A3 3.2 quattro (DSG) S line OR MkIV R32

S

Stuno1

Registered User
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Location
NULL
I am kind of torn as to which to get, i am leaning towards the A£, both cost the same on my budget and both have around the same milage and are the same age. Appreciate R32 does not have DSG.

I have heard the golf has loads of issues with it compared to the A3 that i have heard no issues about.

Cheers
 
I had the same issue as you and went for the a3.

Tried 3 R32's and found them alot more dirve focused but the interior felt really dated. Also they are on the mk4 platform not the mk5 which in my eyes makes a difference (manufactuers normally make advancements).

Also my thinking is that there will be more a3's that havent been thrashed compaired to the R.

Both cars are nice to be fair, i would drive both and make your own mind up.
 
Ive got a idea , hang fire and save more dosh for 6-12month and get a S3?

p
 
My previous car was the A3 3.2 DSG - the DSG gets really tiresome after a while. You feel about 80 years old - no interaction with the car whatsoever and it changes up for you when it thinks you are revving too hard (about 6,000 rpm !).

Golf R32s too chavvy (unless you are a chav of course).

Go for A3 3.2 without DSG or follow Phantom's advice and save for an S3 ...
 
My current car 3.2 a3 went in for some work at the dealers they gave a a new s3, i dont know if i would have swapped.....
+
Handling is better.
Generally come in decent specs.
Hold there money better.
Performance

-
Felt like u had to thrash it to make it go and then be going really fast! i.e i think i would prob loose my licence!

Wasnt too keen on the looks (wheels and side view wernt that appealing)

Poor fuel consumtion (that was prob my fault!!! did 300 miles in it and averaged 18 mpg...)

Didnt sound all that good.


Not slating the S3 just i woldnt be willing to pay near double the price compaired to mine..

Migth have to get one next though as the more i drove it the moore i got hooked on boost!
 
I do miss the "launch control" function of DSG when waiting at the lights ..... and low end torque in the 3.2 was fantastic.
 
^^^^Whats the torque on a 3.2? the S3 is 258lbft ( on paper ) not shabby , mines up to 300lbft Std.:)

p
 
Hmmmm, food for thought...Think i may stick with the A3 3.2. I did drive a DSG model and loved the Paddels. May be a novelty but i am willing to take that risk....i think!
 
3.2 torque (on paper) is 236 but it feels like you get it all at about 800 revs ! Many was the time I'd attempt a gentle move away from the lights only to nearly sever the head of an unsuspecting passenger. It really was savage.

There's no action in the S3 until 2800 ish. But when it comes .........
 
R32 for me, drives great and more exculsive i would say........no comes the slating lol
 
This might sound strange but i'd have to know you as a person to say which car suited you!
The MKIV R32, i think is a more special car than the MKV and sure to be a collectors car in time to come.
The 3.2 A3 with a nice set of rims is a great car though and more refined.
My main complaint with Audi is the fact they just swap the engines and don't give different models any defining features. For example, a Golf GTI is instantly recognisable from the R32 and likewise from the GTDI.
Whereas the S-Line 2.0TDI, 2.0TFSI and 3.2 V6 all look exactly the same if debadged. Not keen on that myself, i wish each model was it's own car.
 
Having test driven a 3.2 A3 I found it to be lacking in most departments, it went well enough and sounded nice at full chat, but it was totally devoid of character or soul. It looked like an ordinary A3 with RS6 rims and slightly nice seats. I walked away from the test drive feeling somewhat underwhelmed.

The MKIV R32 is a far more focussed car, it's almost a proper sports car, it handles a lot better, sounds far nicer, is more exclusive and is better equipped with things like xenons, leather and 6CD changer as standard. I agree the interior is pretty dated now, the ride is very harsh, it's very expensive to run and it may be considered chavvy but I love my car, I'm very happy with it.

I've not driven a DSG so I can't comment, but I have to say I preferred the R32 to the A3 by a long margin.
 
Hmmmm I really am stuck, I guess i will need to test drive the R32 as well...shame!

There is no doubt the R32 looks nicer IMO. Althought the A3 looks ok as well...Defo need to test one out...
 
Yeah, I was considering both at one point. And to be honest (o.k. I bought a TDi just now, but thats a stop gap, lol), I preferred the idea of the R32.

When weighing it up, the R32 is the top of the Golf range. Whereas the S3 is top of the A3's range. So I thought about depreciation and the likes and came to the conclusion the R32 is probably the better motor to go for on this basis alone.

I also got the impression, as has been previously mentioned, the 3.2 A3 is just little more than an engine swap, unlike the S3. If, I don't know, it was an S3.2 or something, that would have been different, but its not. It should have been punted as more of a special, drivers car. Not just an engine upgrade option, in my opinion.

With that in mind, I think the R32 wins the debate. But its personal preference. Maybe you don't want the flash looks of the R32? But want the same power. Personally, I know what I'd choose, but I can see how it could be a hard choice for others to make.
 
I would go for the A3 3.2, in fact I did after trying several of both!

If you are interested, mine is for sale at the moment as I need to trade down for something more.... family orientated.
 
I would take the Golf as it is nice and those wheels are so so cool! An A3 3.2 is just an A3 like all others... a Golf R32 is not a Golf is a R32....

You will end up paying the same in service costs... interior might be slightly dated but so is the A3.... Get the Golf. I know I would if was choosing between those..

Worth checking the S3 in 3-4 months though...

Pedro
 
I would go for the R32 personally, just because it fits my lifestyle (young male with little passengers/cargo looking for a fun car to toy around with).

GTI%2010.jpg





of course, adding boost helps.
GTI%2007.jpg
 
Iggu said:
My previous car was the A3 3.2 DSG - the DSG gets really tiresome after a while.
Click to expand...

Amen to that.
It only took a few weeks of ownership for me to go from "this is brilliant" to "god, I wish I had a manual".
Definite love or hate option, is DSG.
I hated it with a passion.
Other on here (to save them the bother) love it so much they wouldn't consider a car without it.
There's no way a sporty driver will like the lack of control.
If you never drive above 70-80%, DSG will suit you fine.
If you drive hard, the lack of proper control will do your head in.

Picture this scenario, as a rough indication of what I mean.
You're flat out around a corner, approaching the red line.
Would you want DSG changing up for you halfway round the bend, even if you're in manual mode?
If the answer is "no", forget DSG, because it does it all the time.
 
bowfer said:
There's no way a sporty driver will like the lack of control.
If you never drive above 70-80%, DSG will suit you fine.
If you drive hard, the lack of proper control will do your head in.

Picture this scenario, as a rough indication of what I mean.
You're flat out around a corner, approaching the red line.
Would you want DSG changing up for you halfway round the bend, even if you're in manual mode?
If the answer is "no", forget DSG, because it does it all the time.
Click to expand...


Disagree with the sporty driver comment - I am very much a sporty driver (too much for the A3 evidently) - I don't think that DSG necessarily impedes that


Agree with the scenario, pretty good summary, the only benefit to DSG in that one is that the car will shift up a gear, without impacting the balance and you'll keep accelerating, whereas in a manual you'll bounce off the redline

I do wish that manual was manual though,
 
bacardi said:
the only benefit to DSG in that one is that the car will shift up a gear, without impacting the balance and you'll keep accelerating, whereas in a manual you'll bounce off the redline
Click to expand...

Yeah, but if you're already on the edge of grip, or even over it, you want the car to rev out.
The last thing you want is for the car to suddenly decide it should go up a gear and wollop you back into some hefty torque!

We're basically singing from the same hymn book though.
Manual mode should mean manual mode.
My money, Mr.Audi.
If I want to bounce off the rev limiter, that's my choice.
A manual owner can, after all.:think:
 
I mentioned it up there somewhere ^^^^ about my annoyance at Audi's badging of S-Line models and the more i think of it, the more it annoys me.
Just extra little styling touches to differenciate models would have made various cars so much more desireable. For example...Why not badge the 2.0TFSI quattro differently (A3 GTS or whatever!!) and make it it's own car like the equivalent Golf GTI is, fit a slightly revised front and reat bumper, a few interior touches and job's a good'n.
Same applies to the 3.2 V6. What a great car and yet gets no recognition in it's own right. It's another S-line. Could be a run of the mill TDI for all anyone cares.

Christ, VAG have got it spot on with the Seat and Golf ranges, even the Skoda range is well badged with individual styling for different levels of performance.... But again, they let down the premium customers!!

It's just a shame really. I think the Audi range of cars could be so much more special than it is. But hey, who am i to say?!

Paul.
 
FWIW, I agree, PNH80.
I think there's far too much 'blurring' with Audi too.
 
Me too, Visually there is feck hall difference between mine and a bloke's 3.2 at work, apart from the pipes
 
bacardi said:
apart from the pipes
Click to expand...

Feck, lucky if I notice that.
Which makes me a bit dim, apparently.:icon_thumright:

I was parked next to a new Mondeo the other day.
You could instantly tell it was 'fancy' one.
No way in hell was it a 1.6 that had had the accessory book thrown at it.
I believe that's a good thing.
It makes the 'fancy' owner feel good, it gives the 1.6 owner something to aim for.
 
audi upgrades
Why would or should a S-Line 3.2 differ from XYZ S-Line? The customer picks the trim level they want along with the engine size they want, just because they chose the larger engine, why should this automatically add more trinkets and badges onto the car? What makes the 3.2 more of a S-Line than the other engine derivitive? Audi gives you the consumer a wider options when it comes to engines per trim level yet that is a negative thing?

So if the Golf GTI for example started offering 1.8, 2.0, 2.2 etc etc engine size the larger engined car should automatically get more styling just because it has a larger engine? To me its a GTI and the engine badges at the back is more than enough to set the cars apart.

Also I dont see how this only applies to Audi? Lots of big car producers uses the same method. BMW for example, I cannot tell the difference between the 318 M Sport and the 335 M Sport but one has a 2.0 engine chucking out 150 odd bhp whilst the other is thier signature straight 6 turbo'd engine producing more than 300 bhp. Same with Mercedes, there is literally no difference between the C180 Kompressor and their massive V6 models if the trim level is the same.

I dont want to sound like an Audi fanboy, just wanted to put some balance back in the thread.

Back on topic, I wouldnt get either of the V6 cars. Apart from the engine note the 2.0TFSI engine is superior, the V6 is just too heavy feels like a fat guy sitting on your bonnet and you can definately compared the 2.0T. The 2.0T also have better tuning potential, better fuel economy and also cheaper too.
 
A golf GTI looks distinctive, you can tell its a GTI, so you know its a 2.0 Turbo

also, The S3 is distinctive, you know that an S3 so you know its also a 2.0T

an S-Line could be a 1.6, 2.0. 2.0TDI. 2.0T, 3.2

you're examples contradict your point?
 
No it hasnt? I said the engine level doesnt matter as long as the trim level is a S-Line or the same depending on brand. The only way you know the GTI is a 2.0 Turbo is because it only has 1 engine offered.

If you are that worried that people dont know you have a V6 3.2 you are very welcomed to stick 3.2 badges all over your car or paint a giant V6 3.2 on your bonnet, but then it would be just silly right?
 
audi upgrades
Ah, I know what you are saying, however I like the way you know a GTI is a GTI and not a diesel as I like the way I know the S3 is an S3 and not a 1.6

Oh and stickers on the bonnet give an immediate 25% BHP increase don't they :)
 
yep, and each exhausts pipes over 2 will automatically give you 25 extra BHP ;)
 
bacardi said:
Ah, I know what you are saying, however I like the way you know a GTI is a GTI and not a diesel as I like the way I know the S3 is an S3 and not a 1.6
Click to expand...

Such is the state of alot of car manufactuers, just got to accept it. Its the same with BMW, if I see a 3 series M Sport driving towards me I wont have a clue what engine it has till I see the back of the car but if a M3 drives towards me I automatically know it has a V8 under the bonnet from the M3 styling and the a V8 roar. (I like using BMW as examples as we used to own a old 3 series)

It's just the way alot of german cars are with their subtle yet head turning styling, to me the V6 purr is more than enough distinction to it's Turbo'd little brothers.
 
I can see what your saying with the why should it be different. But on the other hand, why shouldn't you have the choice? I mean, you can spec s-line, fair enough. But maybe you could choose to have a slightly different bodykit only available on the v6 if you wanted? Or on the 2.0T? I'm only talking subtly changes, but enough so that you can tell, if you want...

As for the golf senario. Well, you could tell the difference between a normal GTi and the ED30 and now the Pirrelli. Back in the mk4 guise you could tell the difference between the anni and the normal GTi 1.8T (and the 2.0 if you looked as far as the interior admittedly), so you COULD in fact tell the difference with a quick visual inspection of the vehicle, contrary to other opinions, without the need for an engine capacity badge, which wasn't there in the first place anyway.
 
Unless 4wd is a must, then I would have a MK5 Gti in that price range.
12K gets you into a nice one these days. Brilliant car.

Sorry, guess the last thing you need is more choices in the mix.

happy shopping

cheers
Paul
 
What about a decent low mile for age 8L S3?

You can get a good 03 plate for 11k Better on fuel than the above , remap to 260-70bhp for £400 , 4WD to put it down , class interior that goes with a Audi......and a few grand left in the coffers for the wedding?

Makes a bit of sense to me.

p
 
PaulAr said:
Unless 4wd is a must, then I would have a MK5 Gti in that price range.
12K gets you into a nice one these days. Brilliant car.

Sorry, guess the last thing you need is more choices in the mix.

happy shopping

cheers
Paul
Click to expand...

agree - I'd pick one, plenty about, you can be choosy with spec/colour/options etc
 
Mine went for £12800 3 months ago, heated leather, monza2 etc, good spec in Red, 26K miles VWSH REVO Stage 1 (250bhp), superb car, lot of metal for the money. It was a 54 plate with my pp on it and could have been mistaken for a 6 month old car.
Even at that price it took a while to sell because there a so many about so its a buyers market.

I reckon if you drive one back to back with the AUDI and R32 you might very well have to rethink your next car.:search:

cheers
Paul
 
I looked at the older s3 but all seem to have 50k plus on them.

I appreciate what you are all saying about differentiating sports models a bit more. Brembos are always a good addition, and a more aggressive bodykit. I guess this all comes down to personal preference.

I like the 3.2 and the looks are fine with me, i just need to get out ther and drive them all!

Cheers for all your pointers. I have heard the R32 MKIV has quite a few issues with it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
3.2 Quattro S-Line DSG query
Replies
8
Views
2K
Sarah's A3
Sarah's A3
I
chipped s3 or a3 3.2 s line dsg ?
Replies
1
Views
939
JeffY
J
Spook
A3 3.2 Q S-Line DSG or New S3?
Replies
5
Views
1K
dbm
dbm
N
2005 A3 3.2 DSG S-line Quattro - lumpy tickover
Replies
15
Views
2K
shariain
shariain
C
A3 3.2 DSG S-Line Tuning???
Replies
18
Views
13K
p1tse
P
Top
Back