# Road and Track Drives the A3 Sedan



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-rev...ormance-tests-first-drives-2015-audi-a3-sedan

Finally, something by an American publication with an American-based car. :laugh:

The front overhang looks massive in the photo below- to me, at least.










Summary: Michael Taylor gushes about the car convincingly enough to be a paid shill for Audi if you're a conspiracy theorist.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

_Audi has set up the A3’s all-wheel drive to act more like rear drive than front drive. It will do proper donuts on a gravel surface._

Yep. :wave:


----------



## Boosted 01 R (Feb 10, 2013)

sweet, been waiting for a NA review


----------



## mookieblaylock (Sep 25, 2005)

" The only bummer for us is that we won’t get the sedan until next year as a 2015 model. "

what a douche, doesnt bother to mention no hatch or manual


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

Dan Halen said:


> Summary: Michael Taylor gushes about the car convincingly enough to be a paid shill for Audi if you're a conspiracy theorist.


I think is review is quite similar to others where the A3 is superior to the CLA, and of course it would be. The CLA is around 200 lbs more, and is a large sedan. Audi at least made something that is sized to be sporty (ok I loved my B5 way too much). This is where I hope BMW falls with their 2-series Gran Coupe, and if they can drop it below 3,000 lbs, it will make it that more interesting.

Definitely a lot of Audi kiss ass at the beginning that's for sure. A little too much haha


----------



## VWNCC (Jan 12, 2010)

Rudy_H said:


> I think is review is quite similar to others where the A3 is superior to the CLA, and of course it would be. The CLA is around 200 lbs more, and is a large sedan. Audi at least made something that is sized to be sporty (ok I loved my B5 way too much). This is where I hope BMW falls with their 2-series Gran Coupe, and if they can drop it below 3,000 lbs, it will make it that more interesting.
> 
> Definitely a lot of Audi kiss ass at the beginning that's for sure. A little too much haha


I can't agree enough.

The A3 is sized so perfectly (between the B5 A4 and the Jetta IV). I miss my Jetta IV and nothing can replace it except for possibly the A3 sedan.


----------



## Chimera (Jul 6, 2002)

"USA has ached for a sedan version of the A3 hatchback for years"

Bold opening statement.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Dan Halen said:


> http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-rev...ormance-tests-first-drives-2015-audi-a3-sedan
> 
> Finally, something by an American publication with an American-based car. :laugh:
> 
> Summary: Michael Taylor gushes about the car convincingly enough to be a paid shill for Audi if you're a conspiracy theorist.


Yeah that was one fluffy review and I kept thinking the same thing: did Audi pay for this kind of press? Look, I have no doubt it will be a solid choice, but he's going on about it as if it's got the driving dynamics of an M3 and the luxury appointments of an S-Class. 

Now, if in reality that's the case - awesome, but I somehow thing he's overplaying that a bit.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Chimera said:


> "USA has ached for a sedan version of the A3 hatchback for years"
> 
> Bold opening statement.


Well, that is true. Audi of America has been trying to build a business case around a small sedan, arguing that it would be the perfect 3-series fighter, for ages now. Instead they've been given the ever expanding A4 and in order to hit price points were forced to bring the multitronic FWD A4, of which they've probably sold ten in the last five years. 

The American market is much more price and value driven - this has been something Volkswagen has completely whiffed on for ages. Look at the compact CUV market: dominated by the CRV and RAV4. Say what you want about them, they're excellent values and extremely reliable. That's what people buy them for: utility, value, reliability. They could care less about a "German driving experience", soft-touch plastics or the torque curve of the 2.0T. 

But what does the US market get? It gets the Tiguan which while nice, is horribly overpriced compared to the competition. My wife looked at one, loved it, then laughed her way into a 2012 CRV-EX AWD which she loves. She didn't care one iota about what Volkswagen was selling, apart from the fact that the Tiguan looked "cute" and she "really wanted a VW".

Volkswagen has to be two companies in the US: consumer focused and yet enthusiast aware. They need to provide models like the GTI, Golf and the up-marketed GLI to keep us happy, and yet also keep prices in check by going the hard plastic, rear-torsen beam route for the masses who just don't care.

Back to the quote above: my point is that the marketing guys in Herndon know what they're doing and they are full aware that compared to the Sportback, the sedan will sell like gangbusters. They'll pull in a lot of new buyers into the brand with the sedan. That's what it is there to do. The Sportback was never going to accomplish that. 

Now, what Audi has demonstrated with the allroad, whose sales have been roughly equivalent to those of the old A3, is that there is a market for wagons. No doubt they're actually making a decent margin on the allroads being sold compared to the A3s, so the key there might be positioning. The new MQB Sportback e-tron will likely be around $40k, and like the allroad, will probably be profitable at that price. 

I have little doubt that as the A3 market develops in the next few years and they refine the packaging as always, that we probably will end up with a standard Sportback at some point in the life cycle. I have a sincere hope that we will also get a manual transmission option because again, without it, I still have serious reservations about actually plunking down my money for an A3. But the market is what the market is and the A3 has an important role to play in their quest for 200,000 units annually. The Sportback and the manual transmission will help fill in the gaps but will never be the driving component toward those sales goals.


----------



## steve111b (Jun 2, 2011)

New S3 acts more like a rear wheel drive car.

The old facelift Gen. 4 Haldex car can do donuts in the Winter. I have never tried it on gravel, but it should be about the same thing as doing donuts in the Winter.

In extreme circumstances (snow covered parking lot) it is possible for all the power to go to the rear wheels. Usually the mix is 85% front and 15% rear but it can be 100% to either axle.


----------



## Chimera (Jul 6, 2002)

Travis Grundke said:


> My wife looked at one, loved it, then laughed her way into a 2012 CRV-EX AWD which she loves.


I can almost guarantee the sportback will come eventually. If the etron sells, it'll be because the public likes the outward appearance. Isn't that why Audi chose the A3 sportback to demo etron? I still believe the sportback never sold well in the US because a base model was fugly (I own an A3) and sportier appearing models were way over priced in the public eye during the economic downturn and compared to lease offerings from competitors. Maybe it's a bit like the A4s dilema... the vehicle is fine, it's how it's been handled that's been a failure.

Without going into differences, I think the new Impreza sportback looks good all around and I'm guessing the awd is as good as ever. They're everywhere in my area. The Impreza sedan is almost non existent. The sportback probably outsells the sedan 10 to 1.

I can honestly say I'm glad to see Audi catching up to the 3series, it should benefit consumers. If it takes a new model sedan, so be it.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Chimera said:


> I can almost guarantee the sportback will come eventually. If the etron sells, it'll be because the public likes the outward appearance. Isn't that why Audi chose the A3 sportback to demo etron? I still believe the sportback never sold well in the US because a base model was fugly (I own an A3) and sportier appearing models were way over priced in the public eye during the economic downturn and compared to lease offerings from competitors. Maybe it's a bit like the A4s dilema... the vehicle is fine, it's how it's been handled that's been a failure.
> 
> Without going into differences, I think the new Impreza sportback looks good all around and I'm guessing the awd is as good as ever. They're everywhere in my area. The Impreza sedan is almost non existent. The sportback probably outsells the sedan 10 to 1.
> 
> I can honestly say I'm glad to see Audi catching up to the 3series, it should benefit consumers. If it takes a new model sedan, so be it.


The normal model line Sportback is a possibility, but I would put good money on the Q3 taking the majority of the sales that would otherwise go toward the Sportback. The reason Audi brought the allroad and discontinued the Avant is because the Q5 stole the majority of Avant sales. For what ever reason, the packaging and branding of the allroad is making that product more successful. 

I think that Audi will use the Sportback as their alternative powertrain model moving forward. We won't see a hybrid or e-tron A3 sedan, but we will see a hybrid/e-tron Sportback. It's a differentiator and allows them to charge more. 

That's not to say that down the road, should Audi start to really rival BMW in sales that they wouldn't bring the Sportback here, but unless Audi gets a hard-on for going after Subaru customers, I don't see it happening.


----------



## Boosted 01 R (Feb 10, 2013)

I would buy an e-tron/hybrid sportback, if it was priced well, but I would expect around 45K for the starting price so I'll have to pass lol


----------



## Chimera (Jul 6, 2002)

Travis Grundke said:


> For what ever reason, the packaging and branding of the allroad is making that product more successful.
> 
> I think that Audi will use the Sportback as their alternative powertrain model moving forward. We won't see a hybrid or e-tron A3 sedan, but we will see a hybrid/e-tron Sportback. It's a differentiator and allows them to charge more.
> 
> That's not to say that down the road, should Audi start to really rival BMW in sales that they wouldn't bring the Sportback here, but unless Audi gets a hard-on for going after Subaru customers, I don't see it happening.


Audi would never compete with the Impreza, it's not the point. I do think, in a country "aching" for more small luxury sedans, it's interesting that the Subaru sportback outsells the sedan so greatly (and just about every other brand now offering a 5-door).

To me it's no surprise the Allroad is doing better than the Avant. It has the appearance of being smaller than the Avant and looks more interesting to most folks (and has the refinements of the refreshed A4 the Avant didn't have). As the designs are improved, sales will improve. And of course it helps that the housing market has stabilized, the stock market is at all-time highs, and unemployment rates are decent.

The A3 sportback is/was probably too cramped for most folks. Raise the roof and make it easier to get in/out of and you've essentially got a Q3. They're too similar to offer both. What is the price range of the Q3, 30-35k?

The upcoming A3 sedan will sell well. Offer competitive monthly lease payment prices and maintenance, and they'll be all over the road.


----------



## Dennis M (Jan 26, 2012)

Chimera said:


> Audi would never compete with the Impreza, it's not the point. I do think, in a country "aching" for more small luxury sedans, it's interesting that the Subaru sportback outsells the sedan so greatly (and just about every other brand now offering a 5-door).
> 
> To me it's no surprise the Allroad is doing better than the Avant. It has the appearance of being smaller than the Avant and looks more interesting to most folks (and has the refinements of the refreshed A4 the Avant didn't have). As the designs are improved, sales will improve. And of course it helps that the housing market has stabilized, the stock market is at all-time highs, and unemployment rates are decent.
> 
> ...


People may not cross shop the base Impreza and the A3, but they will be cross shopping the next gen WRX/STI and A3/S3.

And the sales of the Impreza hatchback are being taken over by the new XV CrossTrek. SoA recently asked FHI for less Imprezas and more CrossTreks. N. Americans just love sedans and crossovers and we enthusiasts represent the minority. I would be all over an S3 Sportback, but I really think that sales of the A3 sedan and Q3 will be so huge that AoA may not even think it will be worth getting us the Sportback.


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

Dennis M said:


> People may not cross shop the base Impreza and the A3, but they will be cross shopping the next gen WRX/STI and A3/S3.


And a significant portion of those will stick with Subaru because they have the foresight to keep offering a manual option.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

ChrisFu said:


> And a significant portion of those will stick with Subaru because they have the foresight to keep offering a manual option.


+1

HOWEVER, Subaru doesn't exist anymore, it is now called Toyota. Don't be surprised now that the evil empire dropped the sportback in one foul swoop, that the manual isn't far behind.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 12, 2001)

Rudy_H said:


> +1
> 
> HOWEVER, Subaru doesn't exist anymore, it is now called Toyota. Don't be surprised now that the evil empire dropped the sportback in one foul swoop, that the manual isn't far behind.


This isn't any more true than saying that Mazda used to be called Ford. Toyota owns 16.5% of Fuji Heavy Industries, which is the parent company of Subaru. They don't own the whole company, and Subaru certainly still exists as an independent entity.

Hyperbole is fun, but let's not get carried away. 

-Tim


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Chimera said:


> Audi would never compete with the Impreza, it's not the point. I do think, in a country "aching" for more small luxury sedans, it's interesting that the Subaru sportback outsells the sedan so greatly (and just about every other brand now offering a 5-door).
> 
> To me it's no surprise the Allroad is doing better than the Avant. It has the appearance of being smaller than the Avant and looks more interesting to most folks (and has the refinements of the refreshed A4 the Avant didn't have). As the designs are improved, sales will improve. And of course it helps that the housing market has stabilized, the stock market is at all-time highs, and unemployment rates are decent.
> 
> ...


The Impreza isn't the market - it's Outback buyers. Looking at the demographic, these are people who are already interested in wagons, have above average incomes and are obviously not interested in SUVs, else they would have purchased one of the gazillion options already on the market. 

Subaru built its core US business on AWD wagons - but in a quest to get away from being a niche automaker they've redesigned their cars to straddle the SUV/wagon market. Subaru's biggest problem is that it can't quite get the upscale / luxo component right. That's where the Audis and Volvos of the world step into the picture, especially if there really is a resurgence in the wagon market.

Volkswagen has the lower end of the market covered with the Golf and Sportwagen. The A3 was always a non-profitable experiment for Audi of America for a variety of reasons: it was too small and too expensive. The allroad sells in similar numbers to the A3 (and secret tip: a good number of those are fleet / loaner vehicles sold to dealerships, then CPO'd), but the key is that the allroad can be sold profitably whereas the A3 never really was. That demographic of Outback buyers will step up to an allroad/avant - but not to an A3 Sportback. 

I'm not convinced that we're going to get a normal Sportback in the US market anytime in the near future, especially with the Q3 on deck. When Audi is selling 300,000 units in the US annually then we may be looking at the regular Sportback, but until that day comes we're going to be dealing with the Q3, A3 sedan, A3 Sportback e-tron, A3 cabrio as the mainstays.

As for pricing, now that we have CLA pricing I'd like to say that we have a better picture, but I'm not so sure since Audi is bringing the 1.8, 2.0TFSI and 2.0TDI, so an apples-to-apples comparison isn't very easy. Do you compare a loaded CLA at ~$39k to a loaded 1.8, or will Audi limit equipment on the 1.8 and the true comparison should be a 2.0TFSI Quattro to a loaded CLA?


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

Travis Grundke said:


> As for pricing, now that we have CLA pricing I'd like to say that we have a better picture, but I'm not so sure since Audi is bringing the 1.8, 2.0TFSI and 2.0TDI, so an apples-to-apples comparison isn't very easy. Do you compare a loaded CLA at ~$39k to a loaded 1.8, or will Audi limit equipment on the 1.8 and the true comparison should be a 2.0TFSI Quattro to a loaded CLA?


I'd like to hope that Audi won't price this such that the 1.8 is the comparison for the loaded CLA. I'm ready for it to be later in the year so some of the unknowns can become known.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> This isn't any more true than saying that Mazda used to be called Ford. Toyota owns 16.5% of Fuji Heavy Industries, which is the parent company of Subaru. They don't own the whole company, and Subaru certainly still exists as an independent entity.
> 
> Hyperbole is fun, but let's not get carried away.
> 
> -Tim


This is true, those were sad years of Mazda from late 90's until 2008, when Ford actually had a strangle hold...RX-7 got killed off, the Miata got fat, the Protege became a slightly cooler Escort, the styling was blah. 

Then in 2010, Ford is next to non-existent in Mazda HQ, Mazda is becoming exciting. Check out the Car Lounge on the new Mazda3 and what enthusiasts are saying, one of the hottest threads, and what people are saying about the Mazda6, list goes on. The Miata is shedding weight in the next generation and going turbo...getting back to it's roots.

Now we need a RX-7 (not RX-8) and they have a great line-up.

I know everyone is going to get up in arms *it's not the samething*, but I wouldn't consider a second a FWD A3 1.8T or TDI when the new Mazda 3 hits the shores. Plus I can get a sportback!!


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Dan Halen said:


> I'd like to hope that Audi won't price this such that the 1.8 is the comparison for the loaded CLA. I'm ready for it to be later in the year so some of the unknowns can become known.


Well, consider that Audi charges between $1,500 - $2,500 less than Merc on most models, we could be looking at a loaded 1.8TFSI in the $37,000-$38,000 range and a 2.0TFSI + Quattro model pricing out about $2k higher at $39,000-$41,000. 

Still too pricey, IMHO, especially if I can't get my transmission of choice!


----------



## VWNCC (Jan 12, 2010)

Travis Grundke said:


> Well, consider that Audi charges between $1,500 - $2,500 less than Merc on most models, we could be looking at a loaded 1.8TFSI in the $37,000-$38,000 range and a 2.0TFSI + Quattro model pricing out about $2k higher at $39,000-$41,000.
> 
> Still too pricey, IMHO, especially if I can't get my transmission of choice!


That's way too expensive for a 1.8TFSI, even if loaded. If they really price it like that, I can't see it selling well (maybe the unloaded will sell well) as it just uses the same motor as many of the 2014 VWs, that sell for much cheaper.

As for the 2.0TFSI+Quattro, there is no way it is just 2k more than the 1.8TFSI. If it was like the current generation where they just add quattro to the FWD version, then 2k is probably right, but the quattro version doesn't just add quattro, it also adds like ~40hp? and loads more torque? It is probably priced 6k higher.


----------



## Cyncris (Aug 12, 2012)

From everything that I have seen on the Mazda 3, it is described as a torque steering, overly stiff, plastic car that moves around a lot.

For a car in it's class, it seems like the Ford Focus ST gets a lot better reviews.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

Travis Grundke said:


> Well, consider that Audi charges between $1,500 - $2,500 less than Merc on most models, we could be looking at a loaded 1.8TFSI in the $37,000-$38,000 range and a 2.0TFSI + Quattro model pricing out about $2k higher at $39,000-$41,000.
> 
> Still too pricey, IMHO, especially if I can't get my transmission of choice!


I sure hope not. Where does that put the prospect of a $39,000 base for the S3 if the 2.0TQ runs roughly the same at all-boxes-checked? We know (right?) that the base A3 will come with some rather higher-end standard features (leather, pano roof, Stronic, Pre-Sense Basic). We expect that car to base around $29,000. Where do you go from there for "fully loaded," really? You presumably have premium and prestige packaging, and some assorted miscellaneous add-ons that don't go with those packages. In rough terms, you have LED headlamps, B&O, the various safety trinkets, drive select...

I sort of expect (and hope) that they keep the 1.8T below $34,000 on the top end. They'll probably have to do this by limiting the amount of fluff you can pile on top (nix the drive select, for one, and I can see an argument for withholding LED headlamps). Ergo, I expect that they'll keep the 1.8 as a true entry level offering. I don't expect it to be as uncommon as the 2.0L NA Jetta- and frankly, I think it will be a volume car. I just don't expect it to be anywhere near the higher end of the price band, from base A3 to topped S3.

While not completely related, I have seen mention a few times of the (perceived) lack of sales the of front-drive A4. I'd actually argue that there's fair demand for front-drive A4s; I see them rather frequently. I even regularly see A4s with reflector halogen headlamps. Contrary to what any of us may believe, I think Audi sees a real benefit from offering front-drive A4s and should see the same benefit from the front-drive 1.8T A3.


----------



## Dennis M (Jan 26, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> This isn't any more true than saying that Mazda used to be called Ford. Toyota owns 16.5% of Fuji Heavy Industries, which is the parent company of Subaru. They don't own the whole company, and Subaru certainly still exists as an independent entity.
> 
> Hyperbole is fun, but let's not get carried away.
> 
> -Tim


The Toyota-fication of Subaru is why I'm here! 

We've been Subaru diehards for 16 years and my wife considered a 2011 H6 Outback Ltd to replace her '99 Outback Ltd. We were really let down by the interior (the '99's interior was nicer) and the handling. She nearly fell asleep from boredom on the test drive and she was driving! With the Supplier Program discount, we realized that the Q5 didn't cost that much more than an H6 Outback Ltd. and was more engaging to drive. Of course, two model years later Subaru said they stiffened up the Outback's suspension to improve handling. If it wasn't Toyota-fication, it was just the same idea to build a car which handles in a bit more boring manner to appeal to the masses.

With ACNA members now getting the Supplier discount, it's a no-brainer to join if you're considering a new A3/S3 sedan (to be on topic  ).


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Dan Halen said:


> I sure hope not. Where does that put the prospect of a $39,000 base for the S3 if the 2.0TQ runs roughly the same at all-boxes-checked? We know (right?) that the base A3 will come with some rather higher-end standard features (leather, pano roof, Stronic, Pre-Sense Basic). We expect that car to base around $29,000. Where do you go from there for "fully loaded," really? You presumably have premium and prestige packaging, and some assorted miscellaneous add-ons that don't go with those packages. In rough terms, you have LED headlamps, B&O, the various safety trinkets, drive select...
> 
> I sort of expect (and hope) that they keep the 1.8T below $34,000 on the top end. They'll probably have to do this by limiting the amount of fluff you can pile on top (nix the drive select, for one, and I can see an argument for withholding LED headlamps). Ergo, I expect that they'll keep the 1.8 as a true entry level offering. I don't expect it to be as uncommon as the 2.0L NA Jetta- and frankly, I think it will be a volume car. I just don't expect it to be anywhere near the higher end of the price band, from base A3 to topped S3.


Dan, good points all, that's why I'm really curious about how Audi is planning to package and price the A3 here in North America. My gut tells me that the 1.8T models will be 'capped' in equipment to keep the range separated and to make the premium for the 2.0TFSI models appear to be the better value (IE: you can spec up a 1.8 to $34,000, but if you stretch just a little bit more to $36 you get a bigger motor, quattro and likely some additional equipment). 

As far as packaging, I have no doubt that a few key options will be:

- Navigation
- Audi Connect
- Self parking
- Drive Select
- LED headlamps
- Audi Phone Box
- Lane Assist
- Radar cruise

It's hard to tell how things will be packaged considering the base model will get a sunroof, leather, bluetooth, MMI control, pre-sense basic. I would bet the move up to the 2.0T gets you things like the lighting package standard, xenon headlamps...but I have a hard time thinking what else it would include as standard apart from the powertrain upgrade. My guess is that the move to the 2.0t essentially is a powertrain upgrade and then also opens up the order book to allow you to add things like drive select, B&O, navigation, safety nannies, etc. This is where the price will go stratospheric...fast. 

Based on this, I bet we'll see some decent overlap between the 2.0TFSI and S3 models. 

Personally, I have little interest in the nanny features. I'm looking for a 2.0TFSI Quattro with Nav, B&O and LED headlamps. Other than that, I can do without anything else. From the folks that I know with Audi Connect on A6, 7 and 8s, it's a novelty that wears off pretty quickly.

On a side note, one of the things that I have recommended to my contacts at Audi of America is that they look into making a manual transmission option available as a no-charge-change item like BMW has done with the 3-series.  In other words, the price is the same for the auto or the manual. The other recommendation is to do with Audi of Australia is doing with the 6MT Sportback and that is to make it a sold-order option only. Apparently these options are being 'investigated', but I wouldn't put any money on it becoming a reality before the 2015 model debuts officially.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

Right on. You're looking for, in a 2.0TQ, what I'm looking for in an S3- though I may pass on the LED headlamps if they're lumped with a bunch of other stuff. I'm not entirely convinced that they're superior to a good projector xenon, yet, anyway.

... and then there's the possibility that the "delayed intro" other countries are seeing for the LED units may stretch beyond the first allotment of cars in the US. 

I'm leaning toward being first in line when the order guide opens, so... delayed intro items may be a factor in what I spec.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

Dennis M said:


> With ACNA members now getting the Supplier discount, it's a no-brainer to join if you're considering a new A3/S3 sedan (to be on topic  ).


What is the supplier discount? Some percentage back of invoice? Something a bit more arbitrary? Or more to the point, is it something _unobtanium_ by today's savvy buyer working on his own?

Edit: It looks like it's 6% back of MSRP, according to ACNA's website: http://www.audiclubna.org/audi-reso...16-acna-content/about-acna/137-acna-discounts.

Based on a quick glance at an A4 and S4 on TRUECar, the ACNA discount looks roughly in line with the average discount from MSRP on the open market. I intend to join ACNA, but I probably won't do it as a means of negotiating the purchase of the S3.


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

Dan Halen said:


> While not completely related, I have seen mention a few times of the (perceived) lack of sales the of front-drive A4. I'd actually argue that there's fair demand for front-drive A4s; I see them rather frequently. I even regularly see A4s with reflector halogen headlamps. Contrary to what any of us may believe, I think Audi sees a real benefit from offering front-drive A4s and should see the same benefit from the front-drive 1.8T A3.


To this point, those base model FWD A4s sell very well in sunny climate southern states like Texas and Florida. If you look at the inventory of A4s and A6s in DFW, the *vast *majority are FWD.

I maintain my view that these models sell well because significant numbers of people have begun in earnest buying Audi vehicles merely as a status symbol.


----------



## mike3141 (Feb 16, 1999)

Dan Halen said:


> Edit: It looks like it's 6% back of MSRP, according to ACNA's website: http://www.audiclubna.org/audi-reso...16-acna-content/about-acna/137-acna-discounts.


You left out the "at participating dealers" part. I'm not lucky enough to have a dealer that gives discounts (purchase, service or parts) with ACNA membership.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

mike3141 said:


> You left out the "at participating dealers" part. I'm not lucky enough to have a dealer that gives discounts (purchase, service or parts) with ACNA membership.


Well... yeah, I suppose so. To be fair, I checked for a couple dealers in the area- dealers which I didn't expect to be on the list. It looked like a _fairly_ comprehensive list to me.

The two I looked for were on the list, but come to think of it, Audi Nashville (who happens to be a Sonic dealer) wasn't on the list- only Gossett Audi and Harper Audi for TN.

Would your dealer happen to be an AutoNation or Sonic dealer? Maybe most of those guys don't participate in this?

Gossett gives the 6% discount but isn't a TRUECar participating dealer. I guess they figure they don't need to be a participating dealer when they're the only game in town.

.. and if we want to get ticky, the "at participating dealers" clause is within the link I posted. :laugh:


----------



## VWNCC (Jan 12, 2010)

Dan Halen said:


> I sure hope not. Where does that put the prospect of a $39,000 base for the S3 if the 2.0TQ runs roughly the same at all-boxes-checked? We know (right?) that the base A3 will come with some rather higher-end standard features (leather, pano roof, Stronic, Pre-Sense Basic). We expect that car to base around $29,000. Where do you go from there for "fully loaded," really? You presumably have premium and prestige packaging, and some assorted miscellaneous add-ons that don't go with those packages. In rough terms, you have LED headlamps, B&O, the various safety trinkets, drive select...
> 
> I sort of expect (and hope) that they keep the 1.8T below $34,000 on the top end. They'll probably have to do this by limiting the amount of fluff you can pile on top (nix the drive select, for one, and I can see an argument for withholding LED headlamps). Ergo, I expect that they'll keep the 1.8 as a true entry level offering. I don't expect it to be as uncommon as the 2.0L NA Jetta- and frankly, I think it will be a volume car. I just don't expect it to be anywhere near the higher end of the price band, from base A3 to topped S3.
> 
> While not completely related, I have seen mention a few times of the (perceived) lack of sales the of front-drive A4. I'd actually argue that there's fair demand for front-drive A4s; I see them rather frequently. I even regularly see A4s with reflector halogen headlamps. Contrary to what any of us may believe, I think Audi sees a real benefit from offering front-drive A4s and should see the same benefit from the front-drive 1.8T A3.


My expectations:

FWD 1.8T A3 starting price = 28.5k

Quattro 2.0T A3 starting price = 33.5k

S-Line Sport Package +2.5k

Xenon Standalone option (FWD 1.8T only) +1k 

Technology Package (Nav, FWD 1.8T only) +2.5k

Premium Technology Package (Quattro 2.0T only, LED + Nav) + 4k


In other words, I expect the FWD 1.8T to get halogen standard and not be able to get full LED headlamps while the quattro 2.0T comes standard with bi-xenon headlamps with the option to get full LED headlamps in an expensive technology package.

For similar equipped FWD 1.8T and Quattro 2.0T, the difference will be around 4k, but the Quattro 2.0T will be able to get many more high-end options.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

I think that's a fair guess.


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

Travis Grundke said:


> Dan, good points all, that's why I'm really curious about how Audi is planning to package and price the A3 here in North America. My gut tells me that the 1.8T models will be 'capped' in equipment to keep the range separated and to make the premium for the 2.0TFSI models appear to be the better value (IE: you can spec up a 1.8 to $34,000, but if you stretch just a little bit more to $36 you get a bigger motor, quattro and likely some additional equipment).
> 
> As far as packaging, I have no doubt that a few key options will be:
> 
> ...


Give me as many nanny features as you can get! With all the crazy people out there, best to have as much safety stuff as possible. I am a firm believer that these things actually work. I think the starting price on the 1.8T fwd is going to be below the $29k range...maybe 28500 to start, or Audi will price it right at $29k. The S3 might be too rich for my blood...i will probably stick with the 2.0T quattro, with Navi, B and O, and all the driver aids. I guess Audi will do Premium Plus and Prestige as they do on their other cars.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

caliatenza said:


> Give me as many nanny features as you can get! With all the crazy people out there, best to have as much safety stuff as possible. I am a firm believer that these things actually work.


With the rental cars I have driven that have many of them I don't see them having much to do with others and mostly about the driver not paying attention.

Lane departure - can't keep in your lane so the warning goes off. Side cameras - don't want to look when changing lanes so the camera/alarm helps you. Backing up, camera or alarms go off so you don't have to look back and around you (very simple with small/medium car). Collision ahead alarms - you are too close or the car in front is stopping and you are going too fast or are too close. Car puts on brakes when crash imminent - you are following too close and/or can't or won't hit the brakes hard and fast enough) - almost always, when you hit someone from behind it is your fault.

More of a general question, not trying to give you a hard time but do any of the "nanny (safety) features" help with other drivers incompetence or are they all a benefit to the driver of the car (that has the features) that isn't paying attention?


----------



## mike3141 (Feb 16, 1999)

On the SportBack A3s AoA was offering "Premium" and "Premium Plus" models. The former got you a base model with halogen headlights, 4-spoke steering wheel and other basic amenities. "Premium Plus" added Xenon headlights, 3-spoke wheel, different wheels, bluetooth, and electric driver's seat plus other enhancements.

Individual options included the RNS-E Nav packages, convenience package, cold weather package, 2 sport packages, Open Sky sunroof, and rear air bags.


----------



## KnockKnock (Jun 30, 2005)

I think the nannies are mostly directed to a) the aging Baby Boomers who's skills are deteriorating and b) distracted drivers and c) the rest of us who think we're perfect but have occasional lapses - humans are imperfect.

I say make them subtle / not an annoying distraction / inexpensive, and bring them on. Sort of like inoculations. The more everyone gets them, the better off everyone is - even those who opt out.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

mike3141 said:


> On the SportBack A3s AoA was offering "Premium" and "Premium Plus" models. The former got you a base model with halogen headlights, 4-spoke steering wheel and other basic amenities. "Premium Plus" added Xenon headlights, 3-spoke wheel, different wheels, bluetooth, and electric driver's seat plus other enhancements.
> 
> Individual options included the RNS-E Nav packages, convenience package, cold weather package, 2 sport packages, Open Sky sunroof, and rear air bags.


Well put. Keep in mind that the MQB A3 will feature things like Bluetooth, sunroof, leather and MMI control as standard. 

There are a lot of ways they can package this car moving up the range. It'll be interesting to see.


----------



## Cyncris (Aug 12, 2012)

Keep in mind with the ACNA discount that it is flat and there is no haggling needed, so you can go get your car within a 2 hour period, not stuck at the dealership all day or walking out 6 times before you finally agree on something.

It also stacks with loyalty for A3 / S3 that is an additional $750

Also for the ACNA discount the dealer takes 4% and ACNA provides 2%. If you have a participating dealer that you can get to take 6% off and then add the 2% from ACNA and add the loyalty you can take a sticker price of 45,000 and have it down to $40,650

You have to be a member of ACNA for 6 months to get the discount. ACNA also provides many other benefits that might be useful to you now.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

Cyncris said:


> Keep in mind with the ACNA discount that it is flat and there is no haggling needed, so you can go get your car within a 2 hour period, not stuck at the dealership all day or walking out 6 times before you finally agree on something.
> 
> It also stacks with loyalty for A3 / S3 that is an additional $750
> 
> ...


I'll be going to Dallas, Atlanta, or Chicago to buy the car, more than likely. If I'm not able to make inroads with one particular person by the time the order guide opens, I'll fire off a letter to the internet sales departments of multiple dealerships with the order specs and my price requirement. If invoice is tight on these cars, the ACNA discount will probably be the way for me to go. I'll join ACNA in the next couple weeks so I have that to fall back on should I need it. Either way, I'm not going to blow a wad of time buying this thing. I haven't for my last two purchases, and I'm not about to start now.

I'm not entirely following your statement above, though. I won't get loyalty, but I guess I would get it when I buy a Q5 after I pay the S3 off... :laugh:


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

I purchased my A5 with the 6% supplier discount and the entire process at my dealer took 45 minutes.


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

KnockKnock said:


> I think the nannies are mostly directed to a) the aging Baby Boomers who's skills are deteriorating and b) distracted drivers and c) the rest of us who think we're perfect but have occasional lapses - humans are imperfect.
> 
> I say make them subtle / not an annoying distraction / inexpensive, and bring them on. Sort of like inoculations. The more everyone gets them, the better off everyone is - even those who opt out.


Put me down for category C. My dad got all the safety systems on his Mercedes C250...he needs it because he is getting older but they work. The active blind spot assist saved my bacon the day we bought the car. Some idiot flew up at like 75 mph in my blind spot and cut me off, as i was about to merge onto the freeway. The system warned me and more than likely moved me away from the other car's lane. I hope to God he doesnt ever have to experience the PRE-SAFE Brake (Autonomous braking) though. The lane keeping assist (thats also active) is a bit annoying, but its useful to correct drifting or when lanes narrow on freeways or if the lane markings are uneven, etc. But Mercedes has made them non intrusive and they actually work...so thats why i am a firm believer in them. I think distracted drivers would need the active versions of these; simple warnings wont help those kind of drivers.


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

dmorrow said:


> With the rental cars I have driven that have many of them I don't see them having much to do with others and mostly about the driver not paying attention.
> 
> Lane departure - can't keep in your lane so the warning goes off. Side cameras - don't want to look when changing lanes so the camera/alarm helps you. Backing up, camera or alarms go off so you don't have to look back and around you (very simple with small/medium car). Collision ahead alarms - you are too close or the car in front is stopping and you are going too fast or are too close. Car puts on brakes when crash imminent - you are following too close and/or can't or won't hit the brakes hard and fast enough) - almost always, when you hit someone from behind it is your fault.
> 
> More of a general question, not trying to give you a hard time but do any of the "nanny (safety) features" help with other drivers incompetence or are they all a benefit to the driver of the car (that has the features) that isn't paying attention?


you probably drove a car with the camera versions of those systems. Those systems dont work very well, i.e like on the Honda Accord and other non luxury makes. I know Mazda has radar based systems, just like Mercedes, Volvo, Infiniti and other luxury makes.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

caliatenza said:


> you probably drove a car with the camera versions of those systems. Those systems dont work very well, i.e like on the Honda Accord and other non luxury makes. I know Mazda has radar based systems, just like Mercedes, Volvo, Infiniti and other luxury makes.


Regardless of whether they are camera based or radar based I don't see it keeping the idiots from hitting me. In my examples above, when it goes to radar based instead of camera how do they suddenly stop idiots from causing accidents with me ? Maybe in really heavy fog, when I can't see, or when I am not paying attention?

If your mirrors are adjusted correctly there isn't a blind spot for the lanes next to yours. Most have the side mirrors showing almost the same view as the rear view mirror which is wrong. Learned from track day driving instructor - adjust the side view mirrors so that as the car behind is leaving the view from the rear view mirror it is entering the view on the side view mirror. If looking in both side and rear view mirrors show virtually the same thing then they adjusted properly.

See this - http://www.wikihow.com/Set-Rear‐View-Mirrors-to-Eliminate-Blind-Spots


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

dmorrow said:


> Regardless of whether they are camera based or radar based I don't see it keeping the idiots from hitting me. In my examples above, when it goes to radar based instead of camera how do they suddenly stop idiots from causing accidents with me ? Maybe in really heavy fog, when I can't see, or when I am not paying attention?
> 
> If your mirrors are adjusted correctly there isn't a blind spot for the lanes next to yours. Most have the side mirrors showing almost the same view as the rear view mirror which is wrong. Learned from track day driving instructor - adjust the side view mirrors so that as the car behind is leaving the view from the rear view mirror it is entering the view on the side view mirror. If looking in both side and rear view mirrors show virtually the same thing then they adjusted properly.
> 
> See this - http://www.wikihow.com/Set-Rear‐View-Mirrors-to-Eliminate-Blind-Spots


the Mercedes Active Blind Spot assist can move you away from a person who is about to come into your lane and hit you. It doesnt steer for you, but it uses the brakes. The new Infiniti systems actually take control of the steering and move you away that way. My mirrors are adjusted, but i think the systems at least provide peace of mind.


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

caliatenza said:


> The new Infiniti systems actually take control of the steering and move you away that way.


...and potentially into traffic in the lane on the other side of your car?  I find it exceedingly hard to believe that is implemented anywhere.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

caliatenza said:


> the Mercedes Active Blind Spot assist *can move you away from a person who is about to come into your lane* and hit you. *It doesnt steer for you, but it uses the brakes.*


Is this a fancy way of saying "the Mercedes will hit the brakes if something is coming into your lane"? I don't understand the "can move you away" using the brakes. 

When my wife and I test drove the new Mazda 6 recently the salesman in the back seat said if we tried to run into a wall the car would stop us before it happened. He seemed pretty certain of himself until I asked him if we could try it.


----------



## tagsvags (Nov 25, 2005)

dmorrow said:


> Is this a fancy way of saying "the Mercedes will hit the brakes if something is coming into your lane"? I don't understand the "can move you away" using the brakes.
> 
> When my wife and I test drove the new Mazda 6 recently the salesman in the back seat said if we tried to run into a wall the car would stop us before it happened. He seemed pretty certain of himself until I asked him if we could try it.


Not too sure of the mazda tech. How about we all just learn to drive. A car can only do so much to save us from our-selfs.


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

ChrisFu said:


> ...and potentially into traffic in the lane on the other side of your car?  I find it exceedingly hard to believe that is implemented anywhere.


no obviously not, the sensors are on both sides. I am assuming in the infiniti, just like in the mercedes, it will calculate whether or not there is somebody in the next lane and take appropriate action.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

caliatenza said:


> no obviously not, the sensors are on both sides. I am assuming in the infiniti, just like in the mercedes, it will calculate whether or not there is somebody in the next lane and take appropriate action.


Can it make the car shrink width-wise, or is that coming with the refresh? :laugh:


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

dmorrow said:


> Is this a fancy way of saying "the Mercedes will hit the brakes if something is coming into your lane"? I don't understand the "can move you away" using the brakes.
> 
> When my wife and I test drove the new Mazda 6 recently the salesman in the back seat said if we tried to run into a wall the car would stop us before it happened. He seemed pretty certain of himself until I asked him if we could try it.


i guess bassically it does just that, it hits the brakes. It works together with the sensors for the active lane keeping assist. I tested the active lane keeping assist on the freeway once, as soon as i crossed over, the car slowed down and i steered back into my lane. I wouldnt try that with a wall lol, but it should work with a cardboard box or something. Out of all the systems i have seen, Volvo and Mercedes do it best. The others i am not sure. I know Infiniti has some really new wizbang stuff on the Q50, but i dont know how its going to be in the real world. I do know on the Accord, the systems are half baked.


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

Dan Halen said:


> Can it make the car shrink width-wise, or is that coming with the refresh? :laugh:


lol . I just looked this up: http://telematicsnews.info/2010/06/16/mercedes-adds-brake-intervention-to-blind-spot-assist/ . Apparently it uses the ESP to create a yaw movement to counteract the collision course.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

tagsvags said:


> How about we all just learn to drive. A car can only do so much to save us from our-selfs.


Actually I wonder if with all of these features if we will be any better off. Once you realize that you don't have to pay attention since the car will take care of it my feeling is you won't bother paying attention. 

Example - why pay attention to staying in your lane if the car alarm will tell you when you aren't.


----------



## BrutusA3 (Jul 10, 2013)

Does anyone know if they if this will be a 6sp or 7sp for the U.S.? The reason why I ask this is I read reviews or things written and I see it written either way (I can send multiple links showing both examples), no one seems to have a firm grasp of this answer.

B.


----------



## mike3141 (Feb 16, 1999)

From the AoA press release:

_* All engines are mated to the standard 6-speed S tronic® transmission*_


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

automate everything about driving! thank you audi. :sly::screwy:

how about giving us a s3 that embraces driving. manual everything stripped of the nannies.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

Travis Grundke said:


> Dan, good points all, that's why I'm really curious about how Audi is planning to package and price the A3 here in North America. My gut tells me that the 1.8T models will be 'capped' in equipment to keep the range separated and to make the premium for the 2.0TFSI models appear to be the better value (IE: you can spec up a 1.8 to $34,000, but if you stretch just a little bit more to $36 you get a bigger motor, quattro and likely some additional equipment).
> 
> As far as packaging, I have no doubt that a few key options will be:
> 
> ...


Pretty much quoting the whole post as in the same boat...

I know it's speculation, however...
A3's will come with halogen, xenons and LED options?

A3 2.0T Quattro 
- must have automatic climate (not even dual who cares about my passengers haha)
- xenons (LED is cool! not a game changer for me)
- nice sounding stereo

If for say the sound system is the only thing I would need to option purchase, I would actually be swayed away from the S3. Otherwise I would just get a base S3 because I know I will have everything I want for sure with that.


----------



## BrutusA3 (Jul 10, 2013)

mike3141 said:


> From the AoA press release:
> 
> _* All engines are mated to the standard 6-speed S tronic® transmission*_


thanks. Not sure why then I keep seeing 7-speed, that must be only for Europe or something, even though technically the last thing I read was from Canada: http://www.autosphere.ca/fleetdigest/2013/07/19/audi-the-hatchless-2015-audi-a3/

Yes no stick option sucks.

B.


----------



## mike3141 (Feb 16, 1999)

The problem manufacturers are having is that manual transmission cars were about 3.5% of sales in the past several years and the number is still decreasing. It costs a lot to have a manual transmission model crash and emissions tested plus the costs of maintaining parts inventories + service training, etc. Estimated sales must be greater than the costs of making a model available.

No profit, no sale.


----------



## tagsvags (Nov 25, 2005)

kevlartoronto said:


> automate everything about driving! thank you audi. :sly::screwy:
> 
> how about giving us a s3 that embraces driving. manual everything stripped of the nannies.


Yes, let the buyer decide what is wanted/needed. Like 7 speed manual, crank up/down windows make climate control optional? An S3 sportback with 2 doors. :thumbup:


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

mike3141 said:


> The problem manufacturers are having is that manual transmission cars were about 3.5% of sales in the past several years and the number is still decreasing. It costs a lot to have a manual transmission model crash and emissions tested plus the costs of maintaining parts inventories + service training, etc. Estimated sales must be greater than the costs of making a model available.
> 
> No profit, no sale.


the problem i have is the nanny state that has been forced upon us. it's all about designing cars for the lowest common denominator now. the idiots who don't want to pay attention while they are surfing the net. that's the definition of luxury now. idiot gadgets. isolate isolate isolate!! god forbid we still had any kind of raw sense of machinery left in our cars.

http://jalopnik.com/5962612/check-o...tage-porsche-built-by-bugattis-head-of-design


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

Dan Halen said:


> Summary: Michael Taylor gushes ab... even tell if they actually DROVE an the car.


----------



## dogbolter (Feb 28, 2010)

kevlartoronto said:


> the problem i have is the nanny state that has been forced upon us. it's all about designing cars for the lowest common denominator now. the idiots who don't want to pay attention while they are surfing the net. that's the definition of luxury now. idiot gadgets. isolate isolate isolate!! god forbid we still had any kind of raw sense of machinery left in our cars.
> 
> http://jalopnik.com/5962612/check-o...tage-porsche-built-by-bugattis-head-of-design


Agree completely. I saw an article in Automobile mag (IIRC), the other day about how NA cars have to be designed differently inside to accommodate people who won't wear seatbelts. Crazy.


----------

