Tell me about Audi A3s

Vertigo1 said:
Well of course you wouldn't pay £17k for a nine-year old E39 any more than you'd pay £17k for a seven-year old A3.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't have paid £17k for my car in 2003, either, but thats what it was worth then, at exactly the same point as the A3 is at now. Stop going down this road, because it hasn't got the mileage in it you think it has :p

£17,000 is too much money for an ordinary version of a mass-market hatchback thats beginning to outstay its welcome in that manufacturers model range. If we were talking S3 maybe I'd feel differently but we are not - he's thinking of a 2.0 TDI or a 2.0 FSI and asking even about whether the 1.9 TDI is worth missing.

My personal and perhaps irrelevent opinion is that currently £17k is a bit of a no mans land. It's too much money for ordinary versions of cars like the pre facelift E90 3 Series, it's too much for the 2000-2008 A4 in any guise bar RS4, it's too much money for an old shape C Class, it's too much money for a normal A3, yet it isn't enough money for a really decent E92, a decent facelift E90, the new A4, or the new C Class really.
 
Last edited:
[TW]Fox;16972283 said:
If you must spend £17k then maybe its time to move on from hatchbacks.
Click to expand...
And there's the prejudice that so many seem to share. What's wrong with hatchbacks? Why is no-one allowed to spend over some arbitrary amount on one? Some people want the build quality, comfort & equipment levels generally associated with larger cars but in a smaller one. Personally I don't need or want anything bigger than an A3 but I do want the comfort and the toys so it suits me perfectly.
 
Nothing is wrong with hatchbacks but you don't need to spend £17,000 to buy a 4 cylinder diesel hatchback. You can get a great one for much less.

You don't count as your employer provides you with a new one every 3 years, which is a tad different from spending your own hard earned on one.

Would you really take an A3 over the all new, latest model A4? Really?

A3 versus previous A4 I can understand, but the A3 is a previous generation car - it's really unusual for it to have breached the 7 year production window really.
 
[TW]Fox;16972399 said:
Nothing is wrong with hatchbacks but you don't need to spend £17,000 to buy a 4 cylinder diesel hatchback. You can get a great one for much less.
Click to expand...
Oh I grant you there's little sense in spending £17k on an average model as you'll no doubt be buying a very "young" one and would be far better served getting a slightly older one which has already depreciated far more. I'm just saying that it all depends on exactly what model you're on about and £17k isn't automatically a daft amount to spend on an A3, it all depends exactly what it is (e.g. the S3 example).
Would you really take an A3 over the all new, latest model A4? Really?

A3 versus previous A4 I can understand, but the A3 is a previous generation car - it's really unusual for it to have breached the 7 year production window really.
Click to expand...

Yes, I would. I prefer the looks of the A3, the interior of the A3 and have no need for anything bigger than an A3. I also think the A4 shouts "sales rep" more than any other car in Audi's range. Given that I prefer the A3 and it suits my needs better, why would I choose the A4 simply because it's a more recent model?

I choose my cars objectively, getting whatever I feel fits my needs and wants best. At present the A3 does this job better than any other model so that's what I have. The year the model was introduced figures literally nowhere in my reasoning.
 
Some people do want a hatch for practicality reasons, it's a shame there aren't many large hatches... I can only really think of the Mondeo and insignia, but you wouldn't really consider one of them premium.
 
Vertigo1 said:
Oh I grant you there's little sense in spending £17k on an average model as you'll no doubt be buying a very "young" one and would be far better served getting a slightly older one which has already depreciated far more. I'm just saying that it all depends on exactly what model you're on about and £17k isn't automatically a daft amount to spend on an A3, it all depends exactly what it is (e.g. the S3 example).
Click to expand...

OP said:
I am stuck between the 2.0 TDI or the 1.8 petrol. I think there is a 2.0 petrol but not sure on the specs. I take it the 1.9 TDI isn't worth looking at?
Click to expand...

He's after a normal one, not an S3. Not even a 2.0TFSI, either..

Yes, I would. I prefer the looks of the A3, the interior of the A3 and have no need for anything bigger than an A3. I also think the A4 shouts "sales rep" more than any other car in Audi's range.
Click to expand...

You must have tried really hard to convince yourself thats the case! The A3 is sales-rep tastic, it's the most easily accessible Audi to anyone with a company car list?!

Given that I prefer the A3 and it suits my needs better, why would I choose the A4 simply because it's a more recent model?
Click to expand...

Because the A3 is old. It's old tech, it's old gen, it's... old. The A4 is a thoroughly different, more modern package. The A3 is thus a ridiculous consideration as a new buy until it is replaced with a new model. You've been driving the A3 longer than we've been having Rolling Road days to give you an example of how just how long in the tooth it is! You know a car is old when it's STILL available when you come to chose your 3 year replacement cycle company car for the THIRD time :p

The year the model was introduced figures literally nowhere in my reasoning.
Click to expand...

So if Audi STILL sold the 8P A3 in 2018 you'd just go ahead and order another one?!
 
[TW]Fox;16972588 said:
You must have tried really hard to convince yourself thats the case! The A3 is sales-rep tastic, it's the most easily accessible Audi to anyone with a company car list?!
Click to expand...
So why do I see vastly more "suits" driving A4s than I do A3s?
Because the A3 is old. It's old tech, it's old gen, it's... old. The A4 is a thoroughly different, more modern package. The A3 is thus a ridiculous consideration as a new buy until it is replaced with a new model. You've been driving the A3 longer than we've been having Rolling Road days to give you an example of how just how long in the tooth it is! You know a car is old when it's STILL available when you come to chose your 3 year replacement cycle company car for the THIRD time :p

So if Audi STILL sold the 8P A3 in 2018 you'd just go ahead and order another one?!
Click to expand...

For someone who continually preaches about the virtues of higher mileage used cars, you're getting awfully hung up on the notion of an "old" car.

As I said, the age of the model isn't relevant per se. Of course, if there are competing models which are newer and, as a result, have superior technology, handling or whatever, then it would become a factor, but that isn't the case here. If I look at any car and it fits all my requirements better than any other then why should I decide against it purely because the model is "old", according to some arbitrary measure?

If I spec up an A4 to the same level as my A3 it ends up costing about £5k more. That's £5k I'd have to pay BIK tax on and may not even be able to get approval for, leaving me with a larger, less well specced car that I don't really need, just because it's "newer".

I'm not sure what I'll be getting next but, if an A3 fits the bill best then I may well get another one. That said, I am aware that the replacement is due late 2011 or early 2012 and I'd therefore only get another 8P on a short lease as I'd potentially want to switch to the new model sooner rather than later.

EDIT: Just for a laugh I just specced up an A3 and A4 to the level I'd want from a car. The A4 came to over £6k more than the A3 and would end up costing me £60 a month more in BIK tax! For what, a bigger "newer" car? I don't need the space so I'm literally paying an extra £700 a year to have a "newer" model car with the same specification. Makes far more sense to me to get an A3 on a short lease then switch to the new model A3 when it arrives.
 
Last edited:
Geekers lads when I say I have a budget of £17k it doesn't mean I wouldn't settle for paying less! Some common sense maybe helps - if any suggestions are made that are better/cheaper then I'm all on for that. I didn't say I WAS spending that money, just that that is how much I'd be willing to go on whatever recommendations.

The models I had looked at were the Black Editions so obviously they will be nearer to that price than a Sport for example.

Had looked at the ST-2 but not sure about the mpg that they are getting. I get 30ish on the Fez at the moment for mostly motorway driving to/from work. I think you'd be doing well to get near that in the Focus. No?

S3's definitely are nice machines but I don't think I'd get one for sensible money unless it was fairly old/high mileage.

Had looked at the 1 series but they look crap IMO.
 
ringo747 said:
Had looked at the ST-2 but not sure about the mpg that they are getting. I get 30ish on the Fez at the moment for mostly motorway driving to/from work. I think you'd be doing well to get near that in the Focus. No?
Click to expand...

Personally I think it's a bit daft worrying about a 5-6-7 mpg difference when spending tens of thousands on a car. An ST-2 will probably average about 26mpg but if you are pushing it then you'll see it drop to about 18 I think.

However, compare that with 30mpg and over the course of a year seems pretty meaningless when you look at the value of the vehicle.
 
S3 is worth it, anything else, go cheaper, as Fox has said.

If you've got £17k, an approved used 2007 S3 with average mileage is just about in budget :)
 
peterattheboro said:
Personally I think it's a bit daft worrying about a 5-6-7 mpg difference when spending tens of thousands on a car. An ST-2 will probably average about 26mpg but if you are pushing it then you'll see it drop to about 18 I think.

However, compare that with 30mpg and over the course of a year seems pretty meaningless when you look at the value of the vehicle.
Click to expand...

Very true, I'm just thinking more longer term would I be better going diesel. Will be doing 15-20k yearly for work and something that is easier run might be more ideal. Then again I still want something that is fun to drive, the diesel A3 wouldn't really be.
 
It's a shame you're not a fan of the 1 Series, as a 120d or 123d could be good.
Have you thought about going a size up, ala A4/3 Series?

Or there's always the Volvo C30..
 
ringo747 said:
Very true, I'm just thinking more longer term would I be better going diesel. Will be doing 15-20k yearly for work and something that is easier run might be more ideal. Then again I still want something that is fun to drive, the diesel A3 wouldn't really be.
Click to expand...

Why not compromise?

When I was looking for some diesels for you I found a number of 06 2.0TFSI S-Lines for £12k. 200bhp, 2 litre Turbo
 
my mate has a A3 2.0tdi


its a nasty piece of kit, if there has ever been a worse engine fitted to a "prestige" car then I have yet to see it
 
Ok I'm confused. It's ok to spend circa £12k on a used A3 but not to buy one new, because they're "old"? Can I deduce from this that the issue here is solely money, and that you think it's madness to pay for a brand new car when the model itself is old and nearing replacement?

If so then, as I'm not paying for it, why does it matter? If I was spending my own cash then frankly I'd be a bit reluctant to buy a car that was nearing replacement (although only for this reason, not because it was "old" per se) but, as it's not my cash, who cares?
 
[TW]Fox;16972941 said:
They also fitted the godawful 1.9 TDI to the A3.

Even the Cabriolet!!
Click to expand...

don't even start me on my mates brand new £35k+ A5 cab with a 2.0TDi

wtf are some folks thinking ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom