# Spied: Audi S3 3-door Turns Laps at the ‘Ring



## [email protected] (Apr 9, 2004)

The Audi R8 LMS may have just won the 24 Hours of Nurburgring, but it’s not the only four-ringer to be logging endurance miles at the ‘Green Hell’ this week. Just spied is what might outwardly appear to be a silver example of the new Audi A3 S-line, though eagle eyes will recognize the car’s quad-tipped exhaust as S-car spec, meaning this is an S3 3-door.

* Full Story *


----------



## V0LKSWAGENSRULE (Aug 26, 2004)

> More recent intel we’ve heard is that the S3 is go for America, though it will skip the 3-door bodystyle seen here in favor of the more US consumer-friendly sedan.


This is music to my ears, as this is will be my next Audi :thumbup:


----------



## djdub (Dec 30, 2001)

I sure hope this comes to the US soon. Next ride for sures...


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

Surprised you are sold on a car that you don't know what it will cost, what it will look like and when it will get here.

Since there is so much competition in the small/mid size sedan segment with around 260 hp (and probably a lot more by the time this gets here) it will depend on a lot of things before I am sold.


----------



## djdub (Dec 30, 2001)

True dmorrow. True.


----------



## GTI2Slow (Jun 23, 2007)

I have read the details on the new FSI/TSI motors, but horsepower and turbo specifics were not mentioned.

I was hoping for a detuned version of the 2.5TFSI (+quattro and 6MT), but from what I can gather the base will have a 1.8TFSI and the S3 will have a 2.0TFSI.

I cant wait for these to go on sale.


----------



## John Y (Apr 27, 1999)

dmorrow said:


> Surprised you are sold on a car that you don't know what it will cost, what it will look like and when it will get here.
> 
> Since there is so much competition in the small/mid size sedan segment with around 260 hp (and probably a lot more by the time this gets here) it will depend on a lot of things before I am sold.


 Can't imagine it will be around 260hp - that would be lower that the current generation of S/R engines, and everything that I have read suggests output will be between 280 and 300hp.


----------



## GTI2Slow (Jun 23, 2007)

If its will be 280-300HP then the 2.5TFSI has gotta be the motor. If the Q3/Q5 are getting a detuned version it would make sense to use it rather than a new hotter version of the 2.0T.


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

John Y said:


> Can't imagine it will be around 260hp - that would be lower that the current generation of S/R engines, and everything that I have read suggests output will be between 280 and 300hp.


 I don't know, it was in the article above, not from me. You have a better source of info?


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

GTI2Slow said:


> I was hoping for a detuned version of the 2.5TFSI (+quattro and 6MT), but from what I can gather the base will have a 1.8TFSI and the S3 will have a 2.0TFSI.


 I doubt Audi will use the 2.0 TFSI motor...it is allready an 8+ year old motor. 
I have heard alot of rumors that the S3 is getting the 2.5 TFSI and it makes sense. I do not recall Audi ever building a 150+hp/L motor in the S line up.


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

Issam Abed said:


> I doubt Audi will use the 2.0 TFSI motor...it is allready an 8+ year old motor.
> I have heard alot of rumors that the S3 is getting the 2.5 TFSI and it makes sense. I do not recall Audi ever building a 150+hp/L motor in the S line up.


 I don't see much chance of that. The 2.5TFSI in the RS3 is a specially designed engine by Quattro GmbH. Too much beefed up component in there to make it mass market.


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

LWNY said:


> I don't see much chance of that. The 2.5TFSI in the RS3 is a specially designed engine by Quattro GmbH. Too much beefed up component in there to make it mass market.


 Nothing special about the 2.5TFSI. The 2.0 FSI / 2.0 TSI & 2.5 Rabbit motor share about 90% of the components.


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

Issam Abed said:


> Nothing special about the 2.5TFSI. The 2.0 FSI / 2.0 TSI & 2.5 Rabbit motor share about 90% of the components.


 you obviously are just some random guy strolling into the forum and blabbering your mouth off. You think Audi just bolted a turbo onto VW's venerable 118hp 2.0 engine and got 200hp out of it? This wasn't a VTEC 2.0 with 240hp, but the worst of the worst 2.0 out there. The 2.0T in the TTS/S3 even got more massaged up by Audi before they bumped it into 260hp. Even more extreme is the 2.5, since its modification was handled by Quattro GmbH, where a complete new engine was designed based on the almost embarrassing 150hp 2.5 from VW.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Issam Abed said:


> Nothing special about the 2.5TFSI. The 2.0 FSI / 2.0 TSI & 2.5 Rabbit motor share about 90% of the components.


 And by that logic, it's 50% of the V10 found in the Lamborghini? 

Everything from the block to the bore to the manifolds, exhaust, turbos, compression, injectors and cooling is substantially different on all of those power plants. About the only common parts you're going to find on any of them is a few of the sensors and some of the pipes. Otherwise the similarities end there.


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

LWNY said:


> You think Audi just bolted a turbo onto VW's venerable 118hp 2.0 engine and got 200hp out of it?


 There is no thinking when you have facts: 
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?4414718-TECH-TT-RS-2.5-Inline-5-Turbo-Motor-in-depth/page4 

Sorry I know you get a lot of trolling in these forums but I just thought I would contribute a little. 
Enjoy the read guys and if you have any questions feel free to follow my facebook fan page: 
http://www.facebook.com/pages/INA-Engineering-Inc/294598024991 

:beer:


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

Issam Abed said:


> There is no thinking when you have facts:
> http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?4414718-TECH-TT-RS-2.5-Inline-5-Turbo-Motor-in-depth/page4
> 
> Sorry I know you get a lot of trolling in these forums but I just thought I would contribute a little.
> ...


 your self stated fact just indicates you say they are practically the same. Given the TTRS/RS3's criteria was to use an existing engine (probably had to use existing casting mold) n the transverse line, they didn't have too much a choice. But it is likely they could modify it anyway they want, thus engine block material, casting method, etc, whatever that could be done within the criteria given to them. That is why you don't see alum block being used since it would need different re-enforcements at different points than the orig 2.5's cast mold. 

Stating that cars with extensively different passenger cell layout would perform the same in crash tests imply you are just talking out of your mouth without thinking.


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

LWNY said:


> hat is why you don't see alum block being used since it would need different re-enforcements at different points than the orig 2.5's cast mold.


 NO 
You do not see aluminum blocks because they are more expensive to produce and the weight savings are minimal in the grand scheme.Look up Volkswagen R5 TDI - All Aluminum inline-5 motor with cylinders that see pressures much higher that the 2.5 TFSI motor. 



LWNY said:


> Stating that cars with extensively different passenger cell layout would perform the same in crash tests imply you are just talking out of your mouth without thinking.


 I never stated anything about passenger cell lay out or crash tests? 
You posted this: 


LWNY said:


> Too much beefed up component in there to make it mass market.


 Which was met with this reply: 


Issam Abed said:


> Nothing special about the 2.5TFSI. The 2.0 FSI / 2.0 TSI & 2.5 Rabbit motor share about 90% of the components.


 which followed your rebuttal: 


LWNY said:


> you obviously are just some random guy strolling into the forum and blabbering your mouth off.


 I am still waiting for the posts where you provide me with some form of technical knowledge that I can contribute to my technical thread. Again 


Issam Abed said:


> I do not recall Audi ever building a 150+hp/L motor in the S line up.


 We know from numerous sources that the 2.5 20V TFSI motor is going to be coming in alot more chassis in years to come. The mounting bosses on the block tell us this (even a longitudinal configuration).


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 9, 2004)

Worth noting are a few key points. 2.5 TFSI is second only to the Bugatti Veyron Super Sport in hp/liter (i.e. also higher than your average Veyron). Perhaps nearly identical means one thing to one person and another thing to another but the Rabbit's 2.5 is one of the cheapest engines Volkswagen could put in that car. You don't need to be an engineer to guess that it wasn't simply a matter of a turbocharger and a new manifold. 

As for future fitments, my understanding of future product is that longitudinal fitment is unlikely. It was explored with the quattro Concept but you have to remember that this engine is longer than the V10 in the S6/S8. In order for it to fit (full production, which quattro Concept wasn't), it would have to go into a chassis that is likely too heavy for its relatively low torque delivery. If the lightweight quattro Concept doesn't get built (and a source at quattro GmbH tells me it now won't) then the likelihood of longitudinal production likely ceases as well. 

Transverse fitment? Well we know next-gen RS 3 and that would suggest next-gen TT RS. Hackenberg likes this engine, suggesting it might find its way to Volkswagens too... but it is expensive to produce and likely 350 hp not necessary so maybe this would be a more cost-effective and less powerful variant. That's just a guess, but it seems a reasonable one.


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

Issam Abed said:


> NO
> You do not see aluminum blocks because they are more expensive to produce and the weight savings are minimal in the grand scheme.Look up Volkswagen R5 TDI - All Aluminum inline-5 motor with cylinders that see pressures much higher that the 2.5 TFSI motor.


Tell that to Audi that just re-designed the 1.8T and 1.4T with alum block, saving significant weight. 

What I said was this was likely a limited budget design, that is why Quattro could not go design a engine completely from scratch like Gallardo's 5.2. They had a 2.5 casting facility, so they can only use material that was stronger, but not so strong that it is impossible to work with like Steel. Alu is significantly different, thus you cannot just pour Al into the same mold and expect the engine block to perform the same. 




Issam Abed said:


> I never stated anything about passenger cell lay out or crash tests?


 This is what you posted: 



Issam Abed said:


> I understand that very well but we are talking A3 3 door vs A3 5 door. Not exactly a huge difference there other than the #'s of doors.


 
A3 3 door would have a longer distance between the A to B to C pillar, significantly affecting passenger cell integrity, roof integrity, longer open space between pillars or it being enclosed space...all effect crash-worthiness. 




Issam Abed said:


> I am still waiting for the posts where you provide me with some form of technical knowledge that I can contribute to my technical thread. Again


 As widely discussed....engine block of different material, valve design, camshaft design, cylinder mfg method, connecting rod material, head casting method (regardless of materal it was cast from), etc.


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

[email protected] said:


> Worth noting are a few key points. 2.5 TFSI is second only to the Bugatti Veyron Super Sport in hp/liter (i.e. also higher than your average Veyron). Perhaps nearly identical means one thing to one person and another thing to another but the Rabbit's 2.5 is one of the cheapest engines Volkswagen could put in that car. You don't need to be an engineer to guess that it wasn't simply a matter of a turbocharger and a new manifold.


 George I outlined the differences in my thread above. If you want me to send you the images of the motors side by side I can as well for you to host up in the gallery.Like I said, 90% of the components found in a TTRS motor can be found on a Rabbit 2.5 motor. I wish it was like B5 S4 2.7TT vs B5 RS4 2.7TT but the differences are not that cast.There are the obvious changes to handle DI and such (talking long blocks here) but this amazing motor started a very simple life. 


LWNY said:


> A3 3 door would have a longer distance between the A to B to C pillar, significantly affecting passenger cell integrity, roof integrity, longer open space between pillars or it being enclosed space...all effect crash-worthiness..


 Different thread. Nothing to do with this one  


LWNY said:


> Tell that to Audi that just re-designed the 1.8T and 1.4T with alum block, saving significant weight..


 Sure, 
except the 1.8 TFSI still uses an iron block (similar to the EA888 2.0 TSI) and the 1.4 TSI (aka the polo motor EA111) has been Aluminum and around since early 2000's.  
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5468544-NEW-EA888-1.8-TSI-2.0-TSI-Engine-Details 
You have to realize unlike many people on this forum, I actually WORK with these motors daily. When the 2013 A3 1.8 TFSI motor becomes available, ill be sure to grab one.


----------



## LWNY (Jul 30, 2008)

Issam Abed said:


> except the 1.8 TFSI still uses an iron block (similar to the EA888 2.0 TSI) and the 1.4 TSI (aka the polo motor EA111) has been Aluminum and around since early 2000's.
> http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5468544-NEW-EA888-1.8-TSI-2.0-TSI-Engine-Details
> You have to realize unlike many people on this forum, I actually WORK with these motors daily. When the 2013 A3 1.8 TFSI motor becomes available, ill be sure to grab one.


 Anything audi redesigns, when they have to take into account that its parent company will also get its hands on, seems to always have to be extremely low tech. Thus they could do whatever clean sheet design, it would always have to be made of low tech material. Maybe VW has a sleuth of iron pouring foundries in East G3rmany that cranks out blocks for dirt cheap. But in a world where super low tech car companies that can't even do DOHC design on their vee engine, but are using alum blocks. VW got to shed this seriously low tech image. They can't keep on relying on Audi to provide them with modern engine technology (vvt, fsi), but at times, Audi seeming to hold back others (valvelift, lightweight block, ASF).


----------



## Resolute (May 15, 2012)

In case anyone wants to actually research the changes made by Audi when developing the new 2.5L TFSI engine, here's a paper by some of the Audi engineers: 
http://www.justfourrings.com/forums/documents/l5ttrs.pdf 

Will


----------



## Rudy_S4 (Nov 10, 2011)

Issam Abed said:


> George I outlined the differences in my thread above. If you want me to send you the images of the motors side by side I can as well for you to host up in the gallery.Like I said, 90% of the components found in a TTRS motor can be found on a Rabbit 2.5 motor. I wish it was like B5 S4 2.7TT vs B5 RS4 2.7TT but the differences are not that cast.There are the obvious changes to handle DI and such (talking long blocks here) but this amazing motor started a very simple life.


 I agree 900% with where your point is going. 

The thing is it would mean the group putting R&D into the engine still. It's the 'cheaping out' on parts that screws over Audi to create a 'cheaper' 2.5L. Say using a cheaper con rod vs whatever the RS3 is using, to put it in the simplest form. I think this is the point being made by the other members against yours. 

If I remember correctly the differences in the B5 2.7T between the S4 and RS4 was turbos, intercooler and the plumbing around it. The engine at it's core was the same...so K03's vs K04's. Nothing too drastic engine wise, hence why you could build a S4 into an RS4 mechanically wise without much effort. 

I would presume the 2.5TFSI is using a larger K04 for example, and I agree using a tiny K03 would be GREAT! 

What I disagree with many, is the cost. By using the 2.5 TFSI, in other models. I think the key is asking simply this : 'what is the future of the Golf R?' 'what is the future of the Q3 / Q5?' 'what is the future of the Jetta / Passat / CC?' How can they utilize that 2.5 TFSI in it's form today in other models? 

Remember the Golf GTI is likely getting bumped according to reports in the 260hp range using the Golf R engine. For the bang for the buck on the GTI, that means the Golf R should get a nice bump...the S3 will follow suit. 

I think if they decide to start using it as Audi did in the past (S4 / RS4 / A6 / All-Road off the top of my head), I don't think anyone would argue. 

I don't think the top end TT RS, or RS3 are enough of an argument...yet! 

Give me a S3 /w 2.5TFSI and the smaller K03, and I am sure a company like APR will have a nice GT3076 ready for it -> 400+awhp. 


***edit I think for myself 300-350 awhp will be enough for me please Audi, AFTER I modify it, displacement makes it easier on me that's all.


----------

