Volks AutosChris Nott
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 61
  1. #1
    Neutral

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Stratford-upon-Avon
    Posts
    40

    New RS3 / S3 Info

    I have the following info on the new S3 / RS3 from an industry source:

    * S3 is a certainty and will arrive with a 3.4 NA V6 with 280PS and will probably arrive Q1 2006
    * RS3 has not been "rubber stamped" by the "board" but current candidate is 3.4 V6 VG Turbo
    * S & RS model development will continue
    * Future performance models will be more focused, not just a normal car with a big engine and a couple of handling tweaks.

    I will pass on more information as I get it.

  2. # ADS
    ADS
    Join Date
    Always
    Location
    Global
    Posts
    Many
     
  3. #2
    C_Audiboy's Avatar
    Vroom Vroom

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    811

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    Surprised the next 'S3' will only have 30 PS more than the existing 3.2 Quattro.......

  4. #3
    nervus's Avatar
    5th Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,116

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    [ QUOTE ]
    Surprised the next 'S3' will only have 30 PS more than the existing 3.2 Quattro.......

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Thats not too suprising - remember the A3 1.8T quattro was 180bhp and when the S3 was released it only had 210bhp so only 30 bhp more than the next best A3 model!

  5. #4
    TDI-line's Avatar
    Uber Post Whore

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Peterborough
    Posts
    8,883

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    3.4 engine sounds fun, probably what the next generation R32 will be (aka R34).

    There was talk that this engine would be in the new Passat for the american market too.

  6. #5
    Soupie69uk's Avatar
    Owner

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    Posts
    2,698

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    one of the mags did a hot hatch issue they said it was going to be a R36!!

    But i think they will just use the same 3.4 as the S3 so it will prob be an R34.

  7. #6
    1st Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    153

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    Latest version of Autocar (Given how reliable that source is!!) has a short article on the new TT along side that of the new RS4. In that they are suggesting 3.6litre engine with 330BHP to power the flagship TT. The 3.6 engine size has also been discussed in relation to the new Passat, so given VAG policy it probably wouldn't make sense to build a seperate 3.4 litre.

    However a 330BHP S3, now that would be something to dream about!

  8. #7
    Neutral

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Stratford-upon-Avon
    Posts
    40

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    [ QUOTE ]

    That must be one the fastest S3 on the planet to leave 15mph (eurh I mean km/h...) behind a 300bhp 3.2....... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/lol.gif[/img]

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Or the slowest 300bhp 3.2 [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] I wonder if Listers game me the right car? The wife asked if it was a diesel! It couldn't pull away from her 106GTi either.

    I didn't try the R32 on the same road, but it seemed much quicker and agile than the A3

  9. #8
    StephaneS's Avatar
    2nd Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Herts
    Posts
    379

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    [ QUOTE ]
    The wife asked if it was a diesel! It couldn't pull away from her 106GTi either.

    [/ QUOTE ]
    If you could not hear the dif with a diesel and you could not pull away from a 106Gti then it wasn't a 3.2 (even standard). I even wonder if there are any 300bhp 3.2 yet anyway
    maybe it was a 300Nm TDI... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

  10. #9
    Neutral

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Stratford-upon-Avon
    Posts
    40

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    The car was supposedly modified by Listers themselves as they do performance tuning in house now.

    It was definately a 3.2, it was the wife who asked if it was a diesel - she was being sarcastic about the performance. It was new so may have needed more running in?

    A standard 3.2 probably only has 20 or so BHP per ton over the wifes old 106Gti, so I would'nt expect to see much difference on the road anyway.

  11. #10
    Neutral

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Stratford-upon-Avon
    Posts
    40

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    The Chinese have been whispering again. I spoke to my source again and he said the new S3 engine will be 'based' on the VAG group 3.4NA engine, which has 280PS.

    In reality I suppose this doesn't mean the production car will have 280PS.

    Still no further info on the RS3 though.

  12. #11
    nervus's Avatar
    5th Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,116

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    [ QUOTE ]
    The car was supposedly modified by Listers themselves as they do performance tuning in house now.

    It was definately a 3.2, it was the wife who asked if it was a diesel - she was being sarcastic about the performance. It was new so may have needed more running in?

    A standard 3.2 probably only has 20 or so BHP per ton over the wifes old 106Gti, so I would'nt expect to see much difference on the road anyway.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I dont car what your 'on paper' stats say, there is no way a 106Gti would live with a bog standard A3 3.2Q never mind a 300hp one (if they exist).

    Anyway just checked my stats:
    pug 106 Gti bhp/tonne = 128. not in the same ballpark mate.

  13. #12
    imported_S_Line
    Guest

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    Pug 106 LOL !!!

  14. #13
    Neutral

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Stratford-upon-Avon
    Posts
    40

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    The wifes 106 wasn't standard - gas flowed, induction, exhaust, ecu. It kept up with my S3 (180BHp/ton) as well at least up to 80 - which is a bit embarassing.

  15. #14
    StephaneS's Avatar
    2nd Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Herts
    Posts
    379

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    if your wife's 106 kept up with your S3 up to 80 and since your S3 left the 300bhp 3.2 well behind @ 90 then the 106 should also leave the 300bhp 3.2 behind..... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bravo.gif[/img]
    interesting [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/noidea.gif[/img]

  16. #15
    Neutral

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Stratford-upon-Avon
    Posts
    40

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    Not having them lined up side by side from a standing start I couldn't say.

    On a section of road where I know my cars speed at a marker from the
    lights, with a standind start, my car hits 90, the A3 3.2 I drove
    managed about 75.

    On the road, the 3.2, with me driving couldn't pull a gap on the wife in her 106.

    I couldn't really pull much of a gap from it in my s3 either.

    The standard 106's 0-62 time is 7.2 seconds (CAR magazine i think).
    Is that really that much slower than an A3 3.2?

    BHP per ton is only a rough guide to performance, there are other factors involved

    Anyway, I dont want to get into a "this car is faster than that" debate. Im just reporting what I found.

    For those who dont believe in a 300hp A3 3.2, ring listers in stratford
    and ask them how much. They also do 420BHP S4's. And by god they are fast!

  17. #16
    Neutral

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Stratford-upon-Avon
    Posts
    40

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    [ QUOTE ]
    As fast as your wifes 106 though?

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Nah nothing is!

    Actually she has a merc C230K now, which is slow and crap.

  18. #17
    Neutral

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Stratford-upon-Avon
    Posts
    40

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    As i said, I dont want to get into a silly debate - I am merely reporting what I found in reality.

    I think I may have touched a nerve with some owners or ex owners of 3.2s. I would have bought the car i tried if i it had gone like i expected!

    PS The 106 had approx 140 - 150bhp, even less sure of WHP

  19. #18
    StephaneS's Avatar
    2nd Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Herts
    Posts
    379

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    [ QUOTE ]
    I think I may have touched a nerve with some owners or ex owners of 3.2s

    [/ QUOTE ]
    [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]nah you haven't actually [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ok.gif[/img]
    I think the 3.2 has some flaws and if you would have said that the modded 3.2 would have been lost on a track by a 106Gti I would have believed you more, but when you compare it to a chipped S3 and say that it's so much slower in a straight line it's very hard to believe unless there was something wrong with the car

    Anyway, I hope the new S3 will be lighter (as you say) but more importantly with an engine positionned behind the front axle but that's not gonna happen
    Also I think that NA engines for real sports cars are best

  20. #19
    TDI-line's Avatar
    Uber Post Whore

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Peterborough
    Posts
    8,883

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    I hope they do a sportback S3, that will be the bees knees. Maybe even tempt me from my future tdi.

  21. #20
    nervus's Avatar
    5th Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,116

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    I think a chipped S3 will outdrag a standard 3.2 steph.

    A standard 225 S3 and 3.2 are about as even as you can get in a straight line.

    @ 106 guy, i dont have a 3.2 mate, just an S3 and a 911. Having had 2 mates with 106 gti's i know how they go. I didnt know yours was modded however, like it would make a difference? [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ok.gif[/img]

  22. #21
    StephaneS's Avatar
    2nd Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Herts
    Posts
    379

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    [ QUOTE ]
    I think a chipped S3 will outdrag a standard 3.2 steph.

    [/ QUOTE ]
    from my short experience it does not (chipped S3 quicker off the line but then loses out at high speed - Cuyen with his chipped S3 also agrees). It was after the AMD RR and the chipped S3 in front of me did not outdrag me at all. Maybe he was not trying and I am wrong [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/noidea.gif[/img]
    on a track (where the chipped S3 should lose the 3.2), I think it was officedog(?) with his 3.2 who left standard S3s behind and only one chipped S3 kept up. But I put that down to him being a pretty good driver eventhough he only had the car for a before prior to that track day!
    all in all there should not be not much betwen the 2

  23. #22
    Neutral

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Stratford-upon-Avon
    Posts
    40

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    To add some fuel to the fire, here are some more of my real world findings. They are not on paper, not on a track, not with well prepared and practiced standing starts and not from my imagination. They are what I have found when 'playing' with other cars on the road.

    All speeds are in KPH of course and are from my speedo.

    53 reg Subaru WRX (1up, me 2up): Dual Carriageway: Speed 30-100ish: No difference
    54 reg Subaru WRX Sti (1up, me 1up): Straight A Road: Speed 10-110ish: No difference
    T reg Audi S4 (1up, me 1up): Straight A Road: Speed 0-11055ish: No difference
    T reg 996 C4 (1up, me 1up): Dual Carriageway: Speed 40-120: No difference to 100, 911 started pulling away slowly after
    54 reg C4S (1up, me 1up): Dual Carriageway: Speed 40-120: 911 started pulling away immediately, at least 10 car lengths ahead by 120
    Private reg Ferrari 550: Twisty A road: 550 was much faster in the corners and even faster on the straight bits. Gave up after about 30 seconds and he was gone
    54 Reg Mazda Rx8: Same road as ferrari: Pushing him on corners and straights


    Any comments on these? [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

  24. #23
    5th Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    922

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    would the wifes ex 106 beat the ferrari? lol couldn't resist [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/angel.gif[/img]

  25. #24
    Neutral

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Stratford-upon-Avon
    Posts
    40

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    Then there is the other end of the scale:

    54reg Mazda 6 Diesel type thing: Twisty A-Road: Seemed as quick as the S3
    Private Reg: BMW 3 unbadged diesel: M6: Couldn't pull a gap from 70 - 130
    T Reg Fiat Coupe: M5: Much quicker 60-120 - it went like the Ferrari. Driver gave me a knowing smile when he had to pull off.

    I find it strange, cars like the Mazda diesel that I thought I would eat for breakfast I cant, yet I cant see any difference with the Subarus, S4 etc. Anyone else find the same?

  26. #25
    5th Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    922

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    if it was a 20v turbo one they are rapid as hell and that's standard!

  27. #26
    1st Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    289

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    I believe a chipped S3 beats a standard R32 in a straight drag, so I dont think a standard A3 3.2 could outdrag a chipped S3 (I assume R32 is quicker than A3?). I recently did a track day at Castle Coombe in my S3 and there were quite a few 3.2 TTs there which my car had no problems with at all (chipped TTs had no problems against them either but it could of course be down to drivers). Also did a session (about 15 laps) against a well driven chipped R32 (AMD) and there was absolutely nothing in it, lap after lap.

    Of course though power outputs are so similar for all cars so all it takes it someone in the wrong gear or as nervus said not as committed as the other.

    Also regarding the 106 GTI, I was data logging my car with vag-com the other night and a boy racer in his 106 rallye kep trying to race me - I was actually quite impressed with how his car went - in a straight line on the move once over 60 mph the S3 eats it but I reckon on a B road I wouldnt be able to get past it (assuming similar driver ability)

    Just my observations

    Dunc

  28. #27
    1st Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    289

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    Is this an AMD 300 bhp conversion, the same they do on the R32 (chip, miltek and cams)?

    Dunc

  29. #28
    Neutral

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    39

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    All these big engines what a shame, I quite liked the fact that the old S3 was a 1.8T.

    Id say its only a matter of time before the new 2.0T Fsi gets a chip for 300Bhp. Its well possible and a new S3 would be just the car to bring it out on.

    As for the RS well 3.2 Twin turbo would be acceptable after the wife kids and dog have to be brought around in the thing!

  30. #29
    1st Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    289

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    [ QUOTE ]
    from personal experience...

    R32 vs 3.2A3 the A3 wins...

    standard 3.2A3 vs chipped S3

    about the same i would guess..

    Chipped 3.2 A3 vs chipped S3

    i would assume the 3.2 but i have not had the pleasure of testing it...

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Of course these cars are all similar power, but a chipped S3 pulls the same if not higher BHP than a 3.2 A3 and has quite a bit more torque (270lb/ft - 300lb/ft depending) and lower weight.
    So taking any driver differences out of the equation, on paper, mid gear acceleration, I would expect a chipped S3 to be the quicker car.

    Agree/disagree?

    Dunc

  31. #30
    5th Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,320

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    i think a s3 is quicker than a 3.2,especially a chipped one.The in-gear times would destroy a 3.2.

  32. #31
    StephaneS's Avatar
    2nd Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Herts
    Posts
    379

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    [ QUOTE ]
    i think a s3 is quicker than a 3.2,especially a chipped one.The in-gear times would destroy a 3.2.

    [/ QUOTE ]
    That's a little bit "CTR-behaviour" for me and I think that's never gonna happen in real world with cars so similar

    I have driven 4 types of S3's: standard 210 and 225, chipped 265 and fairly modded 290bhp (Simon MTM monster which is in a league of its own!) and standard S3's are not that quick (an astra coupe turbo was nearly as quick in a straight line as the 225) and a std 3.2 is quicker but would not destroy them at all, far from it.
    But same goes with a chipped eventhough it is a very close call a chipped S3 would never destroy a std 3.2.

    People that drove mine (bog standard) sure said it was as quick as a chipped S3 anyway. But it also feels very different to drive and that's the caracteristic of an NA engine and the softness of the new shape A3. Some might think it's not that quick but check the speedo and you'll be surprised.

    Basically you would get (in a straight line) an astra coupe turbo just slightly slower than a std S3 which is just slightly slower than a std 3.2 which is just slightly slower than chipped S3
    now between the astra and the S3 there will be a real world difference but that's about it.

    I think I've said it already but the only two experience that I know of between a chipped S3 and a std 3.2 on a track (where, being able to maintain the turbo spinning, the S3 should even be quicker) has shown none cars have a definite edge. it's mostly down to the driver's skill/risks.

    So a chipped S3 destroying a std 3.2 (in gear aceleration or not) I dont think so. They're too close for that.

  33. #32
    jojo's Avatar
    S3 Drift King!

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Solihull, Midlands
    Posts
    24,846

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    For christs sake, whats this destroying business you guys are on about? Out on the road, they are about the same! and a few tenths(a second at the most) in it when it comes to in gear and accelleration times doesn't equal destroying your opponent!?

    [ QUOTE ]
    Ryanc said:

    My brother had a 3.2,was not impressed,the chipped s3's instant torque was the main difference and the handling is far superior.That is my opinion.Maybe i was a bit harsh with the destroy stuff.


    [/ QUOTE ]

    Instant torque? how instant is that!?, have you never driven your S3, and got caught out waiting for your turbo to kick in? no doubt an S3 has good torque, especially in chipped form and when everythings on song, but like all turbo cars, we do have to wait for the power, even for a fraction of a second, wether you like it all not - obviously not turbo lag in the form of an Evo FQ400 - but when the power comes in, it's a right shove in the backside. In the V6, it's very smooth and linear in it's power delivery and doesn't feel like it's going fast when it actually is.
    My conclusion is that the V6 wasn't made to be an S car in the first place, more of a junior GT with performance to match an S3, it's not exactly a track day tool IMO. An S3 is supposed to be a performance machine with Audi quality/refinement and it suceeds in both these departments(at the time it was released), but things have moved on, and cars from the opposition have got quicker, so todays S3 should be, and will be a quicker machine than the current A3 V6 with hopefully a lot of tuning potential - bring it on [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ok.gif[/img]

  34. #33
    1st Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    South London
    Posts
    237

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    Imo you cant beat a NA engine. I like my S3 but unless you're driving it on boost all the time, the lag can be quite annoying. I drove a BMW 330ci the other day, and it made me realise just how much i've missed instant throttle response, a nice engine note and a slick gear changes. The 3.2 A3 wouldn't be my first choice at that price point, but I reckon the new S3 should definitely be NA, just like the new RS4.

    [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile_smoking.gif[/img]

  35. #34
    1st Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    South London
    Posts
    237

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    [ QUOTE ]
    If the new S3/ RS3 doesn't have at least 1 turbo, then im not interested!

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Well, I think we all know you're a turbo man. How many turbos does your porsche have again...... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

  36. #35
    scoTTy's Avatar
    6th Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Essex, UK
    Posts
    1,957

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    I didn't think I had much lag on my TT....until I got a normally aspirated car again and then it was very obvious.

  37. #36
    StephaneS's Avatar
    2nd Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Herts
    Posts
    379

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    I really think the new S3 should be NA and based on the 3.2
    the improvement then should be on
    weight let say 2 to 300kg less
    a few engine tweeks to get the power to around 300bhp
    proper adjustable sport suspension and ARB
    better supporting seats
    better/slicker gearbox
    I know they wont but if they could also get the engine behind the front axle and rethink the haldex setup/software that would be perfect...

    then you'll have a winner with near M3 (E46) performance in an AWD small hatch.
    But if they ever do half of that I fear the price

  38. #37
    nervus's Avatar
    5th Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,116

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    [ QUOTE ]
    I really think the new S3 should be NA and based on the 3.2
    the improvement then should be on
    weight let say 2 to 300kg less
    a few engine tweeks to get the power to around 300bhp
    proper adjustable sport suspension and ARB
    better supporting seats
    better/slicker gearbox
    I know they wont but if they could also get the engine behind the front axle and rethink the haldex setup/software that would be perfect...

    then you'll have a winner with near M3 (E46) performance in an AWD small hatch.
    But if they ever do half of that I fear the price

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I really believe audi have abandoned the turbo route and to be brutely honest turbocharging is crude nowdays but, i love the surge and kick up the hoop it gives you.

    I know NA engines are probably faster but as they are more progressive, they really dont feel as quick as a similar turbo car. IMO you need a good 300bhp+ NA engine to make it feel exciting erm..... in a straight line [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Im not one for potentially wrapping my car round a lampost for the sake of taking a bend 5mph mor than my skill allows me too.

    But as you said, if they strip away some serious lard, then a 300bhp NA might just fit the bill!

  39. #38
    AL_B's Avatar
    6th Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Warrington, Northwest England
    Posts
    1,564

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    When I drove the 3.2 during the Audi performance week last year, I have to say it felt neither fast or slower than my S3, on a twisty road I know well.

    What I did love though was the throttle response, its instantly noticeable, and the engine noise was fantastic.

    I was quite surprised recently though to find out that on paper the 3.2 is down as the faster car. I was shocked, I never knew that.

    Be cautious of what magazines claim as being the weight of the S3 (or A3 3.2) for that matter. A lot of them have the weight down as 1375kg, which is for the pre-facelift model, not the facelift model. Facelift model is actually more like 1400kg, mine is 1420kg according to the sticker in the boot.

    So check the manufacturers figures for the weight of your 3.2's. The weight I have seen in mags is 1395kg. Is that right?

    AL

  40. #39
    StephaneS's Avatar
    2nd Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Herts
    Posts
    379

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    If I remember correctly, mine was much heavier : 1577kg as per label on service book!!!!
    the unladen weight is 1475kg I think (?)
    anyway "old" S3 or 3.2 that is too much weight
    the new S3 will have to go on a diet if they want it to stay competitive

  41. #40
    StephaneS's Avatar
    2nd Gear

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Herts
    Posts
    379

    Re: New RS3 / S3 Info

    [ QUOTE ]
    I know NA engines are probably faster but as they are more progressive, they really dont feel as quick as a similar turbo car. IMO you need a good 300bhp+ NA engine to make it feel exciting erm..... in a straight line [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Im not one for potentially wrapping my car round a lampost for the sake of taking a bend 5mph mor than my skill allows me too.


    [/ QUOTE ]
    I agree 100% and I would also add that with audi it feels even more calm/quiet/remote/smooth because it is so much insulated that you dont hear nor feel much.
    actually thinking about it a turbo car in a audi dont feel right nowadays [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

 

 
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO

Garage Plus, Vendor Tools vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO