RE: Audi S3 revelation: PH Blog
Discussion
Interesting article as ever from Chris Harris, the S3 does look to be a good package much like the Golf R and the Cupra 280 but they are all built from the same platform to cater for different tastes.
I would say for all those happy to slate the RS3 how many of you have driven one on a regular basis? One journalist does not make the universal guide. Some of Chris articles are great, some I'm less inclined to agree with but he like everyone else is entitled to their opinion.
I replaced my B7 RS4, arguably Audi's best handling, best packaged RS model ever with the RS3 after driving several alternatives including the M135i, B8 S4, Mercedes A Class (A45 wasn't available at that time but on way), Mk 6 Golf R. There are elements of the RS3 that show it is on a chassis developed 12 years ago; the interior wasn't quite as nice as the RS4; I have changed the rear ARB and now run the same size "decent" tyres all round (Goodyear F1's, the OEM Conti's are universally derided) as a consequence on 8Jx19 rims which has dramatically changed the handling of the car and dialled out most of the under steer. For the most part however and the majority of daily driving we all do, bar the change in aural tone (and I do sometimes still miss the V8) I would be hard pushed to say the RS4 is a better car.
As for Chris's article on the RS3, when someone says there is a suspension change when he presses the sport button then it loses some credibility (for reference it slightly changes fuelling and opens a valve in the exhaust so gases are splurted out of both pipes rather than one). Perhaps the increased noise increased his sensory perception and made the suspension feel harder? If he had pressed the ESP button next to it he would have found a sport setting which marginally alters the Haldex power distribution and gives far better drivability but ultimately if Audi had provided the car on better tyres his perception would have been changed. Note in later Harris reviews, particularly A45 AMG via M135i differences in tyres are referenced yet not in the RS3 v M135i video?
Ultimately unless you are doing licence losing speeds or fortunate to be doing track days in your car, you'd be hard pressed to notice a lot of the differences exacerbated by the media. But better still whilst Harris and others are entitled to their opinion, the one that matters is your own and what you need and want from a car. I'm not Sebastian Loeb and there are no doubt better drivers out there, however for the larger general public I'm probably pretty representative and the RS3, even with its engine parked on the nose of the car isn't as bad as made out but isn't perfect; but then which car bar a McLaren P1 is? If the 8V S3 is as good as Harris and other journos suggest, the next RS3 will hopefully be cracking.
I would say for all those happy to slate the RS3 how many of you have driven one on a regular basis? One journalist does not make the universal guide. Some of Chris articles are great, some I'm less inclined to agree with but he like everyone else is entitled to their opinion.
I replaced my B7 RS4, arguably Audi's best handling, best packaged RS model ever with the RS3 after driving several alternatives including the M135i, B8 S4, Mercedes A Class (A45 wasn't available at that time but on way), Mk 6 Golf R. There are elements of the RS3 that show it is on a chassis developed 12 years ago; the interior wasn't quite as nice as the RS4; I have changed the rear ARB and now run the same size "decent" tyres all round (Goodyear F1's, the OEM Conti's are universally derided) as a consequence on 8Jx19 rims which has dramatically changed the handling of the car and dialled out most of the under steer. For the most part however and the majority of daily driving we all do, bar the change in aural tone (and I do sometimes still miss the V8) I would be hard pushed to say the RS4 is a better car.
As for Chris's article on the RS3, when someone says there is a suspension change when he presses the sport button then it loses some credibility (for reference it slightly changes fuelling and opens a valve in the exhaust so gases are splurted out of both pipes rather than one). Perhaps the increased noise increased his sensory perception and made the suspension feel harder? If he had pressed the ESP button next to it he would have found a sport setting which marginally alters the Haldex power distribution and gives far better drivability but ultimately if Audi had provided the car on better tyres his perception would have been changed. Note in later Harris reviews, particularly A45 AMG via M135i differences in tyres are referenced yet not in the RS3 v M135i video?
Ultimately unless you are doing licence losing speeds or fortunate to be doing track days in your car, you'd be hard pressed to notice a lot of the differences exacerbated by the media. But better still whilst Harris and others are entitled to their opinion, the one that matters is your own and what you need and want from a car. I'm not Sebastian Loeb and there are no doubt better drivers out there, however for the larger general public I'm probably pretty representative and the RS3, even with its engine parked on the nose of the car isn't as bad as made out but isn't perfect; but then which car bar a McLaren P1 is? If the 8V S3 is as good as Harris and other journos suggest, the next RS3 will hopefully be cracking.
Edited by PGC on Friday 11th April 11:30
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Yes, like an EVO, STI, etc. A pretty standard recipe. Also worth noting that the outlier in this class, the M135i is also a bit nose heavy.But if you consider an additional 4-5% on the front axle to be a deal killer for an all-rounder designed for family hauling occasional and back-road or track antics, then there is nothing to discuss.anonymous said:
[redacted]
Luckily we have sports cars for that.anonymous said:
[redacted]
Then buy a Cayman. What you seek is not available in any sport compact. It is splitting hairs in this class. I cannot think of one truly flawed sport compact from any major manufacturer in the past 10 years. The newest batch now have near super car levels of performance, with dynamics that are more than engaging enough for an all-rounder. My old S3 due to its size, weight, and electro-mech AWD, was far more entertaining than my current S4, which although very competent is simply too large and not something I'd ever compare with a sports car, despite it having a few items "right" on paper. The new S3 will run rings around one on a tight track, and maybe even a power track.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
But you too are also missing the point because these are cars designed to be 'sporty' but can the majority of their time carry 4-5 in comfort with a boot full of stuff and do the daily commute. If you designed something just to be sporty then it would be 1 or 2 seat, mid-engine layoutanonymous said:
[redacted]
Why as a major car manufacturer would you though? By placing the engine behind or on top of the front axle you compromise cabin space, impact crash impact design and make a bigger car. By making it rear wheel drive you run the risk in certain countries they will not sell because as good as they are in the dry and wet, in worsening conditions for the majority of drivers they are a liability. And in snow, when the majority of the UK public think winter tyres are a 'luxury' or not necessary FWD will always prevail FWD is also cheaper to build making a cheaper car for consumers to buy. If we were all petrol heads demand may well be greater, but for most it is A to B with occasional fun factor and manufacturers design to suit. Classic example in C4 Picasso!
PGC said:
Why as a major car manufacturer would you though? By placing the engine behind or on top of the front axle you compromise cabin space, impact crash impact design and make a bigger car. By making it rear wheel drive you run the risk in certain countries they will not sell because as good as they are in the dry and wet, in worsening conditions for the majority of drivers they are a liability. And in snow, when the majority of the UK public think winter tyres are a 'luxury' or not necessary FWD will always prevail FWD is also cheaper to build making a cheaper car for consumers to buy. If we were all petrol heads demand may well be greater, but for most it is A to B with occasional fun factor and manufacturers design to suit. Classic example in C4 Picasso!
Funnily enough, if you go to Southern Germany, Austria, Switzerland etc, you will see plenty of BMW's and Mercs driving around, and very few of them getting stuck. Amazing what putting the right tyres for the conditions on can do. I can also think of a quite simple reason why you'd start with an engine inside the axle line and rear-wheel drive - because it makes the car a much better steer. FWD/AWD will always be a compromise, putting packaging and cost ahead of balance and driver satisfaction. I mean look at BMW - well known for producing amongst the best everyday cars to drive, and they almost all start with the engine in the front behind the axle, and the drive going to the back.
scherzkeks said:
Perhaps a discussion on the interplay between suspension design and wheelbase would be more productive than your "feelings."
Oh dear. You're not doing your fellow Americans any favours by living up to the stereotype, taking aim at the wrong person in your haste to force tour opinion on others. The comment you quoted was originally made by 'iloveboost' earlier on. 
This is the second time you've done that this week.
The discussion, however, is welcome.
scherzkeks said:
Here we go again. The engine position is the same as virtually every other sport compact on the market...
The RS3's is even further forward than most. - The axle line is fully behind the engine whereas in most hatches, the engine sits partially over the axle. This is something that's been improved with MQB as I pointed-out earlier. Why would they make this change if they didn't see the need?scherzkeks said:
...and from a handling standpoint, is even better than last-gen big Audis, where the entire engine really was ahead of the axle and positioned higher than the equivalent transverse app.
Oh, so you now recognise that having the engine in front of the axle is counterproductive? Wonderful. Now we're getting somewhere.scherzkeks said:
Also that "boat anchor" is particularly compact and weighs just 30 kg more than the newestlightweight TFSI in the 8V (the older one obviously being heavier). The RS also employed carbon fiber body panels up front to offset the marginal weight difference, and has the same weight bias same as the current S3.
Quoting a front/rear weight distribution is too simplistic for this discussion. If a car had, for example, 50/50 distribution but the majority of the weight was at either end and outside the wheelbase, it isn't going to be as well balanced as one with the weight contained within the wheelbase.Real world example: If I stick heavy duty steel bumpers on either end of my Discovery, it's not going to deal with it as well as if the added weight was made up by additional equipment in a box behind the front seats.
bodhi said:
PGC said:
Why as a major car manufacturer would you though? By placing the engine behind or on top of the front axle you compromise cabin space, impact crash impact design and make a bigger car. By making it rear wheel drive you run the risk in certain countries they will not sell because as good as they are in the dry and wet, in worsening conditions for the majority of drivers they are a liability. And in snow, when the majority of the UK public think winter tyres are a 'luxury' or not necessary FWD will always prevail FWD is also cheaper to build making a cheaper car for consumers to buy. If we were all petrol heads demand may well be greater, but for most it is A to B with occasional fun factor and manufacturers design to suit. Classic example in C4 Picasso!
Funnily enough, if you go to Southern Germany, Austria, Switzerland etc, you will see plenty of BMW's and Mercs driving around, and very few of them getting stuck. Amazing what putting the right tyres for the conditions on can do. I can also think of a quite simple reason why you'd start with an engine inside the axle line and rear-wheel drive - because it makes the car a much better steer. FWD/AWD will always be a compromise, putting packaging and cost ahead of balance and driver satisfaction. I mean look at BMW - well known for producing amongst the best everyday cars to drive, and they almost all start with the engine in the front behind the axle, and the drive going to the back.
Lets stay reasonable after all it's just a car! Ok the 2.5 RS models understeer and ride a bit worse than other cars in their class partly by having an over-stiff front end and an engine in front of the front axle like other FWD cars. They are still nice cars I'd like to drive now calm down or you're all getting detention. 
I drive a FWD TDI and it hasn't fallen off the road yet.
I drive a FWD TDI and it hasn't fallen off the road yet. scherzkeks said:
Yes, like an EVO, STI, etc. A pretty standard recipe. Also worth noting that the outlier in this class, the M135i is also a bit nose heavy
So one minute you're happy to quote front/rear weight distribution figures (50/50 for the M135i) and the next you're saying that the car's "nose heavy"?The BMW, Mitsubishi and Subaru all have better-balanced AWD systems and the Subaru obviously has the boxer engine to help the weight distribution / placement (though it's obviously still not ideal, Imprezas are known to understeer but not as much as the RS3).
scherzkeks said:
But if you consider an additional 4-5% on the front axle to be a deal killer for an all-rounder designed for family hauling occasional and back-road or track antics, then there is nothing to discuss.
Nice flounce.scherzkeks said:
Luckily we have sports cars for that.
You mean like a TT?Oh.
scherzkeks said:
Then buy a Cayman. What you seek is not available in any sport compact. It is splitting hairs in this class. I cannot think of one truly flawed sport compact from any major manufacturer in the past 10 years. The newest batch now have near super car levels of performance, with dynamics that are more than engaging enough for an all-rounder.
We're car enthusiasts; these details matter. We're not talking about a "C-Max vs Zafira" school run test...even if BMW do want to make a Touran.scherzkeks said:
My old S3 due to its size, weight, and electro-mech AWD, was far more entertaining than my current S4, which although very competent is simply too large and not something I'd ever compare with a sports car, despite it having a few items "right" on paper. The new S3 will run rings around one on a tight track, and maybe even a power track.
Out of interest, which gearbox does your S4 have and does it have the Sport Diff?iloveboost said:
Lets stay reasonable after all it's just a car! Ok the 2.5 RS models understeer and ride a bit worse than other cars in their class partly by having an over-stiff front end and an engine in front of the front axle like other FWD cars. They are still nice cars I'd like to drive now calm down or you're all getting detention. I drive a FWD TDI and it hasn't fallen off the road yet.
I drive a FWD TDI and it hasn't fallen off the road yet. 
On a serious note; this is all just discussion and I hope nobody's taking this personally. Scherzkeks, if I ever meet you I'll buy you a drink. I don't suppose you'll be at Le Mans this year?Clivey said:
scherzkeks said:
Yes, like an EVO, STI, etc. A pretty standard recipe. Also worth noting that the outlier in this class, the M135i is also a bit nose heavy
So one minute you're happy to quote front/rear weight distribution figures (50/50 for the M135i) and the next you're saying that the car's "nose heavy"?Sounds very much like the S4 that Mr Harris has, until Audi facelifted it and made it DSG only, not perfect but nice & sporty to drive and understated. Looks like most Audi S cars are nicer to drive than the RS cars based on the reviews I've read.
Its also its nice to see an Audi that isn't over done with black wheels and other s-line kit when its really a 2.0 TDi.
I quite like the idea of the sportback S3 in brown - may be I'm weird.
Its also its nice to see an Audi that isn't over done with black wheels and other s-line kit when its really a 2.0 TDi.
I quite like the idea of the sportback S3 in brown - may be I'm weird.
scherzkeks said:
You've set up another straw man (your last two posts are constructed almost entirely of them), since I never said anything of the sort.
What are you talking about? You said it in your post at 11:27.scherzkeks said:
The M135i X-drive is 54/46 and the regular car 52/48.
Fair enough. - Top Gear quote 50/50 for the standard car but I'll admit they're not the best source. 52/48 overall is still brilliant but my earlier point is that the figure is still simplistic. With the engine behind the front axle, it's better than if it were in front.FisiP1 said:
Not quite the same, but closely related cars and thus relevant. Have been running a (now last-gen) TTS for the past year, think it is very very good. With the standard magride it is supple, fast as you'd ever honestly need for overtaking, (subjectively) looks more interesting than a box-hatch shape, and has a lovely interior.
Previously owned a Cayman and out of the say 15hrs a week I spend in the car, I'd chose the TTS for 14.5 of them.
Glad the new gen of S3 is a good car, hope it spreads awareness that despite the hate there are still some very good Audi models around. I look forward to the next-gen TTS tests.
The next-gen TTS looks like it could well be pretty awesome. A spec of 0-62 in 4.7s (that's presumably with the standard manual box, optional S-Tronic should be quicker) and likely improved handling over its S3/Golf R cousins (lighter and lower than both) should make for a seriously potent car. Seriously expensive too though, no doubt.Previously owned a Cayman and out of the say 15hrs a week I spend in the car, I'd chose the TTS for 14.5 of them.
Glad the new gen of S3 is a good car, hope it spreads awareness that despite the hate there are still some very good Audi models around. I look forward to the next-gen TTS tests.
Won't be available until Q1 2015 though and still nothing close to a real world road-test of any new Mk3 TT to go on so far.
Clivey said:
cerb4.5lee said:
I think its just what you are used to I loved the steering in my E92 M3/Z4M/E90 330i but then I drove our Audi TTS and I had a brand new 320d as a loan car and I hated the electric steering on both massively but like with anything you get used to it so you just adapt to it.
What`s best will always be a matter of opinion...but like the Auto/Twin Clutch debate my preference will always be for the old days hence my love of hydraulic steering and the manual gearbox but that's clearly not the future...I clearly need to go with the times.
I'm sure they said that when the quartz watch came along...in the '50s, people were predicting nuclear-powered cars but here we are over half a century later and Ford are about to bring a NA petrol V8 Mustang with a manual gearbox to the UK. What`s best will always be a matter of opinion...but like the Auto/Twin Clutch debate my preference will always be for the old days hence my love of hydraulic steering and the manual gearbox but that's clearly not the future...I clearly need to go with the times.
cerb4.5lee said:
Clivey said:
cerb4.5lee said:
I can see you are a massive fan of them!
anonymous said:
[redacted]
You seem to forget that most people are terrified of using an E46 M3 for circa 20k miles a year. Equally, I had an E92 M3 at the same time as the S3, the back-to-back comparison didn't do the Bimmer any favours. The new v used argument only works if you're willing to underwrite out-of-warranty. As a man who's about to pay for an S4 DSG gearbox, I feel qualified to say that.
Chris Harris said:
You seem to forget that most people are terrified of using an E46 M3 for circa 20k miles a year. Equally, I had an E92 M3 at the same time as the S3, the back-to-back comparison didn't do the Bimmer any favours.
The new v used argument only works if you're willing to underwrite out-of-warranty. As a man who's about to pay for an S4 DSG gearbox, I feel qualified to say that.
How much was that?!The new v used argument only works if you're willing to underwrite out-of-warranty. As a man who's about to pay for an S4 DSG gearbox, I feel qualified to say that.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff