2005 Audi A3 S-Line from UK and Ireland - Comments

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...

'They make a 170 BHP model now, and that's slow too!

The 2.0 TFSi Petrol is far superior in every way!'

Apart from in terms of economy & in-gear acceleration.

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!

I was reading review on A3 TDI as I am considering buying one, and have found subsequent comments hilarious! Why was the offended Petrol head looking at a A3 diesel review in the first place?

Anyway, I think the initial comment referred to the TDI having a lot of power, and not that it was super quick. The TDI does have significantly more grunt than a 182. You can test this by having a car full of passengers and then trying to overtake (at motorway speeds) up an incline!

I think the point is that the performance in the TDI is easily accessible, whereas in the petrol you'd have to thrash the nuts off it to get the performance (albeit less so in the petrol turbo 2.0T FSI).

Just my 2p.

I bought into all the diesel hype and actually own an A3 TDI (140) and have to say that it feels quicker than it actually is.

The torque delivery feels good (once you have overcome the turbo lag) but this does not translate into breakneck speed.

You can only drive the TDI quickly once the turbo spools up (at about 1800-2000 rpm) and it is all over by 4500rpm. Whilst you are busy snatching for another gear the petrol equivalent is just getting into its stride and disappearing into the distance.

I average 42mpg from my TDI. If I "give it some beans" this figure can plummet rapidly to the high 20's. I used to own a Mk1 A3 1.8T which averaged 33mpg on the same route and never dropped below 23mpg even when pressing on. For the extra power and the way this was delivered I think that 11mpg is a small price to pay.

I have a friend that owns a 2.0 TFSI (197bhp) his car can leave mine for dust in every situation. He also averages 32mpg in everyday driving.

Yes, Audi make a 170bhp TDI, they also make a better 2.0 TFSI that delivers just as much torque as the beefier TDI.

Just my 2 penneth, but I think to get the best of both worlds you cannot beat a turbo petrol. They deliver more mid-range speed than a diesel (look at the 30-70 through the gears, not just the individual in gear times) and better fuel economy than a non turbo.

For what it is worth I also think that Captain Clio was right, the performance of the TDI is comparable to a 1.6 - but only off the line. Once the TDI is rolling it will leave the 1.6 trailing in a cloud of diesel smoke.

I can't agree more with the last post.

As part of the review there has been a comparison with a 1.6 petrol. I can't speak about the Clio and really wouldn't want to. However, the 1.6 petrol A3 I can as I had this as a brief replacement while my 2.0 TDI was serviced. I drove 60 miles up the motorway and it struggled up moderate hills and ate petrol. Just what you need! I don't believe that there can be all that much improvement in that even with more performance-oriented cars.

Someone else mentioned that the A3 creaks. Well I have driven mine pretty hard for a year and never experienced this. This was from a BMW driver. However we all know that the BMW is not a complete car as they are built without indicators.

Very often these debates turn into petrol vs diesel, I find it all quite interesting to see both sides of the story. I doubt the top of the range a3 diesel is that slow, and the fact that diesels are turbo'd does give them good on the move acceleration, then again if you want all out performance you will choose a petrol. I think for the cost/engine logivity/mpg/residuals etc the diesel is the better option when comparing like for like.

In a quick response to the guy with the clio, the astra 888 diesel will hit 100 as quick as your car and is only a 1.9. Look it up, very quick car for a diesel, I think there is a good video on youtube comparing it to the vxr, and it only just loses out in a drag race with 20 less bhp.

Why do 182 owners think they have good cars. Their bland, girly, unimaginative, give the impression to people you don't have much money, they fall to peices, loose value, have no luxuries what so ever and 0-60 in 7 seconds is hardly what I would call a performance car.

I've just part ex my Subaru Impreza WRX 2.5 turbo 2006 model for an A3 TDI sport, and the tdi is definately more fun. 0-60 is not better but 50 to 70 is awesome... that's awesome.