2.0 tfsi quattro buying advice, general advice please

T

ti_172

Registered User
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
NULL
HI All,

Im currently looking strongly at A3 with the 2.0tfsi quattro, i would love an s3 but only have around 12k to spend so thats out of my price range (sadly!)

I was wondering with a miltek and a remap to around 260 (ive read on here not 100% the figures) would this make it the same speed as a standard s3, giving the similar 0-100 figures?

As ive read that s3 do 0-100 in low 14's ? Were as a standard 2.0tfsi is around 17? would it really knock off 3 seconds ?:S

Also any advice on buying one? is 12k enough? Running costs?

Any help would be greatly appreciated as ive read and is a very informative forum.

Btw i currently drive a 172, i just want a more refined car with power to match.

Regards

Tony
 
Don't think you will quite get the same performance but it will still be quick, S3's I believe get to a 100 in mid 13's which I read in one of the mags. It does appear standard S3's run on V-Power are kicking out 280 - 290 BHP which is alot more than the quoted figure.
I had a standard 20TQ before my S3 and found it to be a great car, much better then my previous Civic Type R.

Mark
 
I also had a 2.0TQ before my S3 and yeah it's a great car. Not the best handling, more for comfort rather than performance. It's rapid though. It's as fast as a Golf Gti but with 4WD. A remap will take it to around 240bhp and makes the engine come alive!

I also had a CTR before my 2.0TQ Mark!
 
Hmm! Seems quite a few on here have had CTR's? My views entirely, great when you want to rev the nuts off them, and cack when you don't. The tyre noise was my biggest bugbear!!
regar
DSCF0001.jpg
ds
dave
 
After reading more it seems standard 0-100 is around 20 sec? Do these feel very slow? The 172 i have now handles great and feels pretty quick when pushing, just dont wanna feel as though the a3 will perform poorly compared.

I know someone with a type r too nice cars, when you guys made the transition did it feel slower than ur type r and less agile?
 
Won't be as fast as an S3 without a bit more work - the suspension set up is not as good afaik, so you'll be a bit slower through corners. They're still plenty fast though, mine has a basic remap and it has really made the car, definitely recommended.

12k is enough, depending on age/mileage you're after and how many goodies. Mine cost less than that though, 05 plate with 30k earlier this year.

If you can get one with the light and rain sensor pack installed - it's a pain to retrofit (new windscreen). Most other stuff can be retrofitted if you want it.

Running costs - not much different to an S3, fuel consumption seems to be similar (think high 20s), servicing and the like will be the same I expect. They're out of the top tax band, so you should escape the worst raping from the government...
 
Hi Tony

With £12k you should be able to get a nice 2.0T with low miles. I had one 56 plate s-line one owner back in feb 21,000 bought it for £12k. The 2.0T also are very good with tuning. AMD have quite a few stages on the car. And also says gains between 40-60bhp. I dont think it get the same figures as an S3 gets 0-60 or 60-100 dont you wont be left disapointed. But they are fast! And did always leave me with a smile.
It didnt cost that much, i thought it be alot worse if i'm being honest!
I had to sell but if insurance is still to high on an S3 when i'm 21 i'm gonna go back to my beloved a3 2.0T :)


Hope that helps

Ashley


ti_172 said:
HI All,

Im currently looking strongly at A3 with the 2.0tfsi quattro, i would love an s3 but only have around 12k to spend so thats out of my price range (sadly!)

I was wondering with a miltek and a remap to around 260 (ive read on here not 100% the figures) would this make it the same speed as a standard s3, giving the similar 0-100 figures?

As ive read that s3 do 0-100 in low 14's ? Were as a standard 2.0tfsi is around 17? would it really knock off 3 seconds ?:S

Also any advice on buying one? is 12k enough? Running costs?

Any help would be greatly appreciated as ive read and is a very informative forum.

Btw i currently drive a 172, i just want a more refined car with power to match.

Regards

Tony
Click to expand...
 
ti_172 said:
After reading more it seems standard 0-100 is around 20 sec? Do these feel very slow? The 172 i have now handles great and feels pretty quick when pushing, just dont wanna feel as though the a3 will perform poorly compared.

I know someone with a type r too nice cars, when you guys made the transition did it feel slower than ur type r and less agile?
Click to expand...

Sure you're not confusing it with the 2.0TDI there?

Clocked here at 16.8s for the non-quattro version, the quattro will be a few tenths faster.
 
Hi Guys,

Thanks for the quick replies !

Ive had a butchers on Autotrader and Pistonheads, and 12k doesnt seem to be getting me much at the moment, im looking for the s line pack and quattro.

When looking at the times on the net the 0-100 were varying widely, 16.8 sounds abit better similar to the 172 :))

Im 23 so insurance shouldnt be too bad, just loved the looks specially the front with a black optic grill (also black car) yummy :D

Really interested now guys :)

Regarding the handling also, is it bad or just not up to scratch? Anti roll bar and Eibach springs would sort this? Or is it a full coilover change needed?

You guys are great at the responses much appreciated all !
 
Handling is fine, just not quite as good as the S3. I've certainly had no problems throwing it through bends though.
 
Make sure you buy a QUATTRO. A high powered Audi without 4wd is pants in my experience:greyrs4:.
 
Make sure you buy a QUATTRO. A high powered Audi without 4wd is pants in my experience
Click to expand...

I tend to agree but he is only talking about the TFSI which at just 197bhp can hardly be classed as high powered! Apart from a standing start, and then only if you're prepared to rag the **** off it, the 2wd car will be quicker due to lower weight, and lower powertrain losses. Also you'll get better fuel consumption with the 2wd.
regards
Dave
 
ti_172 said:
After reading more it seems standard 0-100 is around 20 sec? .
I know someone with a type r too nice cars, when you guys made the transition did it feel slower than ur type r and less agile?
Click to expand...

Lots quicker to a 100 than that my friend more like 16-17 seconds, Type R was doing it in 16.5 and the 20TQ did not feel any slower. A lot easier to drive than the CTR as it has lots of low down torque, the CTR is all revs,torque is none existant.CTR also useless in the wet due to lack of traction, 20TQ lots of grip due to quattro.Basicly in comparison the A3 is a much easier car to live with every day, good performance, reasonable handling, decent ride quality and alot more comfortable.

Mark
 
firebobby said:
I tend to agree but he is only talking about the TFSI which at just 197bhp can hardly be classed as high powered! Apart from a standing start, and then only if you're prepared to rag the **** off it, the 2wd car will be quicker due to lower weight, and lower powertrain losses. Also you'll get better fuel consumption with the 2wd.
regards
Dave
Click to expand...

This has been argued here before and still no one has proved this for the A3. Audi's figures for the 2.0TQ are 0.1 seconds quicker to 60 and the same top end as the non quattro.
 
what about the A4 ? i've decided I don't like my a3 much but think thats more to do with DSG oh and the suspension is ****** awfull although that can be rectified. I've been looking at Focus ST's and Astra VXR's but just latley i've also been looking at the A4 2.0tfsi quattro special edition which has 220ps as standard, these might be only just out of your budget but possibly worth a look ?
 
staz1000 said:
This has been argued here before and still no one has proved this for the A3. Audi's figures for the 2.0TQ are 0.1 seconds quicker to 60 and the same top end as the non quattro.
Click to expand...

0.1 seconds? are you sure?

I have raced an a3 2.0tfsi and I had a hell of a takeoff compared to him and easily won..
 
phille87 said:
0.1 seconds? are you sure?

I have raced an a3 2.0tfsi and I had a hell of a takeoff compared to him and easily won..
Click to expand...

Yep, very sure.

Now of course that all depends on the driver and the ground. If it's wet there'll be a bigger difference.
 
im sure it would be different on a track though that must of been on a straight staz and it was the takeoff where he got his one second on a track wet or dry qauttro would be faster than a second for sure
 
At the risk of being slated! Would anyone on here treat their own cars the way "testers" treat them? It means on a manual car side stepping the clutch at 6000+ rpm then ragging the **** off it to the red line and beyond just to get the "nths" of a second to 60mph better than the next car. The whole sequence would have your car in a heap within weeks if you did that everytime you tried to "race" someone. D.S.G. accepted. At the end of the day it's just baroom banter and is worthless in the real world of speed cameras, 20mph speed limits, and sleeping policemen. I remember the 1st time I went for a full bore start in my Evo V, it stood there in a plume of clutch smoke, and cost me the thick end of £800 for a new clutch. Far better IMHO to get rolling before flooring it.
regards
Dave
 
  • Like
Reactions: sportquattro
Flibble said:
Sure you're not confusing it with the 2.0TDI there?

Clocked here at 16.8s for the non-quattro version, the quattro will be a few tenths faster.
Click to expand...

Hes probaly about right. My old 2.0TFSIQ was a heavy car at 1560kg and although the launches were superb it didnt have the power to carry on the acceleration due to the weight and tranmission losses. My T4 Volvo was much quicker from 30mph+ with the same power. Infact I had lots of times were I ran against a 2.0TDI focus(140bhp) on the way home from work and from 50mph up(as traffic cleared) we were dead even up to about 90ish although from below that it would leave the focus for dead.
 
10blazin said:
im sure it would be different on a track though that must of been on a straight staz and it was the takeoff where he got his one second on a track wet or dry qauttro would be faster than a second for sure
Click to expand...

I'm just quoting Audi's official 0-60 figures. Which I believe as I'm sure they'd rather make it a bigger difference to sell more cars with Quattro.

I'm also sure under certain conditions the gap would be a lot bigger!
 
I have had 2.0T Fsi FWD and Quattro 53 and 05 reg. The Quattro is so so much nicer to drive, and handles like a dream. FWD scrambles from take off and felt far less secure and not so quick.

Obvious choice for me. QUATTRO every time ... it's what Audis are best at.
 
got to agree there Ive had both to ....And i got to say any car i buy after this i hope will be quattro or four wheel drive definitely and is a must for me now....
 
Dandle said:
Infact I had lots of times were I ran against a 2.0TDI focus(140bhp) on the way home from work and from 50mph up(as traffic cleared) we were dead even up to about 90ish although from below that it would leave the focus for dead.
Click to expand...

that cant be right, diesels are slow
 
Matt said:
that cant be right, diesels are slow
Click to expand...

Diesels aint so bad really, I've experimented pretty much with a 2.0 tdi 170 hp touran, I've raced a 1.8 t GTI, Mercedes slk 200 kompressor, volvo xc90 2.5t

and I've won over them all from rolling 20 mph, I've won against volvo xc90 from standing start hugely..

the touran was shipped (190 hp) but not so bad for a family car after all =)
 
Sorry that was meant to be tongue in cheek. Some people on here have a real hatred of diesels so would of been spitting feathers about a diesel being anywhere near a petrol :haha:
 
10blazin said:
got to agree there Ive had both to ....And i got to say any car i buy after this i hope will be quattro or four wheel drive definitely and is a must for me now....
Click to expand...

Great we are agreeing... still don't fancy them gren brake lights!!:lmfao:
 
Ive not and never had green brake lights ...it was photoshop affects :keule::faint: ....And il agree with anyone if i think there right ...
 
Matt said:
Sorry that was meant to be tongue in cheek. Some people on here have a real hatred of diesels so would of been spitting feathers about a diesel being anywhere near a petrol :haha:
Click to expand...


I got that you was being sarky straight away lol.... just cant be bothered with the diesel vs petrol crap any engine is tunable just depends how much you wanna spend but petrol is still better :whistle2: but when a diesel sounds like one il get one, il be first on the list just for costs:beerchug:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mark Haslam
2.0 tfsi advice
Replies
7
Views
820
JJ.Foulds
JJ.Foulds
I'mRonBurgundy?
Advice/General Consensus Please - Spacers
Replies
15
Views
1K
mechanic69
mechanic69
V
A3 tfsi Buying advice
Replies
6
Views
945
nates
N
T
1.8 TFSI Buying Advice
Replies
7
Views
3K
lgooch
L
D
Buying advice needed please
Replies
14
Views
1K
Deano82
D
Top
Back