# A3 vs WRX



## groesche (Dec 18, 2000)

I know posting something like this in here, I'll get some bias but here it goes....

How do you think the two comare?
I'm looking at a MT, moonroof, 5 door. A3 premium with options at about 32k. WRX limited at about 30k.

A3 seems to be a little more refined but has 65 less HP and is only FWD.
WRX is only a 5 speed, but is AWD, stereo might not be as good, and I have heard they can have moisture
In the head & tail lights. Not sure if thats issolated or not.

Reason I'm asking, I've been having a hard time finding either to test drive. I'm not hooked on DSG and so far
Only been able to drive a DSG 08 A3 and a 12 STI. Just wondering if someone had the same or similar dilema.


----------



## Rob Cote (Dec 6, 2006)

If you're trying to fix something; Audi. If you're trying to drive something; WRX. Also, no one can beat Subaru when it comes to AWD.


----------



## everso (Apr 4, 2006)

groesche said:


> A3 seems to be a little more refined but has 65 less HP and is only FWD.
> WRX is only a 5 speed, but is AWD, stereo might not be as good, and I have heard they can have moisture


HUH? you can find 2.0Ts with quattro....i have one in my garage. After 2009, the 2.0T was offered with quattro-----don't listen to the Haldex naysayers....it's a great system which works very efficiently and actively with even the slightest slip to turn into full on AWD. I've had it on my MK1 TT for the past 9 years through Detroit, Chicago, and NYC snow....and now i have it on my 2012 A3.

DSG is pretty damn amazing. I am someone who has always been appreciative of a nice manual gearbox, but the DSG has won my heart over. I am in manual mode with the paddles 98% of the time and enjoy it 100% of the time.......definitely the gearbox of the future.

I tested a 2011 WRX during my car shopping, and was underwhelmed by the build quality, styling (or lack of good taste), and overall cheapness/harshness of the car. I did find it to perform very solidly----but to be honest, much preferred the Evo 10 over the WRX, although it was more expensive.

But for overall package, I preferred the A3-----compact, beautifully detailed and built, and a striking package with solid, seamless performance.


----------



## BL-2-8P (Aug 16, 2008)

@everso i think OP is looking for a MT

If you are looking for new...tough choice

I Came from a 06 Subaru Legacy GT - that i miss it daily 

Leggy at her prime http://legacygt.com/forums/showthread.php/my-last-mini-shoot-socal-48384.html?t=48384

I got the A3 for the refinement(plus i was getting tix in my leggy every other day) - and to really try something new, new crowd, not too common of a car. Last year this time i wanted to get into a 2011 STI Limited w/ nav and after ordering it, putting a depo down and pretty much everything but taking the car of the lot, i decided against it after a very generous test drive. 

The drive just isnt the same as well as the fit and finish of the car. I know i know two different cars two different purposes, so it really comes down to, what you want, the amount of plush (or lack of) that you desire, and your over all goal for the car. 

if you dont mind going used - look for a used legacy GT 06-09 (spec - b if you want 6speed and a nav)

The new Legacy's are also decent - the tailights, are the only thing that kills it for me. 

Hope that helps, if you want more insight feel free to post or pm...


----------



## BW11 (Nov 9, 2011)

The Subie is a new package but I am surprised that dealers in your area don't have demo cars for prospective buyers. The A3 has never caught on in NA and dealers do not typically keep many in stock. 




groesche said:


> I know posting something like this in here, I'll get some bias but here it goes....
> 
> How do you think the two comare?
> I'm looking at a MT, moonroof, 5 door. A3 premium with options at about 32k. WRX limited at about 30k.
> ...


----------



## groesche (Dec 18, 2000)

Yup, car must be MT. I know most like DSG after trying it but not me.

Around here, not a single A3 in any flavor, hence trying a used 08 with DSG. Just for interior space requirements and to try out DSG. Not a fan, but I can be pig headed 

I drove the STI because thats what the dealer had at the time. Loved the power but didn't think there's 10k more love between a limited & STI. The fit, finish & materials are not the same as you find on tbe Audi.

Are Subies more reliable than an Audi with maintenance issues? 

I've mostly had VWs (Jetta, Corrado, old Beetle) and liked them for what they are. Except for a B5 Passat we had. Liked it at first and HATED it at the end. So Ive grown attached to the brand. But wonder if theres something better out there. Or will I be kicking myself later for even considering making a change?


----------



## skotti (Sep 27, 2005)

Love my A3- but if I knew what I know now, and were shopping, I'd look at a Mazdaspeed 3 or the WRX.


----------



## groesche (Dec 18, 2000)

Why? What do you know now?


----------



## dman4486 (Jun 22, 2011)

I looked at the speed3 and wrx hatch when i decided on my A3. 

The main reason I didn't get the mazda was because of interior space (I could not sit in the back seat with the front set where I drive it). Secondary is the torque steer... AWFUL in the Speed3.

The WRX I loved except that the fit and finish was not there. I realistically do not have a need for AWD since I primarily live in the south and have a rig for winters anyway. The WRX also gets crap for mileage compared to the Audi and at almost the same performance. 

I ended up with a '12 A3 6MT and have driven it over 5k already. Absolutely love the car and have yet to have an issue with it.


----------



## Euronymous Prime (Oct 23, 2000)

I drove a wrx for 3 yrs before getting my A3. It was great - no drama. I beat the crap out of it and it just kept going. I don't even know if the car had a check engine light, as I never saw it.

Took about 1 week for the A3 to show me some CEL love. Got me back in the "what now?" mode I was used to w/ german cars. Lights going off, coilpacks, windows dropping, ac compressors dying, broken sunshades. Nice to know that after driving vdubs for the last 20 yrs the "experience" remains unchanged. From Corrados to A3s..."what now?"

That being said, I could never "get into" the wrx. Just felt...soulless.

Interior was crap. Stereo was crap. Sheet metal would get dings if you stared too long. The wind would scratch the paint by simply being. BUT, it was the most reliable car I've ever owned.


----------



## SilverSquirrel (Jul 24, 2006)

Euronymous Prime said:


> I drove a wrx for 3 yrs before getting my A3. It was great - no drama. I beat the crap out of it and it just kept going. I don't even know if the car had a check engine light, as I never saw it.
> 
> Took about 1 week for the A3 to show me some CEL love. Got me back in the "what now?" mode I was used to w/ german cars. Lights going off, coilpacks, windows dropping, ac compressors dying, broken sunshades. Nice to know that after driving vdubs for the last 20 yrs the "experience" remains unchanged. From Corrados to A3s..."what now?"
> 
> ...


The most profound post i have ever read here. :thumbup:


----------



## groesche (Dec 18, 2000)

Euronymous Prime said:


> I drove a wrx for 3 yrs before getting my A3. It was great - no drama. I beat the crap out of it and it just kept going. I don't even know if the car had a check engine light, as I never saw it.
> 
> Took about 1 week for the A3 to show me some CEL love. Got me back in the "what now?" mode I was used to w/ german cars. Lights going off, coilpacks, windows dropping, ac compressors dying, broken sunshades. Nice to know that after driving vdubs for the last 20 yrs the "experience" remains unchanged. From Corrados to A3s..."what now?"
> 
> ...


Thats what I was sort of thinking, thanks for the post :thumbup:
I might have 1.25 feet over the line towards an A3


----------



## jericks2 (Aug 10, 2011)

Rob Cote said:


> Also, no one can beat Subaru when it comes to AWD.


Subaru AWD is still a reactive system and not active like a torsion system... Its good but nothing beats a true Quattro/torsion system.


----------



## groesche (Dec 18, 2000)

True, but for me, getting AWD would have been a bonus on the WRX and not possible on the A3 because I want a MT.


----------



## kgw (May 1, 2008)

Hmmm...My 2006 A3 3.2 quattro has been great for about 56K. Other than a starter motor, that is. Great car.


----------



## MisterJJ (Jul 28, 2005)

groesche said:


> I know posting something like this in here, I'll get some bias but here it goes....


Don't assume too much. You'll find that most people here are extremely fair about comparing other cars to the A3, unless the car you are comparing is clearly a poor choice {cough} S40.

The A3/WRX comparison has been done here many times, but not recently. The general consensus is that for rally racing or driving all the time like you are rally racing, go with the WRX. Otherwise, go A3.

As has been said already, the WRX interior is poor quality, will rattle like crazy and the car will rattle you like crazy, but the car will be a blast to toss around. Don't expect the interior or much of the rest of the car to be in great shape after 10 years though if you are keeping it long term.

The A3 is more refined, inside and out. It can have significant mechanical issues but most have been addressed in the newer models and if you hang out in the forums you'll know what to look for to prevent many issues. Maintenance and repairs are likely to be more costly no matter what though. With some great tires and suspension mods, it can be almost as much fun to toss around as the WRX. And that 65 hp difference... A $500 chip tuning and you've got that covered.


----------



## krazyboi (May 19, 2004)

kgw said:


> Hmmm...My 2006 A3 3.2 quattro has been great for about 56K. Other than a starter motor, that is. Great car.


You need to drive more. My '06 just passed 70k....and it was not in my possession for 2+ years.


----------



## davis_449 (Apr 6, 2011)

SilverSquirrel said:


> The most profound post i have ever read here. :thumbup:


I agree. That was a great, truthful post. Couldn't say it better.


----------



## cldub (Jul 2, 2010)

krazyboi said:


> You need to drive more. My '06 just passed 70k....and it was not in my possession for 2+ years.


I'm knockin on 90k's door


----------



## drew138 (Dec 3, 2006)

No substitute for driving both cars. I like the WRX but it's too over the top for me. A3 is more subtle. I think the refinement issues is a bit of a farse. The A3 has its share of issues in the refinement department: window switch peeling, ebrake/armrest to name a few. I think if you like VAG than you will love the A3 and not regret. I don't think we've had any WRX defectors; maybe 1 over the past few years.


----------



## groesche (Dec 18, 2000)

i wouldn't equate refinement to overall quality. Sure VAG products have some short comings regarding quality issues. But they still can be refined compared to the "masses".

Case in point, I really like the sport seats in the A3. Nice bolsters, very form fitting and they keep you in place. On the WRX, there's no side bolster so you're free to slide around. Or maybe it's just me be a "big" American 

I think VAG products don't overwhelmingly stand out because they do 100 little things "right" in the mind of a true driver. Whereas other companies can be great in one arena and be know for it, but fall short overall.

I got the OK from the other half to order it, now i have to decide on color.......


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

refinement does not mean reliability. You got crude workhorse vehicles that would not break down and cars that are so refined but so prone to things falling off or breaking.


----------



## LM Spec (Jan 2, 2008)

I didn't have a WRX before, I had a '02 Impreza TS Sportwagon. So I can't compare the driving dynamics. Most of the opinions are correct about the poor paint and bland interior etc on Subarus.

There's more cargo room in the Impreza than the A3. So if you have kids (i.e. 2 car seats and a stroller) or haul lots of cargo, Impreza might be the better option.


----------



## ipponrg (Dec 25, 2010)

I have a 2005 impreza wrx and have an order for a 2012 A3 quattro. My wrx is fun as hell to drive stock, but the interior needs some serious work for the amount of money you're paying for it. After 10k miles, the plastic interior started rattling. Other than that, it's been a pretty reliable car. I have a turboback exhaust with 1 high flow cat and a tune (240 whp on cali oct 91 piss gas).


----------



## BL-2-8P (Aug 16, 2008)

LM Spec said:


> I didn't have a WRX before, I had a '02 Impreza TS Sportwagon. So I can't compare the driving dynamics. Most of the opinions are correct about the poor paint and bland interior etc on Subarus.
> 
> There's more cargo room in the Impreza than the A3. So if you have kids (i.e. 2 car seats and a stroller) or haul lots of cargo, Impreza might be the better option.


a3 has more storage room compared to the STI Hatch that i did i comparo with


----------



## djomlas (Nov 19, 2008)

ive had a few subies, and i really dont like the jerkiness of the transmission.
ive been driving manual cars all my life, and i just couldnt take it....
loved the power tho, and that car can take a beating and just keep going...


----------



## theblue (Aug 16, 2001)

here how it would break down for me.

If you're into performance cars and can only own one car then I would go with the WRX.

If you can own a fun car and also another for daily which is still fun then buy the A3.

I came from owning a modified evo and then sold it so I could buy a more fun car to drive (BMW vert), and a more fun car to track (BMW E30), then once they were paid off I wanted a nice daily that could haul some cargo so the A3 was my choice.


----------



## kgw (May 1, 2008)

That's because they were having fun "testing" your ride, KB! 



krazyboi said:


> You need to drive more. My '06 just passed 70k....and it was not in my possession for 2+ years.


----------



## lotuselan (Apr 9, 2008)

The Impreza was on my list to buy, except very late in the process I found the A3. The Subaru is rough, noisy more plastic interior and I don't need or want 4wd. No matter what I looked at I kept wanting the Audi. Price was my only concern but I found a low milage S-Line and except for tires I have no issues with the car. And now that I have about 5000 miles on some Michelins I think my tire problems are over with.

A co-worker had a Mazda 3 and it broke often and the dealer sucked.


----------



## maverickar15 (Mar 7, 2011)

Sorry, late to the party but since I own both 07 2.0T A3 and a 06 STI so I can give you somewhat of unbiased opinion. 

A3 pros
1. Usable torque available at lower rpm and more linear power delivery
2. Softer clutch - easier to drive in city and when you are tired
3. More refined and much better interior without being chintzy
4. Exterior paint fit and finish is heads and shoulders above Subaru
5. Better ride quality without being all soft and wobbly
6. Transmission is easy to shift but has an accurate feel at the same time
7. Better gas mileage (I'm averaging just over 30 mpg mixed driving)

A3 cons
1. Wouldn't call it slow, but it certainly isn't "blazing" fast either
2. Pedal arrangement is awkward for a heel and toe downshift
3. Steering ratio could be quicker, and feels somewhat disconnected from the road
4. Need to modulate gas pedal to put power down at start or in slippery conditions with FWD
5. Softer clutch feels like it can't keep up when you are shifting really fast
6. More expensive to fix? Might be okay with more preventative maintenance.

STI pros
1. Noticeably faster and responsive as long as you are above 3,000 rpm
2. Quicker steering rack, and it has more "assuring" feedback
3. Pedal arrangement is perfect for heel and toe downshifting
4. STI's DCCD AWD is unmatched (WRX might not be as good since it lacks front/rear mechanical diff and also lockable center diff.)
5. Statistically easier to maintain and less things to electrical gremlins? 
6. Car is very communicative and responsive overall

STI cons
1. Car is a dog if you are at lower revs (this can be tuned out somewhat but we are talking stock here)
2. Cabin is louder, and full of random squeaks. You won't be able to talk to your passengers in the rear seat without raising your voice at highway speeds.
3. Shifter requires forceful yet accurate shifting. Being sloppy with clutch pedal or gear lever is not tolerated and will be met with certain grinding noises.
4. Relatively bad gas mileage (23-24 mpg mixed most of the time)
5. Heavier clutch is harder to live with city traffic
6. Subaru doesn't seem to know how to make cars corner flat without breaking people's back.
7. Sub-par interior, but it isn't boring at least

As you see pros could turn into cons and vice versa depending on your perspective.

I would say STI is a more focused driver's car overall, and for spirited driving it will be better than the A3 in any condition. However, A3 is better all around car with better build quality, and it still has enough power to have fun. Both are compact cars but they are at the separate ends of spectrum in pretty much every category...you will have to test drive both and decide.

I will say one thing though... if you are worried about FWD with snow, don't. With proper tires, the FWD A3 will have no issue going through snow. I was very impressed with the A3 here in Colorado. I run a dedicated set of 16" for snow tires and I had absolutely no issues getting to the mountains during blizzard conditions for skiing. That said, the fun you can have with permanent AWD and snow tires is definitely something else.


----------



## abadidol (Mar 1, 2009)

maverickar15 said:


>


holy amazing garage!


----------



## MattFueh2234 (Apr 19, 2006)

@maverickar15: guess you like blue? I'd like to ask: what about the engine sound comparison? I hear Subies and they sound great. VAG 2.0T sounds comparatively like a toy doesn't it, especially when idling?

Now, paint that nice garage!!!


----------



## groesche (Dec 18, 2000)

Awesome post-I can easily see how/why you came up with each pro & con. Thanks!

Wish I could have both....


----------



## abadidol (Mar 1, 2009)

Problem was you are not comparing the two cars I want compared. 

A3 2.0T Q vs. WRX hatchback (not STI)


----------



## SilverSquirrel (Jul 24, 2006)

maverickar15 said:


>


you gonna paint that drywall?


----------



## maverickar15 (Mar 7, 2011)

To be frank I like the engine sound of 2.5L boxer engine better, but again this is stock to stock. 

Yes I have painted the dry walls since ... I'm indeed sucker for blue cars. I would have gotten the A3 in orange color instead if I was given a choice, however. I actually found that A3 by accident early last year, and I wouldn't have purchased it if it didn't satisfy both manual transmission and sprint blue pearl color at the same time.


----------



## maverickar15 (Mar 7, 2011)

abadidol said:


> Problem was you are not comparing the two cars I want compared.
> 
> A3 2.0T Q vs. WRX hatchback (not STI)


True, and my opinion might be worth even less because newer gen WRX/STI's in general are supposedly a bit more refined. I did drive new WRX/STI's and I don't like the way they've gone to. Yes they are faster, but they don't feel as raw. Also I don't think they are as refined as Subaru hoped to be, so I think they've gotten themselves into a no-man's land; an unhappy compromise. Again I have older generation STI and obviously I'm biased.

As for the new gen WRX...these cars are just as fast as old generation STI as far as acceleration is concerned, but you still lose the bullet proof 6 speed, brembo brakes and the DCCD AWD, and weaker 5x100 bolt pattern based hubs vs 5x114 in the STI. Newer gen WRX's also do not have viscous rear LSD - instead it gets open rear diff like the front. Some one mentioned Subaru AWD is reactive and I would have to agree the normal Subaru AWD system isn't as good as a torsen based quattro system. The DCCD AWD however is an exception, and is only offered in the STI. It has lockable electro-mechanical center diff along with mechanical front/rear differentials. That is why an STI weighs so much more than a comparable WRX.

Now....how much are these going to make a difference in everyday driving in a good weather? Frankly, probably not much. Its just that I know my 6 speed can take the launch but I would never do that in a Subaru 5 speed personally. I've seen too many 5 speeds blown up.


----------



## biff2bart (Dec 5, 2011)

*Just wanted to confirm...*

...maverickar15's posts:

We have 2010 2.0T A3 and a an older WRX (2.0T).

Despite our WRX being non-STI and only 2.0T (instead of newer 2.5T), when we bought the A3, we extensively test drove both the WRX 265 and the STI. In the end, the A3 won out, for these reasons:

STI was definitely "faster and more sporty" but outside of that, the car was definitely less "livable" on a daily basis. Cost of the STI was also a few grand higher similarly equipped (A3 DSG Quattor vs STI): this didn't make a purchasing decision against the STI, but as someone else mentioned earlier in this thread, new suspension and a chip on the A3 will get you 95% of the way to the STI (apart form the A3's steering, which is "loopy and vague) and cost essentially the same. In fact, I would say that for under $3K, you'll get a more drivable car around town with possibly better suspension and a better power / torque engine curve. That being said, the WRX's steering is nothing to brag about and in fact, my previous Mk IV jetta's steering was better than either of these cars, but it's still better than the A3's.

Also, as has been said, only the STI's AWD can match (and possibly exceed) the A3s: if you're only getting FWD, then this is not a concern, but the base model WRX's AWD is great for getting you out of a snowed in parking lot, but not proactive AT ALL in spirited driving. You can easily get these cars to seriously understeer in snow when screwing around (or driving aggressively through deep snow or even in rain). The A3 is definitely better than base WRXs here though the nod may ultimately have to go to the STI. However, supposedly the HPA Haldex mod improves this significantly: I'll let you know when i do mine, as it's on the list for later this year 

Re: DSG: when we bought the A3, which wanted the 6MT with quattro - as you know, not available in N. America because VAG Canada / USA are a bunch of morons. Anyway, it took about 1 - 2 months of driving to _really get_ the DSG. If you've only tried it on a test drive, well, it's going to suck. It will be lethargic in auto mode, useless in sport mode (which is still the case) and weird to drive with in standard mode, no matter how good a driver you are. However, once using the DSG really becomes second nature (which honestly took a couple of months of continuous driving), then it begins to shine and i think this is where you will see people start to get really stoked on this transmission. Things like highway lane changes and passing are just so perfect: you can flick the DSG paddle and hit the indicator with one hand in about 0.5 seconds, which drops a gear and just gives you the correct amount of engine power needed to be super comfortable doing this, no matter how slow you're going in your lane and how fast traffic is in the passing lane. And, as someone else said (and I know that this is better with the newer 2.5T subbie engines), the Audi 2.0T engine is WAY BETTER in lower RPM torque.

Anyway, in the end we picked the A3, knowing that it didn't have the spunk that the STI had - and I don't regret it. The car is in process of being mod'd a bit this year (new shocks, wheels, summer tires, brake pads and a chip are planned to start), and then we'll see where I go from there (Haldex mod probably, and hopefully eventually something like K04 or similar). I know you can mod Subbies to insane levels as well: i guess my point is if you compare cost to cost, you can get the handling and power from an A3 to similar levels that the STI has with an overall more liveable daily driver car.

Anyway, my $.02

Ps: I know our WRX is older, but it's reliability has been terrible: $5K was dropped in the car the past year and while it handles and drives almost better than new now, it's certainly not been a reliable car overall (and much less so that our previous VR6 Jetta was). Both cars have timely PM done and run synthetic fluids, but the subbie just always had something going on with it.


----------



## abadidol (Mar 1, 2009)

biff2bart said:


> Anyway, my $.02


:thumbup::thumbup: thanks!


----------

