128 vs audi A3 impressions.

[doublevanosrc]

I used to own a 2008 GTI which is very close to the A3. The car was good and very practical and enjoyable to drive. But the fwd and a/c are real let downs, they really make the car bad. Of course the suspension was stiffer than a 1 despite have 17in wheels and the handling was no where near the BMW. BMW engineering is just on another level.

[Evice]

Originally Posted by bbbradley

The published specs disagree with that (86 ft^3 vs 89 ft^3), regardless you can't argue that 4 doors (5 if you count the HB) make for a more user-friendly cargo carrying vehicle.

The 128 has the driving dynamics, the A3 has the packaging.

Originally Posted by fugly1

I am sure you could easily argue this, but that wouldn't mean you are making a valid argument with sound statements. Sorry--the A3 has the 1er beat in terms of usable storage space.

how many times in your life you needed extra 12 inch x 12 inch x 12 inch square and 1er didn't cut it?

In my opinion, 1er gives you 96% of the storage space that you can find in A3. And just think this; in your typical daily life, how often you would need that space? you would rarely use that extra 4%... Hence, I wouldn't call that A3 has an great edge over 1er. Yes A3 is bigger, math doesn't change but 1er is as good.

[gnat]

Originally Posted by Evice

And just think this; in your typical daily life, how often you would need that space? you would rarely use that extra 4%..

But how much does it suck on those occasions (however infrequent) if you don't have that extra 4% of space but you really need it?

I think the bigger question (which the numbers don't answer) is how usable that space is based on your needs.

If you want to go by how much you can cram in, I think the A3 wins due to the hatch providing you a consistent height front to back. The second set of doors also help in maneuvering large objects into place.

If you want to go by how much you can put in just the trunk (e.g. behind the back seats and under the screen in the A3), the 1 wins without question.

[bbbradley]

Originally Posted by Evice

how many times in your life you needed extra 12 inch x 12 inch x 12 inch square and 1er didn't cut it?

All it takes is once. Nothing more frustrating than seeing the big open space...hampered by a tiny opening.

Originally Posted by Evice

In my opinion, 1er gives you 96% of the storage space that you can find in A3. And just think this; in your typical daily life, how often you would need that space? you would rarely use that extra 4%... Hence, I wouldn't call that A3 has an great edge over 1er. Yes A3 is bigger, math doesn't change but 1er is as good.

The small trunk opening coupled with the 2-doors limits practicality for the car, HBs exist as a more practical solution. The A3 has this easily over the 1, but some people don't need that extra space.

The ping-pong ball volume test is perfect, if you carry ping-pong balls. I do not.

[JasonCSU]

Originally Posted by Evice

how many times in your life you needed extra 12 inch x 12 inch x 12 inch square and 1er didn't cut it?

In my opinion, 1er gives you 96% of the storage space that you can find in A3. And just think this; in your typical daily life, how often you would need that space? you would rarely use that extra 4%... Hence, I wouldn't call that A3 has an great edge over 1er. Yes A3 is bigger, math doesn't change but 1er is as good.

The one advantage an A3 would have over a 1er in this respect would be the hatch, and the ability to load large objects that wouldn't fit into the trunk opening of a 1er. How often do many of us need that utility though?

[fugly1]

Originally Posted by Evice

how many times in your life you needed extra 12 inch x 12 inch x 12 inch square and 1er didn't cut it?

In my opinion, 1er gives you 96% of the storage space that you can find in A3. And just think this; in your typical daily life, how often you would need that space? you would rarely use that extra 4%... Hence, I wouldn't call that A3 has an great edge over 1er. Yes A3 is bigger, math doesn't change but 1er is as good.

Like others have noted, it is the A3 hatch that makes rear storage more useable, if you are ever going to carry anything larger that what the 1er allows you to load through the trunk. Some people have this need, others don't. If you have this need, the 1er is not as good as the A3 in the above respect.

When I was deciding between another A3 and other non-hatch cars for my replacement vehicle, I actually tried to count how many times I used and absolutely needed the hatch in my A3. It was't something that I needed on a frequent basis, but I did need it and the 1er would not have worked in those situations (e.g. picking up a large, boxed entertainment console for my 60" rear projection TV, my boxed aftermarket catback and downpipes, boxed aftermarket 17" wheels, my fiance's 19" aftermarket wheels (with tires) for his Boxster S, outdoor shelving, landscaping plants, wheelbarrow, etc.). At the end of the day, I recognized I didn't need the hatch space all the time and I also have other large vehicles available for my use, so I decided a hatchback wasn't necessary for me--though I recognize the 1er's limited, useable storage space will inconvenience me at some point in the future.

[RPM90]

Originally Posted by gnat

If it's on the A4, that's new since she looked (I want a small toy car so the A4 isn't on my radar). The A3 as of 2 months ago still didn't have a power passenger option.


We will just have to disagree here


In principle I agree with you so long as it's done right which it's not in the Audi.


Every time you get in the car. If I'm paying 30+ for a car (hell 20+), I don't want it to annoy me every time I get in it. My business is process automation and making life simpler, so something like this really grates on me.


I hope so too, but this is 2 revisions of the A3 that have had these annoyances so I'm not holding my breath. And yes, BMW is far from perfect themselves, it just comes down to personal preference.


I haven't driven a Quattro in a manner to test it out, but when BMW finally puts xDrive into the 1 I'm likely to have a bit of a "crisis"

The A4 has had power passenger seats for a while now.
In the current A4, power passenger seats are standard.
I had them in my 06 A4.

Yes, we'll have to disagree. Even if it ain't perfect in the Audi at least it's there. In my 3yrs with my A4 it was a nuisance for about week or so.
Poorly designed? Yes. Mostly for us MT drivers. For most drivers though it's a non issue as most Audi's and BMW's are automatics with no need to use the parking park all the time.
So for me, the function still out weighs the minor flaw.
You're paying $30k Plus for a 1 series that doesn't even have any adjustment. So it's a toss on which one sucks more.
But, we do agree that neither Audi nor BMW go it right.

Quattro is superior to X drive.
For me, a RWD BMW is the performance setup. In an Audi, quattro is the performance setup. X drive makes a BMW feel out of place.
Even performance tests show that something gets lost in an X drive version.

Oddly, I find FWD in a VW like the GTI works much better than it does on the A3. The suspension tuning on the GTI makes for a fun to drive FWD.

If I had to have AWD it would be Audi or Subaru.
Go test drive an A4 quattro and then an A4 FWD, you'll notice the difference, especially with this newer chassis. Audi move the engine back, repositioned the steering rack, and gave the AWD system a 60/40 split rear to front, which has really improved overall handling and balance.
Prior chassis like my A4 had a 50/50 quattro and more weight in front of the axle line, thus it had more "push" going into a turn. Still a very fun car to drive though with the sport suspension and MT.

I'd love to see an S3 comes to the states. Audi really needs something to try and compete with the 1 series. It would be somewhere between the 128i and 135i in terms of power.

[RPM90]

Originally Posted by MikeinAlexandria

I want to like Audi, but they just don't quite make a driver's car. Have not driven an R8, but I would bet one I'd rather drive the Lambo gallardo, or maybe a Boxster spyder. Enjoy the BMW, I think you made the right choice!

Even out 1's are not that great in terms of overall handling, as the suspension is not that great, very workable but not even as good as the 3 series sport.

I'd argue that Audi do make drivers cars especially with the TT-S and S4, and the coming TT-RS. The S4 has actually beat the 335i in overall performance. It took Audi some time, but they did it.
The TT-S has been very well received as a performance vehicle.
It's no Caymen but then not many cars are.

It'll be interesting to see if BMW can make small displacement turbo's as well as Audi can, since that seems to be the direction they are headed in.
Audi has more experience in that arena, but BMW is no slouch in engineering.

[ManMachine]

Audi reliability continues to be an issue - although BMW isn't that great either.

Practically speaking, A3 is a poor man's family entry luxury car. BMW simply doesn't care about that market in the U.S. yet.

[Raine]

I don't think many people buy the 1 series for the trunk space...

I mean, it's a compact 2 door coupe. The space us definitely there though if you need it (if you gold down the rear seats) which is good enough for me.

[Rawhide]

This thread reminds me why I have a beater truck.

[bbbradley]

Originally Posted by ManMachine

Practically speaking, A3 is a poor man's family entry luxury car. BMW simply doesn't care about that market in the U.S. yet.

MINI is cheaper than an A3, and everyone knows it is just a FWD BMW. The 128 and the A3 are similar in price; I'd say BMW has two cars in the "poor man's" segment.

[Rawhide]

I always get a kick out of the phrase "poor man's" this or that. Especially when we're talking $30,000 + cars.

That's nowhere near poor.

[bbbradley]

Originally Posted by Rawhide

I always get a kick out of the phrase "poor man's" this or that. Especially when we're talking $30,000 + cars.

That's nowhere near poor.

The 3-series is often called the Boston Civic in these parts, they truly are a dime a dozen.

[Rawhide]

I guess when I hear the word "poor" I think of people I've seen in other countries that can't afford shoes, not someone driving around in a new Audi A3 or BMW 128i (or Hyundai Accent for that matter).

[MikeinAlexandria]

Originally Posted by ManMachine

Audi reliability continues to be an issue - although BMW isn't that great either.

Practically speaking, A3 is a poor man's family entry luxury car. BMW simply doesn't care about that market in the U.S. yet.

Actually, BMW cares alot about that market. So much so that they purchased an entire factory and created a new genre of cars to bring folks in... MINI. The Clubman and now the Countryman will outhandle most small SUVs, get as good fuel economy at 75mpg as alot of hybrids (low 40s mpg) and have a cache that is second to none. In addition, BMW is building cars now to attack the market held onto by SMART. I have seen some of the hybrid city car designs, and they look pretty cool. For someone living in a densely populated city with a stop and go commute, they may make sense.

That said, Audi makes the S3, a three door hatch with the handling and power to keep up with anything... not available in the US. According to Audi's prez, with whom I got a chance to chat some time back, there aren't enough enthusiast buyers looking for up-market hot hatches in the US. The trouble here is that folks who want luxury cars want a foor-door, five passenger sedan with all the trimmings. For me, I want a sporty small car with Porsche-like handling and the fuel economy of a Hybrid (BMW 123d... BMW, are you listening?) But I am fairly unique in that interest.

So, I think one's buying decision comes down to what you can live with on a daily basis, vs. what yuo might need 4 percent of the time. That four percent, I can borrow a friends SUV in return for a dinner or two and a tank of gas.

[gnat]

Originally Posted by RPM90

X drive makes a BMW feel out of place.
Even performance tests show that something gets lost in an X drive version.

In completely non-scientific "studies" I find I get more out of the e30ix and e90xi than I do their i counterparts (haven't driven 36s or 46s). The weight balance is a bit better and the traction (in corners) is noticeably better.

I have also watched a stock e90 328xi out perform a bunch of stock 335i cars at an Auto-X. At the same event a 335xi (stock) out performed everything (including the tuned and modded 335s) except the Z3 Ms and Minis. Both cars were able to do better (at least partly) due to the AWD system. In both cases, even though they were "sport models" they didn't have the sport suspension like their counter parts.

I recognize neither of those cases is good empirical knowledge, but my point is that I wouldn't be so quick to discount xDrive as not being a performance option. Yes there are hits to performance due to the extra mass of the car (both overall as well as the drive line itself), but approaching the edge is where the AWD systems come into their own and show their real worth.

Go test drive an A4 quattro and then an A4 FWD

My intent has not been to say xDrive is better than Quattro. I just don't have the personal experience to judge as I haven't spent significant time driving one (especially in a manner where the AWD makes a difference).

If I was going to get an Audi (which as I said previously I keep trying to convince myself to do) Quattro is on the top of my list of features. But at the same time, if I'm buying a 997 the C4 (or the Turbo) is the only option in my book and xDrive is a must have on a BWM that has that option.

[bbbradley]

Originally Posted by gnat

In completely non-scientific "studies" I find I get more out of the e30ix and e90xi than I do their i counterparts (haven't driven 36s or 46s). The weight balance is a bit better and the traction (in corners) is noticeably better.

I have also watched a stock e90 328xi out perform a bunch of stock 335i cars at an Auto-X. At the same event a 335xi (stock) out performed everything (including the tuned and modded 335s) except the Z3 Ms and Minis. Both cars were able to do better (at least partly) due to the AWD system. In both cases, even though they were "sport models" they didn't have the sport suspension like their counter parts.

I recognize neither of those cases is good empirical knowledge, but my point is that I wouldn't be so quick to discount xDrive as not being a performance option. Yes there are hits to performance due to the extra mass of the car (both overall as well as the drive line itself), but approaching the edge is where the AWD systems come into their own and show their real worth.


My intent has not been to say xDrive is better than Quattro. I just don't have the personal experience to judge as I haven't spent significant time driving one (especially in a manner where the AWD makes a difference).

If I was going to get an Audi (which as I said previously I keep trying to convince myself to do) Quattro is on the top of my list of features. But at the same time, if I'm buying a 997 the C4 (or the Turbo) is the only option in my book and xDrive is a must have on a BWM that has that option.

Does BMW still neuter the AWD cars with a higher ride height like in days past?

Auto-x is a poor tool to draw conclusions from, it is ~90+% driver, ~5% course setup, and ~5% car.

[gnat]

Originally Posted by bbbradley

Does BMW still neuter the AWD cars with a higher ride height like in days past?

The xDrive cars don't have the sport suspension installed when they are the "sport" models.

Auto-x is a poor tool to draw conclusions from, it is ~90+% driver, ~5% course setup, and ~5% car.

I think you have the car underrated as it and it's configuration can make a significant difference, but yes most comes down to the driver which is why I said it wasn't empirical data .

I think, however, Auto-X is an excellent test of AWD vs FWD/RWD as it mostly takes raw power out of the equation and grip/traction become the main performance factor. You want to keep as much power/speed as you can through the course, but you have a smaller window for error that you can correct from (e.g. you blow a gate and you are done unless everyone else screws up worse than you ).

[bbbradley]

Originally Posted by gnat

The xDrive cars don't have the sport suspension installed when they are the "sport" models.

OK, I recall there used to be 3 ride heights for the cars. ix version was the highest, base was in the middle, and sport was the lowest. This has since changed then? BMW's initial AWD offerings were somewhat of a joke due to that.

Originally Posted by gnat

I think you have the car underrated as it and it's configuration can make a significant difference, but yes most comes down to the driver which is why I said it wasn't empirical data .

I think, however, Auto-X is an excellent test of AWD vs FWD/RWD as it mostly takes raw power out of the equation and grip/traction become the main performance factor. You want to keep as much power/speed as you can through the course, but you have a smaller window for error that you can correct from (e.g. you blow a gate and you are done unless everyone else screws up worse than you ).

88% driver, 6% car, 6% course. Better?

I think the driver is by far the most important factor in an auto-x. I've trounced a Viper, a 911, and an STI in my C-Stock Miata, yet I have no delusions a Miata is a faster car than those cars. Given an equal level of skill, then the car and prep takes a larger role, but driver is still the king.

[footie]

Given the choice of a 128i or A3 2.0TFSI then I would chose the Beemer, basically because the A3 isn't as sporty or as rewarding to drive, for that you need to switch to the S3 which doesn't come to the US.

But there are other alternative from VAG which could be considered as just as entertaining as a 128i to drive and even more stylist. The GTI Golf is one hell of a great little driver's car, it's got the looks, it's got the speed as I have one and can confirm it will reach 60mph and 100mph in 6.1s and 15.2s respectively, plus this thing can really handle.




Does the 128i really look as stylist?

[Rawhide]

I dig the GTI too - cool little car.

I like the interior of the GTI a little more because it has more of a cockpit feel to it's layout. But body style wise I'd still have to go with the 1er.