# Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio?



## WolfsburgerMitFries (Jul 4, 2005)

I'm sort of surprised nobody has brought this up yet, but late last month (March 07) Audi announced a convertible version of their A3, which appears to be the most direct competition possible for the Eos because the 2 cars will inevitably share many parts, for example...
The A3 cabrio is supposed to offer either the 2.0T, or 3.2L engines (sound familiar?). The existing Audi A3 is built on the Golf/Jetta PQ35 platform, so it has the same wheel base as the Eos. One key difference between the Eos and A3 cabrio will be the top. The A3 cabrio is supposed to have a soft top.
So far all the images you can find on the internet are artists renderings, and the exact details are few, but the A3 cabrio is supposed to be unveiled at the Frankfurt auto show this fall. 
I think this will be one of the better "VS" discussions we will have in this forum. I like it, a lot.









That illustration above is the best looking A3 cabrio rendering I could find. There are some downright fugly renderings I've seen on the internet like the picture below. But I just like the headlights on the car above.











_Modified by WolfsburgerMitFries at 2:38 PM 4-12-2007_


----------



## liquid stereo (Feb 26, 2003)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (WolfsburgerMitFries)*

This thing is not pretty.
Its thick, slab-sided, and looks like a bath tub on wheels.


----------



## Funmobile (Feb 19, 2007)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (WolfsburgerMitFries)*

Nice clean lines, a little more masculine, but...
Soft top? meh...


----------



## just4fun (Oct 29, 2006)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (WolfsburgerMitFries)*

Since this is an artists rendering, it is a little hard to comment. But, as shown, the front end has a very Chrysler appearance.
I agree it will be interesting to see the head to head comparo's on vs the Eos once the A3 cabrio actually hits the street.
Kevin


----------



## liquid stereo (Feb 26, 2003)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (just4fun)*

Sometimes I think the germans have just lost it when it comes to design. Everything is so thick and slabby. Mercedes is the only one doing any remotely resembling sexy. The CLS came out and blindsided everyone. Hopefully they'll respond.
Audi has tried, with the A5/S5, but its going to require another generation before they get it really ready to compete.
BMW... good luck. They're still unmaking the 5-series they made 4 years ago.


----------



## WolfsburgerMitFries (Jul 4, 2005)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (liquid stereo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *liquid stereo* »_Sometimes I think the germans have just lost it when it comes to design. Everything is so thick and slabby. 

Everything has high side profiles today, so the car gets good side impact ratings. The days of lower side profiles like this...








are gone forever

Look at a 300c, that's slab sided.








Look at the Mercedes-Benz CLS you bring up. That's acutely slab sided, yeah there's a curve to it, but outside of the 300c, its probably the most slab sided car there is.










_Modified by WolfsburgerMitFries at 12:50 PM 4-9-2007_


----------



## mark_d_drake (Aug 17, 2006)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (WolfsburgerMitFries)*

Ah the days when the Jaguar actually looked like a Leaping cat..


----------



## flubber (Sep 12, 2005)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (liquid stereo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *liquid stereo* »_This thing is not pretty.
Its thick, slab-sided, and looks like a bath tub on wheels.

Looks like a cross between the A4 convertible and the new TT, and they're both very good looking in person, as long as you like the shield grill.
But if it's going to be smaller than the current A4 convertible, it may have only a vestigial back seat. If that's so, I think I'd prefer the TT roadster.


----------



## liquid stereo (Feb 26, 2003)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (WolfsburgerMitFries)*

There's definitely a lot of slabbiness on the CLS. However, it doesn't appear to define the vehicle. The sketch of the Audi A3 convertible looks like an inverted bathtub on wheels.

_Quote, originally posted by *WolfsburgerMitFries* »_
Everything has high side profiles today, so the car gets good side impact ratings. The days of lower side profiles like this...
Look at the Mercedes-Benz CLS you bring up. That's acutely slab sided, yeah there's a curve to it, but outside of the 300c, its probably the most slab sided car there is.
_Modified by WolfsburgerMitFries at 12:50 PM 4-9-2007_


----------



## _Rick_V_ (Jan 21, 2007)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (WolfsburgerMitFries)*

I've always had a thing for low-profile headlights. I don't know what it is, I think they simply make the car look more aggressive.
It's also why I don't care much for the styling of Lexus's-- their headlights seem to wrap halfway up the hood, like dripping candle wax.
-Rick


----------



## swordfish1 (Jul 22, 2006)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (WolfsburgerMitFries)*

Ive posted a couple of pictures/links on another forum with regards to the A3. Personally I think the back end looks like an old Vauxhall/Opel Astra Convertible. I do like the proposed S3 version though.
Still a softtop.
My brother inlaw has the coupe S3 version. Quite small in the rear of that, so I'd expect the rear of the softtop to be even smaller (as they drop tops are usually smaller in the rear).
If it's priced right, I can see it taking orders off the EOS still tho. Just wouldn't have swayed my opinion.


----------



## flheat (Sep 29, 2006)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (liquid stereo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *liquid stereo* »_Ther The sketch of the Audi A3 convertible looks like an inverted bathtub on wheels.


tip that tub over and pour me in...if this would have been available last fall, I'm afraid I would have been driving it now. Don't get me wrong, I love my Eos, but I loved my A4 Cabriolet a bit more, but I just couldn't see myself buying the same car again. I think if the two cars were priced comparably, the Eos would have a run for its money. 
Bruce


----------



## liquid stereo (Feb 26, 2003)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (flheat)*

I hear you http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif
(That styling just doesn't do it for me.)

_Quote, originally posted by *flheat* »_
tip that tub over and pour me in...if this would have been available last fall, I'm afraid I would have been driving it now. Don't get me wrong, I love my Eos, but I loved my A4 Cabriolet a bit more, but I just couldn't see myself buying the same car again. I think if the two cars were priced comparably, the Eos would have a run for its money. 
Bruce


----------



## gizmopop (Feb 6, 2000)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (liquid stereo)*

I guess it comes down to will it be available with AWD (as the soft top takes up less trunk space which could accomodate a Haldex coupling) and will it come near the price of the Eos. If its indeed slotting between the TT convertible (already more than the Eos) and the A5 (i'm sure the A4 is leaving) then it isn't going to be cheap...
but then again the 3 door hatch should come here to the U.S. before this has a chance to.


----------



## WolfsburgerMitFries (Jul 4, 2005)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (gizmopop)*


_Quote, originally posted by *gizmopop* »_I guess it comes down to will it be available with AWD (as the soft top takes up less trunk space which could accommodate a Haldex coupling) and will it come near the price of the Eos. 

Excellent point. Although the Eos' retractable hardtop is high end, if the A3 cabriolet is available with AWD, its really going to skew the equation towards the Audi.


----------



## liquid stereo (Feb 26, 2003)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (gizmopop)*

I'm not sure what you mean but AWD, in a convertible??? AWD is useless in most vehicles in most climates. 
Wolf and Gizmo, you're in Kentucky and Florida, respectively... lot of good AWD would do you. Don't get me wrong, I like useless technology as much as the next guy (I've got the 600W Dynaudio)

_Quote, originally posted by *gizmopop* »_I guess it comes down to will it be available with AWD (as the soft top takes up less trunk space which could accomodate a Haldex coupling) and will it come near the price of the Eos. If its indeed slotting between the TT convertible (already more than the Eos) and the A5 (i'm sure the A4 is leaving) then it isn't going to be cheap...
but then again the 3 door hatch should come here to the U.S. before this has a chance to. 



_Modified by liquid stereo at 12:05 PM 4-12-2007_


----------



## WolfsburgerMitFries (Jul 4, 2005)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (liquid stereo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *liquid stereo* »_I'm not sure what you mean but AWD, in a convertible??? AWD is useless in most vehicles in most climates. 


I'm gonna have to disagree. AWD is useful anytime you're stopped at a red light while the road is wet, and that jackass in a 350z who is all the way over to the right (in a lane that ends on the other side of the intersection) thinks he's gonna sneak around everyone waiting in traffic in the normal lanes and cut you off. More traction in simple wet conditions is always a big help in shutting down the fools...at least to me. 
Here's a very interesting 5th gear video that shows the difference in wet and dry traction between a new TT quattro 3.2 (again the VW PQ35 platform), and a BMW Z4. Interesting results. I'm going to excuse the Brits for their pronunciation of the word "coupé". Listen for that beautiful VR6 sound too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6T7nR-bPLc




_Modified by WolfsburgerMitFries at 2:22 PM 4-12-2007_


----------



## GurnyGub (Nov 21, 2006)

Sean,
Why not AWD in a convertible? That makes no sense to me. Useless? Not at all. I made a tough decision between the V6 Eos and the Audi Quattro convertible and chose the former. I kinda miss AWD, plain and simple. I live on a really twisty coastal road, and I love my Eos, but...I've had two AWD Ford Cosworths, an AWD Subaru, and have driven the R32 a few times on the same roads, and I love that extra feeling of grippp. 
John


----------



## liquid stereo (Feb 26, 2003)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (WolfsburgerMitFries)*

I'm not saying it has no value. I'm saying its value is quite low as in the number of times it intercedes on behalf of your safety. Its like the genii who buy a Ford F150 so they have space when they buy the 52in TV. (But this is like me going on to a porn site and saying that the objectification of women is destructive to society viz a viz the disenfranchisement of a significant part of our population.)
I know this is an unpopular sentiment as this is a motoring enthusiast site, but it is what it is... primarily useless







But I'm the guy who thinks VW should bring the 1.6 and 2.0 FSI engines over here, wheels are too big, and SUVs should be have $8k added to their base price.
There's always some opportunity for something to be of benefit. But the cost of that thing, in conjunction with the practical benefit, should be weighed. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif

_Quote, originally posted by *WolfsburgerMitFries* »_
I'm gonna have to disagree. AWD is useful anytime you're stopped at a red light while the road is wet, and that jackass in a 350z who is all the way over to the right (in a lane that ends on the other side of the intersection) thinks he's gonna sneak around everyone waiting in traffic in the normal lanes and cut you off. More traction in simple wet conditions is always a big help in shutting down the fools...at least to me. 
Here's a very interesting 5th gear video that shows the difference in wet and dry traction between a new TT quattro 3.2 (again the VW PQ35 platform), and a BMW Z4. Interesting results. I'm going to excuse the Brits for their pronunciation of the word "coupé". Listen for that beautiful VR6 sound too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6T7nR-bPLc
_Modified by WolfsburgerMitFries at 2:22 PM 4-12-2007_


----------



## just4fun (Oct 29, 2006)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (liquid stereo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *liquid stereo* »_ ... and SUVs should be have $8k added to their base price.


Well, we are half way there, Canada just imposed tax levies of up to $4000.00 on fuel inefficient SUV's and high power sport cars.
Kevin


----------



## gizmopop (Feb 6, 2000)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (liquid stereo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *liquid stereo* »_I'm not sure what you mean but AWD, in a convertible??? AWD is useless in most vehicles in most climates. 
Wolf and Gizmo, you're in Kentucky and Florida, respectively... lot of good AWD would do you. Don't get me wrong, I like useless technology as much as the next guy (I've got the 600W Dynaudio)

 
I don't consider it useless down here...the Postcards from Florida may show the beach and sunny weather, and yeah we do have that, but we also have the hurricane season and just an abundance of rain...AWD has its benefits down here...it isn't just for the snow.
I brought it up because you can get the A4 convertible with AWD as well as the TT convertible (in 3.2 form no less) you never know if Audi might offer it in the A3 vert as well.


----------



## jgermuga (Jan 11, 2007)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (liquid stereo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *liquid stereo* »_
and SUVs should be have $8k added to their base price. 


Yes, place yet another tax on middle class families. So in addition to the expected $4 per gallon that we will soon be paying, our middle class can pay the penalty for 4 generations of greenhouse gas emmisions. 
I am not saying we don't have a problem, but an 8k levy on every SUV is a bit off the mark in terms of solutions. 
Here's an idea idea. We''ll stick with a levy on SUVs and cut college tuition by 8k per year for every US resident.
At any rate, AWD in an SUV and AWD in a performance car are two different things. In an SUV, it is usually only worthwhile in inclement weather, while in a performance car, it is a huge step up in handling and off the line performance. 
I don't see how having AWD in a car results in a drastic difference in fuel economy. If anything, it should theoretically result in better fuel economy since less power is wasted on spinning a wheel that has lost traction.


----------



## GurnyGub (Nov 21, 2006)

Sean,
You just said you are not saying AWD has 'no value,' then you say it's 'primarily useless'. Huh? Wolf was describing beating 'other' jackasses at the lights. I'm somewhere between you two, which is using a car, always sensibly (!), and finding that...oohh...frisson between car and driver that makes you grin; not cutting other cars up or off, but the whole driving experience, the pleasure of the right angle into corners, when you put just the right amount of welly (UK?) down, and all the rest. You know what I mean. And the DSG in heavy traffic? So much less stressss. Be safe.
John


----------



## liquid stereo (Feb 26, 2003)

*Re: (GurnyGub)*

Yes. Its primarily useless in the sense that it does not dramatically improve the motoring experience. I've lived in Buffalo, NY and Minneapolis, MN where the snow and ice are truly endless. (It was snowing last night.) Would AWD be good? Yes. Is it dramatically better than a set of snow-tires? Not for me.
Inclement weather aside, one would need to be traveling a greater rate of speed than I find prudent for AWD to be useful. Increased traction just means more speed is needed before one breaks traction.
(I get my driving fun with my rear-engine, rear wheel drive, Karmann Ghia with the 170hp flat-six in the rain.)


_Quote, originally posted by *GurnyGub* »_Sean,
You just said you are not saying AWD has 'no value,' then you say it's 'primarily useless'. Huh? Wolf was describing beating 'other' jackasses at the lights. I'm somewhere between you two, which is using a car, always sensibly (!), and finding that...oohh...frisson between car and driver that makes you grin; not cutting other cars up or off, but the whole driving experience, the pleasure of the right angle into corners, when you put just the right amount of welly (UK?) down, and all the rest. You know what I mean. And the DSG in heavy traffic? So much less stressss. Be safe.
John


----------



## PaulZooms (Dec 16, 2006)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (jgermuga)*


_Quote, originally posted by *jgermuga* »_
At any rate, AWD in an SUV and AWD in a performance car are two different things. In an SUV, it is usually only worthwhile in inclement weather, while in a performance car, it is a huge step up in handling and off the line performance. 


I agree regarding "off the line performance". My 2.0T (and several others I test drove before buying) requires a light touch on start up to avoid wheel hop. AWD would solve this nicely, and I could punch it off the line instead of starting "granny style".


----------



## liquid stereo (Feb 26, 2003)

*Eos is a bit numb*

Are you serious








I was just lamenting the acceleration of the 2.0T Eos to my GF. The car I just traded, 20AE GTI, was so much more "brutal" and direct. I feel like the 2.0T is in fact a granny car. I had the thing floored and though the car was moving, the lack of sensation was rather dramatic (in terms of absence).
I know there's a bit of remorse with most car purchases but I'm pretty close to really wanting my 20AE back. I'm sure that will change once the weather improves to the point where I can actually put the top down. That is, after all, why I bought the car.
http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

_Quote, originally posted by *PaulZooms* »_
I agree regarding "off the line performance". My 2.0T (and several others I test drove before buying) requires a light touch on start up to avoid wheel hop. AWD would solve this nicely, and I could punch it off the line instead of starting "granny style".


----------



## sydeos (Dec 30, 2006)

The best car I ever had was a Lotus Elise Series 1. Super light pure steering and great performance with fantastic economy. The sort of car you take the long way to the corner store just for the hell of it. Compromises, sure plenty and in the wet it required a huge amount of care








The total opposite of a Evo IX which is the sort of car where you just floor it and go regardless of the conditions. The more complex and heavier the car gets doesn't mean always a similar improvement in the driving.
As an example look at the Porsche 911 Turbo. Awesome car but any enthusiast will prefer the GT2 or GT3 cars which are RWD for driver reward even though they are much more demanding on the driver.
The Evo provides a easier to access performance level but for me it is certainly no where near the level of driver involvement and reward available for getting it right in the Elise.
Maybe I am old fashioned but the reward for me in driving is all about the attainment of a skill and working to perfect it. Not just burying the throttle and holding on


----------



## archiea (Nov 29, 2006)

*Re: Eos is a bit numb (liquid stereo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *liquid stereo* »_Are you serious








I was just lamenting the acceleration of the 2.0T Eos to my GF. The car I just traded, 20AE GTI, was so much more "brutal" and direct. I feel like the 2.0T is in fact a granny car. I had the thing floored and though the car was moving, the lack of sensation was rather dramatic (in terms of absence).
I know there's a bit of remorse with most car purchases but I'm pretty close to really wanting my 20AE back. I'm sure that will change once the weather improves to the point where I can actually put the top down. That is, after all, why I bought the car.
http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

Yeah, my expectations were in check when I test drove the EOS. I try to minimize the buyer's remorse.... 
The Eos that will soon be mine, I saw as a replacement for the Saturn... So I used the Saturn as a yardstick.. I.e. daily beater that is practical and somewhat acceptable in mileage. So for me, the convertableis a plus, as is the styinlig interior and the DSG tranny. I don't step into it comparing it to what are basically sold as performance cars. It was the same thing with t he T-bird..people were expecting a corvette beater. While I wouldn't have rejected a 'blown version of the T-bird, I think it perfroms just as it was sold. Same with the Eos. I mean to get a convertable (with the limitiations imposed by its design, i.e. a high center of gravity) along with the structural enhancements that the EOS has, and then expect the performance of a GTI, I mean how realistic is that?


----------



## liquid stereo (Feb 26, 2003)

*Re: Eos is a bit numb (archiea)*

Its not at all realistic but it happens when there is a transition. Its not that I expect the performance of a GTI, but rather many of the characterisitcs of the GTI are still appealing to me and their MIA status is noticeable.

_Quote, originally posted by *archiea* »_
Yeah, my expectations were in check when I test drove the EOS. I try to minimize the buyer's remorse.... 
.
.
.
I mean to get a convertable (with the limitiations imposed by its design, i.e. a high center of gravity) along with the structural enhancements that the EOS has, and then expect the performance of a GTI, I mean how realistic is that?


----------



## swordfish1 (Jul 22, 2006)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (jgermuga)*


_Quote, originally posted by *jgermuga* »_
Yes, place yet another tax on middle class families. So in addition to the expected $4 per gallon that we will soon be paying

How many of us Brits have gritted teeth now? Try $10 gallon over here.















Think I may do an Arnie and buy myself a hydrogen Hummer. And then have nowhere to fill it up.


----------



## liquid stereo (Feb 26, 2003)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (jgermuga)*

A digression but people need to pay for what they use/want. On this side of the pond, we pull out that "middle-class taxpayer" like its the emergency situation solver. Maybe if the MCT had to pay the true costs of things then MCT wouldn't want (re. need in their minds) a 5000lb vehicle that gets 15mpg. Hell maybe mileage would actually be above 30mpg, and the U.S. companies would be able to sell to the largest burgeoning auto market in the world








Anyways, what does this have to do with the Audi A3 cabrio? Well that thing is so ughlee it makes me want to buy a GMC Suburban








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

_Quote, originally posted by *jgermuga* »_
Yes, place yet another tax on middle class families. So in addition to the expected $4 per gallon that we will soon be paying, our middle class can pay the penalty for 4 generations of greenhouse gas emmisions. 
I am not saying we don't have a problem, but an 8k levy on every SUV is a bit off the mark in terms of solutions. 
Here's an idea idea. We''ll stick with a levy on SUVs and cut college tuition by 8k per year for every US resident.
At any rate, AWD in an SUV and AWD in a performance car are two different things. In an SUV, it is usually only worthwhile in inclement weather, while in a performance car, it is a huge step up in handling and off the line performance. 
I don't see how having AWD in a car results in a drastic difference in fuel economy. If anything, it should theoretically result in better fuel economy since less power is wasted on spinning a wheel that has lost traction.


----------



## mark_d_drake (Aug 17, 2006)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (liquid stereo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *liquid stereo* »_Anyways, what does this have to do with the Audi A3 cabrio? Well that thing is so ughlee it makes me want to buy a GMC Suburban








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


And that would be for carrying your EOS in








(For those who are not familar with the beast in question... When one of my friends first came over here to visit his comment on seeing a surburban for the first time was "My god, you could fit an entire suburb in it, including the houses !!!)
















-Mark

_Modified by mark_d_drake at 6:43 AM 4-13-2007_


_Modified by mark_d_drake at 6:44 AM 4-13-2007_


----------



## jgermuga (Jan 11, 2007)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (swordfish1)*


_Quote, originally posted by *swordfish1* »_
How many of us Brits have gritted teeth now? Try $10 gallon over here.

















Yikes! I think that price would cripple our economy over here.
How may miles per year does the average Brit drive?


----------



## liquid stereo (Feb 26, 2003)

*Nope*

We aren't dumb, just lazy.
Its just the sort of prodding that's needed to cause us to rediscover ingenuity.

_Quote, originally posted by *jgermuga* »_
Yikes! I think that price would cripple our economy over here.
How may miles per year does the average Brit drive?


----------



## minnvw (Oct 16, 2006)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (jgermuga)*


_Quote, originally posted by *jgermuga* »_
Yikes! I think that price would cripple our economy over here.
How may miles per year does the average Brit drive?
 at ten bucks a gallon? wonder how many hay bales a average horse eats a year?


----------



## jgermuga (Jan 11, 2007)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (WolfsburgerMitFries)*

I have always like the understated look of the Audi's, and I think this is in keeping with their styling. I think it looks as sharp, if not sharper than the Eos with the top down. The thing I like about the Eos is that it also looks presentable with the top up. So seeing onle one pic, it's hard to do a full comparison.
But speaking of sharp, I am really digging the new A5. If it had been available now, I may have forgone a convertable entirely. To bad Audi went down stream with the drop top instead of up stream to the A5.


----------



## flubber (Sep 12, 2005)

*Re: Eos vs. the recently announced Audi A3 cabrio? (jgermuga)*


_Quote, originally posted by *jgermuga* »_I am really digging the new A5. If it had been available now, I may have forgone a convertable entirely. To bad Audi went down stream with the drop top instead of up stream to the A5.

I don't know if Audi has officially announced it yet, but it's generally accepted that there will be a convertible version of the A5. That's the replacement for the current A4 convertible, not the A3. Last I heard the word was that the A5 convertible will still be a softtop.


----------

