Spec me a posh/sporty/comfy car for £5000

He can't afford a 2005+ one though, and they are not crap ...well the pre 2002 ones are but the 2002-2005 ones aren't crap at all, just not as good as the later cars. Also it depends what you compare it to, in this case I'm pushing this one forward as an option to an X-Type ...it's a bigger, more expensive, better equiped car than that ...sure you could argue it's not as a good as a 5 series of the time though ...but then we aren't comparing it to one just now.

Usually I wouldn't put the S-Type into this mix at all, but since I found one of the elusive manual varieties ...I thought why not, it's green too with cream leather ...so one of the best colour combos, this one has nice wheels too.
 
Last edited:
I have an S3. They are certainly not a motorway waftmobile but they are reasonably fast and pretty comfortable for what they are. I wouldn't call it a hot hatch simply because it's not 'edgy' enough for that - it may be pretty fast but it certainly doesn't scream for you to chuck it about.
 
I have an S3. They are certainly not a motorway waftmobile but they are reasonably fast and pretty comfortable for what they are. I wouldn't call it a hot hatch simply because it's not 'edgy' enough for that - it may be pretty fast but it certainly doesn't scream for you to chuck it about.

Since when was 'edgy' a prerequisite for a hot hatch?

It has 225bhp. It is a 3 door hatchback. It is a hot hatch.
 
Iv driven a manual Stype, and ummm...

Its hard to explain S types are too "big Jag-ish" to be manuals, just dosent suit the car.

You can just about get away with it in an X Type.

2002 and 2004 were the mile stones for S types.
 
[TW]Fox;17452987 said:
Since when was 'edgy' a prerequisite for a hot hatch?

Since just about forever? :confused:

There is a distinct difference between a "Hot Hatch" and a "Hatchback that just happens to have a larger/powerful engine".
 
Last edited:
Since just about forever? :confused:

No?

A hot hatch is a car of two halves. In the morning, a normal everyday practical hatchback thats easy to get the kids in, easy to park in Tesco, takes a bag of shopping, is serviced by your local dealer at a reasonable cost and then on the way home....


...you can give it a damn good thrashing and have a great time.

Can't see how the S3 doesn't fit that?
 
[TW]Fox;17453185 said:
No?

A hot hatch is a car of two halves. In the morning, a normal everyday practical hatchback thats easy to get the kids in, easy to park in Tesco, takes a bag of shopping, is serviced by your local dealer at a reasonable cost and then on the way home....


...you can give it a damn good thrashing and have a great time.

Can't see how the S3 doesn't fit that?

As I've just edited above, you're roping the S3 into the Hot Hatch category just because it is a hatchback with a powerful engine. Do you consider the A3 3.2 Quattro to be a hot hatch?

Look back in every generation of Hot hatches and you will see that all of the greats were, in your words, "edgy".
 
Obviously.

I see.

You do realise that the Golf GTI and the Audi S3 share the same platform, chassis, engine, etc etc? The only real difference is that the S3 has more power and Haldex.

What about the Cupra R? Is that not a hot hatch? It's effectively a front wheel drive S3.
 
Fox, we are side tracking here.

No, we are really not - you've just realised the massive flaw in your argument and are attemping to sidetrack.

So, I ask again. If the Golf GTI and the Leon Cupra R are hot hatchbacks, then why isn't the Audi S3? All 3 are fundamentally the same car.

The point here is that the you think the S3 isn't a hot hatch. Lets address that before you start bringing in other cars you dont think are hot hatches, yes?
 
Good lord, they are all hot hatches, fwd or 4wd ...2 litre turbo or 3.2 V6 ...if it's a hatchback and it's got 200+ bhp I'd say it's by definition a hot hatchback.

You might be right about the S being too 'big Jag' for a manual Mark, although I'm not sure why an X-Type with a manual would be any 'better' ...seems to be more about perception than anything to me. Having said that I've never driven any of them with manual boxes, only autos ...where of course the S-Type is quite a bit better. Dunno really. X-Type is probably cheaper to service and put tyres on though, it seems to suite the manual box better on the face of it, but thinking about it, I don't really see why the S wouldn't work with one, it's just no-one expects an S-Type to be manual.

It's academic really anyway, I found one manual car and working on the assumption that there is a reason not to buy that one ...that doesn't really leave any choice. Where as a manual 3 litre X-Type is easy to find and gives him plenty of choice.
 
Last edited:
Good lord, they are all hot hatches, fwd or 4wd ...2 litre turbo or 3.2 V6 ...if it's a hatchback and it's got 200+ bhp I'd say it's by definition a hot hatchback.

You might be right about the S being too 'big Jag' for a manual Mark, although I'm not sure why an X-Type with a manual would be any 'better' ...seems to be more about perception than anything to me. Having said that I've never driven any of them with manual boxes, only autos ...where of course the S-Type is quite a bit better. Dunno really. X-Type is probably cheaper to service and put tyres on though, it seems to suite the manual box better on the face of it, but thinking about it, I don't really see why the S wouldn't work with one, it's just no-one expects an S-Type to be manual.

Its got a good gear change the S type manual, very smooth it just didnt feel right.

Saying that i dont like manual cars so i am biased i suppose.

As for hot hatches i must admit i lump them all in together, if its quick with a hatch, its a hot hatch.
 
Last edited:
Saying that i dont like manual cars so i am biased i suppose.

I was about to agree but really I wouldn't say I don't like them, I do on a country lane when I'm in the mood for a good blast, but that's about it ...I'd take an auto any day the rest of the time. A manual Jag seems wrong really, whatever kind it is.
 
Back
Top Bottom