diesel. So I'm happy!