# 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed



## [email protected] (Apr 9, 2004)

You guys probably already know this, but Johan de Nysschen from Audi confirmed to us in an interview we've published today that the 2.0T would get quattro with the DSG transmission setup standard. You can read the full interview here...
http://www.fourtitude.com/news...shtml


----------



## angryrican66 (Apr 16, 2006)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed ([email protected])*


----------



## mcelster (Jul 21, 2005)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed ([email protected])*

I just read that interview. Sadly, it seems that true
manual transmissions will be increasingly rare as we
move forward. I have a 5-spd manual in my Passat
and love it. Thanks George for hammering home 
the issue of manuals and the purists who love them.


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 9, 2004)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (mcelster)*

No prob. I'll keep doing so.


----------



## TPE_A3 (Feb 5, 2008)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed ([email protected])*

I refused to drive an auto for my whole driving life.(16 years)
refused to ever drive auto.
But DSG changed my mind and i won't go back!


----------



## nstotal (Sep 26, 2006)

yeah that sucks. i would trade in my A3 for the quattro version, but not if it came with DSG


----------



## drew138 (Dec 3, 2006)

*Re: (nstotal)*

Not sure what the big deal / fascination is with Quattro and 2.0T? It makes the car heavier and slower. Sure you get better traction and control, but why is this so much better than the 3.2Q which is already an option?


----------



## gCHOW (May 26, 2006)

*Re: (drew138)*


_Quote, originally posted by *drew138* »_Not sure what the big deal / fascination is with Quattro and 2.0T? It makes the car heavier and slower. Sure you get better traction and control, but why is this so much better than the 3.2Q which is already an option?

turrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrbo.


----------



## Uber-A3 (Feb 23, 2002)

*Re: (drew138)*

I wonder if they will stop selling the 3.2 all together here.


----------



## i_baked_cookies (Aug 28, 2007)

*Re: (BlownM3)*


_Quote, originally posted by *drew138* »_Not sure what the big deal / fascination is with Quattro and 2.0T? It makes the car heavier and slower. Sure you get better traction and control, but why is this so much better than the 3.2Q which is already an option?

Turbo and mod options - you can push huge numbers with the dinky little four-banger! Front-wheel drive is just crap, sure the quattro will slow things down a bit, the extra traction off the line and in the corners will make the cars much better, and offset the weight difference.

_Quote, originally posted by *BlownM3* »_I wonder if they will stop selling the 3.2 all together here.

I hope not... the 2.0t is a fantastic little engine, but it isn't as dynamic or mature as the 3.2... even though the 2.0t w/ quattro and dsg + mods could blow the doors off any non-turbo 3.2Q. 
I'm a little pissed that everything is automatic and DSG - the DSG is fantastic, but it makes the car half as fun to drive


----------



## angryquattrorican66 (Mar 11, 2007)

Will the body be the same?
I might get this or a 328i wagon... decisions decisions


----------



## snowboardegn (May 4, 2003)

*Re: (nstotal)*


_Quote, originally posted by *nstotal* »_yeah that sucks. i would trade in my A3 for the quattro version, but not if it came with DSG

x2.
I regret not buying the 6mt. DSG shifts fast and all, but it's so boring. Plus, repair costs when out of warranty... OUCH.


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

*Re: (angryquattrorican66)*

Good news just means my parts will be easier to source for my conversion


----------



## KnockKnock (Jun 30, 2005)

*Re: (drew138)*

1st: The torque numbers of the 2.0T are near the 3.2, and with a chip, can surpass it, but funneling all that power through the front wheels is a constant traction issue. Even w/o a chip, anything but a careful foot will break the front tires loose. A lot of L.A. freeway onramps are uphill with a red light. It turns green, my A3 spins and doesn't go.
2nd: The 2.0T is a little bit lighter than the 3.2, and the smaller displacement turbo gets significantly better gas mileage. I think realistic 2.0T numbers are 25 mpg vs. the 3.2's 18. Add Quattro and it might drop to 22-23?
Add it all up and many consider it a better match than the 3.2 for a Quattro option. Not to bash the 3.2. It has smoother power delivery and the torque delivery is less bucking-bronco and it doesn't sound like a diesel. But subtlety aside, it's on the short end of the physics numbers game.
Sure, you can opt to not go for Quattro, and you'll get better mpg. Having done the Audi Experience, and flogged a lot of Quattro cars though it's something I really want now - not only for foul weather, but for handling and a more solid, confident drive.
Damn - this was not in my budget.









_Quote, originally posted by *drew138* »_Not sure what the big deal / fascination is with Quattro and 2.0T? It makes the car heavier and slower. Sure you get better traction and control, but why is this so much better than the 3.2Q which is already an option?


----------



## kayaker10 (Jan 10, 2006)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed ([email protected])*

Any idea which quatro system it will be? I'd be game if comes with the version that is biased 40/60. Isn't the haldex in the 3.2 basically front wheel drive unless slip is detected?


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (kayaker10)*

It will be haldex.


----------



## CChaos (May 30, 2003)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (kayaker10)*


_Quote, originally posted by *kayaker10* »_Any idea which quatro system it will be? I'd be game if comes with the version that is biased 40/60. Isn't the haldex in the 3.2 basically front wheel drive unless slip is detected?

I'm pretty sure the different systems are paired with the different engine layouts and the A3 will almost certainly be Haldex. That said, you can upgrade the controller to a module that allows you to set your preferred bias. I know there are a few threads on the subject around here.
P.S. I like the idea of the 2.0T Quattro DSG, but where's my 3.2 Quattro 6 speed?


----------



## GGVDub (Apr 8, 2004)

*Re: (i_baked_cookies)*


_Quote, originally posted by *i_baked_cookies* »_
Turbo and mod options - you can push huge numbers with the dinky little four-banger! 

Yes, but your forgetting that the 2.0T quattro would be a DSG not a 6M, which can put up huge numbers. The DSG is still limited to what the gear box can take. I know that some companies have made the adjustment for the 3.2Q DSG, but I am sure the 2.0T will sill be limited to the same numbers.


----------



## .:R2theT (Sep 7, 2005)

*Re: (KnockKnock)*


_Quote, originally posted by *KnockKnock* »_
Damn - this was not in my budget.









That's how I feel. But this is really the car I want. I love Haldex. I need DSG. I need better milage/power upgradability of the 2.0t. This is the car we would have bought in the first place. Damn you Audi. Now to wait a year and see if they give us the "S3 treatment". I am very excited about this whole development!


----------



## tiptronic (Apr 18, 1999)

*Re: (drew138)*


_Quote, originally posted by *drew138* »_Not sure what the big deal / fascination is with Quattro and 2.0T? It makes the car heavier and slower. Sure you get better traction and control, but why is this so much better than the 3.2Q which is already an option?

because some can ....
i know i can't.. i'm happy the way the a3 2.0t fwd handles. Especially since i'm in SouthernCalif, it rains like total 26days out of the year?







And out of 365days- when do i encounter snow on the twisties? maybe twice or 3x to go boarding. 
I'm glad that the A3 came with FWD, otherwise, there's just no way i can afford to drive a brand new audi


----------



## eh (Mar 4, 2003)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed ([email protected])*

I'll be interested to see the fuel economy numbers for the FWD vs. the new quattro model.


----------



## judgegavel (Apr 26, 2002)

Thats great news, except for current 2.0T owners (at least with DSG) as its definitely going to hurt the already poor resale value.


----------



## ZFXR (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: (judgegavel)*


_Quote, originally posted by *judgegavel* »_Thats great news, except for current 2.0T owners (at least with DSG) as its definitely going to hurt the already poor resale value.

Unfourtunately, I put the A3's resale value on par with my past Oldsmobile Intrigue


----------



## i_baked_cookies (Aug 28, 2007)

*Re: (GGA3)*


_Quote, originally posted by *GGA3* »_
Yes, but your forgetting that the 2.0T quattro would be a DSG not a 6M, which can put up huge numbers. The DSG is still limited to what the gear box can take. I know that some companies have made the adjustment for the 3.2Q DSG, but I am sure the 2.0T will sill be limited to the same numbers. 

Does anyone know how much a DSG box can take before it gets baked?


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 9, 2004)

*Re: (angryquattrorican66)*


_Quote, originally posted by *angryquattrorican66* »_Will the body be the same?
I might get this or a 328i wagon... decisions decisions

I would expect that it'll get the updates that the Cabriolet already has at some point, but I don't know when.


----------



## .:R2theT (Sep 7, 2005)

*Re: (i_baked_cookies)*


_Quote, originally posted by *i_baked_cookies* »_
Does anyone know how much a DSG box can take before it gets baked?









HPA puts 400HP to the crank in a DSG transmission without any upgrades. Beyond that they recommend upgrading the DSG. I don't see why the DSG in the 2.0t wouldn't be able to handle the same type of power as the VR6.


----------



## samckinn (Jun 21, 2002)

*Re: (.:R2theT)*

Nice interview...
I think the response about offering DSG only because it is higher perfomance is kind of lame. I'm pretty sure all the people around here know that DSG is the higher performance tranny in terms of quickness. As it has been said many times, the 6sp manual can be more desirable from a fun-to-drive perspective. Especially, if you are not racing all over the place or trying to improve times at the track. That being said, I believe this arguement gains even more traction when paired with the current and future gas prices.


----------



## Hesaputz (May 12, 2006)

*Re: (samckinn)*

Why, Judge G, would the availability of a 2.0 quattro hurt resale value on current A3's? I'm sure the Quattro will be a $2000 or so upcharge, so it in no way obsoletes or degrades the current 2.0T. I can see it hurting the 3.2, though.
Samckinn, what do gas prices have to do with all this? Buy a quattro, trade a bit of efficiency for fun and all weather traction. Are you talking about DSG vs manual? If so, you should know that I have both cars and the DSG is about 1.5 MPG better in city/suburban conditions.


----------



## lcohen999 (Mar 3, 2001)

am I the only one that doesn't see this as a problem 6MT drivers.
I have good winter tires, I know how to use my RPMS for traction control and never once though, hey I would do better with Quattro...
For DSG, yes, I could see it, but people with manuals, if you know how to use it properly should never worry


----------



## angryrican66 (Apr 16, 2006)

*Re: (Hesaputz)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Hesaputz* »_Why, Judge G, would the availability of a 2.0 quattro hurt resale value on current A3's? I'm sure the Quattro will be a $2000 or so upcharge, so it in no way obsoletes or degrades the current 2.0T. I can see it hurting the 3.2, though.
Samckinn, what do gas prices have to do with all this? Buy a quattro, trade a bit of efficiency for fun and all weather traction. Are you talking about DSG vs manual? If so, you should know that I have both cars and the DSG is about 1.5 MPG better in city/suburban conditions.
I have to agree with Hezaputz on this one, it doesn't affect the resale of the A4 in any way how would it affect the A3 , if anything it will hurt the 3.2Q since it will be a lot more efficient fuel wise, I could just see it being an added option that will make someone looking at a Subaru look at an A3 for a better winter weather car, in places like the Northeast, PNW and Utah or so


----------



## samckinn (Jun 21, 2002)

*Re: (Hesaputz)*

No, i was not comparing the fuel efficiency between the manual and the dsg. Just that the gas prices lower the desire to floor the pedal. And without the 0-to-60 glory, the manual provides more driving fun over the dsg tranny.


----------



## feels_road (Jan 27, 2005)

*Re: (KnockKnock)*


_Quote, originally posted by *KnockKnock* »_1st: The torque numbers of the 2.0T are near the 3.2, and with a chip, can surpass it, but funneling all that power through the front wheels is a constant traction issue. Even w/o a chip, anything but a careful foot will break the front tires loose. A lot of L.A. freeway onramps are uphill with a red light. It turns green, my A3 spins and doesn't go.
2nd: The 2.0T is a little bit lighter than the 3.2, and the smaller displacement turbo gets significantly better gas mileage. I think realistic 2.0T numbers are 25 mpg vs. the 3.2's 18. Add Quattro and it might drop to 22-23?
Add it all up and many consider it a better match than the 3.2 for a Quattro option. Not to bash the 3.2. It has smoother power delivery and the torque delivery is less bucking-bronco and it doesn't sound like a diesel. But subtlety aside, it's on the short end of the physics numbers game.

I agree with you 100% --- lower weight, better weight distribution, better fuel economy, similar power-to-weight ratio. This is the combination I have been waiting for, now for eight years or so. 
Not sure I will bite, though. First of all, I always preferred the Golf form factor. Secondly, I have moved on, over all these years. My standards concerning mileage have risen. I may simply go Diesel with my next purchase. I just hope, VW/Audi will not make us wait another eight years for a Diesel AWD. (And I am not talking about the 3.0 TDI A4 quattro Avant, which I heavily desire, but which will literally cost my kid's college funds). At that time, I can probably buy a plug-in electric that gets twice the mileage, yet again.
I'll buy the cake if I can have it and eat it, too.







http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## RyanA3 (May 11, 2005)

*Re: (feels_road)*

Why would anyone want to purchase a 3.2Q over a 2.0TQ:
The 3.2 is:
-not fsi
-heavier
-more expensive
-less fuel efficient
-2.0T after spending $500 on a chip = more hp + globs more tq than a 3.2.
Seems like a stupid argument to me.


----------



## Nuke-em (Oct 2, 2006)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed ([email protected])*

We've had the snowiest winter in 25 years 'round here. FWD works just fine.
Matt


----------



## Hesaputz (May 12, 2006)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (Nuke-em)*

Well, the 3.2 is a nice feeling and nice sounding motor - really responsive, with NO turbo lag; that's certainly worth something. Hard to quantify the advantages of the 3.2, but the car is more driveable, a more refined and complete package than the 2.0. 
That said, I'll probably be buying a 2.0 Quattro - efficiency and easy mod-ability are more important to me.


----------



## eltonsi (Mar 17, 2005)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (Hesaputz)*

Given the choice with a budget, I would pick the 2.0TQ as well. But then again, most of us 3.2 guys are still dreaming over that HPA turbo kit.


----------



## angryrican66 (Apr 16, 2006)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (eltonsi)*


_Quote, originally posted by *eltonsi* »_Given the choice with a budget, I would pick the 2.0TQ as well. But then again, most of us 3.2 guys are still dreaming over that HPA turbo kit.
















Now in all honesty we should probably wait to see what trim options are going to be available, God only knows they seem to have screwed that up before, what if it comes over looking like a mini All Road?







I think the only thing in my daily driving I would appreciate from the 2.0T would be the better MPG, heck with a mix of NYC Taxi Cab dodging rush hour beating parkway to parkway driving I've been averaging a stout 23.8 MPG , heck I've been getting around 300 miles out of every tank, and my cars power delivery is so smooth and the sound is so Sweet







BTW, DSG in Real city traffic rules http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 


_Modified by angryrican66 at 7:49 PM 3-4-2008_


----------



## cokedrinker (Feb 24, 2005)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (angryrican66)*

WTB hpa turbo pst
hpa is the only reason i won't trade my 3.2 in for the 2.0


----------



## DavidSG (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (cokedrinker)*

Question on quattro - are most of the benefits for snowy conditions, or would I appreciate having quattro in everyday conditions? Not a whole lot of snow here in the DC area. I currently drive a 1.8T GTI. Mostly happy with the car, but kind of annoying when you try to accelerate with any authority up a hill when the road is a little wet. Which seems to be most of the winter - and my commute is fairly hilly. Just always feels like I need to be overly restrained. So I guess my question - for this area, would the 2.0T quattro be worth the upgrade over the 2.0T FWD?
Also, any idea when dealers would start taking orders for these 2.0TQ's? Thanks


----------



## angryrican66 (Apr 16, 2006)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (DavidSG)*


_Quote, originally posted by *DavidSG* »_Question on quattro - are most of the benefits for snowy conditions, or would I appreciate having quattro in everyday conditions? Not a whole lot of snow here in the DC area. I currently drive a 1.8T GTI. Mostly happy with the car, but kind of annoying when you try to accelerate with any authority up a hill when the road is a little wet. Which seems to be most of the winter - and my commute is fairly hilly. Just always feels like I need to be overly restrained. So I guess my question - for this area, would the 2.0T quattro be worth the upgrade over the 2.0T FWD?
Also, any idea when dealers would start taking orders for these 2.0TQ's? Thanks
Being one of the few that has owned both a 2.0T FWD and a 3.2Q, I can honestly say the Quattro is well worth it in all conditions, you will notice an improvement in handling in all conditions, not just Snow( but it does shine there) we will know next month when we can order them and what the spec will be( I think the New York car show is when we find out)


----------



## DavidSG (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (angryrican66)*

Good to know - thanks.
Now I just have to come to grips with not having a manual! But probably for the better - never really had much skill in the first place...


----------



## KnockKnock (Jun 30, 2005)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (angryrican66)*


_Quote, originally posted by *angryrican66* »_Being one of the few that has owned both a 2.0T FWD and a 3.2Q, I can honestly say the Quattro is well worth it in all conditions, you will notice an improvement in handling in all conditions, not just Snow( but it does shine there) we will know next month when we can order them and what the spec will be( I think the New York car show is when we find out)

x2
The physics of having 4 driven wheels benefits control, traction, performance in many circumstances, not just when it's snowing. In addition to the obvious benefits on hard launch, in corners, you can get on the gas much earlier. If you don't care to push the car hard, then maybe you wouldn't notice.


----------



## KnockKnock (Jun 30, 2005)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (DavidSG)*


_Quote, originally posted by *DavidSG* »_... never really had much skill in the first place...

There's an honest man http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif We need more of you on the forums. I considered myself pretty good with a stick (







) but for every odd scenario when I catch the DSG off-logic, I can count 5 times I banged the synchros, or lugged in the wrong gear, or missed a gate. Not fun.


----------



## wall man (Jan 2, 2008)

This would be the car I should buy, but I can't wait. So in the mean time I will 'make do' with the basic 2.0T.


----------



## angryrican66 (Apr 16, 2006)

*Re: (wall man)*


_Quote, originally posted by *wall man* »_This would be the car I should buy, but I can't wait. So in the mean time I will 'make do' with the basic 2.0T.

I'm pretty sure you can order April 1st for July delivery, thats not that far off


----------



## BUK8TEE (Nov 1, 2002)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed ([email protected])*

looks like my '07 a4 2.0t is going bye-bye in less than a year of ownership








i 'till this day have refused DSG, not even a test drive!, and would hella prefer the a3 2.0tq w/ 6mt and dsg as an option! do they consider those who honestly may not be able to afford the dsg option....i.e. i'm sure i could spend that money on other factory options to spice up my a3 from the showroom http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
btw...any updated a3 pics or is the body and exterior facade going to stay on par?


----------



## Func7 (Oct 10, 2007)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed ([email protected])*

I dont understand why you would get a DSG for the 2.0T Quattro as it isnt an option even in Europe.


----------



## DavidSG (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: (angryrican66)*


_Quote, originally posted by *angryrican66* »_I'm pretty sure you can order April 1st for July delivery, thats not that far off
















Seriously? Where did those dates come from? That would be great news.


----------



## angryrican66 (Apr 16, 2006)

*Re: (DavidSG)*


_Quote, originally posted by *DavidSG* »_
Seriously? Where did those dates come from? That would be great news.
Usually that is when the dealer recieves all the info on the next model year, and 1st week of July is when they hit the lot http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## CChaos (May 30, 2003)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (BUK8TEE)*


_Quote, originally posted by *BUK8TEE* »_looks like my '07 a4 2.0t is going bye-bye in less than a year of ownership








do they consider those who honestly may not be able to afford the dsg option....

I think they do consider that people may spend $30,000 on a car and then want to sell/trade it in a year later for another $30,000 car but those poor folks honestly can't afford the DSG option. I believe after considering they said


----------



## mookieblaylock (Sep 25, 2005)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (Func7)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Func7* »_I dont understand why you would get a DSG for the 2.0T Quattro as it isnt an option even in Europe. 

cuz the 2tQ dsg was federalized in the US with th TT and it's an expensive process unfortunatly


----------



## Hesaputz (May 12, 2006)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (mookieblaylock)*

Order forms and info generally hit the dealers at the end of April. First deliveries off of this are around the first of August. I ordered my one car as soon as the forms were available, and got it the end of July.


----------



## BUK8TEE (Nov 1, 2002)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (mookieblaylock)*

the tt-s which is the 2.0t quattro tt i believe will have 6mt, it's the current tt 2.0t that has dsg/s-tronic!


----------



## mookieblaylock (Sep 25, 2005)

"The TTS will only be available in the U.S. with Audi's version of the dual-clutch DSG transmission, the S tronic. "
http://www.motortrend.com/road...i_TTS/
i like dsg


----------



## wall man (Jan 2, 2008)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (BUK8TEE)*


_Quote »_Order forms and info generally hit the dealers at the end of April. First deliveries off of this are around the first of August. I ordered my one car as soon as the forms were available, and got it the end of July.

But would this be the case in Canada? I figured it would be next year before this saw the light of day. I can't wait a year, I've already been waiting for many years to get this car. I actually ordered it back in December! Was just going for a test drive to show my wife and then started talking numbers, she gave the head nod and I went full speed ahead. 


_Modified by wall man at 12:39 PM 3-13-2008_


----------



## Golgo-13 (Aug 20, 2003)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *Johan de Nysschen* »_DC is obviously going to become more interesting for us given that is where our home is. We certainly will be putting some emphasis on developing the DC market. It isn’t anywhere near its potential and, if you look at the share we have there, it is lower than the average that we have in most other important cities. So we will be working very closely with our dealers to enhance the quality of our representation there. 


Yea, gl with that. HBL is good, though Audi of Alex sucks with respect to service.


----------



## Gberg888GLI (Nov 1, 2006)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (Hesaputz)*

can they make manual an option... ill pay extra!


----------



## Gberg888GLI (Nov 1, 2006)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (cokedrinker)*


_Quote, originally posted by *cokedrinker* »_WTB hpa turbo pst
hpa is the only reason i won't trade my 3.2 in for the 2.0

yeah but u could buy about half of what the a3 with the 2.0t and quattro costs for that turbo kit...


----------



## BUK8TEE (Nov 1, 2002)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (Gberg888GLI)*

sick of this DSG business AOA is forcing upon us. if it's so great how about they give us a damn msrp markdown for taking their world acclaimed dsg transmission. if it's so great why isn't it standard in europe?? can any1 from AOA answer these questions?
do they think us in the states don't like old-fashioned white knuckle driving? they must think only american women will be purchasing these hot rods








i mean their badass cars rs4, rs6 and r8 all have manual standard w/ dsg or auto as an option. why would s-line cars or any audi for that matter come w/ dsg standard







oh yea just so they can keep raising the msrp on us and meet their profit margin








i swear it's more cost efficient to build a manual car than a dsg car! they really take the FUN out of driving if they keep this up. i'll just have to force my girl to get the s3 or a3 2.0tq dsg and i'll drive it a couple times a week just to keep me satisfied http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif


----------



## wall man (Jan 2, 2008)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (BUK8TEE)*

I thought I would email Audi Canada about the 2.0T quattro, here is there response. 

_Quote »_Thank you for contacting Audi Canada. Yes, an A3 2.0T quattro with S tronic transmission is indeed planned and is expected, based on current 
scheduling, later this year. Production dates have not yet been confirmed, so please watch for news on the website and our newsletters. 
Again, thank you for your interest; we hope there will be more news soon. 
Marjorie 
AudiTalk 


So yes it is coming, but 'later this year.'


----------



## DavidSG (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (wall man)*

Hmmm. Went to the Audi dealer to test drive both the 3.2 and 2.0T - just wanted to make sure I really didn't want the 3.2 - and that I could live with the DSG, which I had never driven before. No brainer on the 3.2 - really enjoyed the lighter feeling of the 2.0T better (coming from a 1.8T). Now I'm just not sure about the DSG. Yeah, it is nice. And yeah, I have no doubt it knows how to shift a lot better than I can. I just think I'm going to miss the fun of shifting myself.
So now I'm thinking maybe a manual A4 2.0T quattro is the answer. Have to test drive that next. Or maybe just go with the A3 2.0T FWD, although I'm really looking forward to getting away from FWD. Sucks that I have to compromise one way or another - really don't want to give up the hatchback utility - and I like how the A3 is much more unique. And I just don't fancy myself an Avant guy - at least not for a few more years. Decisions...
On a positive note, I surprisingly liked ice silver on the A3 - not as boring as I thought it would be. Will look good with the titanium package, IMHO.


_Modified by DavidSG at 7:39 PM 3/13/2008_


----------



## KnockKnock (Jun 30, 2005)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (DavidSG)*

Usually, I'm one of those fanboys who jumps in and defends DSG with raving words which never change anyone's mind, but on this point, I'd be happy to clarify. DSG RARELY knows _when_ to shift better than you do. Only when you want to go slow and get good gas mileage. But it USUALLY shifts more quickly and more smoothly than a stick driver. 
You basically need to mold yourself to its strengths and weaknesses. For some people, this comes easily and it's rewarding and fun. For some it doesn't, and I don't mean that as a skill-set, like a judgement - just for those, it is frustrating and dull.
It's a big decision though, so take another good long test and keep it in M, so you can do _most_ of the shifting yourself.
And yes, it's a shame you don't get the option of quattro and 6MT.
Cheers -









_Quote, originally posted by *DavidSG* »_ ...And yeah, I have no doubt it knows how to shift a lot better than I can. I just think I'm going to miss the fun of shifting myself.


----------



## GTI_CH (Aug 24, 2001)

I don't like this DSG only crap...R32, TTS, 2.0TQ...it really is a deal breaker for me.


----------



## Gberg888GLI (Nov 1, 2006)

*Re: (GTI_CH)*

it truly is a deal breaker... something tells me everyone in europe bought the manuals and we are getting all the left over DSG ones...


----------



## BUK8TEE (Nov 1, 2002)

*Re: (Gberg888GLI)*

/\
/\
i really like your thought process....sad 2 say but i wouldn't be surprised if that were true








....no wonder we always get later release dates than in europe.


----------



## .:R2theT (Sep 7, 2005)

*Re: (Gberg888GLI)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Gberg888GLI* »_... something tells me everyone in europe bought the manuals and we are getting all the left over DSG ones...

Except I am pretty sure that the 2.0t DSG w/quattro is a new configuration. It hasn't even been available in Europe.


----------



## DavidSG (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed (KnockKnock)*


_Quote, originally posted by *KnockKnock* »_It's a big decision though, so take another good long test and keep it in M, so you can do _most_ of the shifting yourself.


Took your advice - went in for another test drive and stuck with manual mode the entire time. It's nice. Enjoyed it a bit more this time around. I haven't ruled it out completely. I certainly don't think I would be miserable with the DSG box. Heck, it's quite possible after about a week I wouldn't miss my manual. Or not. Now just need to figure out what I want more - a manual or quattro.


----------



## angryrican66 (Apr 16, 2006)

*Re: (Gberg888GLI)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Gberg888GLI* »_it truly is a deal breaker... something tells me everyone in Europe bought the manuals and we are getting all the left over DSG ones...
the biggest reason most people in Europe get manuals and stripped down cars for that matter is the amount of duties/taxes they have to pay on a new car, for most people the DSG is a much superior transmission , but at being a $1500ish option plus up to 50% of the amount on top of that for taxes is insane, the fact that everyone here is able to whine about something that is probably more durable (since it removes the human factor on clutch wear)and more fun to drive then a manual shows the beauty of the system we live in , 6-8% tax on a vehicle compared to 17.5-50 % is huge not to mention some states here in the US remove the amount of your trade as part of the taxable amount, go to an Audi driving experience and learn the 3-9 O'clock theory and learn how to use your paddles and I promise you'll go "what Manual" or at least give it a shot before you babble nonsense on the forum


----------



## shipo (Jan 3, 2006)

*Re: (angryrican66)*

Uhhh, maybe I'm missing something, but I've heard far more issues with the DSG transmission than I have from the conventional 6-Speed units. All in all, given that clutches these days can easily last upwards of 200,000 miles, I'd bet dollars to donuts that the DSG will require considerably more maintenance than a conventional three-pedal manual transmission.


----------



## PDXA4 (Oct 9, 2001)

*Re: (angryrican66)*


_Quote, originally posted by *angryrican66* »_I'm pretty sure you can order April 1st for July delivery, thats not that far off
















Interesting, I'll be watching this thread...


----------



## Gberg888GLI (Nov 1, 2006)

*Re: (PDXA4)*

on top of that... most the DSG trannys have been to the far reaches of their capacity in milage yet... i doubt there are many tuned dsgs over 60k.... 
i cant even imagine what theyll cost to fix when broken.


----------



## DavidSG (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: (PDXA4)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PDXA4* »_
Interesting, I'll be watching this thread...

Wouldn't count on April 1, but my local dealer did confirm it will likely be sometime in April when we can place orders. My guess would be towards the end of the month.


----------



## .:R2theT (Sep 7, 2005)

*Re: (Gberg888GLI)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Gberg888GLI* »_on top of that... most the DSG trannys have been to the far reaches of their capacity in milage yet... i doubt there are many tuned dsgs over 60k....

DSG has been available on the TT for quite a few years at this point so I would imagine there are quite a few with more than 60k. Plus, I know HPA has installed turbos on 3.2 DSG TTs that are pushing 400 HP at the crank with the stock DSG(read:tuned!). 

_Quote, originally posted by *Gberg888GLI* »_i cant even imagine what theyll cost to fix when broken.

I do tend to agree with you on this point. It really is my only fear with DSG.
But I do think the DSG can handle a lot more power than people give it credit for.


----------



## angryrican66 (Apr 16, 2006)

*Re: (.:R2theT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *.:R2theT* »_
DSG has been available on the TT for quite a few years at this point so I would imagine there are quite a few with more than 60k. Plus, I know HPA has installed turbos on 3.2 DSG TTs that are pushing 400 HP at the crank with the stock DSG(read:tuned!). 
I do tend to agree with you on this point. It really is my only fear with DSG.
But I do think the DSG can handle a lot more power than people give it credit for.
the only known issue for the DSG thus far has been the mechatronics, and to put it in perspective my Buddy that is an Audi Foreman at a dealer that is both VW/Audi has only seen 3 with this problem in 2+ years between the A3/GTI/GLI , the clutches on the DSG shouldn't in theory wear since you eliminate the human error and bad habits, and because it is a dual clutch the gearing suffers much less wear since unlike an Auto tranny that uses a converter to engage the gears , you next gear is already engage , so other than it being new and unkonwn to most I can't see how your claims hold water


----------



## .:R2theT (Sep 7, 2005)

*Re: (angryrican66)*


_Quote, originally posted by *angryrican66* »_the only known issue for the DSG thus far has been the mechatronics, and to put it in perspective my Buddy that is an Audi Foreman at a dealer that is both VW/Audi has only seen 3 with this problem in 2+ years between the A3/GTI/GLI , the clutches on the DSG shouldn't in theory wear since you eliminate the human error and bad habits, and because it is a dual clutch the gearing suffers much less wear since unlike an Auto tranny that uses a converter to engage the gears , you next gear is already engage , so other than it being new and unkonwn to most I can't see how your claims hold water

What claims are those? I only expressed fears at what replacing/repairing DSG might cost. Overall, I am very pleased with DSG.


----------



## angryrican66 (Apr 16, 2006)

*Re: (.:R2theT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *.:R2theT* »_
What claims are those? I only expressed fears at what replacing/repairing DSG might cost. Overall, I am very pleased with DSG.
sorry not you the whiner up top


----------



## Gberg888GLI (Nov 1, 2006)

*Re: (angryrican66)*

im not whinning...
god damn it cant i just have a manual tranny... its soo much more fun to drive!


----------



## BUK8TEE (Nov 1, 2002)

*Re: (Gberg888GLI)*

only whinner's i see are those DSG'ers. haha
anyone know for sure when the 2.0t quattro in whatever tranny can be ordered?
i want this car badly but.....
i was being a bad dubber and went to the bmw dealer to check out the 135i...all i can say is that outfit the 135i is going to put my VAG loyalty to a real test.
plus it comes in 6sp and i admit it's much more of a car in person than in pictures







not too small and not too big, basically perfect for 2 people. anything more than a 6 yr old is gonna have a hard time getting in the back of that coupe http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif 
see it's decisions n situations like this where audi loses business w/ its marketing strategy's. $hit just certify the two damn trannys and call it a day, the cars will sell period and they know that


----------



## 5309 (Dec 11, 2002)

*Re: (BUK8TEE)*

what is the price range going to be for the 2.0 DSG AWD?


----------



## .:R2theT (Sep 7, 2005)

*Re: (5309)*


_Quote, originally posted by *5309* »_what is the price range going to be for the 2.0 DSG AWD? 

It will probably be an additional $2,000 or so from the current FWD offering. That seems to be the pattern for other Audis.


----------



## mdiddy (Mar 24, 2008)

thanks guys for the advice!! its greatly appreciated. Im going for a test drive this weekend, I got a couple places that I found a decently new a3 (demo) for sale that I wanted to check out. all your input is very helpful. 
and as far as the new 2.0T quattro goes, I might just have to wait for that. I think thats an offer tooo good to just pass up. 
Once again, thanks guys.. all your effort is appreciated.


----------



## Layman (Nov 27, 2000)

I've been thinking about trading my R32 in for a GTI 4-door DSG to make my life a bit simpler and easier. I'd much rather have this!


----------



## BumbleBeeJBG (Apr 30, 2006)

*Re: (Layman)*

Anymore news on this? I'm ready to pull the trigger on an A3 and would love for it to be a 2.0T quattro http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## angryrican66 (Apr 16, 2006)

*Re: (BumbleBeeJBG)*

should be able to order end of April


----------



## BumbleBeeJBG (Apr 30, 2006)

*Re: (angryrican66)*


_Quote, originally posted by *angryrican66* »_should be able to order end of April









Aw... source? Someone said beginning of April. The sooner I order it, the sooner I get it!


----------



## angryrican66 (Apr 16, 2006)

*Re: (BumbleBeeJBG)*


_Quote, originally posted by *BumbleBeeJBG* »_
Aw... source? Someone said beginning of April. The sooner I order it, the sooner I get it!















my local dealer in Greenwich CT


----------



## DavidSG (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: (angryrican66)*

My local dealer said end of April as well.


----------



## Hesaputz (May 12, 2006)

*Re: (DavidSG)*

Next year specs, color combos. and model availability generally make it to the dealers the last week of April. I wouldn't absolutely count on the 2.0 T Quattro being available for order at this time, though; it may be delayed a month or two, like the Ti package was for '08.


----------



## BumbleBeeJBG (Apr 30, 2006)

*Re: (Hesaputz)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Hesaputz* »_Next year specs, color combos. and model availability generally make it to the dealers the last week of April. I wouldn't absolutely count on the 2.0 T Quattro being available for order at this time, though; it may be delayed a month or two, like the Ti package was for '08.

What are the changes from '08 to '09 anyways? Couldn't find it in a search.
Also.. I'm wondering if the uber 2.9% APR 72 month financing will remain on the A3 when the quattro 2.0T comes around.


----------



## ljstevens (Mar 24, 2007)

*Re: (BumbleBeeJBG)*

Well I just did a few figures on the MPG
I went to the UK Audi site and compared the 2.0TQ manual and the 3.2 manual and DSG.
I had to convert to from UK mpg to US mpg
Urban
2TM - 19.15 mpg
3.2M - 15.99 mpg
3.2DSG - 18.07 mpg
Extra Urban
2TM - 34.55 mpg
3.2M - 29.06 mpg
3.2DSG - 32.22 mpg
Combined
2TM - 26.73 mpg
3.2M - 22.40 mpg
3.2DSG - 25.06 mpg
Although US and UK measuring is a little different, Urban roughly equates to city, and Extra Urban equates to Highway.
I have a 3.2 DSG and would say I get around:
Urban/City - 20 mpg
Highway/Extra Urban - 28mpg
Combined - 25 mpg
I calculated from the 3.2 figures that the DSG is on average 12% more economical than the manual. So my estimates for the 2TQ DSG (based on claimed mpg's for the other cars) are:
Urban/City - 21.64 mpg
Highway/Extra Urban - 38.35 mpg
Combined - 29.94 mpg
That's approximately 10 mpg more on the freeway and 5mpg more around town than my 3.2Q DSG.


----------



## ljstevens (Mar 24, 2007)

I had a dream last night that I was driving the 2.0TQ instead of my 3.2Q... I must be destined for a swap!


----------



## BumbleBeeJBG (Apr 30, 2006)

*Re: (ljstevens)*

I want pricing and financing info!








If it's gonna be normal financing and a 2k premium than I'll just buy the FWD version.


----------



## DavidSG (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: (BumbleBeeJBG)*

I don't think you can count on the special financing incentives to last - at least not in the beginning of the model year. But I can also see a scenario where the economy continues to tank and the low financing remains. At the very least, the standard "market rate" loan will likely remain low or continue to fall for quite some time.
Curious - when you order - can you take advantage of dealer financing incentives at the time the order is placed or do you have to wait until delivery and see what is available?


----------



## wall man (Jan 2, 2008)

*Re: (DavidSG)*


_Quote, originally posted by *DavidSG* »_I don't think you can count on the special financing incentives to last - at least not in the beginning of the model year. But I can also see a scenario where the economy continues to tank and the low financing remains. At the very least, the standard "market rate" loan will likely remain low or continue to fall for quite some time.
Curious - when you order - can you take advantage of dealer financing incentives at the time the order is placed or do you have to wait until delivery and see what is available?

For me, I had to wait until delivery to see what was available. Lukily it was an even better lease rate than when I ordered. 0.6% vs 1.5%.
I think I will wait until the prices come out and then I can decide what I want to do. Knowing the 2.0T Q was coming out is another reason why I leased.


----------



## BUK8TEE (Nov 1, 2002)

*Re: (wall man)*

it's april 1st, any updates or word on if we can place order's w/ the dealer's yet??? i'm trying to figure out if i should sell my a4 now and get a beater or if i should hold on to it 4 a few months (hopefully no more than 4 months max!) and trade it in on a 2009 A3 2.0tq w/ 6mt <-----







, but DSG will probably be my only option so.....


----------



## angryrican66 (Apr 16, 2006)

*Re: (BUK8TEE)*


_Quote, originally posted by *BUK8TEE* »_it's april 1st, any updates or word on if we can place order's w/ the dealer's yet??? i'm trying to figure out if i should sell my a4 now and get a beater or if i should hold on to it 4 a few months (hopefully no more than 4 months max!) and trade it in on a 2009 A3 2.0tq w/ 6mt <-----







, but DSG will probably be my only option so.....








I would go to a dealer and ask until you here what you want


----------



## Raring 2 Go (May 22, 2000)

*Re: (BUK8TEE)*

Add me to the list of people that would be on this if there were a manual transmission option.


----------



## Layman (Nov 27, 2000)

My biggest question is whether the DSG system can handle a chipped car with AWD attached.
No more front-wheel slip - DSG has to be able t handle all the torque that all four wheels put out.


----------



## .:R2theT (Sep 7, 2005)

*Re: (Layman)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Layman* »_My biggest question is whether the DSG system can handle a chipped car with AWD attached.
No more front-wheel slip - DSG has to be able t handle all the torque that all four wheels put out.

If HPA can put the FT400 on a 3.2 TT and have it still be a reliable daily driver I see no reason why a chipped 2.0t DSG wouldn't be just fine. I don't quite understand what you are saying about the AWD. The AWD just puts the energy to the wheels, not back at the transmission.


----------



## Layman (Nov 27, 2000)

*Re: (.:R2theT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *.:R2theT* »_
If HPA can put the FT400 on a 3.2 TT and have it still be a reliable daily driver I see no reason why a chipped 2.0t DSG wouldn't be just fine. I don't quite understand what you are saying about the AWD. The AWD just puts the energy to the wheels, not back at the transmission.

I didn't know about the 3.2TT - that pretty much answers my question.
My point was the following:
There is a big difference in the forces on the drivetrain between an AWD and FWD car. In a FWD or RWD car, if you make too much power, your tires slip and relieves pressure on the transmission. In an AWD car, you no longer have that potential release - the transmission has to be able to handle all the power of the engine without relying on the wheels to slip at a certain point.
Based on the above, this doesn't appear to be an issue - good news!


----------



## Audi'sRevenge (Mar 24, 2008)

*Re: (Layman)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Layman* »_My biggest question is whether the DSG system can handle a chipped car with AWD attached.
No more front-wheel slip - DSG has to be able t handle all the torque that all four wheels put out.

The wheels don't put out any torque, the engine does. The wheels may apply torque to the ground but they certainly don't create it.
The engine torque does not change it can still only give 100% of what it develops, whether it's driving 4 wheels or 6 wheels or 1 wheel.
Also Haldex Quattro doesn't distribute any power to the rear wheels unless there is slip at the front; then, it can distribute up to 100% of the engine torque (in some applications) to the rear wheels in as little as 1/7th of a revolution of a wheel in slippage.


----------



## BumbleBeeJBG (Apr 30, 2006)

*Re: (Audi'sRevenge)*

What he's saying is true though, there is more stress going back to the differential and whole power train if there is less slippage vs. if there is more. The difference is the power making the wheels slip vs. the power having to move a car cause the tires won't spin.
I am not a mechanic nor an engineer, I am a humble bolt on tuner, a crappy one at that. What I just said was a concept of physics, I have no idea if car manufacturers have ways of lessoning said forces. Just trying to explain what that guy was trying to find out.


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

*Re: (Audi'sRevenge)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Audi’sRevenge* »_
Also Haldex Quattro doesn't distribute any power to the rear wheels unless there is slip at the front; then, it can distribute up to 100% of the engine torque (in some applications) to the rear wheels in as little as 1/7th of a revolution of a wheel in slippage.

Haldex cannot go more then 50/50. In the case of these systems they have a range of say 95/5 to 50/50. They are not capable of every putting more then 50% to the back wheels.
The sytem is driven off the front diff which means that the only way power is getting put to the rear is if the front diff is getting power.
When fully engaged the haldex unit is more like a locked transfer case on a truck not a diff like in most awd systems.
That being said AWD systems put a lot more stress on transmissions and clutches then a 2wd setup. You are correct that the engine does not put out more power, but a great load is put on many of the components between the ground and the crank.


----------



## mookieblaylock (Sep 25, 2005)

sounds like if you want to drag race look elsewhere, but maybe ok to pin it whilst in 3rd or above


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

*Re: (mookieblaylock)*

It really depends.. people aren't having issues really with high powered haldex cars, luckily the clutches in the back can slip etc..point was awd cars take more abuse to the drivetrai then 2wd cars.
The only real issue people have with haldex cars is the open rear diff but peloquins makes an upgrade


----------



## BUK8TEE (Nov 1, 2002)

*Re: ([email protected])*

bump for some updates....

someone has to have some inside info by now?????


----------



## GLiNTCH (May 26, 2004)

*Re:*

they better get it together by the time I need a new car; 
[cuz 135i was damn fun]
I am having a hard time finding a fun car in the current <40k line up. 
Small/light and nimble, easy, peppy drive a must.


----------



## R32-4-ME (Jun 14, 2002)

*Re: 2.0T quattro DSG Confirmed)*

We are talking about 2009's getting it? When will they be available for sale?
Would it help to start a petition to ask Audi to bring the 2.0T quattro in a 6spd manual? 









_Modified by R32-4-ME at 8:42 AM 4/14/2008_


_Modified by R32-4-ME at 8:42 AM 4/14/2008_


----------



## buckthorn (Apr 18, 2008)

*Re: (Please tell me about DSG)*

Please enlighten someone who prefers stick shifts about what driving with DSG (manual mode) is like. Ok, no clutch. So how do you control it? How does it compare to a Tiptronic Sports mode (I would never go for this)? I was planning on replacing my '01 A4 1.8TQ (MT, of course) with a '09 Avant. But alas, Audi appears to be offering these only with TipTronic (yuck). So I started looking at the A3 (gotta at least have a hatchback), and hear that the 2.0 will finally get quattro (hooray!) but with this DSG instead of MT.


----------



## angryquattrorican66 (Mar 11, 2007)

dsg wont lag like tiptronic.
manual mode give you instant shift at any rpm range. no 3 second lag before it decided to change gears


----------



## BumbleBeeJBG (Apr 30, 2006)

*Re: (angryquattrorican66)*


_Quote, originally posted by *angryquattrorican66* »_dsg wont lag like tiptronic.
manual mode give you instant shift at any rpm range. no 3 second lag before it decided to change gears

Sorta right.. there's still a lag from when you press it to when it shifts, but when it does happen, it's instant.


----------



## buckthorn (Apr 18, 2008)

*Re: (angryquattrorican66)*

So in Manual you shift by flicking the "stick"-- sort of like you would in Sports Mode? And where are the paddles? Can you point me to any good pics? I'm just trying to picture and imagine what this would be like.


----------



## Craig3Q (Oct 3, 2007)

*Re: (buckthorn)*


_Quote, originally posted by *buckthorn* »_So in Manual you shift by flicking the "stick"-- sort of like you would in Sports Mode? And where are the paddles? Can you point me to any good pics? I'm just trying to picture and imagine what this would be like.

In Manual you can shift with the stick like you do with tiptronic, or with the paddles. Both techniques have the same effect.


----------



## angryquattrorican66 (Mar 11, 2007)

*Re: (buckthorn)*


_Quote, originally posted by *buckthorn* »_So in Manual you shift by flicking the "stick"-- sort of like you would in Sports Mode? And where are the paddles? Can you point me to any good pics? I'm just trying to picture and imagine what this would be like.

what i figured out is when you do manual and driving light footed it will take its time before it decided to switch gears.
but when you are wot it will shift instantly


----------



## forma (Nov 22, 2005)

*Re: (buckthorn)*

it would be like you are playing video game except that you are doing so with a real car on a real road....that's how i would describe it. it's really a personal preference when it comes down to it and i personally prefer MT. i got bored with DSG at the end of the test-drive....for me, it's not about the speed/performance, it's about interactivity. i'd like to feel the clutch and throwing gear in and out with the stick manually. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 


_Quote, originally posted by *buckthorn* »_So in Manual you shift by flicking the "stick"-- sort of like you would in Sports Mode? And where are the paddles? Can you point me to any good pics? I'm just trying to picture and imagine what this would be like.


----------



## buckthorn (Apr 18, 2008)

*Re: (forma)*

I know I would have to try DSG before deciding whether I liked it, but I did read this blurb from a 2006 review:
"As perfect as the DSG seems out on the road, it does have a few minor annoyances. Take-offs from a dead stop are a bit abrupt unless you’re after maximum acceleration. Inching up driveways, into garages, and out of parking spaces is also abrupt and clumsy. Likely Audi’s powertrain engineers favor protecting the hardware within the transmission, rather than allowing the clutches the ability to feather smoothly. ..."
Does this match your experience? Thoughts, reactions, comments?


----------



## i_baked_cookies (Aug 28, 2007)

*Re: (buckthorn)*


_Quote, originally posted by *buckthorn* »_I know I would have to try DSG before deciding whether I liked it, but I did read this blurb from a 2006 review:
"As perfect as the DSG seems out on the road, it does have a few minor annoyances. Take-offs from a dead stop are a bit abrupt unless you’re after maximum acceleration. Inching up driveways, into garages, and out of parking spaces is also abrupt and clumsy. Likely Audi’s powertrain engineers favor protecting the hardware within the transmission, rather than allowing the clutches the ability to feather smoothly. ..."
Does this match your experience? Thoughts, reactions, comments?

Yea, that is exactly what happens.
The DSG stays in 2nd as much as possible in parking lots, so it's usually jerky and clumsy. There's a small lag when you let off the brake pedal before the car simulates an automatic and starts moving a bit. It rolls forward and backwards on inclines in D if you're not careful, etc.
If the A3 2.0t Quattro came with a 6MT, I would trade my A3 3.2 in for it... just for the gas mileage. But the DSG just ruins it!


----------



## wall man (Jan 2, 2008)

*Re: (buckthorn)*


_Quote, originally posted by *buckthorn* »_I know I would have to try DSG before deciding whether I liked it, but I did read this blurb from a 2006 review:
"As perfect as the DSG seems out on the road, it does have a few minor annoyances. Take-offs from a dead stop are a bit abrupt unless you’re after maximum acceleration. Inching up driveways, into garages, and out of parking spaces is also abrupt and clumsy. Likely Audi’s powertrain engineers favor protecting the hardware within the transmission, rather than allowing the clutches the ability to feather smoothly. ..."
Does this match your experience? Thoughts, reactions, comments?

Take-offs, in my car I wouldn't say abrupt. I would just say plain slow. I have adjusted that I need more throttle input to get the car going.
I don't have any problems for driveways or garages, it inches nicely for me. But I put it in Manual and leave it 1st. 
I still experience slow shifts from 4th to 3rd when driving at a regular pace. It seems to take forever, like 2 seconds to actually engage 3rd. 
If I'm driving hard, there's no problem with the shifts.
I used to be a big supporter of the DSG. Now I'm just accepting the fact that the DSG will in no way replace how I like to shift. That was my expectation, if I want a gear I get it withing 200 milliseconds in all driving styles. I don't beleive this is the case. Driving hard it will shift fast, cruising it takes it's time. 
I still have many more miles to experiement, but that is my first 1,500 km thoughts of the DSG.


----------



## drew138 (Dec 3, 2006)

*Re: (wall man)*

DSG is great all around but it has trouble accounting for the fact that sometimes I like to make a sudden aggressive downshift to 'make a move'. I've found myself with a major frustration level after not being able to pop down a gear or two to go hard on the acceleration to squeeze into a gap or blast through a yellow light. The car is more more responsive if you keep it in sport mode, which is what I do 95% of the time now. Most if the time I just drive it with lots of torque to make sure she's ready to go.


----------



## Hesaputz (May 12, 2006)

*Re: (wall man)*

DSG has a learning curve - you need to experiment a bit.
There's a system sensor for the speed of throttle application, as well as the travel. Smooth application, smooth takeoff; feel the clutch engage, and then apply more throttle. When you press the trottle suddenly, the speed sensor tells the car to peel out. When you want to take off quickly, it's best to preload a bit of throttle against the brake as you release it.
If you're talking about the 4 to 3 downshift when in manual mode, try applying a little gas right before you hit the paddle; When you're cruising along in 4th, the DSG generally has 5th preloaded since you came up through the gears. A bit of gas or brake will preload 3rd, making the shift a lot quicker.


----------



## shagwAg3n (Sep 9, 2006)

*Re: (judgegavel)*


_Quote, originally posted by *judgegavel* »_Thats great news, except for current 2.0T owners (at least with DSG) as its definitely going to hurt the already poor resale value.

good thing i don't plan on selling it ANYTIME soon at all


----------



## KnockKnock (Jun 30, 2005)

*Re: (drew138)*

To both of these, there's a workaround. Goose the throttle a fraction of a second before pulling the downshift paddle. Show the computer your intent to GO with your foot, and your manual downshift will go faster.
Most of the time, DSG pre-selects the next higher gear, so upshifts are predictably fast. And when you're in 6th, the downshift to 5th is fairly predictable. But in the middle gears, it errs on the upshift side. A sudden (not even a big dose of throttle... experiment to see how little it needs) increase in gas swings the pre-selection to the lower gear.
I call it a workaround, and not a solution. But it's a timing challenge for DSG enabled, much like heel-toe-ing requires practice. A real solution would be 3 clutches/drivetrains. That way, at any given instant, a lower AND a higher gear could be pre-selected.

_Quote, originally posted by *drew138* »_DSG is great all around but it has trouble accounting for the fact that sometimes I like to make a sudden aggressive downshift to 'make a move'. I've found myself with a major frustration level after not being able to pop down a gear or two to go hard on the acceleration to squeeze into a gap or blast through a yellow light.


_Quote, originally posted by *wall man* »_I still experience slow shifts from 4th to 3rd when driving at a regular pace. It seems to take forever, like 2 seconds to actually engage 3rd.


----------



## drew138 (Dec 3, 2006)

*Re: (KnockKnock)*


_Quote, originally posted by *KnockKnock* »_To both of these, there's a workaround. Goose the throttle a fraction of a second before pulling the downshift paddle. Show the computer your intent to GO with your foot, and your manual downshift will go faster.
Most of the time, DSG pre-selects the next higher gear, so upshifts are predictably fast. And when you're in 6th, the downshift to 5th is fairly predictable. But in the middle gears, it errs on the upshift side. A sudden (not even a big dose of throttle... experiment to see how little it needs) increase in gas swings the pre-selection to the lower gear.
I call it a workaround, and not a solution. But it's a timing challenge for DSG enabled, much like heel-toe-ing requires practice. A real solution would be 3 clutches/drivetrains. That way, at any given instant, a lower AND a higher gear could be pre-selected.


This does work as advertised but this assumes you have advanced warning about the need to 'get on it' hard / fast. Most so when you're in 5th and needing 3rd. Not dissing DSG -- I love it actually -- but until they nail the milisecond shifting that F1 cars can achieve in our daily drivers, the 6m/t guys are going to have a valid argument.


----------



## BUK8TEE (Nov 1, 2002)

*Re: (drew138)*

ghee how can a tranny that's meant to make life easier (DSG) have so many damn obstacles and speed bumps to get thru to enjoy the car in all gears?????????








life would be so much simpler w/ a 6mt standard and dsg as an option so those who want the headache of trying to make their dsg equipped car faster can deal w/ it on their own time.


----------



## BUK8TEE (Nov 1, 2002)

*Re: (BUK8TEE)*

oh ya any word on if these are up on the order guide's yet????


----------



## JaxACR (Dec 6, 2007)

*Re: (BUK8TEE)*


_Quote, originally posted by *BUK8TEE* »_ghee how can a tranny that's meant to make life easier (DSG) have so many damn obstacles and speed bumps to get thru to enjoy the car in all gears?????????










Probably because for 95% of people it really does make life easier. It's us 5% that get on the forums and pick apart every little technical detail that find problems with it


----------



## mookieblaylock (Sep 25, 2005)

*Re: (BUK8TEE)*


_Quote, originally posted by *BUK8TEE* »_ who want the headache of trying to make their dsg equipped car faster can deal w/ it on their own time.

why bother, dsg car is already faster


----------



## monkey7247 (Apr 9, 2007)

bump for any info...


----------



## angryrican66 (Apr 16, 2006)

*Re: (monkey7247)*


_Quote, originally posted by *monkey7247* »_bump for any info...
I was told by 2 dealers sales managers that September is the ETA, they both claimed not having info on it, which makes no sense since I was told we would have info late April originally...........


----------



## Hesaputz (May 12, 2006)

*Re: (angryrican66)*

I've been checking every couple of days - it's not out there yet. '09 order sheets were released last week, with the exception of A3 and A6. No word on when they're coming - could be anyday.


----------



## Audi'sRevenge (Mar 24, 2008)

*Re: (KnockKnock)*


_Quote, originally posted by *KnockKnock* »_Most of the time, DSG pre-selects the next higher gear, so upshifts are predictably fast. And when you're in 6th, the downshift to 5th is fairly predictable. But in the middle gears, it errs on the upshift side. A sudden (not even a big dose of throttle... experiment to see how little it needs) increase in gas swings the pre-selection to the lower gear.

Audi should really program the car for the other gearbox to select the next _lower_ gear, if you're crusing along for a while or driving at a constant speed. It would make more sense to me anyway. If you're accelerating either hard or moderately then sure select the next higher gear in the other gearbox, but if you're either crusing or slowing down (as in throttle closed) I would rather that it select the lower gear because in this situation you're more likely to start accelerating again than just continue to mosey on like that and then decide to upshift.
I mean I guess it has to take into consideration current gear and speed as well... If you're at 4-5krpm in any given gear, then you're probably going to upshift as your next shift whether you're at constant speed or slowing or not; but if you're in a higher gear and slowing down or maintaining a constant speed it should be the opposite.
If you're doing the latter, who cares if your upshift takes a little while longer if you actually do decide to upshift at that point (despite you closing the throttle/slowing down)? I'd rather have a delay in a lazy-driving upshift (because it's a Sunday drive anyway, lol) than a delay when you need more acceleration "now".
As you mentioned if you're in 6th obviously the other box is going to be in 5th (because there is no other gear for it to be in really) so why doesn't it do the same for cruising in any other gear? Strange.
Too bad the DSG logic can't be reprogrammed in the aftermarket


----------



## JaxACR (Dec 6, 2007)

*Re: (Audi'sRevenge)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Audi’sRevenge* »_
Too bad the DSG logic can't be reprogrammed in the aftermarket









_Can't_ or just hasn't happened yet....?


----------



## yacoub (Apr 24, 2008)

*Re: (JaxACR)*

So are they still making a 2.0T DSG w/ Fronttrack in 2009? The more I think about it, the more I think I'd prefer that over Quattro since Quattro is FWD-biased anyway and it just saps more drivetrain power and adds weight and maintenance requirements.


----------



## wall man (Jan 2, 2008)

*Re: (yacoub)*

Now that's a good question. 
Currently, 2.0T FWD available in 6 spd and DSG. 3.2 Quattro DSG only.
Future, 2.0T FWD 6 spd and DSG? 2.0T Quattro DSG only and 3.2 Quattro DSG only.
Now would Audi NA just add an additional model to the A3 line up or would the drop two? The 2.0T FWD 6 spd and DSG? 
The final lineup could be 2.0T Quattro and 3.2 Quattro only with DSG?


----------



## .:R2theT (Sep 7, 2005)

*Re: (yacoub)*


_Quote, originally posted by *yacoub* »_So are they still making a 2.0T DSG w/ Fronttrack in 2009? The more I think about it, the more I think I'd prefer that over Quattro since Quattro is FWD-biased anyway and it just saps more drivetrain power and adds weight and maintenance requirements.

You could go with a manual if you were going with the FWD(would make it lighter yet).
Just keep in mind that if you are planning on modding the car to higher HP output the FWD will give you a fair amount of wheel-hop/slip. Plus, the maintenance is on Haldex is a non-issue, twice in 100k hardly seems worth mentioning. Also, the AWD adds a lot of control in the curves/turns.


----------



## .:R2theT (Sep 7, 2005)

*Re: (wall man)*


_Quote, originally posted by *wall man* »_
The final lineup could be 2.0T Quattro and 3.2 Quattro only with DSG?

I doubt that. I think what we have this year will be what we get for the next couple of years until the next generation A3 is made available to us in 2011/2012. Just a guess but I can't see them muddying the waters anymore...except for maybe the S3 Sportback(doubtful).


----------



## yacoub (Apr 24, 2008)

*Re: (.:R2theT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *.:R2theT* »_
You could go with a manual if you were going with the FWD(would make it lighter yet).
Just keep in mind that if you are planning on modding the car to higher HP output the FWD will give you a fair amount of wheel-hop/slip. Plus, the maintenance is on Haldex is a non-issue, twice in 100k hardly seems worth mentioning. Also, the AWD adds a lot of control in the curves/turns.



No interest in manual, just DSG.


----------



## wall man (Jan 2, 2008)

*Re: (Audi'sRevenge)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Audi’sRevenge* »_
Audi should really program the car for the other gearbox to select the next _lower_ gear, if you're crusing along for a while or driving at a constant speed. It would make more sense to me anyway. If you're accelerating either hard or moderately then sure select the next higher gear in the other gearbox, but if you're either crusing or slowing down (as in throttle closed) I would rather that it select the lower gear because in this situation you're more likely to start accelerating again than just continue to mosey on like that and then decide to upshift.
I mean I guess it has to take into consideration current gear and speed as well... If you're at 4-5krpm in any given gear, then you're probably going to upshift as your next shift whether you're at constant speed or slowing or not; but if you're in a higher gear and slowing down or maintaining a constant speed it should be the opposite.
If you're doing the latter, who cares if your upshift takes a little while longer if you actually do decide to upshift at that point (despite you closing the throttle/slowing down)? I'd rather have a delay in a lazy-driving upshift (because it's a Sunday drive anyway, lol) than a delay when you need more acceleration "now".
As you mentioned if you're in 6th obviously the other box is going to be in 5th (because there is no other gear for it to be in really) so why doesn't it do the same for cruising in any other gear? Strange.
Too bad the DSG logic can't be reprogrammed in the aftermarket









I totally agree with this line of logic/programming. 
A simple programming selection could be done where the next lower gear is always ready vs the next higher gear. That might be easier to implement and probably solve a lot of gear change lag issues.
So to be on topic, any news on pricing and availablility?


----------

