# New A3 / S3 doesn't come in manual



## motech (Oct 2, 2004)

Does anyone else care?
I'm insulted by this. 
It's only a matter of time before the A4 looses the options as well. 

I really was looking forward to the 2014/5 A3 in stick. 
I'm even more shocked about the S3 but that's likely out of my budget anyway. 


I guess the bean counters win again.


----------



## GTI2Slow (Jun 23, 2007)

A 6 speed manual is almost a deal breaker for me, hopefully we get a RS3 with a man pedal.


----------



## motech (Oct 2, 2004)

Petition if anyone is interested. 

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


----------



## Pretarion (Jun 13, 2003)

I am sure I will be burned on this, but I actually love my DSG tranny. It is quick responsive and I love that my left quad muscle doesn't hurt in stop and go traffic anymore. I am looking forward to just having the ability to purchase a S3 here in the states. I will take it either way.


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

Ive said it in other threads already, but to reiterate, this is a HUGE disappointment. Ive had cash in hand the past year, ready to buy the S3 sedan the moment it was available. Not buying a DSG.

This is the luxury "step up" for all the WRX/STI drivers out there. I am guessing a lot of us like our manual transmissions.

MAKE THE MANUAL AN *OPTION *AUDI. Make it CTO only for all I care. This is pure heresy.


Interesting enough, this sentiment is echoed all over AudiUSA's facebook page comments.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

agreed. this blows.


----------



## Exousia (Feb 22, 2010)

It does bug me when they can't offer these things as an option- I think there is a serious issue with the industry that they can't seem to figure out HOW TO SELL THINGS TO PEOPLE

A. PEOPLE WILL PAY YOU FOR MANUAL(PROBABLY EXTRA)
B. FIND A WAY TO SELL THE MANAUL TO PEOPLE( ORDER ONLY, WHATEVER)

It's not as though competitors don't exist: You may be leaving money on the table for others, don't keep thinking people will make 40k purchasing decisions on brand loyalty.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

In all honesty, I really liked the A3's S-tronic / DSG. I am actually interested in the S-Tronic which is something you would have never heard me say before. The reason I say this is the technology gone into the S-tronic. I don't care who you think you are, you will not be able to compete with this transmission.

HOWEVER,

Maintenance costs...after seeing a bill for a S4 S-tronic, and how low mileage it is recommended to perform maintenance, I want a manual. Maybe as this becomes mainstream things will change.


----------



## motech (Oct 2, 2004)

Please sign petition above.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

motech said:


> Please sign petition above.


i signed it motech. Rudy, s tronic costs $300 bucks canadian for an oil change every 40k km! my 6spd will cost $100 cdn every 120k km. when i finally get to 120k.


----------



## motech (Oct 2, 2004)

Thanks kev


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

Interesting tidbits from the AudiUSA facebook page (take with large doses of salt)



> *Edvis Mazeika*
> We enthusiasts have been waiting for you to offer us the S3 for YEARS. Now that you're finally bringing it, you're offering no manual option.....disappointed.
> 
> 
> *Audi USA* We appreciate your enthusiasm Edvis. You are correct. The A3/S3 Sedan will be offered with an S tronic transmission. We will be sure to forward your preferences to our product planning department for review as we are still planning and finalizing for the 2015 model year production.


(emphasis mine)


----------



## ProjectA3 (Aug 12, 2005)

Exousia said:


> It does bug me when they can't offer these things as an option- I think there is a serious issue with the industry that they can't seem to figure out HOW TO SELL THINGS TO PEOPLE
> 
> A. PEOPLE WILL PAY YOU FOR MANUAL(PROBABLY EXTRA)
> B. FIND A WAY TO SELL THE MANAUL TO PEOPLE( ORDER ONLY, WHATEVER)
> ...


Audi is on 26 months in a row of record sales, i dont think selling the cars they make is an issue at all.
Right now my dealer has 2 manual transmission A4's that have been sitting around longer than the rest of the cars. The demand, in this class of car, for manuals is so low its just not worth the expense.


----------



## bugzy (May 29, 2000)

Since I'm a past owner of a manual B6 A4 Avant and a manual B7 S4 Avant I think I can state a couple things.

1. A lot of people say one thing, but in reality it doesn't happen. For those that are true to what they say, I'm sorry. But the rest mess it up for you.
2. I've had some amazing resell value on my manual cars since they are rare.
3. DSG is an amazing technology, even though not as "fun" as a manual.


----------



## atomic1125 (May 31, 2001)

I'm ok with that... S3 with DSG, nicely equiped at around 40-45k... I think that would sell very well...

Not sure how it'll compare to the CLA 45 AMG or the supposed BMW M2 but come late 2014 I'll be looking to replace my 9 year old A4 with one of those...


----------



## motech (Oct 2, 2004)

Its all bull ****. 
Do they really make money off halo cars? No. But it attracts enthusiasts. 
Enthusiasts tell their friends what cars to buy. 

Make the stick cars to make loyalists and enthusiasts happy.


----------



## motech (Oct 2, 2004)

car and driver linked to the petition !

http://blog.caranddriver.com/why-th...et-audi-a3s3-and-why-its-not-time-to-despair/


----------



## QwaktastiK (Jul 9, 2006)

So disappointed in the lack of manual trans. Just signed the petition. God I hope we can get the S3 in manual.


----------



## LazyLightning (Aug 11, 2012)

motech said:


> Its all bull ****.
> Do they really make money off halo cars? No. But it attracts enthusiasts.
> Enthusiasts tell their friends what cars to buy.
> 
> Make the stick cars to make loyalists and enthusiasts happy.


Great point. Ditching wagons and manuals = unhappy enthusiasts that don't recruit new folks to the cult! (abandoning the folks that allowed Audi to have a foothold here in the first place seems shortsighted).

I signed that petition for what it's worth! Regardless of how many tenths of a second can be shaved off of 0-60 times with DSG, it just doesn't put a smile on my face. To me there is no point in owning a sports car without 3 pedals!! C'mon Audi - bring us the S3 w/ 6MT!! I'll pre-order that sucker right now!


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

LazyLightning said:


> Great point. Ditching wagons and manuals = unhappy enthusiasts that don't recruit new folks to the cult! (abandoning the folks that allowed Audi to have a foothold here in the first place seems shortsighted).
> 
> I signed that petition for what it's worth! Regardless of how many tenths of a second can be shaved off of 0-60 times with DSG, it just doesn't put a smile on my face. To me there is no point in owning a sports car without 3 pedals!! C'mon Audi - bring us the S3 w/ 6MT!! I'll pre-order that sucker right now!


*I would pre-order as well*. I emailed my local audi rep and asked him to send the message to head office. he responded by saying audi canada has absolutely no say in what cars we get. i.e. , audi america is the decision maker.

having shopped around for awhile now, the choices for manual tranny in sedans or wagons is very slim indeed. depressing really. for example, i test drove a 328i manual. here in canada you are forced to get a "line". m sport is not offered on the 328 because they think it would kill 335 sales so you have to order sportline. that's 45k to start. add a couple options you actually want and you are at 48k. you still don't get sport suspension!!!! the steering weight still reminds me of my dad's old 1978 cadillac!! it's so light i could steer with 1 finger!! (ok it's a little more accurate hehe)

i wonder if these companies get it? for me this is a real problem. electronic systems are killing everything i want in car. i want to shift my own gears. i want to feel the road through the steering wheel and my seat. i want weight to my steering. i only put up with traction control. i don't need lane change warning. i actually look!! (what happened to 8 tracks?? ) in the end, i want to be reminded i am driving a machine not a computer. as we move further away from the "machine", younger drivers will have no understanding of this concept. (note all the people who keep reiterating the fact that s tronic trannys are faster etc) to those people, you have completely missed the point! 

i've only owned manual transmissions and i'm finding it very difficult to reconcile to the idea that i might be driving an automatic for my next car. i guess my 3.2L avant 6spd is a rare beast. my mechanic keeps saying he has buyers for me once i decide to sell but i can't find a car to replace it.


----------



## Dawg90 (Sep 28, 2003)

I love manuals too, but seriously, are there that many buyers who (a) want a manual A3/S3 and (b) won't buy a GTI/Golf R? 

I blame the US government for all our ridiculous certification requirements.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

Dawg90 said:


> I love manuals too, but seriously, are there that many buyers who (a) want a manual A3/S3 and (b) won't buy a GTI/Golf R?
> 
> I blame the US government for all our ridiculous certification requirements.


you nailed it. ridiculous regulations. the european union and NA should make an agreement to match standards then the automakers wouldn't care if you wanted to special order any model you wanted as long as they offered it in europe......but then there would be a whole bunch of bureaucrats out of work!!


----------



## Dawg90 (Sep 28, 2003)

kevlartoronto said:


> you nailed it. ridiculous regulations. the european union and NA should make an agreement to match standards then the automakers wouldn't care if you wanted to special order any model you wanted as long as they offered it in europe......*but then there would be a whole bunch of bureaucrats out of work!!*


And there you have it. And bureaucrats have too much pride to trust another country's testing.


----------



## QwaktastiK (Jul 9, 2006)

I'd pre-order now (6MT) if it could make a difference.


----------



## KnockKnock (Jun 30, 2005)

It's ironic, but I think the companies who offered the best automatics are the ones moving away from the stick. And those who offered the best manuals are still in the game. Thinking Lamborghini, Ferrari and now Audi, probably Porsche soon. Vs. Mazda, Honda/Acura.

Not sure how Federalization works with platform cars like the MQB, but if VW and Audi get together and say, okay the 2.0TQ is the most likely seller of a 6MT, maybe it could be a future option.

I wouldn't expect it first year though. The Sportback was an experiment back in 2006 for North America. Entry level luxury model. And it failed to meet projections. Probably due to price and wagon-ness. We didn't even get an S3. 

A Sedan A3 is also an experiment. There has never been a sedan A3, not even in Europe. If it pans out okay, then they should be able to afford some options. If they can push 100K-150K A3 sedans annually in N.A., then maybe they can sell 6K-7K manual transmissions (which is roughly how many A3's they're _currently_ selling).


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

KnockKnock said:


> It's ironic, but I think the companies who offered the best automatics are the ones moving away from the stick. And those who offered the best manuals are still in the game. Thinking Lamborghini, Ferrari and now Audi, probably Porsche soon. Vs. Mazda, Honda/Acura.
> 
> Not sure how Federalization works with platform cars like the MQB, but if VW and Audi get together and say, okay the 2.0TQ is the most likely seller of a 6MT, maybe it could be a future option.
> 
> ...


The A3 sedan is more than an experiment. Audi is making big investments in this car and is targeting between 20,000 - 30,000 units annually in North America alone. Selling 100,000 A3s in North America alone is almost their entire volume for the whole company in a year!


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

Travis Grundke said:


> The A3 sedan is more than an experiment. Audi is making big investments in this car and is targeting between 20,000 - 30,000 units annually in North America alone. Selling 100,000 A3s in North America alone is almost their entire volume for the whole company in a year!


agreed travis. i won't be surprised if the a3 sedan rivals the a4 in sales in canada. this is why i thought they would end up mirroring the a3 offering with the a4. i can understand why the bigger cars, i.e. the a6, a7, a8, don't offer manuals but quite surprised they nixed it in the a3 lineup. esp given that the jetta has now been decontented. my feeling was that the a3 sedan would fill a gap but maybe they think the GLI does that.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

motech said:


> car and driver linked to the petition !
> 
> http://blog.caranddriver.com/why-th...et-audi-a3s3-and-why-its-not-time-to-despair/


From this article - 



> At the reveal event for the A3, held in New York the night before the auto show opened to the press, we grabbed an affable Audi exec to talk about this grave gear-changing oversight. *“There’s no business case for it,” he said, smothering our faint hopes of a stick making an appearance in a yet-to-be-announced gasoline version of the A3 hatchback. The best chance for the A3, we learned, had been the hot 300-hp S3. “We lobbied hard for a stick in the S3,” the exec said, “but in the end the numbers just didn’t add up.”*
> 
> We’ve heard the business-case line before, and it’s really not just a line in some pejorative “get-off-my-case” way. *The fact is, even something as simple as offering a manual transmission requires EPA and other government certification—and it costs millions of dollars.*


They don't think the volume and added sales justify the cost. Maybe they are right, maybe wrong but it's not too hard to understand the thinking.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

if they don't bring a manual in the a3 or s3, the only thing to do is *"NOT BUY"* it's as simple as that. i won't. i'll get a bmw before i buy an s tronic.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

kevlartoronto said:


> if they don't bring a manual in the a3 or s3, the only thing to do is *"NOT BUY"* it's as simple as that. i won't. i'll get a bmw before i buy an s tronic.


You're right but the real problem is when they did offer the manual not enough people bought them. Also, with them hoping to sell 30,000 of them I don't see 100 of us on this forum making much difference.


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

dmorrow said:


> You're right but the real problem is when they did offer the manual not enough people bought them. Also, with them hoping to sell 30,000 of them I don't see 100 of us on this forum making much difference.


When did they offer a manual quattro A3 in the USA?

When did they offer a manual TDI A3 in the USA?

They didn't.

Had they sold the A3 with a manual and quattro, I would have bought it years ago. 

Its hard for me to believe that AoA can predict anything with regard to manual sales when they have never offered anything like it before in this class.

Did they honestly not even study the "hot small sedan/hatch" market, and notice that Subaru sold MAYBE 5% automatic WRXs prior to 2008, and dropped the automatic option entirely after that?

It blows my mind that they are stupid enough not to realize they could capitalize on the entire market of Impreza-line owners would are looking to upgrade to something a little nicer than a subaru. But every single last WRX and STI owner I personally know would not buy an automatic.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

their strategy is clear. vw= manual, audi=s tronic. every vw is offered with a manual. even the passat!!!! but the s3 isn't?? give me a break audi. the excuses are endless. tell me how many people actually buy manual passats. or manual bugs. i'd love to know. to me the a3 and a4 need to have manuals on offer as they represent the bridge between vw and audi.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

ChrisFu said:


> When did they offer a manual quattro A3 in the USA?
> 
> When did they offer a manual TDI A3 in the USA?
> 
> ...


Audi used to sell almost all of their cars as manuals and as people stopped buying them they stopped offering them. So you can get a manual quattro A4 but very few buy it but lots would buy a manual quattro A3? So people don't buy the manual varieties they offer so they should offer more varieties.

Hoping that most WRX and STI owners next car would buy a manual quattro A3 seems like a stretch. Maybe the R will continue to have a manual and you and they can buy it.

Just my opinions, I have a DSG and am happy with it and would have liked them to produce a manual for the ones that wanted it but really don't care. I like my manual car for a weekend car but don't see myself buying another daily driver manual.


----------



## ProjectA3 (Aug 12, 2005)

ProjectA3 said:


> Right now my dealer has 2 manual transmission A4's that have been sitting around longer than the rest of the cars. The demand, in this class of car, for manuals is so low its just not worth the expense.


I'll quote myself
I've been selling Audi's for 10 years, in that 10 years i have MAYBE, just MAYBE sold a TOTAL of 25 to MAYBE 30 manual transmission Audi's. that is including all of our models. out of the hundreds of Audi's i have sold, that is a severely low number. It really is not worth it for them.

everyone one this forum will bitch about no manual, but how many of you would ACTUALLY buy one? if they lose 200 sales because no manual quattro, they will make up for them with a few thousand sales of S-tronics to the general public.

I dont mind the S-tronic, hell i've had 4 cars with it (2006 A3, 2008 A3, 2012 TT, and 2013 S4) and have never had an issue with it in my commute and occasional track says. But i currently have two manual trans VW (R32 and Cabrio) so with the S3 next year i'll have my cake and eat it too. A fast 4cyl car, high HP, AWD for these horrid Arizona winters, and better gas mileage for my 50 mile commute each day.


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

Audi is not some hard core enthusiast brand, but a luxury performance one, and the S3 is nowhere near the top of its all our performance model. People are not buying the S3 sans skylight or anything that will be viewed as dead weight. It will be a car that people can take on the curvy road while still being pampered. That is why it doesn't offer a AC/rear seat delete, plexiglass window or carbon fiber skin or titanium exhaust option.

They viewed the dual clutch S-tronic as a meaningful alternative and successor to the manual transmission and is light years ahead than the slushboxes that cars like the IS-F gets away with.

If you are rowing the gears for the sake of rowing the gears, then that is not really good enough an excuse to not get the DSG.

I would be more upset that it will lack a front and/or rear locking differential.


----------



## LazyLightning (Aug 11, 2012)

dmorrow said:


> You're right but the real problem is when they did offer the manual not enough people bought them. Also, with them hoping to sell 30,000 of them I don't see 100 of us on this forum making much difference.


Funny - I keep hearing this over and over again but haven't seen evidence of it. Between my A3 and my Golf R, I seriously considered buying a 6MT A4 or S4. I could hardly ever find one available to test drive! The occasional 6MT that showed up at Bay Area dealers was spoken for in advance, or disappeared within days of arrival (or didn't have the features I wanted). Meanwhile: there would be rows of auto A4s and S4s on every lot collecting dust. I realize the Bay Area is not representative of the country at large (e.g. probably the only US market where the A3 is a smash hit!) - but nevertheless: in my experience the demand has clearly exceeded supply for Audi manual cars. If the demand is so piss poor as people suggest, Audi has miraculously managed to undersupply it!

Definitely doesn't make sense anymore to provide manuals on the larger cars, but I find it hard to believe that sales of the 6MT A3/S3 wouldn't warrant its inclusion - it would totally recruit up-and-coming Subie owners, etc. looking for something with more refinement / panache that is still a non-bloated, tossable driver's car. I bet the no manual thing is motivated more by some evolving VWoA branding philosophy and divergence as people are suggesting: manual = VW, auto = Audi. Disappointing...


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

this is exactly what it is. vw=manual, audi=auto only. 

or vw=young people who can still move their arm and don't whine endlessly about how much work a manual transmission is, audi= old rich buggers who want the car to do everything for them including stopping changing lanes, parking, ie anything that requires involvement in the act of driving etc etc 

interesting marketing approach.

i wonder how many vw gti R's awd manual transmissions they have sold. is the R coming in the golf VII?


----------



## QwaktastiK (Jul 9, 2006)

What kept myself and probably a handful of other enthusiasts from not committing to the 8L or 8P A3 in N.A. is that it it never came in manual with Quattro. :banghead:

The VW Golf R cars seem to only come out every 4 years. So, 2004, 2008, 2012...etc. I wouldn't expect anything upcoming until 2016 with a possible early release date of 2015. 

I don't think the states will ever see an S3 Sportback as it's practically the exact same car as the current MKVI Golf R. Just as such, I don't think we'll likely get an RS3 Sportback as it will take sales over the TT-RS, still being a hatch but with a usable back seat vs the padded shelf that is the TT rear seats. I think if we do get the RS3, it will be a sedan. But I'm betting they wait to see how well the S3 sedan does first before committing to the RS3 sedan for the U.S. market. 

Regardless, I'm very excited about the upcoming S3. I've been waiting for this for a long time. The B5 S4 is such an incredible car with wonderful tuning and aftermarket potential, but it is flat out old at this point. As much as I respect them, I can't bring myself to purchase a 12 year old car that requires you to remove the engine to swap out the turbos. 

It's about time Audi offer something of that size again though. Although I was comparing the lengths over the B5, B6, B7 & B8 platforms. Much to my surprise, the new S3 is slotted to be a few inches shorter than the old B5 A4/S4. And I also didn't realize the B5S4 was the widest of all the S4's to date at 72.8" according to Wiki. Hoping the transverse engine of the S3 allows for a better layout of the interior and results in a few more inches of rear leg room. But that's not a deal breaker.


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

dmorrow said:


> Hoping that most WRX and STI owners next car would buy a manual quattro A3 seems like a stretch.


Quattro manual *S3*, not A3.

And yes, I personally know at least 6 WRX/STI owners who would have done just that. Six sales lost, and thats just among my NASIOC friends!

I honestly think AoA is underestimating the impact of not even offering the OPTION. Just look on the Audi USA facebook page. 

All they'd have to do is make the production 100% S-tronic and allow CTO manuals.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

i just know audi is going to sit on this one forever. now i really getting annoyed. george give us hope!!!


----------



## Chimera (Jul 6, 2002)

I'd more readily accept DSG if it didn't automatically shift in Manual mode when I don't want it to. At least make Manual actually manual so I don't have to have a 3rd party flash the transmission, and leave Sport to the folks that want the car to shift for them.


----------



## cyberpmg (Nov 27, 2001)

Chimera said:


> I'd more readily accept DSG if it didn't automatically shift in Manual mode when I don't want it to. At least make Manual actually manual so I don't have to have a 3rd party flash the transmission, and leave Sport to the folks that want the car to shift for them.


No company leaves DSG (or similar) in pure manual mode. They don't want to be held liable when the driver makes a mistake (not shifting or downshifting too much and bouncing the rev limiter).

DSG is as close as you'll get to a manual without being a manual.... but it will never be a manual.

How is this handled with the high end cars that only have paddle shifters? What does Aston Martin, Ferrari, Maserati, do with their transmissions?


----------



## Cyncris (Aug 12, 2012)

Why would you ever want a DSG that didn't shift for you when you did something retarded?
The only time it shifts is when you hit the rev limiter or when you are below 2,000 rpm. Either way, you should have already been in another gear.
While there are times that you would want to disable traction control
Disabling ABS or auto shift makes no sense. Both only take over when you have done something stupid.


----------



## atomic1125 (May 31, 2001)

I'm ok with it, not by choice but really more by circumstances. At the moment I have a one car garage and having only a manual means that my wife cannot drive my car when she needs to run even simple errands. I see the DSG as a good alternative. My A6 6 speed today is awesome and fun to drive but frankly if and when I have room in my garage and I want something that is more of a driver car, I would go buy an evo/sti or even the new BRZ (hopefully they'll have a turbo variant by then) for a pure "drivers" car. Bottomline, I will be getting the S3 when it comes out, and the fact that it'll come with DSG only is ok by me.


----------



## DavidSG (Aug 11, 2006)

In my opinion, Audi completely missed the boat with the current generation A3 - it was a lousy value proposition and/or poorly targeted. If you wanted a manual transmission fwd hatch, the GTI was the much better value - not to mention it was actually updated since the Clinton administration. If you wanted AWD with a manual, you had to look elsewhere. The Golf R was a nice offering, but personally it didn't hit the mark as it was missing a few important features.

So I agree with those who say the market for a proper manual A3/S3 is more significant than Audi realizes. We don't all want to continue to drive GTIs or WRX's as we hit our 30's and 40's.

Unfortunately, it is clear that Audi doesn't care and won't miss by business. But they may miss my wife's business, who I "forced" into buying a Q5. And they may miss the business from the numerous friends/coworkers that I have steered in Audi's direction over the years. No spite or anything - just time to move on.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

DavidSG said:


> In my opinion, Audi completely missed the boat with the current generation A3 - it was a lousy value proposition and/or poorly targeted. If you wanted a manual transmission fwd hatch, the GTI was the much better value - not to mention it was actually updated since the Clinton administration. If you wanted AWD with a manual, you had to look elsewhere. The Golf R was a nice offering, but personally it didn't hit the mark as it was missing a few important features.
> 
> *So I agree with those who say the market for a proper manual A3/S3 is more significant than Audi realizes. We don't all want to continue to drive GTIs or WRX's as we hit our 30's and 40's.
> *
> Unfortunately, it is clear that Audi doesn't care and won't miss by business. But they may miss my wife's business, who I "forced" into buying a Q5. And they may miss the business from the numerous friends/coworkers that I have steered in Audi's direction over the years. No spite or anything - just time to move on.


this is exactly why i won't be buying a vw as an alternative to my audi. just because people want to buy a more premium car doesn't mean they want to give up participating in driving the car.


----------



## MickSF (May 22, 2008)

QwaktastiK said:


> I'd pre-order now (6MT) if it could make a difference.


I agree, I would do the same. I will take a S3, Quattro, stick. I would put my deposit down right now. This isn't just talk, I have had a 99.5 A4, 2004 A4 Avant, 2009 A4, and now a GTI all stick shift...


----------



## Nitrousx8 (Dec 3, 2004)

MickSF said:


> I agree, I would do the same. I will take a S3, Quattro, stick. I would put my deposit down right now. This isn't just talk, I have had a 99.5 A4, 2004 A4 Avant, 2009 A4, and now a GTI all stick shift...


Same here! I would go to the dealership tomorrow and put down a deposit on a stick shift S3 with Quattro if they were going to offer it. Also, I would be willing to pay more for a stick shift option.


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

The most important aspect of driving a stick shift is that it gives a direct feel to the engine/wheel interface. You know what the power/torque that the engine puts out is driving the wheels, the amount of throttle you apply is applied to the tires, behavior of the car could be predicted when downshifting and engine braking.

All those subject aspect of the transmission are faithfully preserved by the S-tronic. It is not a slushbox where when you put the pedal to the metal, the engine sound produced doesn't correspond with where the car is going.

I would be more upset with turbo lags where the car's behavior does not follow your throttle input.

If you want to row the gears for the sake of rowing gears, you mind as well put a dummy clutch pedal and use the shift level to up/downshift.



I read some corvette forums where people come out touting the superiority of slushboxes compared to high end dual clutch transmissions. Everybody has their excuse to hate cars they don't have.


----------



## QwaktastiK (Jul 9, 2006)

Well, after reading reviews on the B8 S4 forums (here and Audizine), I'd definitely be willing to try an S-tronic transmission. I'd definitely prefer a manual, but with so many benefits like faster shifts, faster 0-60mph and faster 1/4mile time, better fuel economy...etc., I can certainly see the appeal. Especially for the manufactures within the competitive automotive market, I understand the acceleration AND fuel economy of a vehicle really help sell cars when comparing numbers side by side.

I also read that the faster shifts help keep boost levels elevated in FI applications, which helps to improve the acceleration times.


----------



## DavidSG (Aug 11, 2006)

LWNY said:


> The most important aspect of driving a stick shift is that it gives a direct feel to the engine/wheel interface. You know what the power/torque that the engine puts out is driving the wheels, the amount of throttle you apply is applied to the tires, behavior of the car could be predicted when downshifting and engine braking.
> 
> All those subject aspect of the transmission are faithfully preserved by the S-tronic. It is not a slushbox where when you put the pedal to the metal, the engine sound produced doesn't correspond with where the car is going.
> 
> ...


I've spent a decent amount of time with the S-tronic transmission. Impressive technology, no doubt. But it absolutely does not offer the same level of engagement as a manual transmission. But that is a tired debate - it's simply a matter of preference and Audi can do whatever they want. They have just lost me as a customer, which is fine. The upcoming BMW M235i is looking pretty good right now.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

DavidSG said:


> I've spent a decent amount of time with the S-tronic transmission. Impressive technology, no doubt. But it absolutely does not offer the same level of engagement as a manual transmission. But that is a tired debate - it's simply a matter of preference and Audi can do whatever they want. They have just lost me as a customer, which is fine. The upcoming BMW M235i is looking pretty good right now.


What is interesting about STronic vs. 6MT discussions is that a lot of the arguments are purely technical: the speed of shifts, downshifts, economy, efficiency, etc. Audi uses this language heavily in its marketing.

Unfortunately, while all of these things are true, they do not replace the sheer enjoyment from 'rowing your own gears', as I would say. There is something very satisfying about snick-snick-snicking through the gears that I feel to be integral to the automotive experience.

Clearly I'm in the minority on that opinion, but I could care less about the speed of shifts.


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

Travis Grundke said:


> Clearly I'm in the minority on that opinion, but I could care less about the speed of shifts.


+12345

I understand the max-performance argument on hypercars. Not on a car like the S3.


----------



## Nitrousx8 (Dec 3, 2004)

Travis Grundke said:


> What is interesting about STronic vs. 6MT discussions is that a lot of the arguments are purely technical: the speed of shifts, downshifts, economy, efficiency, etc. Audi uses this language heavily in its marketing.
> 
> Unfortunately, while all of these things are true, they do not replace the sheer enjoyment from 'rowing your own gears', as I would say. There is something very satisfying about snick-snick-snicking through the gears that I feel to be integral to the automotive experience.
> 
> Clearly I'm in the minority on that opinion, but I could care less about the speed of shifts.


I feel like this discussion about S-tronic vs stickshift is very similar to what automakers are doing with touch screen monitors on cars. The car I am currently driving has both a touch screen and "hard buttons" for all of the main radio/ entertainment system functions. When I am driving, I spend more time clicking the actual buttons vs the touchscreen and I think this is due to the fact that your body can easily tell where things are if they are mechanically there. (i.e. try to use your smartphone with your eyes closed).

This is also true for the S-tronic vs stickshift discussion. You can easily tell what gear you are driving a car with a stickshift, while this is not always true if you are manually dictating the gears on a automatic. The stickshift provides a sense of control while the driver of an automatic car knows that in the end, the computer is controlling the gears. (By the way, I have driven a DSG equipped GTI before and I do know it can shift gears faster than I will ever be able to....)


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

Travis Grundke said:


> What is interesting about STronic vs. 6MT discussions is that a lot of the arguments are purely technical: the speed of shifts, downshifts, economy, efficiency, etc. Audi uses this language heavily in its marketing.
> 
> Unfortunately, while all of these things are true, they do not replace the sheer enjoyment from 'rowing your own gears', as I would say. There is something very satisfying about snick-snick-snicking through the gears that I feel to be integral to the automotive experience.
> 
> Clearly I'm in the minority on that opinion, but I could care less about the speed of shifts.


The most important aspect of Stronic is that it preserves the feel of a clutch, especially when driven at high RPM and you are using it for both engine braking and the feel of the exact amount of power you want to put onto the road, which is especially important in those twisty roads....hard trail brake into the turn, then fast acceleration out of the turn. Plus, you can upshift anywhere, especially useful on those long sweeping turns that you accelerate more and more and eventually hit redline. I know with a manual, one tends to keep the RPM on the lower end of the scale, so one is not always engine braking or full throttle with max potential torque, nor are they ever hitting the redline, thus requiring a upshift in the middle of a turn.


What I am saying, with DSG, the concept of rowing gears is gone, but the ideal of being in the most optimal gear becomes much more feasible. Its like going from FWD to AWD, your mindset on how to drive certain roads in certain condition completely changes. You open up a new realm of driving.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

LWNY said:


> The most important aspect of Stronic is that it preserves the feel of a clutch, especially when driven at high RPM and you are using it for both engine braking and the feel of the exact amount of power you want to put onto the road, which is especially important in those twisty roads....hard trail brake into the turn, then fast acceleration out of the turn. Plus, you can upshift anywhere, especially useful on those long sweeping turns that you accelerate more and more and eventually hit redline. I know with a manual, one tends to keep the RPM on the lower end of the scale, so one is not always engine braking or full throttle with max potential torque, nor are they ever hitting the redline, thus requiring a upshift in the middle of a turn.
> 
> 
> What I am saying, with DSG, the concept of rowing gears is gone, but the ideal of being in the most optimal gear becomes much more feasible. Its like going from FWD to AWD, your mindset on how to drive certain roads in certain condition completely changes. You open up a new realm of driving.


Actually, that's a *really* good point that I often overlook: engine brake and power control. 

I may actually have to go take an S-tronic equipped car out for a test here again to double-check my prejudices. ;-)


----------



## DavidSG (Aug 11, 2006)

LWNY said:


> The most important aspect of Stronic is that it preserves the feel of a clutch, especially when driven at high RPM and you are using it for both engine braking and the feel of the exact amount of power you want to put onto the road, which is especially important in those twisty roads....hard trail brake into the turn, then fast acceleration out of the turn. Plus, you can upshift anywhere, especially useful on those long sweeping turns that you accelerate more and more and eventually hit redline. I know with a manual, one tends to keep the RPM on the lower end of the scale, so one is not always engine braking or full throttle with max potential torque, nor are they ever hitting the redline, thus requiring a upshift in the middle of a turn.
> 
> 
> What I am saying, with DSG, the concept of rowing gears is gone, but the ideal of being in the most optimal gear becomes much more feasible. Its like going from FWD to AWD, your mindset on how to drive certain roads in certain condition completely changes. You open up a new realm of driving.


As a manual driver, I certainly don't keep the RPM on the lower end of the scale - I attempt to keep it in the band where I have the most torque at my disposal. And what does hitting redline have anything to do with a manual versus S-tronic? 

In any event, your mindset shouldn't change, as you should be attempting to find the optimal gear when driving a manual. But I'll give you that it always isn't practical to make that shift with a manual so you might find yourself in a less than optimal gear. But that's part of the fun of driving manual - it's easy to find yourself in less than ideal situations, and you are always striving to improve the overall driving experience. 

Same tired debate. I don't doubt that the S-tronic may engage your driving sensibilities in a way that a manual may not. It's a matter of preference, and I find the S-tronic experience, while cool in some ways, to be an inferior driving experience.


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

DavidSG said:


> As a manual driver, I certainly don't keep the RPM on the lower end of the scale - I attempt to keep it in the band where I have the most torque at my disposal. And what does hitting redline have anything to do with a manual versus S-tronic?
> 
> In any event, your mindset shouldn't change, as you should be attempting to find the optimal gear when driving a manual. But I'll give you that it always isn't practical to make that shift with a manual so you might find yourself in a less than optimal gear. But that's part of the fun of driving manual - it's easy to find yourself in less than ideal situations, and you are always striving to improve the overall driving experience.
> 
> Same tired debate. I don't doubt that the S-tronic may engage your driving sensibilities in a way that a manual may not. It's a matter of preference, and I find the S-tronic experience, while cool in some ways, to be an inferior driving experience.


Hitting the redline/rev limiter on a manual meaning you get a sudden shift in momentum, where it could upset the balance of the car. With the Stronic, it will upshift for you or if you got the upshift disabled, you upshift yourself, all w/o upsetting the balance of the car.

Your mindset obviously changes because what you can do is completely different with Stronic. Upshifts in order to continue accelerating in turns are possible, Upshifts to reduce the amount of power applied to the tires in case you are accelerating too hot in a long sweeper turn also becomes possible. These techniques were always frowned upon in manual transmissions, and even on single clutch automated transmissions because of its slow shift time, thus upsetting the balance of the car during shift (that's why mfg like Ferrari had flappy paddles fixed to the steering column, to dissuade you from shifting when your are not going straight).

Anyway, with Stronic, I am almost always above 4k RPM w/a 6500 RPM redline. In many videos of people on the track driving stick, they don't shift much, freqently coming out of the apex at 2k RPM.


----------



## The DarkSide (Aug 4, 2000)

I used to be a die hard manual person. I was in my mid twenties before i actually drove an automatic (while my car was down for repair).

That said.. I got a bit older. I also live in one of the worst areas of the nation for traffic. 2 years ago I got into a 2010 GTI with DSG and I haven't regretted it since. I DO miss the clutch pedal. But the vast majority of my driving is traffic. Even with a choice I'd still go with the DSG. I understand people wanting both options.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

Most of the DSG vs. Manual debate seems to relate to performance, driver control, optimum shifting on a track, etc. but for 95% of what most people are doing is driving to work in traffic and running errands from stoplight to stoplight. Yes they lose the manual feel but at some point most find the fun is gone most of the time unless you live in a very rural area or are willing to deal/enjoy shifting in traffic or less than spirited driving for the times when it is truly fun. 

Even for the enthusiast on this site who prefers a manual but doesn't want to deal with it day to day and buys a DSG, they are completely ok with the manual user having that option. The problem is the number of people who buy manuals continues to get smaller as the automatics get more gears, better engagement, better mileage, quicker acceleration and overall better performance compared to old auto's when there isn't much to do to improve the manual.

Manufacturers are going to continue to offer fewer manuals as the market for manuals gets smaller. Increase the market and they would offer more, pretty logical even if you don't like it. While some have said it, they aren't trying to screw us, just trying to make logical decisions to make more money and long term market share.

Based on certification costs and limited overall market for the A3, they would prefer to offer the 1.8T over the manual version of either the 2.0T or diesel.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

dmorrow said:


> Most of the DSG vs. Manual debate seems to relate to performance, driver control, optimum shifting on a track, etc. but for 95% of what most people are doing is driving to work in traffic and running errands from stoplight to stoplight. Yes they lose the manual feel but at some point most find the fun is gone most of the time unless you live in a very rural area or are willing to deal/enjoy shifting in traffic or less than spirited driving for the times when it is truly fun.
> 
> Even for the enthusiast on this site who prefers a manual but doesn't want to deal with it day to day and buys a DSG, they are completely ok with the manual user having that option. The problem is the number of people who buy manuals continues to get smaller as the automatics get more gears, better engagement, better mileage, quicker acceleration and overall better performance compared to old auto's when there isn't much to do to improve the manual.
> 
> ...


this is the main problem - certification costs. how is it we cannot have one testing agency for all these countries? it is absolutely ridiculous. all of these cars come in both transmissions and all of these cars get tested ad nauseam. they don't do this for every country in europe do they?


----------



## asal (Oct 12, 2007)

dmorrow said:


> From this article -
> 
> 
> 
> They don't think the volume and added sales justify the cost. Maybe they are right, maybe wrong but it's not too hard to understand the thinking.


Petition signed!


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 12, 2001)

kevlartoronto said:


> this is the main problem - certification costs. how is it we cannot have one testing agency for all these countries? it is absolutely ridiculous. all of these cars come in both transmissions and all of these cars get tested ad nauseam. they don't do this for every country in europe do they?


Well, there would have to be some really big changes in Federal law for that to happen. Right now, DOT regulations specify all sorts of things for US market vehicles that mean manufacturers have to make special versions of many parts to sell cars here. (Sidemarkers, taillights, etc). In addition to that, our impact standards, emissions standards, and a bunch of other things are all completely different from European ones. For a car to be sold here, each version of the drivetrain has to be emissions and crash tested separately in order to gain certification, and because our standards are different from European ones, it has to be done separately, with the US market version of the car - EU crash test standards are not valid here, nor are their emissions standards.

For this to change, they'd have to rewrite massive sections of motor vehicle law, and in the current climate, I just don't see that happening.




Now...

As to the manual / S-tronic debate, here's my five cents:
For background: I've always been a manual owner, except for five years when I owned a MKV GTI with DSG. (The plan was to keep that car until the MQB S3 was here, but two asshats pulling out in front of me within one year put an end to that hope.) I am now in a MKVI GTI with 6MT. I've owned a bunch of other cars, all with manuals - Audis, VWs, Hondas, Acuras. I've driven nearly every product that VAG makes, in nearly every drivetrain combination, and that includes some cars not sold in the US market. (Notable exceptions are the new RS cars and the new dual clutch R8, but I hope to have those issues corrected at some point here....  )

My take on the whole thing is that for something I am going to be driving on a track or in an autocross, I will take the DSG / S-tronic every time. My old DSG GTI was a faster car than my new 6MT one in just about every situation. I am also a much, much faster driver with a dual clutch transmission and it lets me concentrate more on other aspects of my driving, so both the car and I are faster. As has been mentioned, you can do things in track situations with a dual clutch that you just can't with a traditional manual.

For a daily / street car, it's something of a mixed bag, with me probably leaning toward the traditional manual. I am really enjoying being back in a 6MT car right now after five years with a dual clutch. Sometimes in traffic I'd rather have the dual clutch back, but the stock clutch and flywheel are so permissive that it's really not an issue most of the time. I spent a bunch of time in a B8 S4 with a 6MT, and it was a great combo, but that 3.0T V6 when paired with S-tronic is just a monster, and they fit well together, so I wouldn't turn that down either.

One car (or type of car) that I would definitely, definitely want the 6MT in would be the R8 or something of that class (again, assuming that it was going to be primarily a street car). Driving something like that should be a bit of an "event" in my mind, and the open gated 6MT in those cars is just magic. The feel of the solid billet shifter, the "click, clack" sound as you shift, the weighty clutch - all of it combines to give more of a sense of occasion to the experience than sitting down and putting it in "D." (Now, like I said, that's with the caveat that I haven't driven an S-tronic R8 yet, but I don't think that opinion is going to change that much.)

So I'm not totally in despair or whatever about the A3 / S3 not coming in a manual. The S-tronic will make them faster (and in that class, it's more of a "help" on the street, too - coming out of a stoplight or whatever in a dual clutch car with +/- 200HP is helped a lot by dual clutch, whereas in something like an R8 you just push the gas pedal and obliterate whatever it was that was next to you....  ) and they're still fun.

Also, remember that Audi is trying really hard to predict what will sell well here and serve that need. The facelifted B8 S4 is no longer offered in a 6MT in Europe - that option is US market only, and they kept it around because they knew it would sell enough here to make it worth their money to get it certified.

-Tim


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

How much does it _*really *_cost to get a manual version of a car they alreay are maketing everywhere else certified here? They were willing to spend whatever that cost on the CVT FWD A4.

Also, another thing I have only seen mentioned once....how much does the 35k service cost on a DSG, which includes a filter change and replacing BOTH sets of DSG fluids: the transmission fluid, and the hypoid oil. $500? $1000?

Seems AoA is doing their dealer service operators a favor by omitting the manual option...


----------



## DavidSG (Aug 11, 2006)

LWNY said:


> Hitting the redline/rev limiter on a manual meaning you get a sudden shift in momentum, where it could upset the balance of the car. With the Stronic, it will upshift for you or if you got the upshift disabled, you upshift yourself, all w/o upsetting the balance of the car.
> 
> Your mindset obviously changes because what you can do is completely different with Stronic. Upshifts in order to continue accelerating in turns are possible, Upshifts to reduce the amount of power applied to the tires in case you are accelerating too hot in a long sweeper turn also becomes possible. These techniques were always frowned upon in manual transmissions, and even on single clutch automated transmissions because of its slow shift time, thus upsetting the balance of the car during shift (that's why mfg like Ferrari had flappy paddles fixed to the steering column, to dissuade you from shifting when your are not going straight).
> 
> Anyway, with Stronic, I am almost always above 4k RPM w/a 6500 RPM redline. In many videos of people on the track driving stick, they don't shift much, freqently coming out of the apex at 2k RPM.


Thanks for the additional clarification, but you're really just talking about incremental performance at the margin. And who are these drivers coming out of the apex at 2K RPM? If I'm there, then I'm kicking myself for botching my shifts or admitting that I was too lazy to be in the proper gear.

So again, I don't doubt that the S-tronic provides a different kind of driving engagement - one where you can attempt to squeeze out performance gains at the margin. I've played around with the types of shifts that you are describing when driving S-tronic cars - mostly to keep myself amused with an otherwise unengaging driving experience (to me). I certainly understand why people would prefer that transmission to a manual - especially if you spend time on the track. I just don't typically drive in a way where I get much pleasure from chasing those shifts you are describing - and as such I wind up getting bored and putting it in "D" or "S" and find myself hating that driving experience. In everyday driving circumstances where I try not to drive like a maniac, I personally find a manual to be far more engaging and fun. But to each their own.


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

DavidSG said:


> Thanks for the additional clarification, but you're really just talking about incremental performance at the margin. And who are these drivers coming out of the apex at 2K RPM? If I'm there, then I'm kicking myself for botching my shifts or admitting that I was too lazy to be in the proper gear.
> 
> So again, I don't doubt that the S-tronic provides a different kind of driving engagement - one where you can attempt to squeeze out performance gains at the margin. I've played around with the types of shifts that you are describing when driving S-tronic cars - mostly to keep myself amused with an otherwise unengaging driving experience (to me). I certainly understand why people would prefer that transmission to a manual - especially if you spend time on the track. I just don't typically drive in a way where I get much pleasure from chasing those shifts you are describing - and as such I wind up getting bored and putting it in "D" or "S" and find myself hating that driving experience. In everyday driving circumstances where I try not to drive like a maniac, I personally find a manual to be far more engaging and fun. But to each their own.


It is not just on the track where you could enjoy the Stronic. Even on twisties where you have to keep both hands on the wheel, you can go thru shifts and always be on the right gear. For manuals, one has to go in slower and anticipate when the gear change will happen. That might be considered fun and not missing a shift in those hairy situations give a sense of satisfaction. But I think being closer to the edge of the limit is the fun part, and with rowing gears/stepping on the clutch/hell&toe rev matching out of the way, one's focus is completely on not falling off the cliff.


----------



## DavidSG (Aug 11, 2006)

LWNY said:


> It is not just on the track where you could enjoy the Stronic. Even on twisties where you have to keep both hands on the wheel, you can go thru shifts and always be on the right gear. For manuals, one has to go in slower and anticipate when the gear change will happen. That might be considered fun and not missing a shift in those hairy situations give a sense of satisfaction. But I think being closer to the edge of the limit is the fun part, and with rowing gears/stepping on the clutch/hell&toe rev matching out of the way, one's focus is completely on not falling off the cliff.


Again, don't doubt / disagree with any of that. But in daily driving situations, I find myself driving more aggressively than perhaps I should be with an S-tronic in order to liven up the driving experience. Which gets old really quick. I feel I can still have fun with a manual while not driving like a maniac.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

ChrisFu said:


> How much does it _*really *_cost to get a manual version of a car they alreay are maketing everywhere else certified here? They were willing to spend whatever that cost on the CVT FWD A4.
> 
> Also, another thing I have only seen mentioned once....how much does the 35k service cost on a DSG, which includes a filter change and replacing BOTH sets of DSG fluids: the transmission fluid, and the hypoid oil. $500? $1000?
> 
> Seems AoA is doing their dealer service operators a favor by omitting the manual option...


i don't know about the states but in canada the dsg oil change alone is a little over 300 dollars every 40k km.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> Well, there would have to be some really big changes in Federal law for that to happen. Right now, DOT regulations specify all sorts of things for US market vehicles that mean manufacturers have to make special versions of many parts to sell cars here. (Sidemarkers, taillights, etc). In addition to that, our impact standards, emissions standards, and a bunch of other things are all completely different from European ones. For a car to be sold here, each version of the drivetrain has to be emissions and crash tested separately in order to gain certification, and because our standards are different from European ones, it has to be done separately, with the US market version of the car - EU crash test standards are not valid here, nor are their emissions standards.
> 
> For this to change, they'd have to rewrite massive sections of motor vehicle law, and in the current climate, I just don't see that happening.
> 
> ...


i understand that there is a multitude of little details that make our NA cars different but in the end, the summation of these differences is very small esp given the new euro emission standards. for the amount of money spent by each country on testing, it seems ridiculous that there isn't more universality in the core standards. i.e. emissions and crash capabilities. it's not like we would be relying on china for these standards. i live in canada, given we are such a small market it seems even more ridiculous that we don't accept both american and european standards. unfortunately what happens is we follow american demands. i was told by audi canada that they don't even have a choice of what is brought to canada or not. basically, they said that we wait to hear from the AofA what we are getting.


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

kevlartoronto said:


> i understand that there is a multitude of little details that make our NA cars different but in the end, the summation of these differences is very small esp given the new euro emission standards. for the amount of money spent by each country on testing, it seems ridiculous that there isn't more universality in the core standards. i.e. emissions and crash capabilities. it's not like we would be relying on china for these standards. i live in canada, given we are such a small market it seems even more ridiculous that we don't accept both american and european standards. unfortunately what happens is we follow american demands. i was told by audi canada that they don't even have a choice of what is brought to canada or not. basically, they said that we wait to hear from the AofA what we are getting.


Don't you have to pass the moose test in canada, but with the proliferation of SUVs demanded by AOA, it makes passing the moose test harder?


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

LWNY said:


> Don't you have to pass the moose test in canada, but with the proliferation of SUVs demanded by AOA, it makes passing the moose test harder?



hehe. we got lots of moose in toronto. unfortunately they are human.


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

kevlartoronto said:


> i wonder how many vw gti R's awd manual transmissions they have sold. is the R coming in the golf VII?


VWoA sold 3,894 Golf R's (6MT only) in 2012.

http://www.vwvortex.com/news/volkswagen-news/volkswagen-of-america-2012-sales/

The assumption is an MK7 Golf R would be available at some point in the MK7 lifecycle. (we VW pundits are thinking MY 2016 at best)


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 12, 2001)

kevlartoronto said:


> i understand that there is a multitude of little details that make our NA cars different but in the end, the summation of these differences is very small esp given the new euro emission standards. for the amount of money spent by each country on testing, it seems ridiculous that there isn't more universality in the core standards. i.e. emissions and crash capabilities. it's not like we would be relying on china for these standards. i live in canada, given we are such a small market it seems even more ridiculous that we don't accept both american and european standards. unfortunately what happens is we follow american demands. i was told by audi canada that they don't even have a choice of what is brought to canada or not. basically, they said that we wait to hear from the AofA what we are getting.


Oh trust me, I agree. The DOT has a long and silly history of mandating things that a) make no sense, b) make no difference in the operability or safety of the vehicle, and c) make us different from everyone else in the world.

The manufacturers would love it if that would happen too, because it would mean much better economies of scale for them - no more making a separate bumper with sidemarkers, separate taillights, and a dozen other things for our market. The reason that VW didn't put the LED taillights on the US Golf R that everyone else gets, for example, is that the lights have to be stamped in a certain way to pass DOT regs, and it just wasn't worth it for them to make a whole new set of molds and tooling just for the 5,000 vehicles that we got.

-Tim


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

While it would be great and save the manufacturers (and then customers) a lot of money I think it is extremely unlikely you could ever get the U.S. and Euro regulations to be one. Probably about about as likely as getting everyone to drive on the same side of the road (also saving cost for the manufacturers and customers).


----------



## JOES1.8T (Sep 8, 2003)

[email protected] said:


> The reason that VW didn't put the LED taillights on the US Golf R that everyone else gets, for example, is that the lights have to be stamped in a certain way to pass DOT regs, and it just wasn't worth it for them to make a whole new set of molds and tooling just for the 5,000 vehicles that we got.
> 
> -Tim


Wow.. did not know that. Good info... was always wondering why the VW around here in Germany had them, but their counterparts in the U.S. didn't. It is nice seeing all the lineups of both VW and Audi over here. Over here in Stuttgart, they are the norm just like a Ford or Chevy is the norm back in the states. My wife got a chance to drive a A1 which she fell in love with when her Tiguan was in the shop. I was jealous of course seeing I was out of town, but I hate that as well that over here is much more of a selection than it is back in the states. I've seen plenty of the new MQB 2 door and sportbacks running around here, once I see the S3 I will snap some pictures. Their is an Audi dealership right down the road from where I live so I will also be on the lookout for the new sedan as well.

It's also easy to spot the American spec from the European spec, turn signals are one for example along with side markers on bumpers and amber corner lights. European spec have an amber turn signal for both rear and front while U.S. utilize the normal brake light for the turn signal on the rear.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

kevlartoronto said:


> i signed it motech. Rudy, s tronic costs $300 bucks canadian for an oil change every 40k km! my 6spd will cost $100 cdn every 120k km. when i finally get to 120k.


ha I know...that's why I noted would prefer the manual

For every other aspect, I would take the S-Tronic / DSG any day of the week.

If this was a forum for a different automotive manufacture still using torque converters or CVT's, I would be angry and launching death threats, possibly even investing in North Koreans nuclear program to aim nukes at said HQ's, but VAG's DSG / S-Tronic UBER ALLES!!!

The S-Tronic in the current 8P is a joy!


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

Rudy_H said:


> ha I know...that's why I noted would prefer the manual
> 
> For every other aspect, I would take the S-Tronic / DSG any day of the week.
> 
> ...


you would think that is the case, but if their car doesn't have a dual clutch transmission, they are likely to be still in the dark about it. All it takes is some slushboxphile touting all the BS virtues of the equiv of using a propeller to drive your car forward and the ignorant suckers gets fooled. Just look at this slushbox forum:

http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-...-shift-auto-and-dual-clutch-transmission.html

Poster #11 would say things like...If you think dual clutch is good, our slushbox has 7 clutches.....you want the crude engagement of a clutch'd car, we can do that to by making the slushbox operate real bad.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

LWNY said:


> you would think that is the case, but if their car doesn't have a dual clutch transmission, they are likely to be still in the dark about it. All it takes is some slushboxphile touting all the BS virtues of the equiv of using a propeller to drive your car forward and the ignorant suckers gets fooled. Just look at this slushbox forum:
> 
> http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-...-shift-auto-and-dual-clutch-transmission.html
> 
> Poster #11 would say things like...If you think dual clutch is good, our slushbox has 7 clutches.....you want the crude engagement of a clutch'd car, we can do that to by making the slushbox operate real bad.


I think this sums up the whole thread though.



> I not that technical on this matter at all concern the mechanics! New technology for me.


Getting some Bud and grits and see some Corvette trolls show up.

Seriously though, I'm sure there will always be misinformed. As long as those who own one know the following

DSG / S Tronic > manual > Torque Converter > CVT (worst transmission in the world period unless you like replacing it weekly)

I guess I am also biased towards DSG, cause my 500 lbs-ft clutch and crap single mass flywheel is getting on my nerves in the city. My left leg is in phenomenal shape though


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

Rudy_H said:


> ha I know...that's why I noted would prefer the manual
> 
> For every other aspect, I would take the S-Tronic / DSG any day of the week.
> 
> ...


does the gas 8p a3 have normal size paddle shifters?? the 8p tdi i test drove had these lame tiny things hiding behind the steering wheel. in comparison, i test drove a sportline 328i and the paddle shifters on that car were perfectly placed and had a great ergonomic feel to them.


----------



## chrisHD (Jan 13, 2006)

DavidSG said:


> Again, don't doubt / disagree with any of that. But in daily driving situations, I find myself driving more aggressively than perhaps I should be with an S-tronic in order to liven up the driving experience. Which gets old really quick. I feel I can still have fun with a manual while not driving like a maniac.


This. 

All I want to do on my daily drives is have a little fun; if that means I have to push the car to 9/10ths, well, that's just not going to happen. A manual is one part of having that extra little fun. 

Perhaps its a crude analogy, but this is also the reason I didn't look too seriously at something like a 335 4 door - which is just far too capable to wring out anywhere but a track - to replace my A5 and ended up with a GLI manual instead. Just more fun in daily driving at sane speeds.


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

kevlartoronto said:


> does the gas 8p a3 have normal size paddle shifters?? the 8p tdi i test drove had these lame tiny things hiding behind the steering wheel. in comparison, i test drove a sportline 328i and the paddle shifters on that car were perfectly placed and had a great ergonomic feel to them.


According to the review, it has larger paddles:

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/Drives/Search-Results/First-drives/Audi-S3-2013-CAR-review/

"and the S3 follows the revised R8 supercar and finally has a set of paddles that aren’t the size of TicTac packets."


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

too bad we couldn't organize a group buy of manual s3's. make them special editions like the bmw 1M.


----------



## steaguejr (Aug 3, 2006)

I was very excited to find out 2 years ago that there was talk about *S3* coming to the states. I was super excited when I saw pictures the first initial pictures of the S3. It is my background. Then I heard that the S3 sportwagen wasn't coming to the states. :sly: But I still had high hopes for the S3 Sedan. Then the legit pictures of the S3 Sedan were relieved.:thumbup: Then I read the specs . NO ****ING MANUAL!!! I like to believe the S-models are for the enthusiast, offer them anything they want in a car. This is extremely disappointing. Audi needs to look at VW R32 sales, preferably 08 R32 in the states. All DSG, all of them! Look at car websites, they are still be sold with low mileage or a bunch of them up for sale. It garbage! There is no fun. Then they need to look at the current Golf R, you can't turn of ESP! It has a switch for it, but doesn't actually do crap. Luckily there are people that break into the computer and do research and it can be turned off. Auid, learn from other people. You just lost a buyer, just because you didn't offer a manual.:thumbdown: Hello MK7 R


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

yah, i've pretty much given up. after 8 years of owning audis i'm 99% sure i'm going to get a 3 series.


----------



## LazyLightning (Aug 11, 2012)

kevlartoronto said:


> too bad we couldn't organize a group buy of manual s3's. make them special editions like the bmw 1M.


 Damn that would be sweet! I'd sure pony up the $$ stat.


----------



## LazyLightning (Aug 11, 2012)

steaguejr said:


> I was very excited to find out 2 years ago that there was talk about *S3* coming to the states. I was super excited when I saw pictures the first initial pictures of the S3. It is my background. Then I heard that the S3 sportwagen wasn't coming to the states. :sly: But I still had high hopes for the S3 Sedan. Then the legit pictures of the S3 Sedan were relieved.:thumbup: Then I read the specs . NO ****ING MANUAL!!! I like to believe the S-models are for the enthusiast, offer them anything they want in a car. This is extremely disappointing. Audi needs to look at VW R32 sales, preferably 08 R32 in the states. All DSG, all of them! Look at car websites, they are still be sold with low mileage or a bunch of them up for sale. It garbage! There is no fun. Then they need to look at the current Golf R, you can't turn of ESP! It has a switch for it, but doesn't actually do crap. Luckily there are people that break into the computer and do research and it can be turned off. Auid, learn from other people. You just lost a buyer, just because you didn't offer a manual.:thumbdown: Hello MK7 R


 I feel yer pain. So freaking disappointed - and surprised! I figured since they still offer (for now anyway) a 6MT on the A4 and S4 it would be a no-brainer for the A3/S3 which has got to appeal to more manual drivers than its bigger siblings! I ain't no financial wizard but I think there have to be metrics that the bean counters overlook when they make decisions like this. Probably just my wishful thinking... 

Yeah - although I was banking on an S3 next, looks like I will probably swap my MK6 R for the MK7 R when it arrives. Although: I've heard scary rumors that the MK7 R may be DSG only again! :thumbdown: 

Sure is slim pickins' for folks wanting 6MT + AWD (+ hatch)!!


----------



## LazyLightning (Aug 11, 2012)

kevlartoronto said:


> yah, i've pretty much given up. after 8 years of owning audis i'm 99% sure i'm going to get a 3 series.


 Before I bought my MKV GTI I drove an endless series of Bimmers from the 70's, 80's and 90's (over 15 of them). Still by far my favorite driving experiences (e.g. my '72 Bavaria and '88 535is). None of the Bimmers built in the last >10 years do anything for me at all. I drove the new 3 series (a 328 not a 335 though) and was like... meh. No smile to be had. 

But at least they'll offer you 3 freaking pedals!!


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

yah i was at the bmw dealership last week. up here in canada they make it very difficult to get the car configured the way you want it. no sport suspension or brakes with 320/328s. no m sport on the 320/328s either. 

maybe i should order a s3 and have them take the s tronic tranny off and sell it and order a proper tranny.


----------



## steaguejr (Aug 3, 2006)

LazyLightning said:


> I feel yer pain. So freaking disappointed - and surprised! I figured since they still offer (for now anyway) a 6MT on the A4 and S4 it would be a no-brainer for the A3/S3 which has got to appeal to more manual drivers than its bigger siblings! I ain't no financial wizard but I think there have to be metrics that the bean counters overlook when they make decisions like this. Probably just my wishful thinking...
> 
> Yeah - although I was banking on an S3 next, looks like I will probably swap my MK6 R for the MK7 R when it arrives. *Although: I've heard scary rumors that the MK7 R may be DSG only again!* :thumbdown:
> 
> Sure is slim pickins' for folks wanting 6MT + AWD (+ hatch)!!


 I hope the rumors are very wrong. I figured the whole purpose of this new MGB style frame is to save cost and offer MORE OPTIONS. It just seems like they are keeping the prices up with less options. To me, this sounds communist. :thumbdown:


----------



## LazyLightning (Aug 11, 2012)

steaguejr said:


> I hope the rumors are very wrong. I figured the whole purpose of this new MGB style frame is to save cost and offer MORE OPTIONS. It just seems like they are keeping the prices up with less options. To me, this sounds communist. :thumbdown:


 Yup - I hear ya! The cost savings on their end aren't translating into more customizability on our end it seems. 

Well: worst case scenario I'll just hang on to my MKVI R for the long haul! Could be worse fates...


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

steaguejr said:


> I hope the rumors are very wrong. I figured the whole purpose of this new MGB style frame is to save cost and offer MORE OPTIONS. It just seems like they are keeping the prices up with less options. To me, this sounds communist. :thumbdown:


 The MQB architecture allows Audi/VW to develop cars much more quickly, assemble them much faster and amortize the costs over a much larger sum than before. What you hear Audi touting a lot in the new A3 is the attention to detail and the feature set that they're able to bring into the compact segment, from the standard MMI interface to drive select. 

While final US specs aren't complete, you're actually getting substantially more bang for your buck than with the 8P, especially when you consider that the 8P is a nearly 10 year old platform. 

What we're not seeing, at least initially, is the breadth of powertrain options we'd all like. That is a simple matter of supply and demand, where manual transmission vehicles comprise a shrinking portion of Audi's sales. Audi of America has to sell somewhere between 20,000 - 30,000 A3s per year to keep the bosses in Germany happy. They're going to push the most profitable and largest volume models first (S-Tronic) before introducing more niche models. 

Make no mistake, MQB will afford greater flexibility, scalability and options - but it doesn't mean that the US market will get all of those. Personally, I'm very disappointed in the lack of a 6MT powertrain and that may very well preclude me from purchasing a new A3. We'll have to wait and see what we get this time next year.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

steaguejr said:


> I hope the rumors are very wrong. I *figured the whole purpose of this new MGB style frame is to save cost and offer MORE OPTIONS.* It just seems like they are keeping the prices up with less options. To me, this sounds communist. :thumbdown:


 Communism is building a product more efficiently but the company not giving all of the savings to the consumer? :screwy: Them doing whatever they want seems pretty capitalistic to me. 

Since we don't have pricing, haven't driven the car, or or know exact options that will be offered I have a hard time with saying the pricing isn't good compared to the competition. 

With the plan on selling more engines - diesel, 1.8T, 2.0T and some type of hybrid, aren't we getting more options, just not the ones some want?


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

kevlartoronto said:


> yah i was at the bmw dealership last week. up here in canada they make it very difficult to get the car configured the way you want it. no sport suspension or brakes with 320/328s. no m sport on the 320/328s either.
> 
> maybe i should order a s3 and have them take the s tronic tranny off and sell it and order a proper tranny.


 As crazy as that sounds...I don't think it is... 

Wonder how the transmission in a Golf R bolts up to the new S3? The only thing is the way the new engine is seated vs the old...


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

Rudy_H said:


> As crazy as that sounds...I don't think it is...
> 
> Wonder how the transmission in a Golf R bolts up to the new S3? The only thing is the way the new engine is seated vs the old...


 the 6 spd transmission is already available in europe for the new engine in the a3 sportback. they will be bringing it to NA in the gti etc. is it exactly the same as the audi tranny?


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

steaguejr said:


> I hope the rumors are very wrong. I figured the whole purpose of this new MGB style frame is to save cost and offer MORE OPTIONS. It just seems like they are keeping the prices up with less options. To me, this sounds communist. :thumbdown:


 If they didn't have the MBG skeleton, then the A3 sedan wouldn't have a different track as the sportback. Since changing those parameters would have been a major undertaking. If that car's bones was of a even older design, you might just see a boot attached to the rear of the A3 3dr since that's that was the technological capability in designing different outside on the same underlying tubes.


----------



## waltern (Jan 9, 2013)

Pretarion said:


> I am sure I will be burned on this, but I actually love my DSG tranny. It is quick responsive and I love that my left quad muscle doesn't hurt in stop and go traffic anymore. I am looking forward to just having the ability to purchase a S3 here in the states. I will take it either way.


 On the Audi website they call the trans an S-tronic, but is it a dual clutch semi-manual DSG?


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

kevlartoronto said:


> the 6 spd transmission is already available in europe for the new engine in the a3 sportback. they will be bringing it to NA in the gti etc. is it exactly the same as the audi tranny?


 Which country? Not on UK or Germany 
I only see on their sites up to 1.8TFSI and the 2.0 TDI's with Quattro...the S3's all only offer S-Tronic 

IMO, for the transmission I can't imagine why it wouldn't work, if it already works in other countries, except for really one piece...is the TCU in corporated into the ECU, or two separate units?


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

sorry rudy, technically you are correct but the s3 hatch will be available next month (i believe) or and the sedan by the summer. i was thinking yesterday how funny it would be if a bunch of us ordered manual transmissions to replace the s tronic on a brand new car. i could only imagine the look on the vw or audi parts department's faces when they get an order like this.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

kevlartoronto said:


> sorry rudy, technically you are correct but the s3 hatch will be available next month (i believe) or and the sedan by the summer. i was thinking yesterday how funny it would be if a bunch of us ordered manual transmissions to replace the s tronic on a brand new car. i could only imagine the look on the vw or audi parts department's faces when they get an order like this.


 I'm sure we could get a group buy going, and a shipping crate from Europe  

Besides the lack of warranty, yes, it will cost a few G's but if you sell your old S-Tronic, it will surely offset. If we


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

super bored at work... 

http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2013/03/2015-audi-s3-sedan-unveiled-with-296-hp.html 



> the Audi S3 is powered by a 2.0-liter TFSI engine with 296 hp and 280 lb-ft of torque. Paired with the S tronic transmission, the S3 accelerates to 62 mph in 4.9 seconds while the manual transmission takes 5.3 seconds.


 Obviously the question becomes, where did the 5.3 seconds come from and how much will it cost?


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

probably came from this article from the uk. http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/audi/a3/63298/new-audi-a3-saloon trying to rub it in that we won't be getting the proper transmission.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 12, 2001)

waltern said:


> On the Audi website they call the trans an S-tronic, but is it a dual clutch semi-manual DSG?


 That's what "S-Tronic" is. It's Audi's branding of the dual clutch automated manual transmission style gearboxes that VW calls DSG. 

-Tim


----------



## SK VeeDubR (Apr 18, 2008)

ProjectA3 said:


> I'll quote myself
> I've been selling Audi's for 10 years, in that 10 years i have MAYBE, just MAYBE sold a TOTAL of 25 to MAYBE 30 manual transmission Audi's. that is including all of our models. out of the hundreds of Audi's i have sold, that is a severely low number. It really is not worth it for them.
> 
> everyone one this forum will bitch about no manual, but how many of you would ACTUALLY buy one? if they lose 200 sales because no manual quattro, they will make up for them with a few thousand sales of S-tronics to the general public.
> ...


 Weird.. When I sold Audi I would say easily 15-25% were manuals (2008 - 2010) across the range from A3 to R8s


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

SK VeeDubR said:


> Weird.. When I sold Audi I would say easily 15-25% were manuals (2008 - 2010) across the range from A3 to R8s


 The numbers really are shrinking. Take the last sales report for example: Of the 3,143 A4s sold, 17% were S4 models. That is 534 S4s sold in April. If the take rate for the 6MT transmission is 10%, that's only 53 cars sold with a manual transmission. If the take rate on the remaining A4s is 10% then that's 260 manual transmission A4s, for a total of 313 manual transmission A4/S4 models. 

The 10% figure on the A4 6MT sales is probably high (5-8% is more likely) and the 10% on the S4 may be low (30-40% is more likely there), but regardless, at the end of the day, in a good month we're probably only looking at 500 or so A4/S4s sold with the manual transmission. 

Is that enough to keep it in the mix? That's a question for the product planners and bean counters. Clearly Audi thinks it to be in their best interests to do S-tronic only for the A3/S3, so I would imagine the future of the manual transmission in the A4 lineup is not looking so good either.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

I agree with the above. 

Also think they talk to Marketing and say, would sales be higher if we didn't have the manual but instead replaced it with a different engine or body style or whatever. With the A3 coming out with the 1.8T and the hybrid, my guess is they figure these engines will make them far more money than the manual and the number of ways to build a relatively low selling car has gotten pretty high. Layout all of the options for the car and pick and chose to limit the variations, while increasing overall sales numbers for the model and maximize profit. Low selling options get cut to let them keep some of the others. 

I can definitely see the enthusiast not being happy about it and Audi has to look at this also. 

If this car was a 300,000 a year car in the U.S. and they were still selling 10% of them as manuals the numbers would make a lot more sense.


----------



## jp455 (Jun 1, 2010)

Hi all...just want to add something from a suppliers perspective. I work for one of the large companies that supply all car brands so just want to show the magnitude of costs we are talking about and why companies are starting to no longer offer manuals. Keep in mind that car companies dont actually manufacture cars anymore in the sense of say a Ford model T, car companies nowadays mostly assemble components bought from suppliers, the biggest execption being the stamped panels for the chasis and body. 

I know it sucks that a manual isnt offered but the fact is that a very small percentage of buyers want cars with manuals any more. At Ferrari only 1% of California (the model not the state)buyers order manuals, and as you can guess they will soon not even be offered to order. 

The reason for this is cost. Putting aside testing for the EPA etc, the costs from suppliers to manufacturers is huge. H.U.G.E. Im not even talking about making changes to a part, just to use a part in say, an Audi, and to use the SAME EXACT part in say a Mercedes it costs hundres of thousands of Euros JUST to change the part number on the part and make sure it works in the Mercedes. Yes, you read right... 

This also applies when a part is used in one model and a car company wants to use the EXACT part in another model. Sometimes something as simple as using back up sensors from one model to another costs at least 60,000 Euros. This is just to use the part in an A3 and then use the exact same part in an A6. Im not guessing on that figure btw. It is accurate. 

So, unless there is a massive demand for manual transmissions the major OEMs will slowly make them die. Its not a matter of make it order only, or make it available in one model etc. Its just not worth the cost for the sales they get in the end.


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

jp455 said:


> Hi all...just want to add something from a suppliers perspective. I work for one of the large companies that supply all car brands so just want to show the magnitude of costs we are talking about and why companies are starting to no longer offer manuals. Keep in mind that car companies dont actually manufacture cars anymore in the sense of say a Ford model T, car companies nowadays mostly assemble components bought from suppliers, the biggest execption being the stamped panels for the chasis and body.
> 
> I know it sucks that a manual isnt offered but the fact is that a very small percentage of buyers want cars with manuals any more. At Ferrari only 1% of California (the model not the state)buyers order manuals, and as you can guess they will soon not even be offered to order.
> 
> ...


 Thats an invalid argument when the capital investment to design, fabricate and tool for the manual transmission for the MQB A3 has already occured to support the rest of the worldwide markets that they are offering. 

In this specific case, the absolute only argument they can make is based on the certification costs for the US. And if that is their argument, its weak. 

AoA is gauging anticipated sales of of the manual version of their upcoming smallest, least expensive car based upon their experience selling larger more expensive models, and the decontended FWD A3 from the past decade here. How they convinced themselves thats a relevent baseline is head scratching. Like I have had said ad nauseum, they are ignoring a huge market segment of AWD enthusiasts stepping up from WRX/STIs.


----------



## jp455 (Jun 1, 2010)

Chris Im not sure you read my post correctly. 

It doesnt NOT matter that the capital investment to make the gearbox is done, just using the gearbox in another car model (A3, RS3 and S3 are considered different models) makes Audi spend hundreds of thousands of Euros. 

As per my example of the rear parking sensors...the hardware for the sensors and little ECU that controls them is paid for, but we still charge 60,000 JUST to put them on another car! And that is for dumb little parking sensors. 

Let me give another example more gearbox related. A car company I cant name right now is going to use an automatic trans in a model where they are upgrading the engine. They ALREADY use that same exact automatic, and the engine is the same as far as the block and so on, it just has some ECU/throttle/injector upgrades to make more power and less emissions. 

For all these items, where the tooling already exists, they will spend approximately 500,000 Euros! This is JUST to calibrate the automatic to the new engine calibration and make the combination work 100% perfectly!! 

So no, my argument is not invalid. Not only is it valid, it is not an argument at all as you say...these are companies I work with every day supplying ALL components for their car builds and this is exactly what goes on in their meeting rooms when they discuss what parts to use and which ones not to, its not a matter of opinion its fact. 

This is why I wanted to give you all an insight into what goes on behind closed doors and the OEMs dont give details about. So regardless of how "huge" enthusiasts think the market is, it simply is not. The numbers simply do not add for them.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

jp455 - 

Really interesting stuff on the supplier side of things, thanks for the input. So what it sounds like to me is that a lot of this overhead cost is really in compliance, testing and verification of similar parts on different models, correct? Or, is this something akin to a home builder who has a series of floor plans available, but once you start customizing slightly the 'change order' fees start to add up quickly. It's a major profit center for builders, and I would assume component makers as well. 

The Truth About Cars ran a really interesting piece about the true profit centers in the auto industry (pro tip: it ain't in new car sales). If I can find the link to it, I'll post it, but there is a LOT of money in the parts business. An insane amount. 

I would caution that another factor that needs to be considered is logistics management and floorplanning for US dealerships: for each additional powertrain option added to the lineup the complexity of available permutations of the car increases. Logistically planning to deliver, stock and then floorplan becomes a real pain in the rear. 

Let me give you an anecdotal piece on that: almost 15 years ago I worked an internship program that turned into a job at a large Volkswagen dealership in NE Ohio. We had a boatload of green and red Passat GLS and GLS V6 wagons on our lot that VW dumped on us. By boatload I recall that number being somewhere around 15. They sat. And sat. And sat. Bored one day, I happened to make a connection with a dealership on the West coast who had no Passat wagons of any type. Bone dry. So I offered to sell and truck all 15 of ours if we got to keep the holdback on them. He was keen to have some inventory, we needed to unload them because they cost the dealership a fortune in interest payments. 

My point in the story is this: it's very costly to have slow moving, high value inventory on dealership lots. For every unwanted car on the lot that is one additional vehicle the dealership cannot (or will not) accept from the manufacturer because of finance/floorplan limits and costs. For every unwanted car on the lot that's another potential dollar Audi needs to spend in incentive money to move the car, in the form of sales/dealership incentives, floorplanning assistance, marketing or old fashioned rebates. 

The margins on the A3 are going to be slim, especially since the car is being imported from Europe. Granted, Hungary has a lower cost of manufacture than Germany, but there are still import duties, shipping costs and of course the big fudge factor: currency fluctuations (one of the major reasons we won't know pricing until much closer to launch). Volkswagen made the right move by moving Golf 7 production to Mexico: it will reduce the costs associated with selling in North America and allow them to increase the content in the vehicles. Audi's move to build the Q5 in Mexico is an equally smart move. I would not be surprised to see an A3/MQB factory open up in the Americas within the next ten years if the car is as successful as they say. 

Margins are tight, costs are increasing and the competitive nature of the market is insane right now. My deep hope is that Audi does for North America what they're doing for the Sportback in Australia: offering the 6MT as a sold-order only option and not part of normal dealer stock. 

The good news is this: should the A3 and Q3 sell as expected Audi will easily be able to hit their targets. As volume grows, so will options. Audi of America has stated their goal to be profitable growth. The balancing act is to introduce highly profitable, low volume products (A6/S6,7,8,Q7) with higher volume, lower margin product (A3 sedan and to a lesser extent, A4). Kept in check this keeps the bean counters happy and the customers happy.


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

jp455 said:


> Chris Im not sure you read my post correctly.
> 
> It doesnt NOT matter that the capital investment to make the gearbox is done, just using the gearbox in another car model (A3, RS3 and S3 are considered different models) makes Audi spend hundreds of thousands of Euros.
> 
> ...


 But the MQB A3 in europe, china, india, australia is NOT a different car than the MQB A3 to be sold here. 

You are saying that it costs money to shoehorn parts in across different models. Of course that requires investment....but in this case almost none of that has to be done. They are selling the EXACT automobile in other (multiple) markets. 

And as Travis said, a CTO option for the manual would not burden the dealers with inventory that "doesnt move".


----------



## jp455 (Jun 1, 2010)

A couple of things here... 

Chris, believe it or not the cars sold in Australia China etc ARE different in the eyes of the OEM (as well as in the eyes of the government and NOT just because of emissions). As an example, right now one of the OEMs my company will supply parts to is releasing a new model, they are releasing it in two distinct phases, NA and Rest of World. This means that even though it is the same car, the differences between the cars sold in the US and the cars sold in the rest of the world are enough to warrant two separate launch/production dates. So no, its not exactly the same. And as I mentioned previously, even a small change will cost tens of thousands. 


Travis, its not a case of modifying existing plans as it were. Many times the parts themselves dont get modified at all, literally. One example, say company A uses part X, company B also wants to use the same exact part X. This means that naturally company A and B cant bothe have the same box or part number and label on the part. When you buy a Toyota part it comes with a Toyota box that the Toyota dealer looked up using the Toyota part number. If you go to a Chevy dealer and ask for that part number it will not show up at the Chevy dealer, but one with their part number, and box, will. It is EXACTLY the same part. So, just to do this different box and label with the company's name and part number...tens of thousands of euros. 

And yes, you are right Travis, there is a LOT of money in the parts business. As I said before, car companies nowadays dont really make anything in the cars they sell except for the chassis and body. Companies that make car parts do all that, so when you buy a spare part it comes from Bosch, Continental, Denso or whatever and all the money spent inventing, developing, testing, making, etc all the work and money spent doing the work comes from the parts manufacturers.


----------



## KnockKnock (Jun 30, 2005)

JP455: very useful insights here, thanks. 

From the economics standpoint it seems like a big opportunity for innovative parts manufacturers - to be more agile and flexible than the biggies. I don't know who makes the 6MT in question, but someone like Getrag - if they're going to charge Audi 6-figures to put it in the A3 even though it's already in the GTI, it seems like BorgWarner (just googling around for possibilities) could win a huge contract by doing it across the line for 5-figures per iteration. 

Maybe the barriers to entry, or economies of scale are ganging up to say it has to be the way it is. And I could 'get that'. But companies like Mini and Scion are making customization a product differentiator. It really does come down to earning new customers.


----------



## jp455 (Jun 1, 2010)

KnockKnock said:


> JP455: very useful insights here, thanks.
> 
> From the economics standpoint it seems like a big opportunity for innovative parts manufacturers - to be more agile and flexible than the biggies. I don't know who makes the 6MT in question, but someone like Getrag - if they're going to charge Audi 6-figures to put it in the A3 even though it's already in the GTI, it seems like BorgWarner (just googling around for possibilities) could win a huge contract by doing it across the line for 5-figures per iteration.
> 
> Maybe the barriers to entry, or economies of scale are ganging up to say it has to be the way it is. And I could 'get that'. But companies like Mini and Scion are making customization a product differentiator. It really does come down to earning new customers.


 Thats an idea, unfortunately its not how it works. Firstly there are contracts to keep in mind. If Bosch for example designs a part all the intellectual rights and even patents belong to them. That means Borg Warner cant just come along and make the same part. Unfortunately this is what would be required because the part would have to fit and function exactly the same way. So basically you would have to have Bosch agree to let Borg Warner make their part. That is extremely rare. Even if it it does happen borg Warner would still have to pay for tooling, a line in the factory to make the part, employees to do all the paperwork, etc etc. In the end there really isnt a saving. Thats just to make the part, then there is the contracts that usually say supplier X will be the sole supplier to OEM B. 

What you mention with the Mini is different in one respect. If you get a Mini Coupe for example, and have the hundreds of options that go in it, all those options were designed and validated for that model. So getting sat nav or not or a sunroof or not is not a problem because all the options have been accounted for as far as how many people will order them in relation to how much it costs to have those things put in the car. The really big costs come when you start using items across model lines. Say for example you want to use the Ecoboost V6 in an F150 or in a Taurus then the costs to use that same exact part becomes huge. There have been cases then, as in the GTI and A3, where an part will be a great seller in one model and not in another and so that option wont be available in that model. This also happens for marketing reasons, no Ecoboost V6 in a Mustang for example, but thats a completely different story. 

In any case it all boils down what Travis said before, if an option will not sell enough then it just wont make it onto a car. Unfortunately manual gearboxes are becoming one of those options.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

jp455 said:


> Travis, its not a case of modifying existing plans as it were. Many times the parts themselves dont get modified at all, literally. One example, say company A uses part X, company B also wants to use the same exact part X. This means that naturally company A and B cant bothe have the same box or part number and label on the part. When you buy a Toyota part it comes with a Toyota box that the Toyota dealer looked up using the Toyota part number. If you go to a Chevy dealer and ask for that part number it will not show up at the Chevy dealer, but one with their part number, and box, will. It is EXACTLY the same part. So, just to do this different box and label with the company's name and part number...tens of thousands of euros.


 jp - 

Thanks again, that's some really interesting intel there. Long story short is: same part, different product coding and boxing for each buyer. Makes sense, and knowing a few people in the packaging, labeling and printing business this jives with conversations I've had in the past on the subject (read: it's far more expensive than one would think to just change packaging and product numbers). 

Amazing how we take these things for granted, huh?


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Something else I've been thinking about: as the power trains become more common across vehicles, and the costs for the big ticket items increase (transmissions, drivetrains, engines, etc.), increasingly the only variable that distinguishes one model from the next is aesthetics and infotainment. 

Audi's steps into modular, upgradeable infotainment with the new nVidia MMI system in the A3 is an interesting step in this direction. From my reading on other forums it appears that in Europe at least there are dealer installable upgrades for different versions of the navigation system (basic and advanced, for lack of a better term). We've already seen this happen with things like power windows and AC becoming standard equipment across the board on virtually any car out there, it's only a matter of time before this mentality trickles down to other subassemblies. 

I've always wondered what the obstacles were to making more things dealer installable as the cars become more modular. Case in point - I would say that it makes more sense for Audi to equip all A3s with the higher resolution new MMI 7" display than make two versions available. Just control the resolution through software and/or through modular components. This reduces assembly, logistics and component complexity and costs. Further, it reduces the number of variants dealerships need to stock and increases the likelihood of upselling the customer at the time of the buy. Dealer plugs in VAG-COM, enters a code and bam, for $1,500 you get the upgraded MMI Nav system with higher resolution. 

My point being that I see the auto industry moving toward standardization on the powertrain front (ie: S-tronic across the board) while providing more flexibility on the infotrainment/creature comfort front.


----------



## jp455 (Jun 1, 2010)

Travis this is exactly right. My car has the MMI screen but I didnt get the sat nav. All the buttons for the sat nav systems are in place, but when I hit the sat nav button it says sat nav not installed. So basically its like you say, a hardware thats in the car but needs a software upgrade. 

I was asked by an OEM this past week about something exactly like this, they want a back up camera system where the hardware is all in place to be able to upgrade to a birds eye view system with just a software change and the addition of the three remaining cameras (sides and front).


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

ChrisFu said:


> Like I have had said ad nauseum, they are ignoring a huge market segment of AWD enthusiasts stepping up from WRX/STIs.


This point is worth repeating. Well said.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

jp455 said:


> Travis this is exactly right. My car has the MMI screen but I didnt get the sat nav. All the buttons for the sat nav systems are in place, but when I hit the sat nav button it says sat nav not installed. So basically its like you say, a hardware thats in the car but needs a software upgrade.
> 
> I was asked by an OEM this past week about something exactly like this, they want a back up camera system where the hardware is all in place to be able to upgrade to a birds eye view system with just a software change and the addition of the three remaining cameras (sides and front).


 This is somewhat similar to the IT world: hardware is almost a commodity any longer, it can practically be given away. The real value add is in the software. I have to imagine that automakers would open up a whole new world of possibilities by putting most hardware in at the factory and then activating it via software or dealer-installable modular upgrades. Think of it this way: you go to the dealership and find a car you love. It's the right color, has the right power train and has *almost* everything you want except...no navigation system. Darn. How great of an up-sell opportunity would it be for the dealership to be able to enable the nav system via a software upgrade for $1,500. 

Better yet - think of it this way: you buy a car today without the navigation system but decide down the road you really would have liked it. Just head back to the dealership and for $1,500 they'll enable the nav system for a software upgrade fee. I think this would be a GREAT revenue model for manufacturers and dealerships because a lot of people would go this route. 

I could imagine this being done via software or a combo of software and modular hardware. Great way to extract more money from the customer down the road. It would work for all kinds of things: 

1. Navigation 
2. Audio 
3. LED headlights 
4. Exterior cameras 
5. Heated seats 

The trick is in pricing these things in such a way, and marketing them toward customers in such a way that you increase the eventual take rate. Think of it like iTunes pricing, where the cost is so minimal why WOULDN'T you do it? I'd be curious to see what kinds of savings you get at the factory level by simplifying the components and the build system, not to mention the assembly process. I imagine it is a not insubstantial number. Combine that with fewer incentives to move unwanted configurations at the dealership level and the chance to capture more dollars down the road from people who won't spend up front - I'd say that's a big win.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Waterfan said:


> This point is worth repeating. Well said.


 I don't know what the sales figures are for the STI/WRX - does anyone here know?


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

The reality is all of these explanations are long winded excuses. Almost every car in the vw lineup has a manual tranny including the passat of all cars... And the a3/s3 doesn't? Please spare us the drool.


----------



## asal (Oct 12, 2007)

Way to put it in perspective man. VW group is still clueless sometimes. 

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

kevlartoronto said:


> The reality is all of these explanations are long winded excuses. Almost every car in the vw lineup has a manual tranny including the passat of all cars... And the a3/s3 doesn't? Please spare us the drool.


 Volkswagen sells 100,000+ Passats annually in the US, plus it is sourced and assembled locally. Jetta sells 150,000+ annually. The A3 will at most add 20-30,000 units annually. 

Hey, I agree that the lack of a 6MT in the A3 stinks - but were I making the model line decisions and my job depended on accurate forecasting, I would probably make the same initial call as well.


----------



## LazyLightning (Aug 11, 2012)

Travis Grundke said:


> Volkswagen sells 100,000+ Passats annually in the US, plus it is sourced and assembled locally. Jetta sells 150,000+ annually. The A3 will at most add 20-30,000 units annually.
> 
> Hey, I agree that the lack of a 6MT in the A3 stinks - but were I making the model line decisions and my job depended on accurate forecasting, I would probably make the same initial call as well.


 I hear ya, but even as far as the volume angle goes: I read somewhere (I think C&D?) that ~10% of Passats sold in the US are TDIs. And: I'm guessing only a small fraction of those are 6MTs, based on everyone's confident proclamations about America's disdain for rowing gears. So: at the end of the day we're talking like... ~1,000 6MT TDI Passats sold annually? But somehow VWoA can justify the US DOT homologation costs for this drivetrain combo? 

I really wonder if a good chunk of this no 6MT thing has to do with reinforcing the perception of divergence between brands in the US. Audi = luxury = automatics for everyone. VW = proletariat vehicle = D.I.Y. shifting  

I'm a happy R driver overall, but I would definitely swap it out for an S3 6MT w/ more upscale interior & exterior - sad that "luxury" and "manual" have essentially become mutually exclusive in the US.


----------



## KnockKnock (Jun 30, 2005)

Travis Grundke said:


> Volkswagen sells 100,000+ Passats annually in the US, plus it is sourced and assembled locally. Jetta sells 150,000+ annually. The A3 will at most add 20-30,000 units annually.
> 
> Hey, I agree that the lack of a 6MT in the A3 stinks - but were I making the model line decisions and my job depended on accurate forecasting, I would probably make the same initial call as well.


 x2. :beer::thumbup:


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

LazyLightning said:


> I really wonder if a good chunk of this no 6MT thing has to do with reinforcing the perception of divergence between brands in the US. Audi = luxury = automatics for everyone. VW = proletariat vehicle = D.I.Y. shifting
> 
> I'm a happy R driver overall, but I would definitely swap it out for an S3 6MT w/ more upscale interior & exterior - sad that "luxury" and "manual" have essentially become mutually exclusive in the US.


 
Lazy, 

I think that quote above has a lot more to do with it than anyone has yet given credit.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

Think it has more to do with the given production levels and take rates for the manual. 

Currently this car sells about 10,000 cars per year. They sit in a meeting and say the next version is going to come with 4 engines (1.8T, 2.0T, diesel, hybrid) and FWD and AWD. Start doing the math on which models they think will sell at what levels, then take 10% of one of the models and make them manuals and they come to the conclusion that it isn't a profitable decision. Not 10% of the total but 10% of one model. 

They hope that with all of these variations the production numbers will be far greater but they really don't know now. 

I am assuming most enthusiasts want the 2.0T AWD as a manual but maybe the numbers come closest to making sense for the 1.8T FWD since this is the least expensive (similar to the Honda Accord decision). If they were to offer the manual in the variation most here still wouldn't be happy. 

For the Passat question, this car currently sells more than 10 times as many cars as the A3 so I think the higher production makes it easier to justify a manual. 

Edit: One other thing, when they don't offer the manual they don't lose all of the customers that would have purchased the manual, some will buy the A3's that are offered, some will buy other Audi's and some will go to VW route. Actual lost customers is even smaller than the take rate of the manual would have been.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/06/how-volkswagen-is-run-like-no-other-car-company/ 



Awesome article, and gives insight into how the VW group operates. They are FAR from a supplier based company running in the red because of out sourcing work. Use this example of how a properly run company should run (less out sourcing). 

Requested for a manual : 
Audi A3 2.0T Quattro 
Audi S3 Quattro 
VW Golf R 

How modular is the system? If the efficiency can be found look how quickly that manual transmission can be used across the line-up : 
Golf GTI 
Jetta GLI 
Passat 2.0T 
Bettle 
Scirocco 

Note, I didn't include Seat and Skoda where there are some sharing as well occurring.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 12, 2001)

kevlartoronto said:


> The reality is all of these explanations are long winded excuses.


 You can look at them as excuses, but really, they're not. People are trying to explain the business reasons why we're not getting all of the options that we'd like. There is sometimes a perception amongst some enthusiasts that there are a bunch of guys in suits in an Audi (or Volkswagen, if you go look at some of the VW forums) office down in Herndon laughing at all of the enthusiasts because they just don't feel like "giving" us manual transmissions any more, and that's just not the case. There are solid business reasons behind the decisions that they make, and while we may not all like them (if I was going to order an A3, I would have wanted a 2.0T 6MT Quattro, for example) they're made so that AoA will keep making money and stay profitable. I'd rather have that then have them end up as an Alfa Romeo or something. 



LazyLightning said:


> I really wonder if a good chunk of this no 6MT thing has to do with reinforcing the perception of divergence between brands in the US. Audi = luxury = automatics for everyone. VW = proletariat vehicle = D.I.Y. shifting


 There is definitely, definitely a very concerted effort at Audi of America to differentiate the brand. There are a lot of people out there who still say "Oh, they're just expensive Volkswagens" when I tell them I work with an Audi site. Johan De Nysschen, for example (ex-president of AoA) was extremely sensitive to this and initiated a lot of measures to make sure that everyone at AoA was working toward brand differentiation (and that's continuing under Scott Keogh). This goes as far as that when you walk into the HQ building at Herndon, which is shared with VW, you can tell who the "Audi people" are vs. the "VW People." Everyone at Audi is in a suit, every day. (I'm maybe exaggerating a little there, but not much.) There is a concerted effort at product differentiation as well, but it does not necessarily extend to things like transmission choice. Those decisions are made more around business case, and if anything, the folks at AoA are fighting to keep the manuals around just as much as anyone else. Witness the current S4, which is no longer available in Euro markets with a 6MT, but they kept that option for the US because the take rate was high enough that they'd make a profit. 



dmorrow said:


> Think it has more to do with the given production levels and take rates for the manual.


 It absolutely does. I know Mark Fruechtnicht, the head product planner for the A3 line personally, and while he'd love to be able to offer the 6MT across the board, the case just isn't there for it. Mark's a car guy, born and bred (his dad worked with Max Hoffman to bring BMW to the USA, for those of you who know who Hoffman was), but he can't do things that are going to lose money for the company just because he wants to. 

In the end it just comes down to the fact that people on the whole aren't buying manual transmissions like they used to. Yes, the enthusiast market still wants them, but you have to remember that in the scope of a company the size of any of the major manufacturers, the enthusiast market is a tiny, tiny part of who they need to be able to sell cars to. They give us what they can when they can, but they can't be making unprofitable decisions and stay in business. 

-Tim


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

i'm not one to think that there is some conspiracy but i do agree with the points that this is more about differentiating audi as a brand from vw then anything else. it's a little embarrassing if this is actually the case. i made this point before. if they wanted differentiation themselves from vw, they should have given higher output engines to the audi lineup across the board. i.e. tdi should have been a the 180hp version. 

people looking at a s3, s4, or s5 won't be going to vw if they want a manual transmission, they will go straight to bmw. these cars are being compared to the 328/335, 428/435 coupe as an alternative. in fact, by not offering manual transmissions audi is pushing many of the enthusiast crowd to bmw. 

i definitely think that bmw is so successful because they won over the enthusiast crowd and the rest of the consumers just follow like lemmings being told that this is the best, bar none.


----------



## DaLeadBull (Feb 15, 2011)

kevlartoronto said:


> i'm not one to think that there is some conspiracy but i do agree with the points that this is more about differentiating audi as a brand from vw then anything else. it's a little embarrassing if this is actually the case. i made this point before. if they wanted differentiation themselves from vw, they should have given higher output engines to the audi lineup across the board. i.e. tdi should have been a the 180hp version.
> 
> people looking at a s3, s4, or s5 won't be going to vw if they want a manual transmission, they will go straight to bmw. these cars are being compared to the 328/335, 428/435 coupe as an alternative. in fact, by not offering manual transmissions audi is pushing many of the enthusiast crowd to bmw.
> 
> i definitely think that bmw is so successful because they won over the enthusiast crowd and the rest of the consumers just follow like lemmings being told that this is the best, bar none.


 Very good point. 

When it comes to enthusiast models like the S and RS, Audi needs to put business second and put the enthusiast's desires first. They can make their base model A4's, A6's A3's (cash cows) and offer them in auto only, I don't care. Brand loyalty is what sells enthusiast cars and often the best business move is not apparent by looking at the numbers alone.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

kevlartoronto said:


> i'm not one to think that there is some conspiracy but i do agree with the points that this is more about differentiating audi as a brand from vw then anything else. it's a little embarrassing if this is actually the case. i made this point before. if they wanted differentiation themselves from vw, they should have given higher output engines to the audi lineup across the board. i.e. tdi should have been a the 180hp version.
> 
> *people looking at a s3, s4, or s5 won't be going to vw if they want a manual transmission, they will go straight to bmw.* these cars are being compared to the 328/335, 428/435 coupe as an alternative. in fact, by not offering manual transmissions audi is pushing many of the enthusiast crowd to bmw.
> 
> i definitely think that bmw is so successful because they won over the enthusiast crowd and the rest of the consumers just follow like lemmings being told that this is the best, bar none.


 Aren't you complaining about something that hasn't happened yet? You can get the S4 and S5 as a manual and we don't know for sure about the S3 yet. Since we have never had the S3 any sales of this model would be better than what they have had in the past. 

You believe they are trying to differentiate themselves from VW and this is why they don't offer the A3 as a manual? I strongly believe that if they could make enough money by selling enough of them they would have a quattro manual A3 and that we don't because the numbers aren't high enough.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

i'm being pessimistic, yes but i think audi is intent on killing the manual in the a4, s4 and s5 as well. it's funny hearing audi worry about being compared to an expensive/overpriced vw but they are doing this to themselves. they need to bring higher output gas and diesel engines in addition to quattro. 

bmw has a hardcore following because they have built up a huge fan base with the enthusiasts. you don't win devotees and a fan base with the enthusiasts by killing the manual. it's not always about the basic numbers. it's like investment into racing. i'm sure it's not a winning proposition but companies do it because they are building a reputation.


----------



## Chimera (Jul 6, 2002)

It's seeming like VW and Audi are growing ever closer in parts/platform sharing. I don't get a sense that the general public has caught on fully, in which case I'd image it's huge deal to keep as much separation between the brands so the public doesn't begin to perceive Audi as a re-badged VW in some way. 

Re BMW's success, IMO it's about having a variety of good drivers cars with lease rates that the general public eats up. I'd be curious to have known what Audi sales would have been if the lease rates were more inviting compared to their competitors.


----------



## jsausley (Dec 2, 2011)

I'd trade my R in on a 6MT RS3 sedan if it were offered. 

If not, I'll wait for the MKVIII Golf R or something.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 12, 2001)

kevlartoronto said:


> i'm being pessimistic, yes but i think audi is intent on killing the manual in the a4, s4 and s5 as well.


 I think you may have missed the bit in my post above about how the manual transmission is no longer an option on the S4/S5 in Europe, but AoA got them to keep the 6MT for the US market because they knew they could sell them here. The AoA folks had to fight for that one, and they got it though. They are not somehow trying to kill off manual transmissions. Where they can make a case to sell them, they will. 



> bmw has a hardcore following because they have built up a huge fan base with the enthusiasts. you don't win devotees and a fan base with the enthusiasts by killing the manual.


 You mean like how they tried to sell the previous M5 without a manual, and will sell the new M5, M6, and possibly the new M3 without one? This is just the direction the market is moving. Even companies like Porsche are finding that the take rate on the PDK transmissions are much higher than the manuals. 



> it's not always about the basic numbers. it's like investment into racing. i'm sure it's not a winning proposition but companies do it because they are building a reputation.


 Sometimes that's the truth. Halo cars, for example, are brand builders that sometimes don't make a lot of money. However, even with the S cars, we're talking an important amount of volume for Audi, and they can't afford to waste money on options that aren't going to sell. 



Chimera said:


> It's seeming like VW and Audi are growing ever closer in parts/platform sharing.


 Yes and no. The current VW group strategy of using modular platforms like the MQB that the new A3 is on allows a great economy of scale for lower costs by sharing across all the group brands, but actually allows MORE differentiation in things like materials choice and dimensional changes than they had previously. It's much easier for Audi to substitute lightweight materials for the cheaper stuff that VW will use on a given platform, for example. One of the reasons why the current TT is so expensive is that it has extensive use of aluminum components on a platform that wasn't really designed to allow part substitution like that. The new platforms (MQB, MSS, etc) are designed for that, so you can have an aluminum frame, for example, for much less cost increase than on previous platforms. They're also able to change dimensions like wheelbase and track width much more cheaply than they could before, which is only a good thing. 

-Tim


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

sorry tim but i don't know about what bmw intends to do in the future but presently, the 2014 m5, 2014 m6 gran coupe and 2014 m6 coupe are all available with a manual transmission. as is the 128, 135, 135is, 320, 328, 335, 535, 550, z4 28i, and the z4 35i. according to most sources i've read, the next m3 sedan and m4 coupe will have a manual option as well. 

so while infiniti, lexus and mercedes and now seemingly audi are completely ditching the manual bmw still offers quite an array of options for manual drivers...and not too far in the future there will be a 2 series gran coupe manual tranny to directly compete with the a3 sedan. where will all of these manual drivers go? they won't be going down market to vw as they have systematically stripped many of their cars to go after the appliance market. (thank god the gti/gli and golf R still exist!!) if audi wants to continue to develop the distinction from vw they shouldn't restrict options they should offer "better" options like higher output engines. 

so for me, this makes bmw stand out even more from the crowd.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

also need to make it perfectly clear, this is an AUDI OF AMERICA problem, not Audi Corporate problem... 
The Brits and rest of Europe are enjoying their 6-speed manual S3's just fine...another article was posted of a 6-speed quattro... 

The costs involved are : DOT / EPA certifcations, that's what will keep it from hitting North America, that's it that's all...in the end could it be a marketing ploy? Get all the potential A3 2.0T Quattro future owners get all hot and angry then give them what they want? 

End of day, this is the direction Audi is heading towards... 
http://www.autoblog.com/2013/05/07/worldwide-every-third-audi-will-be-an-suv-by-2020/


----------



## jp455 (Jun 1, 2010)

As Tim said, we can all look at these things as excuses, or laziness, or whathave you on the part of the OEMs. But at the end of the day it all comes down to money which was the reason for my original post. 

The supplier I work for is huge. HUGE. makes billions a year and it still thinks long and hard about selling a part to an OEM if the volume is under a certain number. For one part alone, mind you a part that it already has off the shelf ready to go so nothing that it has to develop or anything like that, the minimum order is 50,000 units a year. So unless an OEM makes 50,000 cars that will use that part my company doesn't even bother. And as I said previously, its not just one model LINE such as A4 with A4 S4 RS4 diesel etc etc, but just one individual model in that range, say the S4. Even if a fancy customer comes along which people would say makes a ton of money, say Ferrari, if they arent buying 50,000 pieces then we are NOT selling it to them. Plain as that. 

These decisions come after looong meetings with a lot of planning and are not taken lightly. The factory's capacities are planned many many years in advance. So no, its not excuses or voodoo...it is plain old profit margin calculations. End of story. 

As far as Audi missing out on sales to buyers coming from the WRX Ill say this, Subaru has taken the decision to not continue to sell the WRX in the UK, a fairly car obsessed country. This was certainly not done out of laziness or as an excuse, the sales simply were not there to justify it. This is happening in general with all car companies, they are trying to slim things down as much as possible.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

i find the different marketing mind sets interesting. there are clearly the tangibles and the intangibles and so often the latter is neglected.


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> I think you may have missed the bit in my post above about how the manual transmission is no longer an option on the S4/S5 in Europe, but AoA got them to keep the 6MT for the US market because they knew they could sell them here. The AoA folks had to fight for that one, and they got it though. They are not somehow trying to kill off manual transmissions. Where they can make a case to sell them, they will.


 No S4/S5, yet you can buy A1, A2, A3, S3, A4, A5, A6, Q3, Q5 and TT in a manual in europe.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

ChrisFu said:


> No S4/S5, yet you can buy A1, A2, A3, S3, A4, A5, A6, Q3, Q5 and TT in a manual in europe.


 I can see what Tim means here... 

For the S4 / S5 you have to consider the drivetrain. Quattro + 3.0T 
So this is used in the Q5, A7 and A6 as well. I don't think any other VAG product would use this combo otherwise across the corporation. So on top of the S4 / S5 not being a considered a large volume mover, neither is the A6, A7, and the Q5 3.0T manual would be just ridiculous the low percentages. This to me makes sense, the volume just can't justify the sale and I can see how Audi of America would have to fight for it if Audi of Europe says no...that means if it's like any other corporation, the costs are going to be billed to Audi of America and it's going to be expensive. 

However, the focus is on the 2.0T /w Quattro 
If you are looking at the longitude A4 -> high volume model + Q3 and Q5 

The crazy thing is, and this is why the argument is mute and null, 2.0T /w Quattro (transverse) 
Again you look at my list, and the numbers are staggering and we know how big MQB platform is. You are also sharing drivetrains across other enthusiast driver models like the Golf R. 

There is such a massive business case for at least having a manual 6-speed for Quattro / 4-Motion on the shelf, it's so hard to avoid. Hence why the Europeans have it, it's on the shelf available with no real additional 'R&D costs' like you would with a 3.0T /w Quattro. It's the fact of not using it / certifying it. 

On initial launch, one would have to ask though, why not for America? Where are the manual transmissions being created for the European S3's, and where is that in relation to the sedans being built? What logistics problems would be involved? 

I think it would be absolutely ridiculous for Audi of America to say no, because it won't sell. 

That said, I don't care, as long as I get a S-Tronic, I will be content. Maybe just getting old, and should really be opting for an old man A6 or start get driven around in an A8...


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

Rudy_H said:


> I can see what Tim means here...
> 
> For the S4 / S5 you have to consider the drivetrain. Quattro + 3.0T
> So this is used in the Q5, A7 and A6 as well. I don't think any other VAG product would use this combo otherwise across the corporation. So on top of the S4 / S5 not being a considered a large volume mover, neither is the A6, A7, and the Q5 3.0T manual would be just ridiculous the low percentages. This to me makes sense, the volume just can't justify the sale and I can see how Audi of America would have to fight for it if Audi of Europe says no...that means if it's like any other corporation, the costs are going to be billed to Audi of America and it's going to be expensive.
> ...


 
After reading all of your posts this made me laugh. You're the exact case for not bringing it.


----------



## Chimera (Jul 6, 2002)

Rudy_H said:


> End of day, this is the direction Audi is heading towards...
> http://www.autoblog.com/2013/05/07/worldwide-every-third-audi-will-be-an-suv-by-2020/


 "So far this year, 40 percent of Audi vehicles sold in the US have been light trucks, with the company's sales in that segment jumping by 53 percent. By comparison, Audi passenger car sales have increased by just one percent" 

Is this due to consumer preference for utility vehicles or a problem with Audi's sedan offerings? Are other manufacturers seeing such poor sedan growth? This kind of goes against the logic for bringing the A3 in sedan only.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Chimera said:


> "So far this year, 40 percent of Audi vehicles sold in the US have been light trucks, with the company's sales in that segment jumping by 53 percent. By comparison, Audi passenger car sales have increased by just one percent"
> 
> Is this due to consumer preference for utility vehicles or a problem with Audi's sedan offerings? Are other manufacturers seeing such poor sedan growth? This kind of goes against the logic for bringing the A3 in sedan only.


 This is why part of the business plan includes the Q3 next year. 

But to answer your question directly, yes, many manufacturers are seeing the same thing. As an example, BMW 3-series sales have been relatively flat, while sales of the X1 and redesigned X3 have increased substantially as a proportion of their overall sales. 

This is why the Q3 will be critical for Audi and will also fit the space the A3 Sportback used to fulfill here in the US. The redesigned Q7, due this September in Frankfurt, will be the opening of the next salvo from Audi: it moves to the MLB kit, loses a ton of weight and supposedly will introduce the next generation design language. It will likely be a major seller and profit center here in the US.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

man, it's like a double stab to the heart. NAs love SUVs and don't drive manuals. from what i see here in toronto people are obsessed especially with the x1 and x3. they are everywhere.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 12, 2001)

Travis Grundke said:


> This is why part of the business plan includes the Q3 next year.
> 
> But to answer your question directly, yes, many manufacturers are seeing the same thing. As an example, BMW 3-series sales have been relatively flat, while sales of the X1 and redesigned X3 have increased substantially as a proportion of their overall sales.
> 
> This is why the Q3 will be critical for Audi and will also fit the space the A3 Sportback used to fulfill here in the US. The redesigned Q7, due this September in Frankfurt, will be the opening of the next salvo from Audi: it moves to the MLB kit, loses a ton of weight and supposedly will introduce the next generation design language. It will likely be a major seller and profit center here in the US.


 Exactly. FWIW, I've driven the current Q3, and it's not a bad little car / crossover. I think they'll move a fair amount of them in the US. 

-Tim


----------



## asal (Oct 12, 2007)

[email protected] said:


> Exactly. FWIW, I've driven the current Q3, and it's not a bad little car / crossover. I think they'll move a fair amount of them in the US.
> 
> -Tim


 So is the SQ3 gonna have a manual? 

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

q3 replace sportback??? it's beyond me why anyone would want a q3 over the sportback. another stab to the heart. we all should be driving ford flexes or chevy suburbans. :banghead:


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 12, 2001)

asal said:


> So is the SQ3 gonna have a manual?


 No. CVT Only. 





Now that you've all had a heart attack, I honestly have no idea on our transmission choices yet.  

Seriously, though, I wouldn't buy one for myself, but it'll be a good competitor in that segment, which is something that'll benefit AoA. 

-Tim


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

dmorrow said:


> After reading all of your posts this made me laugh. You're the exact case for not bringing it.


 It's true, mind you I think I am just bitter right now with my current car, and my launches at the 1/4 have blown chunks I am so inconsistent.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> No. CVT Only.
> 
> Now that you've all had a heart attack, I honestly have no idea on our transmission choices yet.
> 
> ...


 lol missed the sarcasm, was about to say hadn't Audi learnt their lesson the first time?  
http://www.autoblog.com/2013/03/25/audi-settles-cvt-class-action-suit-over-2002-06-a4-failures/ 

With the transition of customers to CUV/SUV's, it's no wonder manual is trying to be killed off. I think i have been in a Mazda B-series with a manual, that's all I can remember, otherwise you are driving a truck, you can't be enjoying driving in the first place...besides the fear of rolling down the road...literally.


----------



## Cyncris (Aug 12, 2012)

Rudy_H said:


> That said, I don't care, as long as I get a S-Tronic, I will be content. Maybe just getting old, and should really be opting for an old man A6 or start get driven around in an A8...


 I always have said that I would never want to drive an A8, I would just want to be driven around in one. 
I had never driven one. 
This past weekend at http://quattrodemayo.com I got to take a spin in an S8 
Holy hell is that thing awesome! It really feels just barely heavier than the A4 and it doesn't feel any wider or longer from the drivers seat. On top of that it has a hyperspace button. It is big, rectangular and on the drivers right side floorboard. I got the same stupid grin and giggles as I did the first time that I rode a 1000cc sportbike. 

That said, I am not interested in spending $130,000 on a car, but respect for anyone who does. 
I will just keep waiting on the S3 and if it isn't all it is cracked up to be, I will opt for a CPO S5.


----------



## cyberpmg (Nov 27, 2001)

Cyncris said:


> That said, I am not interested in spending $130,000 on a car, but respect for anyone who does.
> I will just keep waiting on the S3 and if it isn't all it is cracked up to be, I will opt for a CPO S5.


 Exactly my thoughs as well. The S8 at QDM was amazing... so was Ted's TT-RS


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

Cyncris said:


> I always have said that I would never want to drive an A8, I would just want to be driven around in one.


Agreed as long as it's Jason Statham driving the S8, and I am not playing the role of the slutty package.


----------



## KnockKnock (Jun 30, 2005)

Is the Q3 on the MQB platform? I thought it was based on the older. Wonder when an MQB Q3 will happen.


----------



## Chimera (Jul 6, 2002)

Dang, I was hoping the "Q3 will fill any sportback/utility/wagon needs" logic wouldn't be reinforced, but I guess there's no way around it. Back on topic...


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

Travis Grundke said:


> I don't know what the sales figures are for the STI/WRX - does anyone here know?


http://media.subaru.com/newsrelease...er=subaru-reports-best-ever-april-sales&mid=1

WRX (and STI) 2013 YTD US sales (Jan-Apr): 4181 units sold (44% increase over 2013 YTD!!!)

At this pace ~12k units sold for 2013.

Audi sales report for comparison: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/audi-achieves-third-best-monthly-152831537.html


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

kevlartoronto said:


> i find the different marketing mind sets interesting. there are clearly the tangibles and the intangibles and so often the latter is neglected.


Marketing mindset is always the same: Build the brand and differentiate the brand to drive share of sales.

Intangibles simply don't exist. Any marketer worth their salt knows exactly what drives value in their brand perception and in a rigorous, data-rich and logical manner.

They know what choices/changes will increase and decrease brand value (and therefore profitability) down to the last minor detail and down to the past penny.

If MT was profitable OR if it lead to enhanced perception of brand value/differentiation it would absolutely be offered.

And you only have to listen to the A3/S3 New York reveal to understand their brand strategy:
"[we are brining high-end features and finishes into an entry level sedan]". This is literally the A3/S3 differentiation/brand strategy, filing a gap in the sport-luxury compact sedan segment.


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

Rudy_H said:


> I think it would be absolutely ridiculous for Audi of America to say no, because it won't sell.


It is more correct to say that "it won't sell enough to be profitable".


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

Waterfan said:


> Marketing mindset is always the same: Build the brand and differentiate the brand to drive share of sales.
> 
> Intangibles simply don't exist. Any marketer worth their salt knows exactly what drives value in their brand perception and in a rigorous, data-rich and logical manner.
> 
> ...


your statement is completely false. much of what is put into marketing and advertising is not quantifiable at all. it's impossible to know how racing or specific models change the way a consumer views a brand. it's only speculation. do you actually think bmw makes a huge profit offering manuals in almost everyone of their models to lazy NAs? probably not, but it allows them the claim that they are the ultimate driving machine. they offer options for the enthusiasts.


----------



## Boosted 01 R (Feb 10, 2013)

[email protected] said:


> No. CVT Only.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



CVT!!! ..... a part of me almost died reading that LOL....... Hopefully the CVT days never come to any VW Groups....... this thread should be renamed "lets talk MQB" lol


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

I can't see them offering a manual in the next a4/s4 either if the a3/s3 has killed it.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

kevlartoronto said:


> I can't see them offering a manual in the next a4/s4 either if the a3/s3 has killed it.


My guess is that the S4 carries a substantially greater profit margin than the A3/S3, so it may still be profitable for Audi to sell the S4 6MT.

That said, I agree, the future of the 6MT isn't looking very good in any Audi product here in North America, unfortunately.


----------



## Boosted 01 R (Feb 10, 2013)

Travis Grundke said:


> My guess is that the S4 carries a substantially greater profit margin than the A3/S3, so it may still be profitable for Audi to sell the S4 6MT.
> 
> That said, I agree, the future of the 6MT isn't looking very good in any Audi product here in North America, unfortunately.


Strange that the next gen GOLF R will only come to NA in Manual only (based on info I found on the net, could be wrong)........ you would think the S3 would have that option at least.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

Boosted 01 R said:


> Strange that the next gen GOLF R will only come to NA in Manual only (based on info I found on the net, could be wrong)........ you would think the S3 would have that option at least.


This is what the current generation of Golf R is here in Canada. 
4-door, 6-speed, loaded


----------



## Boosted 01 R (Feb 10, 2013)

Rudy_H said:


> This is what the current generation of Golf R is here in Canada.
> 4-door, 6-speed, loaded


Yeah I know, but its not MQB like the next gen....... I like the Golf R, but it would be my daily and I would want DSG lol.... If the Golf R in NA came DSG, it would be on my short list....... I'll leave the manual for my weekend car


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

Rudy_H said:


> This is what the current generation of Golf R is here in Canada.
> 4-door, 6-speed, loaded


does anybody actually know when the new golf R is coming?


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

kevlartoronto said:


> your statement is completely false. much of what is put into marketing and advertising is not quantifiable at all. it's impossible to know how racing or specific models change the way a consumer views a brand. it's only speculation. do you actually think bmw makes a huge profit offering manuals in almost everyone of their models to lazy NAs? probably not, but it allows them the claim that they are the ultimate driving machine. they offer options for the enthusiasts.


Quantifiable through Market Research (which if done properly, is scientifically rigorous and statistically significant). Not at all impossible to know. Not speculation.

Your BMW example proves my point. BMW knows that manual offerings enhance their brand position as 'ultimate driving machine' (or not offering manuals would disproportionately harm their brand). Maintain and/or enhance brand position = increased sales to the segment(s) they target.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

Waterfan said:


> Quantifiable through Market Research (which if done properly, is scientifically rigorous and statistically significant). Not at all impossible to know. Not speculation.
> 
> Your BMW example proves my point. BMW knows that manual offerings enhance their brand position as 'ultimate driving machine' (or not offering manuals would disproportionately harm their brand). Maintain and/or enhance brand position = increased sales to the segment(s) they target.


:screwy::bs:


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

kevlartoronto said:


> :screwy::bs:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

i guess my decades in the ad business means nothing.  no personal attack here. i just call it like i see it. you are making "misleading statements".


----------



## chiphead (May 12, 2011)

The only reason why Audi would release a product is if it makes money. Not to appease some rabid manual intraweb posters who are threatening to go elsewhere. I'm sure they won't lose sleep over it.

Would I like a manual? Maybe, but there are much bigger issues like weight reduction, nose heavy weight ratio and having all their cars look the same (same sausage, different lengths) that they need to address. Not to mention this car design is getting long in the tooth even before it gets released. It will already be 2.5 years since the 2011 Geneva/Shanghai intro before it reaches dealers.


----------



## mookieblaylock (Sep 25, 2005)

chiphead said:


> but there are much bigger issues .


the lack of an s3 hatch or even a 2t hatch bigger issue than the paddles


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

mookieblaylock said:


> the lack of an s3 hatch or even a 2t hatch bigger issue than the paddles


mookie, at this point it's a dead horse. The sedan will sell in substantially greater volume than the wagon.


----------



## mookieblaylock (Sep 25, 2005)

Travis Grundke said:


> mookie, at this point it's a dead horse. The sedan will sell in substantially greater volume than the wagon.


and so will the dsg, still want a wagon though


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

kevlartoronto said:


> i guess my decades in the ad business means nothing.  no personal attack here. i just call it like i see it. you are making "misleading statements".


I may have glossed over the difficulty of pining down some of the drivers of brand perception, but I don't see how that (or anything else) was truly misleading.

1. Conduct qualitative and/or quantitative market research to understand brand perceptions and drivers of brand perceptions
2. Change/enhance/communicate product features (quality drivers) to enhance brand perception
3. Profit (hehehe, literally this time )


----------



## Chimera (Jul 6, 2002)

There's always VW. Or the extra ground clearance of the Q3.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

Boosted 01 R said:


> Yeah I know, but its not MQB like the next gen....... I like the Golf R, but it would be my daily and I would want DSG lol.... If the Golf R in NA came DSG, it would be on my short list....... I'll leave the manual for my weekend car


lol I know

I spend 90% of the time in city traffic, and occasionally on the highway. I see why Audi is only going with the manual. I mean I always have loved owning manual for the past 15+ yrs of driving, but technology has changed.

When I want to enjoy driving, I ride my motorbike which is manual...


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

More dashed hopes



> We made a point to re-ask Audi team experts at this event: will the manual come over when we get our S3 with four doors and a trunk in early summer 2014? The answer was indeed 'no,' over-speculation by leading North American publications be damned.


http://www.autoblog.com/2013/05/13/2013-audi-s3-review-first-drive/


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

ChrisFu said:


> More dashed hopes
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.autoblog.com/2013/05/13/2013-audi-s3-review-first-drive/


but of course as the article stated : 


> Long story short, at least with this manual gearbox and pedal orientation, we would prefer Audi stick with its now effectively confirmed decision not to bring the standard manual transmission for the S3 to North America. Do it right and with conviction, or don't do it at all on such a car.


The manual on Audi's shelf is just not that great, and they did a poor job with pedal orientation. One could want the manual, but they will not like it. This is what I have been reading more and more about.

It should be an investment they make, but, well...as automatics become better, manuals are becoming worse. Whoever thunk that. 

I blamed Audi America for not bringing it, but maybe they felt it was just a bad transmission, so why bother? I don't like the 'accountant' reasoning on why we don't bring a transmission over. That would make me want a BMW even more, and I don't like anything in their line-up, now and in the near future...


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

well, there's always the 2015 2 series gran coupe confirmed. 4 door. 6 spd manual tranny. i'm sure bmw won't be making excuses. wow, what a painful experience looking for a manual transmission nowadays.


----------



## atlas310 (Apr 1, 2013)

There are actually some clear shots of the m235i coupe floating around now without any camouflage on.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

the 2 door 235 will come around the same time as the a3 next year, and the 4 door version won't be here until 2015 calendar year. i'm sure they will both have manual transmissions.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

kevlartoronto said:


> the 2 door 235 will come around the same time as the a3 next year, and the 4 door version won't be here until 2015 calendar year. i'm sure they will both have manual transmissions.


I've been following this over on bimmerpost for a while now. As of now the word on the street is that North America will only receive the 2-series in an automatic transmission configuration, including the M variant.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

kevlartoronto said:


> the 2 door 235 will come around the same time as the a3 next year, and the 4 door version won't be here until 2015 calendar year. i'm sure they will both have manual transmissions.


The 2-series looks great, compared to the previous generation. I looked at it, a friend bought a 135i, but hated the front end. It looked so cute, like a a cartoon car. If the 1 series sedan looks half as good, I will take the RWD just fine over AWD

http://www.autoblog.com/2013/05/16/bmw-2-series-caught-uncovered-during-shoot/


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

there won't be a 1 series sedan. the 1 series is being turned into fwd only hatch back. maybe that's why audi decided to keep bringing the sport back. the 2 series will have a coupe, convertible and gran coupe 4 door like a scaled down 6 series gran coupe. i wish i could wait for the 2 series gran coupe. it will have a manual.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

well, has someone actually been reading our endless moaning about harmonizing emissions and safety with europe? probably not, but someone is thinking about it!! http://www.leftlanenews.com/automakers-back-eu-us-free-trade-deal.html


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

kevlartoronto said:


> well, has someone actually been reading our endless moaning about harmonizing emissions and safety with europe? probably not, but someone is thinking about it!! http://www.leftlanenews.com/automakers-back-eu-us-free-trade-deal.html


Actually this is great news, however, like any corporation, it will increase the bottom line...it might not mean really anything to the end consumer like in most of the cases.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

Travis Grundke said:


> I've been following this over on bimmerpost for a while now. As of now the word on the street is that North America will only receive the 2-series in an automatic transmission configuration, including the M variant.


what???? do you have a link? the world is coming to an end!!!! there are pics of the 2 series coupe with a manual. you think they won't bring it to NA?


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

kevlartoronto said:


> what???? do you have a link? the world is coming to an end!!!! there are pics of the 2 series coupe with a manual. you think they won't bring it to NA?


Not offhand, but I've been following a lot of the discussion surrounding the 2 and as of now, scuttlebutt is that the 6MT won't make it to North America.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

With the configurator now up at Audi's German website (http://konfigurator.audi.de/), it's interesting to see that the 1.8T is available only with s-tronic, FWD. Clearly these are just the initial order/launch models, but I find that interesting nonetheless that the only 6MT option is with the 2.0TDI.


----------



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

**** VAG. if all they're interested in is upping their sales, they can do it without me.

you know who has the best sales in the world? Toyota!

i was picking someone up at a toyota dealership earlier this week. walked around the showroom. it was sad. so sad. the only interesting car was an 82 Corolla liftback that they had on display. it made me sad to think how toyota use to build desirable cars. 80's corolla/celica all trac, mr2, supra, even the cressida.

does anyone actually desire a toyota these days*? even lexus pulled a desperation move with that hideous front end.

hey Audi, enjoy building appliances for the masses, **** heads.

*GT86/FRS excluded. but they wouldn't have built that without subaru. here's hoping they build something more practical on that platform.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

t.oorboh! said:


> **** VAG. if all they're interested in is upping their sales, they can do it without me.
> 
> you know who has the best sales in the world? Toyota!
> 
> ...


It's sort of a "chicken and egg" scenario, in my opinion...

They have to ensure they're building what's selling in order to move volume and increase the black ink on the profit graphs. As you hinted, what's selling often doesn't intersect with what the enthusiast wants.

We're getting an S3 for the first time. Ever. We're going to have more RS models than we ever imagined getting (RS5, RS7, TTRS, plus whatever else they decide to bring). Hell, even the SQ5 is coming over here, so... it's a start. They may not have your dream configuration, but they're headed in the right direction. I know, I know- even the SQ5 is "hacked" for the US market, according to some, due to the replacement of the TDI with a gas motor.

Combine that upward trajectory with their new economies of scale they'll realize with the MQB platform, and it should follow that they'll be able to offer us more varied options in the future. I'm sure it would be amazing to have every motor, transmission, and drive line combination available for ordering- and while I imagine we'll get closer to that than we've been before in light of their current volume and profit goals, US government certification requirements will push back against such a utopia. Automakers need to be lobbying for changes to the cert requirements if they have any interest in offering more varied options to US buyers without having to pass through their bean counters first. While things look brighter for Audi enthusiast models in our market, I just don't think they look *that* bright.

I figure you're bent on not spending this $0.02 on an Audi, but there it is, anyway.

-Brian


----------



## DaLeadBull (Feb 15, 2011)

Dan Halen said:


> It's sort of a "chicken and egg" scenario, in my opinion...
> 
> They have to ensure they're building what's selling in order to move volume and increase the black ink on the profit graphs. As you hinted, what's selling often doesn't intersect with what the enthusiast wants.
> 
> ...


I agree that they have to make what sells here in the US but they have to have more leeway when it comes to enthusiast models. This means veering from their conservative ways and bring what enthusiasts want.

They can sell their base models as vanilla as they want.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

I don't think that argument holds water. Toyota systematically ditched every interesting car they ever made. For a decade they have only produced appliances. Toyota wasn't using the appliance sales to produce interesting enthusiast's car. They're appliances replaced the enthusiast or niche car. This is what Audi is doing to the manual transmission. They won't first sell the dual clutch cars to later add the manual. The dual clutch is meant to replace the manual. 

This sucks. Electric steering sucks too. So do most of the driver nannies. Anything that takes away from driver involvement or feel, sucks.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

kevlartoronto said:


> I don't think that argument holds water. Toyota systematically ditched every interesting car they ever made. For a decade they have only produced appliances. Toyota wasn't using the appliance sales to produce interesting enthusiast's car. They're appliances replaced the enthusiast or niche car. This is what Audi is doing to the manual transmission. They won't first sell the dual clutch cars to later add the manual. The dual clutch is meant to replace the manual.
> 
> This sucks. Electric steering sucks too. So do most of the driver nannies. Anything that takes away from driver involvement or feel, sucks.


Invest in MkII Volkswagens. They're not getting any newer.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

DaLeadBull said:


> I agree that they have to make what sells here in the US but they have to have more leeway when it comes to enthusiast models. This means veering from their conservative ways and bring what enthusiasts want.
> 
> They can sell their base models as vanilla as they want.


Enthusiasts want S and RS cars, no? Their record only says they're bringing what enthusiasts want. It's unfortunate that they can't bring every configuration of every one of those cars, but it's what we're being dealt. I still maintain that we'll see more enthusiast models and more options within those models as they a) increase _profitable_ volume and b) further develop the modular platform shares, such as MQB.

An S/ RS enthusiast market is one I believe they'll continue to support. A manual transmission enthusiast market (even in non-S/ RS cars) isn't one that I imagine will ever return. Our best hope, I figure, is to see manual options return as factory order configurations in the S and RS lines where they're currently absent, relating closely to the margin they have in a particular vehicle.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

actually i would love to buy a morgan 3 wheeler. (they can't sell them in Canada) it's a pure and simple, hardcore machine. it's just like mechanical/automatic watches. once upon a time, everybody made them and then along came quartz. this made a well built mechanical watch a very special thing. hopefully the automakers will keep producing pure driver's cars that aren't laden with BS gadgets that interfere with the enjoyment of driving a machine.


----------



## DaLeadBull (Feb 15, 2011)

Dan Halen said:


> Enthusiasts want S and RS cars, no? Their record only says they're bringing what enthusiasts want. It's unfortunate that they can't bring every configuration of every one of those cars, but it's what we're being dealt. I still maintain that we'll see more enthusiast models and more options within those models as they a) increase _profitable_ volume and b) further develop the modular platform shares, such as MQB.
> 
> An S/ RS enthusiast market is one I believe they'll continue to support. A manual transmission enthusiast market (even in non-S/ RS cars) isn't one that I imagine will ever return. Our best hope, I figure, is to see manual options return as factory order configurations in the S and RS lines where they're currently absent, relating closely to the margin they have in a particular vehicle.


This is what I mean, can't they take manual transmissions completely out of base models and reserve them as options for the S and RS models. I'm sure they sell more A3's than S3's and RS3's combined for example. 

I totally understand they can't offer the US every single option available overseas but enthusiast models and manual transmission go hand in hand imo. How come BMW can afford to do this but Audi can't? VAG is a much bigger company right?


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

Yeah, I hope that's the direction they're ultimately headed... but based on one of the reviews I've seen about the manual A3, it's not even an enjoyable transmission to drive. I suppose that means they may have work to do to ensure the manual is even a good match for the vehicle.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

kevlartoronto said:


> actually i would love to buy a morgan 3 wheeler. (they can't sell them in Canada) it's a pure and simple, hardcore machine. it's just like mechanical/automatic watches. once upon a time, everybody made them and then along came quartz. this made a well built mechanical watch a very special thing. hopefully the automakers will keep producing pure driver's cars that aren't laden with BS gadgets that interfere with the enjoyment of driving a machine.


Cayman R? 

Even that is probably a bit more advanced than what you want, but... I guess it's a start. Lotus?


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

This was just sent to me: http://why.vw.com/stories#/stories/show/id/18161

Quite timely...


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

Dan Halen said:


> Cayman R?
> 
> Even that is probably a bit more advanced than what you want, but... I guess it's a start. Lotus?


i drove a cayman S manual. it's a wonderful car. too bad the old cayman design i drove was so ugly. now that they fixed the looks of the old cayman, they added the dreaded electric steering!!! the lotus is wonderful too. a pure driver's car for sure.


----------



## DaLeadBull (Feb 15, 2011)

Dan Halen said:


> Yeah, I hope that's the direction they're ultimately headed... but based on one of the reviews I've seen about the manual A3, it's not even an enjoyable transmission to drive. I suppose that means they may have work to do to ensure the manual is even a good match for the vehicle.


This is another thing. If you are going to bring a manual over, do it right. I've seen some reviews/pics of the mk7 GTI and the gap between the brake and gas pedals has grown. Why??? What could possibly be the reason for this?

All I hear is how well VW is doing in their quest to be the biggest automaker worldwide but I just hope they don't neglect the enthusiast market to get there.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

it's depressing to think that the pure spirit of driving a machine is being pummelled into the ground by technology. i was out and about walking around town today and a 2cv drove by my in-law and i. he turned his head and just said cool. it's not a super car, it's not a slick sexy car but it certainly made a statement. everything about that car was unique. it represents simple and pure driving experience on a level that most cars today fully reject. all the nannies are killing the soul of the automobile.


----------



## KnockKnock (Jun 30, 2005)

I'm usually pro-technology (thinking stuff like anti-lock brakes). But I feel sorry for the BMW die-hards. Aside from maybe the 1, and horsepower improvements, it seems they've lost that special sauce that made me lust for one for decades.

Still want a Porsche


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

KnockKnock said:


> I'm usually pro-technology (thinking stuff like anti-lock brakes). But I feel sorry for the BMW die-hards. Aside from maybe the 1, and horsepower improvements, it seems they've lost that special sauce that made me lust for one for decades.
> 
> Still want a Porsche


bmw is making all the good things about bmw an option. sport suspension, sport brakes, sport seats, proper steering, manual transmission....i agree, anti lock brakes is about the only nannie that isn't really annoying if it's executed properly. traction control sucks (worse when the company won't let you really turn it off properly), lane departure warning sucks, paddle shifters is really an automatic in disguise....translation? they pretty much suck, electric steering sucks, cvt's suck A LOT, simulated engine noise really sucks......on a brighter note the new toyota gt-86 seems to have made all of the right moves. i guess there is hope if toyota can build a car like this. every company should create their old school, decontented, coke classic version of their cars. imagine checking off the NO TRACTION CONTROL BUT BIGGER BRAKES option? porsche even does this and charges money to NOT put standard options in their cars to save weight


----------



## mookieblaylock (Sep 25, 2005)

it really depends on the application. On the a3 q i had for ski trips the skid control allowed the car to cruise stupid fast on ice, but yea the rest of it seems like they are stuffing trendy electro chit into cars that don't have much to do with actually driving it


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

the tragedy is that the process has happened so slowly people have forgotten or never knew how it feels to drive a car with real "FEEL". the semi automatic gear box is simply the next step in removing the driver from process of actually driving. i know, i know chris harris is a bad man for slamming the rs3 but here's a nice piece that illustrates what i'm talking about. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htI3weS49cc


----------



## tagsvags (Nov 25, 2005)

Very much looking forward to driving the A3 sedan with the DSG transmission, must be getting old (66) this month.


----------



## wabbit23 (Dec 7, 2007)

A manual would be nice to have but seeing this will be the wife's ride I'd rather it be a DSG. Ill have my MK4 .:R whenever I feel like rowing through gears.


----------



## hashmaster3k (Dec 6, 2007)

I really want an S3, but not in automatic. Such a shame Audi.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

what's most annoying about all of this is the incessant comparisons between DSG and manual transmissions. THEY ARE NOT SUBSTITUTES FOR EACH OTHER. one removes driver involvement and the other engages. (a quartz watch can never replace a beautifully crafted mechanical watch.) electric steering will never be a replacement for a good mechanical system. 

i find it revolting watching the big car companies replace all the best elements of the driving experience with all of these computer simulated systems and try to convince the public it's better. i would like to drive a machine not have a computer drive it for me.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

Manufacturers offered manuals since the beginning of the car, as time went on people moved from manuals to automatics. The blame shouldn't be on the manufacturer but on the people that don't buy the manuals.

If the majority of the people (or even a large percentage) wanted the manual, they would offer it. They have had decades to figure this out, there wouldn't be some massive change with the new model.

The whole "conspiracy to screw you" is wrong.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

my annoyance IS with the NA consumers. i agree, the companies are just trying to meet the demand and that's why manuals are still made for europe. it's funny how all the car reviewers go completely mental over the brz/frz/gt86 with it's raw and relatively simplistic approach a sports car. many people still want and love a car that focuses on "feel and balance" over technological overkill.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

kevlartoronto said:


> my annoyance IS with the NA consumers. i agree, the companies are just trying to meet the demand and that's why manuals are still made for europe. it's funny how all the car reviewers go completely mental over the brz/frz/gt86 with it's raw and relatively simplistic approach a sports car. many people still want and love a car that focuses on "feel and balance" over technological overkill.


Well you can also blame the increasing urbanization of the world and resultant congestion. If I had to drive daily in heavy commuter traffic I would trade my 6MT for an automatic in a heartbeat. I can handle it currently since heavy traffic is fairly infrequent. But if I lived somewhere where heavy traffic were the norm - I too would trade off the transmission for the sake of my left leg.


----------



## hashmaster3k (Dec 6, 2007)

dmorrow said:


> The whole "conspiracy to screw you" is wrong.


I never thought it was a screw you conspiracy. They stated the reasons early why they didn't intend to bring it over the manual transmission over. I'm just pissed that you still couldn't do a special order or something.

I guess for anyone that really wants one has to go to Germany, order it to US specs and have it shipped here. Though extremely costly it's be a super special car here.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

mkIVfreak said:


> I guess for anyone that really wants one has to go to Germany, *order it to US specs* and have it shipped here. Though extremely costly it's be a super special car here.


You could go to Guam or Ghana to order it; you'll have the same results you'll have in Germany- unfavorable results.

There's not going to be a US-spec car with a manual transmission at this point. The US standards require that each drivetrain combination is individually certified. If Audi could offer you a manual transmission with an incremental certification cost of exactly nothing, I'm reasonably confident they would.

I have to imagine this thought has been offered previously in this thread in some form, but... blame US certification regulations, not Audi.

Now, if you want to talk about ordering a German-spec vehicle and importing it, go ahead and give it the ol' college try if you're feeling spendy. I'm not sure it's even possible for an average person gainfully employed in the pedestrian US private sector. Ergo, if you're not military or some type of foreign dignitary, it may not even be possible (though I couldn't tell you if it's permissible for them, either).

It quickly becomes apparent that buying the car and a separate gearbox may be the most cost-effective way to obtain the S3 with a manual transmission, unfortunately.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

Travis Grundke said:


> Well you can also blame the increasing urbanization of the world and resultant congestion. If I had to drive daily in heavy commuter traffic I would trade my 6MT for an automatic in a heartbeat. I can handle it currently since heavy traffic is fairly infrequent. But if I lived somewhere where heavy traffic were the norm - I too would trade off the transmission for the sake of my left leg.


i live in downtown toronto. population 5 million. i don't have a problem driving a manual.


----------



## hashmaster3k (Dec 6, 2007)

Dan Halen said:


> You could go to Guam or Ghana to order it; you'll have the same results you'll have in Germany- unfavorable results.


Isn't Guam a US territory? Wouldn't seem that ordering a car there shipped to the US would be easier than ordering from Germany or Ghana. 



Dan Halen said:


> The US standards require that each drivetrain combination is individually certified. If Audi could offer you a manual transmission with an incremental certification cost of exactly nothing, I'm reasonably confident they would.


I'm not sure what you mean here. 



Dan Halen said:


> Now, if you want to talk about ordering a German-spec vehicle and importing it, go ahead and give it the ol' college try if you're feeling spendy.


This is what I meant. I thought anyone could do this. I remember a post long ago about someone who went to the factory where they had made his special order car and drive it out of the factory to import it back here. I could be mistaken.


----------



## mike3141 (Feb 16, 1999)

Here's a link to the NHTSA page that has the FAQ for importing cars that are and aren't importable:

http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/import/faq site/pages/page2.html


Just keep in mind that Bill Gates, Paul Allen and Jerry Seinfeld all tried to import Porsche 959s in the late '80s. The cars which were illegal in the U.S. were not allowed through customs and were stored for about 13 years until Gates and Allen were instrumental in getting a law passed (the "Show and Display" law) which allowed importation of "Autos of Interest" which demonstrated significant technology and were produced in numbers less than 500. The federalization process is not cheap and the cost usually discourages those who consider importation.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

kevlartoronto said:


> i live in downtown toronto. population 5 million. i don't have a problem driving a manual.


Nor do I - but apparently a large segment of the car buying populace does. One of Audi's stated reasons for not selling the 6MT S4 in Europe is that the majority of their sales for that model were to urban buyers who were increasingly purchasing S-Tronic due to traffic congestion.

The trend is what the trend is...


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

Travis Grundke said:


> Nor do I - but apparently a large segment of the car buying populace does. One of Audi's stated reasons for not selling the 6MT S4 in Europe is that the majority of their sales for that model were to urban buyers who were increasingly purchasing S-Tronic due to traffic congestion.
> 
> The trend is what the trend is...


this "trend" goes way beyond just the manual transmission. the manufacturers are trying to replace systems with inferior ones and then trying to call it progress. electric steering sucks. traction control has always sucked. variable adjustable suspension? pass! lane departure warning system??....yah i know when i'm not in my lane thanks. backup cameras.....meh, i've never hit anything backing up. it's funny but every time you see a review the first thing the tester does is turn off the traction control and put the variable suspension in sport mode and then oh and humm about how the electric steering is kind of ok. sorry to mention chris harris but in one of his last videos he questions if anyone really adjusts their suspension ever. i.e., it's a gadget nobody uses. if you want a sports car you won't mind the firm suspension. come to think of it, it blows me away that you have to spend a bunch more money just to get sport suspension in a sport sedan. (Yes I'm talking about you Audi and BMW) yes yes i know, it's great marketing.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

mkIVfreak said:


> Isn't Guam a US territory? Wouldn't seem that ordering a car there shipped to the US would be easier than ordering from Germany or Ghana.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


LOL... don't overthink it. Yes, Guam is a US territory; that's not my point. 

I now believe you're referring to the European Delivery option- an option that allows you to take delivery of your home market-spec vehicle in Germany (though this remains to be seen for the A3/S3, as ours will be built in Hungary). European Delivery *does not* equate to European-market specs. 

The other posts below my last one make the same point I attempted to make- that no amount of money is going get you a European-spec A3/ S3 in the US and that you'd be better off ordering the car and a manual gearbox, plus all of the ancillary parts you'd need to install the gearbox yourself.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 12, 2001)

mkIVfreak said:


> I never thought it was a screw you conspiracy. They stated the reasons early why they didn't intend to bring it over the manual transmission over. I'm just pissed that you still couldn't do a special order or something.


Those reasons (homologation and certification costs, basically) are exactly why you can't do a special order. In order to legally be able to offer that engine / transmission combination here at all they have to spend a ton of money, be it for one guy's special order or a regular production run.



> I guess for anyone that really wants one has to go to Germany, order it to US specs and have it shipped here. Though extremely costly it's be a super special car here.


For the same reason as the above, that can't be done.



Dan Halen said:


> some type of foreign dignitary, it may not even be possible (though I couldn't tell you if it's permissible for them, either).


It is possible for foreign citizens who are here on certain types of visas to import a foreign spec car for personal use. I knew a German guy in DC who had a first generation S3 hatch over here on German plates, for example. He was a diplomat. For a US citizen, though, it's a no go.



> This is what I meant. I thought anyone could do this. I remember a post long ago about someone who went to the factory where they had made his special order car and drive it out of the factory to import it back here. I could be mistaken.


You're talking about European delivery. Several marques offer this service, but it's basically you ordering a US spec car and picking it up at the factory to go on a European driving vacation in your new car before having it shipped home to the US. You are still buying and getting a US spec car, you're just picking it up in Europe. It's not buying a German spec car. For what it's worth, you also don't have to order anything particularly special about the car, either. You can get Euro delivery on a bone stock A4 if you want to. Or you can go totally nuts in the Audi Exclusive catalog and spend 20 grand on personal options - they certainly don't care. 



kevlartoronto said:


> this "trend" goes way beyond just the manual transmission. the manufacturers are trying to replace systems with inferior ones


I would argue that this depends on your definition of "inferior." What you and I define as "inferior" may be different than what Joe Blow car buyer defines as inferior, and that's probably still different from what the government policymakers define as inferior.



> electric steering sucks.


First example right here. Why do you say it sucks? I'm going to take a guess that it's because of decreased steering feel and communicativity, since you strike me as an "enthusiast" type of guy (and I'm not being pejorative here - I'd apply the same label to myself). First off I'd say that that's not always true, but even if it was, electric steering is much more efficient, energy wise, than hydraulic steering is. This means less parasitic power loss to the engine, and thus more power for driving and more fuel economy. The fuel economy thing is a huge driving force for most manufacturers who are going electric with their steering. Governmental regulations (and popular opinion) dictate that everyone produce more fuel efficient cars, and doing things like reducing parasitic and friction losses are an easy way to do that without making the cars hugely more expensive.



> backup cameras.....meh, i've never hit anything backing up.


On some cars, they're really, really useful. Anything exotic is HUGELY easier to park with a backup camera, and so are most big trucks and SUVs and the like. I used to think they were another crutch for lazy people, but then I drove a bunch of cars with them, and they're actually really, really useful. Aside from that, I don't see what the penalty (other than a few ounces of weight) is for having them, either.



> sorry to mention chris harris but in one of his last videos he questions if anyone really adjusts their suspension ever. i.e., it's a gadget nobody uses.


I actually do use the adjustable suspensions. On a lot of them, sure, you can't always tell a huge huge difference, but it IS there. When I get in something like an A7, or an S car or whatever, it's actually really nice to be able to put it in comfort mode when cruising down the highway and not have to feel every little bump in the pavement. For example, we (Fourtitude) drove an A7 from Pennsylvania to Sebring, FL for the 12 hour race last year. Slap it in comfort mode for the highway drive down, and it was great. Not having a super firm suspension made it a much more comfortable drive and less tiring as well. Then when we got there, the car went in sport mode to go out on on the track, and it was totally different to drive. Likewise when I take cars like that out on the back roads to push them a little - they go in sport mode for that, and it's great. I really like having a car that can do more than one thing well.

There's definitely a fine balance between cars that are overweight and numb to drive because of dubious "advances" in technology, but I also don't eschew all of them as horrible an unnecessary, either.

-Tim


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

[email protected] said:


> I actually do use the adjustable suspensions. On a lot of them, sure, you can't always tell a huge huge difference, but it IS there. When I get in something like an A7, or an S car or whatever, it's actually really nice to be able to put it in comfort mode when cruising down the highway and not have to feel every little bump in the pavement. For example, we (Fourtitude) drove an A7 from Pennsylvania to Sebring, FL for the 12 hour race last year. Slap it in comfort mode for the highway drive down, and it was great. Not having a super firm suspension made it a much more comfortable drive and less tiring as well. Then when we got there, the car went in sport mode to go out on on the track, and it was totally different to drive. Likewise when I take cars like that out on the back roads to push them a little - they go in sport mode for that, and it's great. I really like having a car that can do more than one thing well.
> -Tim


I would have to agree that if you live in an area where the roads are less than ideal - adaptive suspension can be a wonderful thing. This is one of the reasons why drive select is a 'standard' feature on many Audis sold in the UK.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

Travis Grundke said:


> I would have to agree that if you live in an area where the roads are less than ideal - adaptive suspension can be a wonderful thing. This is one of the reasons why drive select is a 'standard' feature on many Audis sold in the UK.


We don't take my GLI on long trips due to the ride feel with the sport suspension. It doesn't bother me, but with a cushier boat such as the Rabbit at my disposal, why not? It keeps my wife happier, though I'd much rather have my "top sport" cloth seats for longer trips than the standard Rabbit seats.

It'll be nice to be able to take my S3 on trips and tune the suspension as desired, though it probably still won't see the majority of our road trips.


----------



## Mclovin80 (Jun 17, 2013)

The S3 model (in the US) should be manual only. You don't see Mazda offering an auto trans in their Speed3. It's a car for driving enthusiasts not soccer moms. 

Just my opinion. 

Sent from Cloud 9


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

Mclovin80 said:


> The S3 model (in the US) should be manual only. You don't see Mazda offering an auto trans in their Speed3. It's a car for driving enthusiasts not soccer moms.
> 
> Just my opinion.
> 
> Sent from Cloud 9


Well Audi seems to think that people want the utmost absolute performance on a 300hp sedan (like its some sort of supercar), rather than the engagement and control of a manual.

That was the specific reasoning they gave on their FB page when I posted a comment asking...that it was about the performance, and that extra 2 tenths off the 0-60 time.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

:laugh:


ChrisFu said:


> Well Audi seems to think that people want the utmost absolute performance on a 300hp sedan (like its some sort of supercar), rather than the engagement and control of a manual.
> 
> That was the specific reasoning they gave on their FB page when I posted a comment asking...that it was about the performance, and that extra 2 tenths off the 0-60 time.



NA's want automatics. they want to drive cars that do everything for them. the computers will check my blind spot, turn on my lights, adjust my wipers or brake for me, and/or shift for me while i surf the web. :laugh:


----------



## MickSF (May 22, 2008)

Mclovin80 said:


> The S3 model (in the US) should be manual only. You don't see Mazda offering an auto trans in their Speed3. It's a car for driving enthusiasts not soccer moms.
> 
> Just my opinion.
> 
> Sent from Cloud 9


I don't think it should be manual only, but I think stick should be on option on the A3/S3. If Audi doesn't want the business, I am sure BMW or VW will take the business with the 2 series or the GTI/Golf R. Maybe there is a reason why Audi is still chasing BMW in sales in the US...

I get not having a stick on the bigger cars, but on the A3 and TT it should be offered.


----------



## mookieblaylock (Sep 25, 2005)

Mclovin80 said:


> . You don't see Mazda offering an auto trans in their Speed3.


i dont think mazda has dsg, to recap dsg>manual>auto:laugh:


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

mookieblaylock said:


> i dont think mazda has dsg, to recap dsg>manual>auto:laugh:


i don't understand your equation. clearly you have this function wrong.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

MickSF said:


> I don't think it should be manual only, but I think stick should be on option on the A3/S3. *If Audi doesn't want the business, I am sure BMW or VW will take the business with the 2 series or the GTI/Golf R. Maybe there is a reason why Audi is still chasing BMW in sales in the US...*
> 
> I get not having a stick on the bigger cars, but on the A3 and TT it should be offered.


If you don't buy an Audi and instead go with the VW why would VW/Audi care? They still sold the car and made the profit. This seems to be a perfect outcome for them.

They have never sold more than 10k A3's in North America, if this number grew to 30k there would be a better chance of getting a manual (maybe a few versions). I don't know if they would change their minds.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

This whole theory that Audi will bring a manual when they achieve higher numbers is bogus. It's been their strategy to go auto only for years to differentiate themselves from VW. IMO this is a rather embarrassing approach. If they wanted to really separate themselves they would bring higher output power plants. You can't have a premium brand when most of their focus is on streamlining parts and engines with VW.


----------



## MickSF (May 22, 2008)

dmorrow said:


> If you don't buy an Audi and instead go with the VW why would VW/Audi care? They still sold the car and made the profit. This seems to be a perfect outcome for them.
> 
> They have never sold more than 10k A3's in North America, if this number grew to 30k there would be a better chance of getting a manual (maybe a few versions). I don't know if they would change their minds.


VW is the parent company of Audi, so yes the money is still going to VAG. But, do you think Audi itself doesn't have goals and numbers that they are suppose to hit? Audi is graded on how well they sell and on their own results, they need/want to be successful. If I buy a GTI/Golf R it still does hurt Audi... 

Maybe Audi would sell many more A3's if they brought more versions? How about the Sportsback, and the sedan. Maybe a coupe version? Automatics and stick shifts? This sounds like a plan for success... not very limited choices

But the reality is I am more likely going to go with the 2 series. This is after I have owned nothing but VAG cars since 1999. a couple of A4's and currently a GTI, all stick shift.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

While German incorporation laws differ greatly from the US, Audi is traded as an independent company with its own board of directors and management. It is not merely a 'brand' under the umbrella in the same sense as, say, Buick or Cadillac is to GM. It's a completely distinct company.

So yes, while the money flows up the chain to VAG as the holding company, it's not quite that cut and dry.

Back to the topic, though: As I've mentioned before, there is still a very highly likelihood that I will end up foregoing the A3/S3 if Audi focuses on creature comforts over the driving experience. An A4 6MT Sport may become the better option, or even a loaded GTI if I could stomach the thought of dealing with VW service departments again.


----------



## tagsvags (Nov 25, 2005)

MickSF said:


> VW is the parent company of Audi, so yes the money is still going to VAG. But, do you think Audi itself doesn't have goals and numbers that they are suppose to hit? Audi is graded on how well they sell and on their own results, they need/want to be successful. If I buy a GTI/Golf R it still does hurt Audi...
> 
> Maybe Audi would sell many more A3's if they brought more versions? How about the Sportsback, and the sedan. Maybe a coupe version? Automatics and stick shifts? This sounds like a plan for success... not very limited choices
> 
> But the reality is I am more likely going to go with the 2 series. This is after I have owned nothing but VAG cars since 1999. a couple of A4's and currently a GTI, all stick shift.


Excellent idea, S TRONIC and manual. A 2 DR. A3 for North America, and a 2 Dr. coupe A3. This should be the plan, the winning plan for Audi VS BMW. I can't be the only one that thinks this way.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

For those saying Audi has to justify their numbers on their own, my opinion is they are and that is why they aren't bringing a manual.

They have been bringing A3's to North America since 2005 and the total has always been less that 10k vehicles per year. Of this small number a small percentage are manuals and probably dropping. They estimate how many new sales they will make off of the manuals (not people that decide to get a manual over the DSG) and figure out the cost to bring it. When the ROI on the manual is not what they require they don't bring it. 

By the time you do the math on all the configurations available you would probably find the current A3 can be bought in 100 different configurations (colors, transmission, stand alone options, packages, diesel/gas, quattro/manual). They sell less than 10k cars so some of these configurations are probably less 100 cars produced. People on here make it seem like all the manual customers just want one car with no changes and they will be happy. If they only brought a loaded quattro manual many would complain, if it was a base 2wd many would complaint, if it was limited colors many would complain, if it was only the 2.0T some would complain, limited packages - more complaining....


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

MickSF said:


> VW is the parent company of Audi, so yes the money is still going to VAG. But, do you think Audi itself doesn't have goals and numbers that they are suppose to hit? Audi is graded on how well they sell and on their own results, they need/want to be successful. If I buy a GTI/Golf R it still does hurt Audi...
> 
> *Maybe Audi would sell many more A3's if they brought more versions? How about the Sportsback, and the sedan. Maybe a coupe version? Automatics and stick shifts? This sounds like a plan for success... not very limited choices*
> 
> But the reality is I am more likely going to go with the 2 series. This is after I have owned nothing but VAG cars since 1999. a couple of A4's and currently a GTI, all stick shift.


They absolutely would sell more by bringing more varieties, no question that variations will increase sales. Real question is what it would cost and how many more they would sell. I'm sure they have considered it.

I'm sure BMW would sell more 1 or 2 series here if they would bring a 4 dr., hatchback, 2 dr., diesel for all, etc. So far they have decided against most of this but maybe someday (and at a cost).

Also, when I price out the current 128, it is very easy to get to mid $30k's. Pick my color, M sport, and leather and I have a $36k car. This is without moonroof, Technology package, Cold weather package, Premium package, Lighting package (xenon's), Harmon Kardon, and others. Spec for spec you will pay more for a BMW (which helps justify the manuals).


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

tagsvags said:


> Excellent idea, S TRONIC and manual. A 2 DR. A3 for North America, and a 2 Dr. coupe A3. This should be the plan, the winning plan for Audi VS BMW. I can't be the only one that thinks this way.


The Sportback outsells the 2 door about 4-1 on a global basis. 

As for the US sales, IIRC the most sold in a year was something like 6,000. There were several reasons why the Sportback didn't do so well in the US, but something to keep in mind is that it was brought here as an experiment to determine viability of a premium small car in the US. Another thing to keep in mind is that the market has changed dramatically in the last 8 years and the perception that small = cheap is shifting.

1. Primary issue in North America: wagon only in a land of sedans and CUVs.
2. Packaging. It took Audi until MY2009 to get the optimal packaging and pricing.
3. Cost structure. The 8P was never designed with North America in mind and as a result the cost structure built into the product made it prohibitively expensive. 
4. Lack of marketing and incentive dollars. Again, as an experiment Audi let the A3 float on its own merits, which I think was a smart thing to do to gauge the *real* market. 

#4 is instructive: the lack of incentives and support demonstrate the real market for a premium wagon - and it really ain't that big. I have to imagine that the improved cost structure of the MQB product would make the Sportback a viable product today. Still small in comparison to the sedan and CUV market, but viable.

I'm bummed at the lack of Sportback but I can take it or leave it considering I don't need the wagon. The bigger problem for me is the powertrain limitation. Here's to hoping that Audi changes its tune in subsequent model years and brings a 6MT. As I mentioned elsewhere (or maybe in this thread earlier), I think that a great package would be an A3 2.0TFSI Quattro 6MT w/S-line as the unique Audi offering pitted against the comparable BMW offering.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

dmorrow said:


> For those saying Audi has to justify their numbers on their own, my opinion is they are and that is why they aren't bringing a manual.
> 
> They have been bringing A3's to North America since 2005 and the total has always been less that 10k vehicles per year. Of this small number a small percentage are manuals and probably dropping. They estimate how many new sales they will make off of the manuals (not people that decide to get a manual over the DSG) and figure out the cost to bring it. When the ROI on the manual is not what they require they don't bring it.
> 
> By the time you do the math on all the configurations available you would probably find the current A3 can be bought in 100 different configurations (colors, transmission, stand alone options, packages, diesel/gas, quattro/manual). They sell less than 10k cars so some of these configurations are probably less 100 cars produced. *People on here make it seem like all the manual customers just want one car with no changes and they will be happy. If they only brought a loaded quattro manual many would complain, if it was a base 2wd many would complaint, if it was limited colors many would complain, if it was only the 2.0T some would complain, limited packages - more complaining....*


This guy "gets it." :thumbup:


----------



## VR6Nikopol (Jul 11, 2001)

kevlartoronto said:


> i don't understand your equation. clearly you have this function wrong.


The equation is relative to performance (shifting time). Not overall appreciation (well not yours we know that now). :laugh:


----------



## Chimera (Jul 6, 2002)

dmorrow said:


> They have been bringing A3's to North America since 2005 and the total has always been less that 10k vehicles per year. Of this small number a small percentage are manuals and probably dropping. They estimate how many new sales they will make off of the manuals (not people that decide to get a manual over the DSG) and figure out the cost to bring it. When the ROI on the manual is not what they require they don't bring it.
> 
> By the time you do the math on all the configurations available you would probably find the current A3 can be bought in 100 different configurations (colors, transmission, stand alone options, packages, diesel/gas, quattro/manual). They sell less than 10k cars so some of these configurations are probably less 100 cars produced. People on here make it seem like all the manual customers just want one car with no changes and they will be happy. If they only brought a loaded quattro manual many would complain, if it was a base 2wd many would complaint, if it was limited colors many would complain, if it was only the 2.0T some would complain, limited packages - more complaining....


And since 2005, the A3 has never been available with its signature Quattro mated to a manual transmission. Perhaps sales would have been a bit better if they had, any car enthusiast I've come across who's admired the A3 form looked elsewhere because an automatically shifting transmission was the only option. I do see manuals going the way of crank windows, analog temp controls, etc eventually, though. It's inevitable.

I can't imagine there'd be much complaining if they focused on a 2.0T+Quattro configuration. But, it's understandable there's so few core configurations initially. It's shocking that BMW offers TWENTY ONE models of just the 3-series. I dunno how they do it.


----------



## steaguejr (Aug 3, 2006)

More I read about the S-tronic the more I wouldn't mind having it if the manual never comes to the S3. These trannies are going in top exotic cars. From what I have been reading, the S-tronic can with stand up to 550nm of torque. If you drive it hard then you would just have to replace fluid a bet more. Yes the manual provides better upgrades. But there is also software updates for s-tronic to go with power upgrades. But If I got a S3, I wouldn't want a big turbo. i would rock a better intake, TB exhaust, and ECU tune. Done!


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Chimera said:


> I can't imagine there'd be much complaining if they focused on a 2.0T+Quattro configuration. But, it's understandable there's so few core configurations initially. It's shocking that BMW offers TWENTY ONE models of just the 3-series. I dunno how they do it.


BMWUSA's 2012 sales were 347,000+ units. Audi sold roughly 120,000 units. That's how they do it.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

steaguejr said:


> More I read about the S-tronic the more I wouldn't mind having it if the manual never comes to the S3. These trannies are going in top exotic cars. From what I have been reading, the S-tronic can with stand up to 550nm of torque. If you drive it hard then you would just have to replace fluid a bet more. Yes the manual provides better upgrades. But there is also software updates for s-tronic to go with power upgrades. But If I got a S3, I wouldn't want a big turbo. i would rock a better intake, TB exhaust, and ECU tune. Done!


I'm going on eight years with the DSG and am very much looking forward to the S-tronic in the S3. The S3 will be filling a spot I originally intended to fill with a Cayman S- and that car would have been a manual, no doubt about it. Unfortunately, I was never able to get the Cayman S to sail through the purchasing department with a stamp of approval. :laugh:


----------



## FractureCritical (Nov 24, 2009)

Travis Grundke said:


> The Sportback outsells the 2 door about 4-1 on a global basis.
> 
> As for the US sales, IIRC the most sold in a year was something like 6,000. There were several reasons why the Sportback didn't do so well in the US, but something to keep in mind is that it was brought here as an experiment to determine viability of a premium small car in the US. Another thing to keep in mind is that the market has changed dramatically in the last 8 years and the perception that small = cheap is shifting.
> 
> ...



I don't necessariry agree with you on all points, but I agree on some.

1) this is a falsehood. The US is, if anything, a land of hatches. I cite the Focus, the Mazda3, the GTI, the WRX, and the Mini as examples. The Mini is the msot damning, since it costs as much, if not more than an A3, and the ENTIRE BRAND is nothing but hatches with a few convertibles spattered into the mix. The notion that the US doesn't like hatches is jsut an excuse.

2/3) invaidated by the above. It took Audi until 2009 to make the packing work across the board on all their models. They have suceeded at limiting customer options and maximizing conformity, not optimizing the A3 offerings. As an aside, this a great strategy championed by other luminary auto makers like GM, Honda, and Toyota, who are all seen as either dying or otherwise plain vanilla. 

4) I completely agree with you on this. Audi never spent a dime on advertizing the A3. They spends 10's of millions of dollars pushing the A8 and A7, neither of which sold in large numbers, either, and the A7 still isn't a sales leader despite the investment. Hell, I wouldn't have even known about the A3 if my wife and I hadn't literally stumbled across it in the Palace of Fine Arts back in 2005. Oddly, even with Audi's abandonment of the car, you still can't shake a stick in any major metropolitan without hitting a baker's dozen of A3's. In SF, you can count them in threes on any street. In Boston, there's at least two visible from any vantage in any traffic jam. In NYC, anywhere you turn there's an A3 getting a ticket on the windshield. - All sold pretty much by word of mouth, Audi advertizing be damned.


----------



## FractureCritical (Nov 24, 2009)

Travis Grundke said:


> BMWUSA's 2012 sales were 347,000+ units. Audi sold roughly 120,000 units. That's how they do it.


so what you're saying is that Audi's strategy to win more customers, ostensibly from BMW, is to offer them LESS options than BMW is offering? 

That's an... 'interesting' tactic. 
I think Gen. Custer had a similar approach to dealing with some indigneous rabble that worked out great for him, too.

Good Luck Audi!


----------



## VR6Nikopol (Jul 11, 2001)

Dan Halen said:


> Unfortunately, I was never able to get the Cayman S to sail through the purchasing department with a stamp of approval. :laugh:


Looks like our purchasing department is managed with the same core values...:laugh:


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

VR6Nikopol said:


> Looks like our purchasing department is managed with the same core values...:laugh:


Some **** about "what if" we have kids, blah blah blah.

We never take my car on road trips, anyway, and she keeps the "convenient for taking the kids to school or daycare" schedule. Plus, I don't want to be 60 years old with a crappy back trying to climb out of something like that. Oh well.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

FractureCritical said:


> I don't necessariry agree with you on all points, but I agree on some.
> 
> 1) this is a falsehood. The US is, if anything, a land of hatches. I cite the Focus, the Mazda3, the GTI, the WRX, and the Mini as examples. The Mini is the msot damning, since it costs as much, if not more than an A3, and the ENTIRE BRAND is nothing but hatches with a few convertibles spattered into the mix. The notion that the US doesn't like hatches is jsut an excuse.
> 
> ...


Fracture -

Just because there are a lot of hatches in the US doesn't mean that this is the market Audi wants to play in. Due to the economics of the 8P they had a very difficult time bringing the car to North America in a profitable manner. Americans still perceive hatchbacks as lower end cars - not luxury. Audi is trying to burnish their luxury credentials. As a brand this just isn't congruent with the image they are trying to build. 

Again, profitability is important. When you're only selling 120,000 units annually you don't have the luxury of fulfilling every niche. In order to build the brand profitably you build the cars that will sell in the greatest number with the fewest incentives at the best margin possible. The A7 and A8 are highly profitable models and they also have the added benefit of burnishing the image that Audi wants to project. 

The Sportback simply did not fit the image, nor the profit needs of the company. Now, the Sportback will return as a hybrid electric in the US and this DOES fit the image they wish to project, along with substantially better economics behind the vehicle. They will be able to sell it for a premium and begin building their alternative energy credentials. 

When Audi is selling 200, 300, 350,000 cars annually in North America you can bet that we will get more options and more niche models. All things being constant I wouldn't be surprised to see 200,000 hit within the next 36 months. Considering the A3 target is somewhere between 20,000-30,000 units, I also bet they will easily sell another 20,000-30,000 Q3s. With Q5 production moving to Mexico we will get more diversity of product, plus there is nothing to say that the Mexican factory won't turn out other MLB product as well.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

FractureCritical said:


> so what you're saying is that Audi's strategy to win more customers, ostensibly from BMW, is to offer them LESS options than BMW is offering?
> 
> That's an... 'interesting' tactic.
> I think Gen. Custer had a similar approach to dealing with some indigneous rabble that worked out great for him, too.
> ...


Every additional option added to the base car will increase sales numbers to some extent. If this wasn't true they would prefer to have no options, it would make things far simpler and less expensive for them. Difficulty is to offer options that pay for themselves with required profit. They don't believe adding a manual to a historically low volume car that will already come in many variations will provide the required profit. They do care about sales volumes but care more about profit. 

A3 has historically sold less than 10k cars a year in N. America but will come as FWD, AWD, 2.0T, 1.8T, Diesel, and hybrid. Not too difficult to see that unless the volumes go up significantly they will be building many variations of a low volume car.

Luxury/higher end hatchbacks or wagons have generally not sold well here. See the 3 series wagon, 5 series wagon, A4 Avant, CTS wagon, Mercedes wagons. Any higher end wagons (sorry Sportbacks) that do sell well without being Crossovers or SUV's?


----------



## mookieblaylock (Sep 25, 2005)

dmorrow said:


> Luxury/higher end hatchbacks or wagons have generally not sold well here. See the 3 series wagon, 5 series wagon, A4 Avant, CTS wagon, Mercedes wagons. Any higher end wagons (sorry Sportbacks) that do sell well without being Crossovers or SUV's?


but a3 is not a "higher end" vehicle. It is slightly more expensive than a subaru or vw and comparable to mini, all of which sell a fair amount of hatches. So maybe audi banking on people equating the sedan with higher end luxury but without the price, which i guess is shrewd but sucky for the buyer who wants a euro hatch


----------



## MickSF (May 22, 2008)

FractureCritical said:


> so what you're saying is that Audi's strategy to win more customers, ostensibly from BMW, is to offer them LESS options than BMW is offering?
> 
> That's an... 'interesting' tactic.
> I think Gen. Custer had a similar approach to dealing with some indigneous rabble that worked out great for him, too.
> ...


I agree Fracture, If Audi wants more sales in the US they are going to have to step up the offerings. They either believe in their products or they don't. If they want to sell 20,000 to 30,000 A3's in the US do you think just a change to a sedan is going to do it? With the limited variations they are planning on offering? I hope so, but I think it is unlikely.

The last A3 didn't sell with a stick for a couple of reasons. The car was very expensive, much more so than the GTI, and what did it offer that was better for the money? They didn't offer a stick with Quattro, which would have been the key enthusiast offering... They left it in the market in the US too long, it was seriously outdated the last 2- 3 years, wasn't "premium" enough.

It is the age old "chicken or the egg" Do you have to wait to offer more variations until the volume level is where you want it to be? Or, do you have to offer more variations to hit the sales volume level you desire? It is Audi's decision to make. I worked at an Audi/VW dealer for a bit, I met with customers face to face... I know what the issues were selling both GTI's and A3's and how they stacked up against each other, pros and cons for each.


----------



## FractureCritical (Nov 24, 2009)

Travis Grundke said:


> Fracture -
> 
> Just because there are a lot of hatches in the US doesn't mean that this is the market Audi wants to play in. Due to the economics of the 8P they had a very difficult time bringing the car to North America in a profitable manner. Americans still perceive hatchbacks as lower end cars - not luxury. Audi is trying to burnish their luxury credentials. As a brand this just isn't congruent with the image they are trying to build.
> 
> ...


dude, the A7 is a hatch. Audi seems just fine with that car costing over $100k in RS form. 

and your logic is extraordinarity flawed: When Audi was selling 100k cars a year back in the dark ages of the 90's/early 2000's, they were more than happy to make all sorts of wacky things just to get people into the showrooms (remember the 'kermit' allroad with green leather?). Now you're telling me that if Audi sells more cars then they'll make more offbeat products. That is 100% completely the OPPOSITE of what has happened to-date. Do you honestly expect me to believe that if Audi sells 300k cars in the US with their current dumbed-down options and minimal availibiltiy of variants, they ever even bother offering niche vehicles like they used to? you have zero grounds for making that claim.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

MickSF said:


> I agree Fracture, If Audi wants more sales in the US they are going to have to step up the offerings. They either believe in their products or they don't. If they want to sell 20,000 to 30,000 A3's in the US do you think just a change to a sedan is going to do it? With the limited variations they are planning on offering? I hope so, but I think it is unlikely.
> 
> The last A3 didn't sell with a stick for a couple of reasons. The car was very expensive, much more so than the GTI, and what did it offer that was better for the money? They didn't offer a stick with Quattro, which would have been the key enthusiast offering... They left it in the market in the US too long, it was seriously outdated the last 2- 3 years, wasn't "premium" enough.
> 
> It is the age old "chicken or the egg" Do you have to wait to offer more variations until the volume level is where you want it to be? Or, do you have to offer more variations to hit the sales volume level you desire? It is Audi's decision to make. I worked at an Audi/VW dealer for a bit, I met with customers face to face... I know what the issues were selling both GTI's and A3's and how they stacked up against each other, pros and cons for each.


Mick -

I'm with you, but the reality is that the take rate for manual transmissions is less than 5%. That would be about 1,000 units annually at a 20,000 unit sales pace. 

If it only cost Audi $1 million to certify the 6MT along with tooling, logistics and floor planning costs they'd be looking at more than 10 years to recoup the investment at that run rate. Keep in mind I'm pulling the $1 million figure out of my arse - my understanding is that the figure is substantially higher.


----------



## FractureCritical (Nov 24, 2009)

mookieblaylock said:


> but a3 is not a "higher end" vehicle. It is slightly more expensive than a subaru or vw and comparable to mini, all of which sell a fair amount of hatches. So maybe audi banking on people equating the sedan with higher end luxury but without the price, which i guess is shrewd but sucky for the buyer who wants a euro hatch


And it's so easy for Audi to do it right. VW/Audi is the undisputed king of kit type car making. Literally, all they'd have to do is downsize the A7 (isn't that thing a hatch, too?!) and put in on the MQB frame. If Audi wanted to be REALLY lazy about it, they could steal liberally from the VW Scirroco, which is pretty much already a downsize A7 on the MQB frame with a VW logo on it and 2 less doors.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

FractureCritical said:


> dude, the A7 is a hatch. Audi seems just fine with that car costing over $100k in RS form.
> 
> and your logic is extraordinarity flawed: When Audi was selling 100k cars a year back in the dark ages of the 90's/early 2000's, they were more than happy to make all sorts of wacky things just to get people into the showrooms (remember the 'kermit' allroad with green leather?). Now you're telling me that if Audi sells more cars then they'll make more offbeat products. That is 100% completely the OPPOSITE of what has happened to-date. Do you honestly expect me to believe that if Audi sells 300k cars in the US with their current dumbed-down options and minimal availibiltiy of variants, they ever even bother offering niche vehicles like they used to? you have zero grounds for making that claim.


The margin on a $100,000 RS7 is substantial. It is also a halo product designed to burnish the brand, ala the R8. Audi is the profit monster of VAG and you can be assured the bean counters want to keep margins solid, especially considering the soft conditions in Europe right now.

Audi had no choice but to offer the original A6 allroad in the US back in the day because then CEO Franz-Josef Paefgen refused to develop an SUV, thinking them antithetical to Audi and with a personal dislike for them. Much like the Phaeton, it was forced upon the US market when at the time Audi of America was begging for an SUV to compete with the X5 and Merc M-class.

You cannot compare the market of 20 years ago to today. My understanding is that the take rate for Audi automatic transmissions in the EU is now well above 50%. The European S4 is sold S-tronic only, A3s quattros in many EU countries are now s-tronic only, or the 6MT limited to FWD+TDI models.

Now, should the current trade negotiations succeed in harmonizing US and EU safety rules we might be able to get more variants. As sales volume increases we might be able to get more variants. 

Don't underestimate the cost of certification. Cadillac has admitted that they sell a pitiful few CTS-V wagons, but the cost for them to certify is virtually nothing and they can charge a premium for them - so why not do it? They can do this because they're US based for the same reason that Audi offers a lot more variants in Germany than anywhere else in Europe. The costs are lower. 

BMW has been making the same move for some time now and has stated that the pace will accelerate. They've eliminated the manual transmission from the X5, X3, it is not available on the X1, nor on their xDrive models or TDIs. The next Ms are rumored to eliminate it altogether. BMW has moved to make the 6MT a no-cost-change option so you pay the same for the auto or the manual, eliminating another reason many chose the manual - savings.

Look, I'm with you that the loss of powertrain options stinks but this is not unique to Audi and it doesn't seem to be hurting the other automakers, as much as it pains me to say this.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

MickSF said:


> I agree Fracture, If Audi wants more sales in the US they are going to have to step up the offerings. They either believe in their products or they don't. If they want to sell 20,000 to 30,000 A3's in the US do you think just a change to a sedan is going to do it? With the limited variations they are planning on offering? I hope so, but I think it is unlikely.
> 
> The last A3 didn't sell with a stick for a couple of reasons. The car was very expensive, much more so than the GTI, and what did it offer that was better for the money? They didn't offer a stick with Quattro, which would have been the key enthusiast offering... They left it in the market in the US too long, it was seriously outdated the last 2- 3 years, wasn't "premium" enough.
> 
> It is the age old "chicken or the egg" Do you have to wait to offer more variations until the volume level is where you want it to be? Or, do you have to offer more variations to hit the sales volume level you desire? It is Audi's decision to make. I worked at an Audi/VW dealer for a bit, I met with customers face to face... I know what the issues were selling both GTI's and A3's and how they stacked up against each other, pros and cons for each.


They are stepping up their offerings just not offering the one you want. Note the 4 powertrains (2 gas engines, diesel and hybrid), when previous had 2. 

Considering the A3's history, are there any cars available with this many powertrains with this low of previous sales?

As far as being expensive, I don't see the price going down significantly with the new model. Old started about $28k and came with the 2.0T. New is rumored to start at $29k with the 1.8T? Maybe more will be standard but I see the engine as a downgrade.


----------



## kevlartoronto (Jun 10, 2012)

Travis Grundke said:


> Mick -
> 
> I'm with you, but the reality is that the take rate for manual transmissions is less than 5%. That would be about 1,000 units annually at a 20,000 unit sales pace.
> 
> If it only cost Audi $1 million to certify the 6MT along with tooling, logistics and floor planning costs they'd be looking at more than 10 years to recoup the investment at that run rate. Keep in mind I'm pulling the $1 million figure out of my arse - my understanding is that the figure is substantially higher.


It really comes down to the fact that the regulations are absolutely ridiculous. why the hell do we need 100 countries each conducting their own tests to come up with what is effectively the same results? These bozos in government need to get together and have a universal standard.


----------

