Parkers Long Term Review of A3 Saloon 2.0 TFSI 190

[glospete]

There is an interesting long term review of the A3 saloon 2.0 TFSI 190 by Parkers:

http://www.parkers.co.uk/audi/a3/sa...W&email_hash=5e40f4fd3c130c94dbc2a1bbb9d65446

Their conclusion seems to be that it falls between the stools of economy (go for the 1.5COD) and performance (go for the S3).

 

[Timi8888]

I agree with them there. The cost of that car was similar to an S3, and the economy is pretty similar too. S3 for me all day, and if I wanted economy then the 1.5 makes sense!

 

[Brumbrum1]

I chose the 2.0 precisely to fall between the S3 and the 1.4 (now 1.5) and it does exactly that.
For me, far cheaper to run / insure than an S3 (but I completely agree it's not as much fun) but significantly quicker than the smaller petrol.
Nearly 50mpg on a long run is good enough for me.
Less than 7 secs to 60 is plenty quick enough (if I'm ever out of traffic that is).
I do approx 7k miles a year mainly in the city so diesel isn't a good option.
I'm pleased with the 2.0 190.

 

[Vertigo1]

Have to agree with their assessment tbh. If you want performance, get the S3, if you want economy then get the 1.5COD. The 2.0 seems to sit in a no-mans land between the two.

If you don't want the performance or cost of the S3 then I honestly fail to see how the 2.0 is a better choice than the COD.

It's quicker but certainly not "significantly" and only has an additional 40PS. The economy of the COD will be better and it sounds like, from the review, it's a more refined engine than the 2.0. It's also £2k cheaper.

About the only real thing the 2.0 has going for it over the COD, that I can see, is Quattro is available if you want it.

 

[Brumbrum1]

Have to agree with their assessment tbh. If you want performance, get the S3, if you want economy then get the 1.5COD. The 2.0 seems to sit in a no-mans land between the two.

If you don't want the performance or cost of the S3 then I honestly fail to see how the 2.0 is a better choice than the COD.

It's quicker but certainly not "significantly" and only has an additional 40PS. The economy of the COD will be better and it sounds like, from the review, it's a more refined engine than the 2.0. It's also £2k cheaper.

About the only real thing the 2.0 has going for it over the COD, that I can see, is Quattro is available if you want it.

It's the torque of the 2.0 over the smaller petrol rather than the bhp that did it for me but of course each to their own.

 

[Timi8888]

If the 2.0tfsi was the same as the TT's, then 230bhp instead of 190bhp would be worth it!

 

[Trevolly]