# MQB A3-S3 Manual Transmission Grievance Thread



## 03jettaturbo (Jan 6, 2004)

I've been watching this car for the last 2 years as it came to fruition.......Finally got to see it in person at CES last week, and now have come to learn there will be no Manual Transmission option for the U.S. spec A3 sedan. I'm devastated! This is a total deal breaker for me.

Anyone else feel the same?


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

_Mod note: This topic has been covered here, throughout many threads, over the past year. With more mainstream visibility of the car recently, I will be leaving one thread open for collective groveling about the lack of a manual transmission. I have elected to make this that thread, and will redirect others here as I lock future threads. Forum veterans, please go easy on the new posters who come here to ask about manual transmissions. I realize we're all long past the point of griping, but not everybody has been following this car as long as us. -Brian_


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

Short answer: yes.

They announced no manual for the US A3 way back in march of last year.

I had been waiting since they debuted the concept in Geneva 2011. More than a little frustrated, and was illustrated well on AudiUSA's facebook page by many people


----------



## 03jettaturbo (Jan 6, 2004)

ChrisFu said:


> Short answer: yes.
> 
> They announced no manual for the US A3 way back in march of last year.
> 
> I had been waiting since they debuted the concept in Geneva 2011. More than a little frustrated, and was illustrated well on AudiUSA's facebook page by many people


Thanks for the info - I had no idea this was a well-known fact almost a year ago. Hopefully Audi will reverse course on this. No sense in me beating a dead horse at this point.


----------



## lotuselan (Apr 9, 2008)

Go test drive a Lexus IS250 everyone complains "it needs a manual" Lexus says that only 1% of IS were sold with a manual. I can't find a ATS or Regal with a manual to test within 200 miles. If you really want a manual in a car like this you better buy one now. Either that or buy a Mustang or WRX or VW GTI. It's a bummer being the 1%


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

The short answer to the question is that the take rate for manual transmissions is exceptionally small and the price for certification in North America is astronomical. There was a thread over at Jalopnik discussing the certification costs for a new model in the United States and the costs can soar into the double-digit millions to certify and comply with US regulations. 

From my discussions with product planners at Audi of America, there was a pretty significant battle over bringing, at a minimum, the S3 to the US with a manual transmission. The economics and business case simply could not be made. Again, per those discussions, the issue was not just costs, but CAFE requirements. The s-tronic gets marginally better fuel economy, but the way I read the responses it means that automakers are increasingly trying to scratch out every last bit of mileage as the CAFE rules get harder to to meet. Think of it this way, there's a tradeoff between the number of RS7s they can sell based on the fleet economy standards. Were I in Audi's shoes, I'd want to push every last RS7 into this market as possible to take advantage of the substantial margin on that vehicle.

The door has not been closed completely and there are still discussions about potentially broadening the power train options in subsequent model years, but I really wouldn't hold my breath, especially for the unicorn of all unicorns: TDI+6MT+Wagon 

There is, however, some (potentially) very good news on the horizon: the United States and Europe are in the middle of the most far reaching trade negotiations in the last thirty years. One of the major components of this discussion is the harmonization of vehicle regulations and compliance requirements. To give an example, it would allow Audi to potentially sell cars in the US without the current DOT amber lighting requirement and it would allow, say, Ford to ship vehicles to Europe with the amber lighting and both would be acceptable. It would also further reduce tariffs and harmonize crash test results so, again, testing in Europe would be valid in the US and vice-versa. 

I suspect that a lot of the driving force behind this is the recent spate of factories being opened in Mexico versus the US. If you'll recall, Audi's real reason for locating there and not here was not necessarily for substantial cost savings, but moreso because Mexico has a reciprocal trade agreement with the EU that substantially reduces (if not outright eliminates) tariffs on cars built in Mexico and shipped to Europe. The new Q5 factory will build here and ship there as well as to the US. 

Now, these negotiations have a high likelihood of failure and they're not expected to be concluded until the end of 2014 at the earliest, and more likely than not this will drag into the end of 2015; but if this passes then the doors would open to the US receiving a LOT of forbidden fruit.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

And circling back to what has already been said: the lack of a manual transmission has been known since the car's introduction last March in New York. It's unfortunately the reason why I've all but scratched the A3 off my list and am more than likely going to move into an A4+Sport+6MT or even potentially a new MK7 GTI. 

I'm not ready to give up my stick.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

I know this was an issue for the E60 M5, and after a year BMW gave in. Somehow I seem to remember this was also an issue for the B8 S4, and well now we have both.


----------



## 03jettaturbo (Jan 6, 2004)

Great info - thanks for all the discussion. Hopefully somehow a 6sp manual will become an option at some point sooner, than later. Its disappointing that Fuel Economy standards translates to influencing cost of production translates to manual transmission car enthusiasts being subjected to an automatic transmission!


----------



## rMBA13 (Jan 3, 2014)

Because the automatic transmission has better fuel-economy


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

03jettaturbo said:


> I've been watching this car for the last 2 years as it came to fruition.......Finally got to see it in person at CES last week, and now have come to learn there will be no Manual Transmission option for the U.S. spec A3 sedan. I'm devastated! This is a total deal breaker for me.
> 
> Anyone else feel the same?


HA. we've been beating this issue to death for months. But yah, i have a A4 avant 3.2L manual and won't be buying an audi again now that they have decided to kill it. oh well moving on. and to heap insult on injury, they pretty much killed the a4 avant and sportback too. the plug in hybrid isn't my idea of an enthusiast option.


----------



## cjmoy (Aug 23, 2000)

kevlartoronto said:


> HA. we've been beating this issue to death for months. But yah, i have a A4 avant 3.2L manual and won't be buying an audi again now that they have decided to kill it. oh well moving on. and to heap insult on injury, they pretty much killed the a4 avant and sportback too. the plug in hybrid isn't my idea of an enthusiast option.


Yeah, unfortunately this is the case with me too. I had an A4 3.0 6MT and wanted to replace it with an Avant but still wanted a MT so I ended up getting a VW. Other than the S4 or S5, I don't see myself getting another Audi either.


----------



## VR6Now (Dec 31, 2000)

I was angry too...until the Golf R 7 was announced. I'll take the 4 dr Golf R with a manual and be content. Life goes on. Audi will survive without me and I'll survive without Audi.


----------



## FractureCritical (Nov 24, 2009)

03jettaturbo said:


> Great info - thanks for all the discussion. Hopefully somehow a 6sp manual will become an option at some point sooner, than later. Its disappointing that Fuel Economy standards translates to influencing cost of production translates to manual transmission car enthusiasts being subjected to an automatic transmission!


consider just getting an A4. Sure it'll cost you about another $10/month over an A3 to own given the current pricing, but it comes with a manual, real quattro instead of Haldex, and is ostensibly identical to an A3 to everyone who isn't on a forum or working at an Audi dealer


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

FractureCritical said:


> consider just getting an A4. Sure it'll cost you about another $10/month over an A3 to own given the current pricing, but it comes with a manual, real quattro instead of Haldex, and is ostensibly identical to an A3 to everyone who isn't on a forum or working at an Audi dealer


While I am a fan of the A4, and in fact I'm looking at replacing my A3 with an A4 for this exact reason, the two cars are exceptionallydifferent in feel, if not in looks. The A3 feels much smaller (in a good way) and much more nimble than the A4. That said, the A4 with sport package is a great setup and the combination of quattro, a better suspension setup and the longer wheelbase / different balance of the A4 gives the car a great feel.


----------



## t.oorboh! (Feb 11, 2012)

according to autoblog's review of the new golf R. the manual has better fuel economy than the DSG.

my point being that fuel economy (even if in the A3 fuel economy may tilt in favour of the dsg for whatever combination of reasons) is not a determining factor in the no manual decision.



> Estimated fuel economy comes in at a very respectable 10.7/7.7 L/100 km (city/highway) (22/31 miles per gallon) (city/highway) with the manual transmission, and 10.7/8.4 L/100 km EPA (22/28 mpg) with the dual-clutch.


http://ca.autoblog.com/2014/01/27/2015-volkswagen-golf-r-review-first-drive/


----------



## The DarkSide (Aug 4, 2000)

t.oorboh! said:


> according to autoblog's review of the new golf R. the manual has better fuel economy than the DSG.
> 
> my point being that fuel economy (even if in the A3 fuel economy may tilt in favour of the dsg for whatever combination of reasons) is not a determining factor in the no manual decision.
> 
> ...


Weird.. usually the DSG saves fuel in city driving.. I'm not sure how the manuals are ratio'd, but in my MK6 GTI 6th gear w/the DSG does feel too short for highway cruising (70-75mph)


----------



## FractureCritical (Nov 24, 2009)

Travis Grundke said:


> While I am a fan of the A4, and in fact I'm looking at replacing my A3 with an A4 for this exact reason, the two cars are exceptionallydifferent in feel, if not in looks. The A3 feels much smaller (in a good way) and much more nimble than the A4. That said, the A4 with sport package is a great setup and the combination of quattro, a better suspension setup and the longer wheelbase / different balance of the A4 gives the car a great feel.


hey, totally agree. We have an A3 and an A4. both stick. the A3 is far more go-kart than the A4. 
I just don't know that you're gonna get that same feel out of the new A3, or if it's just gonna be an A4 lite.


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

t.oorboh! said:


> according to autoblog's review of the new golf R. the manual has better fuel economy than the DSG.
> 
> my point being that fuel economy (even if in the A3 fuel economy may tilt in favour of the dsg for whatever combination of reasons) is not a determining factor in the no manual decision.
> 
> ...


Consensus on the Mk7 Golf R board thinks these fuel economy numbers got borked somehow and are not to be trusted.


----------



## RabbitInjection69 (Dec 21, 2008)

is it possible to custom order a manual?


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

RabbitInjection69 said:


> is it possible to custom order a manual?


Only in Australia. Not a joke.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

RabbitInjection69 said:


> is it possible to custom order a manual?


Unfortunately, no. Audi has not federalized the manual transmission power train for sale here in the US. 

Ordering has been recommended to Audi of America by several people. As always, it is "under consideration".


----------



## mike3141 (Feb 16, 1999)

ChrisFu said:


> Only in Australia. Not a joke.


And Germany.

And the U.K.

And France.

And Spain.

(should I go on?)


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

mike3141 said:


> And Germany.
> 
> And the U.K.
> 
> ...



All those european countries sell the A3 with a manual at dealers and keep them in inventory.

Australia made the manual option "special order only"


----------



## mike3141 (Feb 16, 1999)

ChrisFu said:


> All those european countries sell the A3 with a manual at dealers and keep them in inventory.
> 
> Australia made the manual option "special order only"



Ahhh--now I understand what you meant.


----------



## John Y (Apr 27, 1999)

FractureCritical said:


> hey, totally agree. We have an A3 and an A4. both stick. the A3 is far more go-kart than the A4.
> I just don't know that you're gonna get that same feel out of the new A3, or if it's just gonna be an A4 lite.


Fear not. 

Based on my own impressions of A4s over the years and the input of others here, I can tell you (after having had a new A3 for 24 hrs+ here in Germany last week) that the new A3 can't be anything like the A4. In fact, "go-kart" and "lite" (as in lightweight-feeling) are terms that wouldn't be out of place in describing the new A3. Admittedly, mine was a Sportback and not a sedan - sorry, I know that will strike a sore nerve with some in here - but I can't imagine the overall dynamics are significantly different. If you know and enjoy the basic feel of an A5 or A6 Golf GTI, you're not far off; it's basically similar - and yet much improved. feedback I had on the old A3 was that it was well past its sell-by date compared with the A6 GTI, so if you liked the old one, you will _love_ the new one.

The impressions that kept coming back and stayed with me throughout the drive were of the truly impressive rigidity of structure of the new MQB-based car (an impression I also had driving the Mk7 GTI, but perhaps to a lesser degree) and the "lightness", which no doubt also contributed to the sense of rigidity and a somewhat go-karty feeling. 

Mine was a 1.8T, S-Tronic. If people here are interested to hear more about it, I can start a separate thread and add a little meat to the bones.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

John Y said:


> Mine was a 1.8T, S-Tronic. If people here are interested to hear more about it, I can start a separate thread and add a little meat to the bones.


Please do!


----------



## John Y (Apr 27, 1999)

Dan Halen said:


> Please do!


Damn, that was fast! Wasn't even done ninja-editing, yet I will work on it tonight, CET.


----------



## Zorro83 (Sep 10, 2011)

John Y said:


> Damn, that was fast! Wasn't even done ninja-editing, yet I will work on it tonight, CET.


That would be awesome...pics don't hurt either  thanks!!


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

John Y said:


> Damn, that was fast! Wasn't even done ninja-editing, yet I will work on it tonight, CET.


Eh, you just happened to post right as I was doing my first check of the day. :wave:


----------



## BrutusA3 (Jul 10, 2013)

I would love to hear about the 1.8T, it is often overlooked, but could prove to be the surprise steal of the line.


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

BrutusA3 said:


> I would love to hear about the 1.8T, it is often overlooked, but could prove to be the surprise steal of the line.


Because 99% of their target market doesn't care about AWD, they are going to sell A LOT of 1.8T A3s in the US. And because the rumored starting price is exactly the same as the Autobahn GLI with Nav and DSG (29,995) VW can pretty much forget ever selling another GLI. (GLI is slightly bigger and more powerful but compared to the overall A3 package, come on )

I bet the breakdown will look like this:
70% A3 1.8T (all trims)
28% A3 2.0T (all trims)
2% S3

And in states/markets with generally good weather:
85% 1.8T
10% 2.0T
5% S3

If MB sold approximately 10k CLAs per month, Audi can grab at least a 3rd of that share away and do 35-40k units a year. (BMW 2-series gets a 3rd of share too probably)


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Waterfan said:


> If MB sold approximately 10k CLAs per month, Audi can grab at least a 3rd of that share away and do 35-40k units a year. (BMW 2-series gets a 3rd of share too probably)


Mercedes has been averaging about 3,300 CLAs per month since launch in September. The question moving forward is whether the A3 will expand that market or eat into it. 

Audi will probably move around 2,200/month in 2014, venturing an educated guess.

I suspect the Q3 will exceed that figure once launched. 2015 ought to be a very good year for A3+Q3 sales. I'll wager that in 2015 Audi moves at least 50,000 of those, combined.


----------



## BrutusA3 (Jul 10, 2013)

I have been hot for the 2.0t but I also have driven a fwd car my whole life and been perfectly happy. $3g is a lot of cheese if your budget is tight. But the question am I gonna feel good with the 1.8t vs the 2.0t in terms of power, we shall see. Still waiting for the follow up.


----------



## John Y (Apr 27, 1999)

BrutusA3 said:


> Still waiting for the follow up.


 Careful what you wish for http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...back-1-8TFSI-S-Tronic&p=84797330#post84797330

I hope you have some time on your hands


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

BrutusA3 said:


> I have been hot for the 2.0t but I also have driven a fwd car my whole life and been perfectly happy. $3g is a lot of cheese if your budget is tight. But the question am I gonna feel good with the 1.8t vs the 2.0t in terms of power, we shall see. Still waiting for the follow up.


Did you see that APR has ECU tunes out for the 1.8T Jetta mk6 (EA888 Gen 3 from Silao, MX.)? Expect something similar for the A3 a few months after they get here. (The EU-built A3 1.8T probably has slightly better tuning potential.) Beats 220hp/258tq of the stock 2.0T pretty handily (though the 220/258 is very likely underrated)

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?6898815-APR-Presents-the-1-8-TSI-Generation-3-ECU-Upgrade!


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

I almost feel like a broken record as I've said this in a couple other places now re: aftermarket software, but...

TD1 should be a very serious consideration/ concern for anyone who plans to circumvent the 2.0T price premium by buying a 1.8T and driving to an APR dealer. $30,000 is a lot of money to spend on a car only to turn right around and void the warranty.

Being content with the stock power on the 1.8T is one thing, but buying simply to avoid the additional cost of the automobile purchase may be penny wise and pound foolish, as they say. I'm not implying either of you have that intention, but I feel it would be disingenuous to not point it out for the uninitiated that may just be joining us here.


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

Dan Halen said:


> I almost feel like a broken record as I've said this in a couple other places now re: aftermarket software, but...
> 
> TD1 should be a very serious consideration/ concern for anyone who plans to circumvent the 2.0T price premium by buying a 1.8T and driving to an APR dealer. $30,000 is a lot of money to spend on a car only to turn right around and void the warranty.
> 
> Being content with the stock power on the 1.8T is one thing, but buying simply to avoid the additional cost of the automobile purchase may be penny wise and pound foolish, as they say. I'm not implying either of you have that intention, but I feel it would be disingenuous to not point it out for the uninitiated that may just be joining us here.


They can only invalidate parts of your warranty for which the modifications have been proven to cause the issue. HOWEVER it is next to impossible to prove that the modification didn't cause the issue and TD1 is the most aggressive anti-modding feature we have seen from VWAG in the history of time. (Owners will get "Blacklisted" essentially)

I saw it more in the context of "I don't need AWD but I like the additional power of 2.0T", but I agree it is not necessarily cost-effective to risk large parts of your warranty. If you want to mod, you have to accept the added expenses, sooner or later.

1.8T with the fat and flat torque curve should be more than sufficient for the average driver since the A3 FWD is going to be rather light (~2700-2800 lbs?).


----------



## cwyattrun (Jan 26, 2014)

Waterfan said:


> 1.8T with the fat and flat torque curve should be more than sufficient for the average driver since the A3 FWD is going to be rather light (~2700-2800 lbs?).


3,175 pounds for the 1.8T - 3,362 for the 2.0T.


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

cwyattrun said:


> 3,175 pounds for the 1.8T - 3,362 for the 2.0T.


I was significantly off. Thank you for for the correction.


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

Dan Halen said:


> I almost feel like a broken record as I've said this in a couple other places now re: aftermarket software, but...
> 
> TD1 should be a very serious consideration/ concern for anyone who plans to circumvent the 2.0T price premium by buying a 1.8T and driving to an APR dealer. $30,000 is a lot of money to spend on a car only to turn right around and void the warranty.
> 
> Being content with the stock power on the 1.8T is one thing, but buying simply to avoid the additional cost of the automobile purchase may be penny wise and pound foolish, as they say. I'm not implying either of you have that intention, but I feel it would be disingenuous to not point it out for the uninitiated that may just be joining us here.


why doesnt Audi/VW do a factory tuning program then? They know a lot of people like to tune their cars...why not take advantage of it?


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

*Re: No Manual Trans option for the U.S. spec A3 sedan! Why??*



caliatenza said:


> why doesnt Audi/VW do a factory tuning program then? They know a lot of people like to tune their cars...why not take advantage of it?


What's even more maddening is that VW actually gives preproduction cars to APR for development!

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

Dan Halen said:


> What's even more maddening is that VW actually gives preproduction cars to APR for development!
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk


then why doesnt APR get into the same program that STASIS is under? Has anyone ever asked VW why there isnt a factory upgrade program?


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

caliatenza said:


> why doesnt Audi/VW do a factory tuning program then? They know a lot of people like to tune their cars...why not take advantage of it?


I have had mine tuned since 20k miles, now at 146k miles without any problems but I think VW/Audi feel that the levels that the aftermarket tuning take the performance wouldn't meet their reliability standards. Many types of owners, all types of maintenance and how these owner treat the car and they need a really low failure rate. They sell the package to everyone and engine/turbo failures go from some tiny number to some greater number (probably still very small) and they don't want the publicity or costs associated with it. Last thing VW/Audi needs is to take chances by offering performance upgrades that they don't feel will match their stringent reliability requirements.

Read up on what they changed on the "R" engine and the S3 engine when tuners never go to these lengths. The current R stock engine HP isn't much different than Stage 1 APR on a standard GTI with the FSI. If VW/Audi didn't think all of the changes were needed they wouldn't have done it either.

Also note that on the new GTI VII there is a "Performance Package" (not sure this is the correct name) which adds 10 hp, I am sure Sales/Marketing would rather have had a package that would have added more and they could have sold it for more.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

dmorrow said:


> I have had mine tuned since 20k miles, now at 146k miles without any problems but I think VW/Audi feel that the levels that the aftermarket tuning take the performance wouldn't meet their reliability standards. Many types of owners, all types of maintenance and how these owner treat the car and they need a really low failure rate. They sell the package to everyone and engine/turbo failures go from some tiny number to some greater number (probably still very small) and they don't want the publicity or costs associated with it. Last thing VW/Audi needs is to take chances by offering performance upgrades that they don't feel will match their stringent reliability requirements.
> 
> Read up on what they changed on the "R" engine and the S3 engine when tuners never go to these lengths. The current R stock engine HP isn't much different than Stage 1 APR on a standard GTI with the FSI. If VW/Audi didn't think all of the changes were needed they wouldn't have done it either.
> 
> Also note that on the new GTI VII there is a "Performance Package" (not sure this is the correct name) which adds 10 hp, I am sure Sales/Marketing would rather have had a package that would have added more and they could have sold it for more.


Are you an engineer, a bean counter, or both? I'm the former, currently fitting myself into the mold of the latter. With that, I agree completely. :laugh:

As for STASIS, my understanding with no actual experience is that their program (to replace the factory warranty) is a lot of talk and almost no walk. It's still not a risk I'd take.


----------



## FractureCritical (Nov 24, 2009)

Dan Halen said:


> Are you an engineer, a bean counter, or both? I'm the former, currently fitting myself into the mold of the latter. With that, I agree completely. :laugh:
> 
> As for STASIS, my understanding with no actual experience is that their program (to replace the factory warranty) is a lot of talk and almost no walk. It's still not a risk I'd take.



I found somethinig interesting in one of these online product surveys that Audi usually sends me -this one regarding what amounted to dealer installed accessories. 

among the floormats and audi branded ballwashers, they also asked what i'd pay for an upgrade to my car's engine power in terms of $/HP. 
Clearly, they are considering following BMW down the path of becoming an in-house tuner, and Audi has talked-up being able to make Wi-Fi app store style purchases for your car's features in the past.

the TD1 code thing was probably a first step to making sure that people stop mucking about with the ECU before they'd implement such an idea. 

what a great boon for the dealers, too. things like trip computers, horsepower, memory seats, etc.. all that 'stuff' is alreadyin there, they jsut have to switch it on for a (not) small fee, with absoloutely zero materials to stock and a bare minimum of 'labor'.


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

Dan Halen said:


> Are you an engineer, a bean counter, or both? I'm the former, currently fitting myself into the mold of the latter. With that, I agree completely. :laugh:
> 
> As for STASIS, my understanding with no actual experience is that their program (to replace the factory warranty) is a lot of talk and almost no walk. It's still not a risk I'd take.


yeah thats not good . At least with Mercedes, they support the aftermarket tuners, such as BRABUS, CARLSON, etc. Those tunes dont affect warrenties as far as i know.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

For those complaining about Audi not wanting to warranty issues possibly tied to tuning companies software, ever notice that the tuning companies also aren't interested in throwing in a power train warranty for items not covered by the car manufacturer? For some reason we only blame the car manufacturer.

Audi engineers spend huge amounts of time and money figuring out what makes a reliable car then random companies want to change parameters to increase performance, and we want Audi to cover possible issues? I can't see any reason they would want to go down this road unless they were getting a big kickback or were the only ones selling it, then we wouldn't buy it because it would cost too much. Current system of "do what you want but don't look for Audi to pick up the pieces" is what I would also do.


----------



## jrwamp (Mar 25, 2011)

So I'm kind of in disagreement with everyone here in that I tune and modify my cars even when they're under warranty. I agree that if something goes wrong you may be more hung out to dry. There's the whole 'pay to play' argument that I'm not really trying to get into with this post though. 

What I will say is that in my experience it's all about the relationship you have with the dealership, and/or how the dealership looks at mods. Some VW dealerships are actually approved APR dealers for instance. I know of one in my area in the process of trying to become one as we speak. My mk6 gti is tuned and I also have aftermarket hardware on my car, and any dealership I've ever been to has never mentioned it as an issue. They obviously know I have my ECU tuned from plugging it in. I've spoken to service advisers who ask what I have done to the car, in the context of 'car talk'.

Audi specifically, I Revo tuned my wife's Q5 and have the Stasis exhaust installed. No issues thus far as well. True, messing up the ECU could happen. But the tuning companies themselves will work with you in the extremely rare circumstance that something happens. They don't want their reputation tarnished by messing up your car, it's in their best business interests to make it right. These aren't fly by night companies(APR, REVO, Unitronic, GIAC, etc.)

My point is, if you're going to modify, do your homework, cross shop, get a feel through the local forum community which places are 'tuner friendly', and you most likely won't have any issues. Sure, something may come up with some random adviser questioning something, but I've also had one question me as to why my oil pan bolt was stripped on my GTI, even though they did it and I could prove it through service records.

And for the record I plan on modifying my S3.


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

dmorrow said:


> I have had mine tuned since 20k miles, now at 146k miles without any problems but I think VW/Audi feel that the levels that the aftermarket tuning take the performance wouldn't meet their reliability standards. Many types of owners, all types of maintenance and how these owner treat the car and they need a really low failure rate. They sell the package to everyone and engine/turbo failures go from some tiny number to some greater number (probably still very small) and they don't want the publicity or costs associated with it. Last thing VW/Audi needs is to take chances by offering performance upgrades that they don't feel will match their stringent reliability requirements.
> 
> Read up on what they changed on the "R" engine and the S3 engine when tuners never go to these lengths. The current R stock engine HP isn't much different than Stage 1 APR on a standard GTI with the FSI. If VW/Audi didn't think all of the changes were needed they wouldn't have done it either.
> 
> Also note that on the new GTI VII there is a "Performance Package" (not sure this is the correct name) which adds 10 hp, I am sure Sales/Marketing would rather have had a package that would have added more and they could have sold it for more.


I think you are correct on all counts. VAG is a VERY conservative operation, so it follows they would have a conservative approach to modding. I may not completely agree with the approach, especially when their competitors have a more relaxed view, but I can understand it and they are entitled to protect their interests as they see fit.

FYI: The bundle of 3 options (electronically-controlled, mechanical LSD; larger "Golf R" brakes all around; and +10hp (by virtue of 200 max rpm increase)) is in fact exactly called "Performance Package". We Mk7 forum-dwellers are shorthanding it as "GTI PP".


----------



## 03jettaturbo (Jan 6, 2004)

Waterfan said:


> Because 99% of their target market doesn't care about AWD, they are going to sell A LOT of 1.8T A3s in the US. And because the rumored starting price is exactly the same as the Autobahn GLI with Nav and DSG (29,995) VW can pretty much forget ever selling another GLI. (GLI is slightly bigger and more powerful but compared to the overall A3 package, come on )
> 
> I bet the breakdown will look like this:
> 70% A3 1.8T (all trims)
> ...


There is one fact that will save the GLI - It has a manual transmission option!


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

03jettaturbo said:


> There is one fact that will save the GLI - It has a manual transmission option!


Zing!!!


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

03jettaturbo said:


> There is one fact that will save the GLI - It has a manual transmission option!


Excellent point.


----------



## cjmoy (Aug 23, 2000)

03jettaturbo said:


> There is one fact that will save the GLI - It has a manual transmission option!


X2, this alone would make me buy a GLI over an A3.


----------



## 03jettaturbo (Jan 6, 2004)

cjmoy said:


> X2, this alone would make me buy a GLI over an A3.


Agreed. Also, the Jetta is getting a refresh later in the year which could improve it's bland look.


----------



## ATI_VR6 (Jun 2, 2006)

*Don't kill the manual! Bring us an A3 Quattro w a manual transmission!*

Please sign petition!!! Thanks! Sharing because I do agree with this! I was looking forward to the new S3 sedan, but this S-tronic is a deal breaker! No thank you! 

Many Americans and Canadians enjoy driving manual over automatic. One of the reasons I was such a fan of audi for years was the combination of all wheel drive and manual transmission.

It really saddens me to see Audi killing the manual. I can only guess the A4 manual options will disappear soon as well.

It may be time to look elsewhere after many many years of being a VW / Audi loyalist. 
I'm now looking towards BMW and Cadillac for my next car in 2014.

Please audi - bring it back! Don't lose me. I'm a good customer.

https://www.change.org/petitions/au...ing-us-an-a3-quattro-w-a-manual-transmission#


----------



## nahf14 (Jul 22, 2004)

I agree. I don't see why they can't do what BMW does and make automatic standard but manual a no cost option


----------



## FractureCritical (Nov 24, 2009)

nahf14 said:


> I agree. I don't see why they can't do what BMW does and make automatic standard but manual a no cost option


I said it before in another thread and I'll repeat it here; who's going to buy an S3? People aren't going to change over from their Corollas and Civics. You're going to get people who already have, or have an interest in factory tuned cars with good power to size/weight balance. Let's look at what else is on the market and how they sell stick to auto:

Ford Foci ST's (100% stick sales), 
WRX's (80% stick sales) 
GTI's (55% stick sales) 

that's smart, Audi. 
sometimes I wonder if Audi in general is a bunch of morons or if it's Audi as a global entitiy.
Maybe they just don't want the money of the above affluent buyers of those cars.
(average income of the people who buy the above cars is well over 6 figures. the average Focus ST buyer makes about $140k/yr)

I certainly won't knock Audi's buisness plan, they do a bang-up job of selling A4's and Q5/Q7's to soccer moms. And the minority of elderly gentlemen who have friends at an Audi dealer and can't afford an E class or 5 series seem very happy in A6's.


----------



## The DarkSide (Aug 4, 2000)

FractureCritical said:


> I said it before in another thread and I'll repeat it here; who's going to buy an S3? People aren't going to change over from their Corollas and Civics. You're going to get people who already have, or have an interest in factory tuned cars with good power to size/weight balance. Let's look at what else is on the market and how they sell stick to auto:
> 
> Ford Foci ST's (100% stick sales),
> WRX's (80% stick sales)
> ...


Wait what? Seriously?


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

Just look at his other posts from this morning. Clearly he's just looking to bait people.


----------



## VW MK 4 (Apr 29, 2010)

nahf14 said:


> I agree. I don't see why they can't do what BMW does and make automatic standard but manual a no cost option


S-Tron for me, because of physical limitations.
But Audi should give us a choice, even if only way to get
the manual is to special order.


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

Im sure thats "household income" similar to Audi's evaluation of the A3 market income being somewhere in the $150k range.


----------



## FractureCritical (Nov 24, 2009)

Dan Halen said:


> Just look at his other posts from this morning. Clearly he's just looking to bait people.


yep, that's how I troll.

but, it doesn't make me wrong.

http://articles.philly.com/2013-12-29/news/45677966_1_the-wrx-impreza-subaru

" Subaru expects automatics to account for only 20 percent of its sales."

and here's an article that adds in the GTI (the denote 50% manual) and they also toss in the scooby and Scion twin coupes at 70% and 60 % sold as stick.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/boot/whats-really-killing-the-manual-transmisson

Focus ST only comes as a stick.


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

dmorrow said:


> For those complaining about Audi not wanting to warranty issues possibly tied to tuning companies software, ever notice that the tuning companies also aren't interested in throwing in a power train warranty for items not covered by the car manufacturer? For some reason we only blame the car manufacturer.
> 
> Audi engineers spend huge amounts of time and money figuring out what makes a reliable car then random companies want to change parameters to increase performance, and we want Audi to cover possible issues? I can't see any reason they would want to go down this road unless they were getting a big kickback or were the only ones selling it, then we wouldn't buy it because it would cost too much. Current system of "do what you want but don't look for Audi to pick up the pieces" is what I would also do.


Okay then Audi should come out with a factory tuning program then...problem solved


----------



## FractureCritical (Nov 24, 2009)

ChrisFu said:


> Im sure thats "household income" similar to Audi's evaluation of the A3 market income being somewhere in the $150k range.


not what it says here: http://www.autoblog.com/2013/11/08/ford-profiles-surprisingly-affluent-focus-st-buyers/
It comes as no surprise when Ford says that 32-percent of Focus ST buyers are under 35, but we weren't expecting this: the average annual salary of Focus ST buyers is $127,000. Twenty-two percent of non-ST Focus buyers are under 35, while their average annual salary is $67,000.

maybe they meant household income, but it's been tossed around on the forums and looks legit.

IF true, this goes exactly in line with what I've said for a while now: there's scant options out there for young, affluent fathers. So few, in fact, that they're looking down-market at cars like the ST and the WRX. 

It makes total sense if you think about it. A well paid young man who wants a fun car but has to have enough room in the back seat for a baby/child seat and enough room in the hatch/trunk for all the cargo having a kid requires. Every maker is missing the boat on this segment and instead trying to sell us automatic sedans with so little rear back seat space that you can forget all about either a rear facing baby seat or a front passenger. Mom won't approve of that deal.


----------



## FractureCritical (Nov 24, 2009)

caliatenza said:


> Okay then Audi should come out with a factory tuning program then...problem solved


BMW already has one. brilliant way to print money


----------



## The DarkSide (Aug 4, 2000)

FractureCritical said:


> not what it says here: http://www.autoblog.com/2013/11/08/ford-profiles-surprisingly-affluent-focus-st-buyers/
> It comes as no surprise when Ford says that 32-percent of Focus ST buyers are under 35, but we weren't expecting this: the average annual salary of Focus ST buyers is $127,000. Twenty-two percent of non-ST Focus buyers are under 35, while their average annual salary is $67,000.


Hrm. Interesting. Then again there are plenty of engineers/scientists where I work, that are probably in excess of 140k annually individually. Most drive camry's and or poop boxes. /shrug


----------



## Chimera (Jul 6, 2002)

Out of curiosity, what exactly would it take to make a manual available as a special order like any other configuration a buyer may order? The dealer wouldn't have to sit on unwanted manuals and the buyer can get their preference. Are there federalization costs for a manual transmission?


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

The DarkSide said:


> Hrm. Interesting. Then again there are plenty of engineers/scientists where I work, that are probably in excess of 140k annually individually. Most drive camry's and or poop boxes. /shrug


Yeah. Honestly, that's a big reason I'm *not* at all interested in a BMW. An Audi will fly low, but a BMW would look the part, so to speak. I have people here making probably twice what I make that drive the token gold Camry. I'm just not interested in the image.

That said, there's quite a difference in $127,000 and $140,000- 10%, in fact. So that figure Fracture threw about was at least slightly disingenuous.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

FractureCritical said:


> yep, that's how I troll.
> 
> but, it doesn't make me wrong.
> 
> ...


That's fine, but that shouldn't be construed as a business case for Audi. None of us here is part of the day-to-day decision process in Herndon- and even if we were, it's likely that Germany calls some of the shots.

Know how I know nobody in Herndon is a frequent contributor here? 'cause we don't have S3 details yet. :laugh:


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

FractureCritical said:


> yep, that's how I troll.
> 
> but, it doesn't make me wrong.
> 
> ...


Do you realize that Audi used to offer a manual in almost every model they offered and as people stopped buying them in the required quantities to make it profitable they stopped? You make it seem like offering a manual would be a new idea.


----------



## The DarkSide (Aug 4, 2000)

Dan Halen said:


> That's fine, but that shouldn't be construed as a business case for Audi. None of us here is part of the day-to-day decision process in Herndon- and even if we were, it's likely that Germany calls some of the shots.
> 
> Know how I know nobody in Herndon is a frequent contributor here? 'cause we don't have S3 details yet. :laugh:


I'd also argue that_generally _speaking, people buying luxury cars are not looking for manuals. Enthusiasts sure, but I don't believe for a moment enthusiasts is the lions share of Audi's sales.

Dan you live in Herndon Va?


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

Haha... no. I have actually been keeping a very lazy eye on Audi's postings, but it would take a lot to get me out of my cushy situation here in one of the lowest cost areas of the country- Memphis.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

The biggest issue here is the gov't regulations both in the USA and Canada. It's absolutely ridiculous that manufacturers need to spend such a huge sum of money getting 2 transmissions approved for emissions....in fact, all of these cars are tested in europe. We should simply adopt & accept their evaluations so we are able to get the car we want. I know Canada has been working on a form of free trade with the EU & I think this type of agreement is part of that deal. Let's hope so, because this whole move toward killing the manual is awful.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

kevlartoronto said:


> The biggest issue here is the gov't regulations both in the USA and Canada. It's absolutely ridiculous that manufacturers need to spend such a huge sum of money getting 2 transmissions approved for emissions....in fact, all of these cars are tested in europe. We should simply adopt & accept their evaluations so we are able to get the car we want. I know Canada has been working on a form of free trade with the EU & I think this type of agreement is part of that deal. Let's hope so, because this whole move toward killing the manual is awful.


I agree but wouldn't the other side say, "can't Europe just adopt our regulations?". Problem also comes from not just emissions but also safety. Things as simple as backup cameras. They will eventually be required in the U.S. and it only requires us changing the law. If regulations need to be the same, do they have to agree to require back up cameras or would we be willing to drop the regulation? 

In the end I hope it happens but am not expecting anything. Every place our regulations don't match would require one of the two groups to change what is required.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

dmorrow said:


> I agree but wouldn't the other side say, "can't Europe just adopt our regulations?". Problem also comes from not just emissions but also safety. Things as simple as backup cameras. They will eventually be required in the U.S. and it only requires us changing the law. If regulations need to be the same, do they have to agree to require back up cameras or would we be willing to drop the regulation?
> 
> In the end I hope it happens but am not expecting anything. Every place our regulations don't match would require one of the two groups to change what is required.


Back up cameras, air bags are a simple add on. I'm talking about creating one standard for emissions & basic safety whether it be Euro or NA (i.e. side impact & bumpers) Somehow the Europeans have figured out how to standardization these issues. How is it NA can't? In Canada, the whole country has one standard so for us it wouldn't be a stretch at all. I'm sure the Japanese would love to see one standard as well. There are many countries that accept both Euro & NA specs.

Having said this, how is it that the US and Canada can't accept the testing done on these cars in Euro re: emissions. Isn't this the main reason we don't get manuals? The companies don't want to pay for these tests? I mean really, with the same engine, do the emissions really change that much??


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

This is all under discussions for the current round of trade negotiations. The push right now is to harmonize rules between the US, Canada and the EU such that a regulation in one country can be and will be acceptable to the others. If this succeeds it should open the doors to a LOT of forbidden fruit.


----------



## FractureCritical (Nov 24, 2009)

dmorrow said:


> Do you realize that Audi used to offer a manual in almost every model they offered and as people stopped buying them in the required quantities to make it profitable they stopped? You make it seem like offering a manual would be a new idea.


see, there you go thinking like a rational person instead of a car maker.

Manual transmission cars didn't stop being profitable, they stopped being as profitable as black and grey automatic sedans. It's not that they couldn't make money off of it, it's that there's an actuarial in a basement somewhere who calculated that the most profitable path (this financial quarter) is to downsize parts inventroy as much as possible and reduce product variation. In that guy's mind, the "perfect" car company would sell one model with one powertrain in only a few colors, possibly in different sizes. Like underwear or garbage bags or kitchen gloves. Hrm, kind sounds like Audi sedan offerings these days, huh?

Doesn't change the numbers above, and doesn't change the fact that predominantly well-to-do younger father types are moving DOWN MARKET to get what they want instead of up. Wagons ARE popular (Volvo is bringing them back due to popular demand), hatches are popular, (Mini makes nothind but hatches as sells them at a profit margin that only Porsche beats), and yes, stick shift transmissions are popular. BMW still markets a stick and here's a head-slapping idea: offer it as a no-cost or even a cost option instead of offering a $1k discount like Audi currently does for cars like the S4. I'll pay extra for the 3rd pedal.

what does it cost to federalize a transmission? $100k? Charge $1k for the damn pedal and I'm sure Audi can scare up 100 people who want a stick in their 'performance' cars.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

FractureCritical said:


> see, there you go thinking like a rational person instead of a car maker.
> 
> Manual transmission cars didn't stop being profitable, they stopped being as profitable as black and grey automatic sedans. It's not that they couldn't make money off of it, it's that there's an actuarial in a basement somewhere who calculated that the most profitable path (this financial quarter) is to downsize parts inventroy as much as possible and reduce product variation. In that guy's mind, the "perfect" car company would sell one model with one powertrain in only a few colors, possibly in different sizes. Like underwear or garbage bags or kitchen gloves. Hrm, kind sounds like Audi sedan offerings these days, huh?
> 
> ...


Well-to-do younger father types are moving down market to get manual wagons? This may be you but after that where do you get this information?


----------



## The DarkSide (Aug 4, 2000)

dmorrow said:


> Well-to-do younger father types are moving down market to get manual wagons? This may be you but after that where do you get this information?


Well my wife and I have an A4 Avant but it's not a manual. My wife would have LOVED a manual. I would have been against it but since she drives it 90% more than I do I'd have probably gone along with it. Then again she doesn't commute into hell and back.


----------



## kharma (Jan 2, 2004)

Is there a no-Sportback grievance thread, or can my bitching commence here? Lamenting a DSG in the A3 is so 2006.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

kharma said:


> Is there a no-Sportback grievance thread, or can my bitching commence here? Lamenting a DSG in the A3 is so 2006.


I hereby grant that this can also be the sportback grievance thread.


----------



## Chimera (Jul 6, 2002)

Was reading the Car and Driver 2.0T review which led me to re-read their S3 writeup. This bit seems appropriate for the topic:

"The S3 is delightful, even with the six-speed S tronic twin-clutch automatic, which will be the only choice in America, but especially with the six-speed manual. Audi claims the stick is not intended for us but made it available to U.S. journalists to try, ostensibly to solicit our comments. Here are ours: Man up, Audi, and bring it, or stand by and watch enthusiasts change the channel to another brand willing to serve them (paging BMW…). We enthusiasts might be small in number, but we establish a brand’s sporting credibility. "


----------



## LazyLightning (Aug 11, 2012)

Chimera said:


> "Audi claims the stick is not intended for us but made it available to U.S. journalists to try, ostensibly to solicit our comments. Here are ours: Man up, Audi, and bring it, or stand by and watch enthusiasts change the channel to another brand willing to serve them (paging BMW…). We enthusiasts might be small in number, but we establish a brand’s sporting credibility. "


Awesome!!! And spot on. :beer:


----------



## juldupp (Feb 12, 2011)

*Audi a3/s3 manual transmission ?*

I know audi is not planning to have manual transmissions at launch, but do anyone know if they will have one in the near future?

Thanks.


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

juldupp said:


> I know audi is not planning to have manual transmissions at launch, but do anyone know if they will have one in the near future?
> 
> Thanks.


They have been steadfast in their committment to present the A3 as some kind of "penultimate technology platform", therefore eschewing the "stone-age" manual to maintain that aura in North America.

I would be absolutely blown away if they decide to spend the money on federalization (the consensus practical argument why they didnt introduce it in the first place) years into production.

So no, not in the near future unless they do something completely unexpected.


----------



## mike3141 (Feb 16, 1999)

They also don't want to lower their CAFE average by importing manual transmission models. The DSG has always tested with a higher average MPG than manual-equipped models.


----------



## FractureCritical (Nov 24, 2009)

mike3141 said:


> They also don't want to lower their CAFE average by importing manual transmission models. The DSG has always tested with a higher average MPG than manual-equipped models.


as if even a statistically improbable 10% take rate on the manual over the 8 speed woud even budge the CAFE number to two decimal places.


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

mike3141 said:


> The DSG has always tested with a higher average MPG than manual-equipped models.


As a blanket statement, that is patently false. In fact, among manual vehicles with DSG and Manual options from VAG with the same number of gears, the Mk7 GTI, CC, and Passat TDI are higher with a manual (the rest are the same).

Also the manual EvoX has better mileage than the Twin SST dual clutch version.


----------



## xbr80bx (Feb 2, 2007)

Get over it...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## m3cosmos (Apr 28, 2011)

I would trade in my cla45 if the rs3 manual was released. It's all about driving feel for me.


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

xbr80bx said:


> Get over it...


Great advice.  It would have served well for everyone who wanted a sportback A3...



...except for the specific fact that people didnt "get over it" was the _precise _reason cited by Audi for bringing it to the US.


----------

