RE: Battle for the B-road: WRX STI vs S3 saloon

RE: Battle for the B-road: WRX STI vs S3 saloon

Tuesday 7th April 2015

Battle for the B-road: WRX STI vs S3 saloon

Japan versus Germany as the fight for honour in the twisties pitches 'yo' against 'ja'



Our battleground? The British B-road. Our contenders? An original hero of 'the twisties' - the Subaru NotImpreza WRX STI. And our new pretender? An Audi S3 saloon. 'What about the Golf R?' you say. Fear not - the newly delivered PH Fleet VW will be out to prove itself against the Subaru over coming months. But here we've chosen the closely related Audi, its three-box saloon format perhaps closer in spirit to the WRX STI since Subaru abandoned its attempt to go hot hatch.

£30K, 300hp, 4WD - which is king of the twisties?
£30K, 300hp, 4WD - which is king of the twisties?
The giant-killing ability of an Impreza in this environment was for years its USP. But the Subaru's performance advantage over increasingly potent hot hatches has closed. The rally heritage has faded from recent memory, scoops and wings are considered a bit chavvy these days and it seemed like game over.

Favourable exchange rates have permitted its rebirth, shorn of the iconic Impreza badge, sharpened, toughened and considerably more aggressive than ever before. But the beach towels went down while its back was turned. And now for the same £30K as the WRX STI you can get a German premium badged four-wheel drive compact saloon with a matching 300hp, looks that won't scare your fleet manager/other half and an interior made from materials more substantial than your average kebab box. If the Audi S3 can pull off weekend Subaru-style B-road ability yet slip unnoticed into the work car park of a Monday morning, what hope is left for the WRX STI?


Audi S3 Saloon
Funny how the addition of a boot turns the Audi S3 from just another hot hatch into something a little more interesting. Superficial or not, as a three-box the S3 stands apart in the crowd of hot MQB platform cars.

Audi engine gets job done; hardly charismatic
Audi engine gets job done; hardly charismatic
The basics. As a relative of the Golf GTI/R, Leon Cupra, Skoda Octavia vRS et al the S3 has a transverse 2.0-litre turbocharged four driving all four wheels via a Haldex 5 powertrain and, in this case, a six-speed manual. Dual-clutch S Tronic is also available, an instant score over the Subaru for many, even for the £1,480 premium. It has a Golf R equalling 300hp/280lb ft of torque, is slightly slower 0-62 at 5.3 seconds and records official numbers of 40.4mpg and 162g/km. As far as spec sheet number crunchers are concerned though the WRX STI's 27.7mpg and 242g/km are the four-wheeled equivalent of Nigel Farage on a John Smiths and B&H bender. No matter that the real-world fuel consumption is actually much closer.

Mechanically the S3 is a much simpler car than the Subaru, the Haldex clutch delegating torque to the rear wheels when necessary and the open diffs regulated by ESP brake nibbling. The S3 does have Audi's Magnetic Ride adjustable dampers and runs 25mm lower than regular A3 saloons but is unmistakably more about style than substance compared with the Subaru.

Unsurprisingly Audi does this bit better
Unsurprisingly Audi does this bit better
When it's carried off this well you won't hear many complaints though. Predictable or not the styling is crisp, well proportioned and won't upset the neighbours. And inside it's the same story, tech and minimalism working hand in hand with flourishes like red bolsters on the logo'd seats - enough to set the S3 apart but done in the best possible taste.

Cars like this shine on a wet road; defiantly the weather remained balmy and dry for our test. Damn. Expecting playful though? Of course you weren't, the Audi still blisteringly rapid across country and utterly consistent in its responses no matter what you throw at it. If the low speed ride feels a little underdamped at pace it actually feels very well sorted and - whisper it - compliant. S Audis often drive with a little more subtlety than RS equivalents and so it is here - maximum pace, minimum fuss. The controls are light, the shifter flopping around the gate as if its linkage has come adrift like most VW group manuals while the variable ratio/variable assistance steering varies weight and response but never feel. Because there isn't any. The brake pedal bites a little too hard on initial prod but none of these gripes interfere with the sense this is a very fast and sorted motor car and quietly satisfying to pedal at pace. Just don't expect much surprise and delight.

The all pervasive EA888 engine is an Audi design and traditionally torquey and undersquare in configuration. It's down 20lb ft on torque compared with the Subaru but subjectively pulls harder, its peak at just 1,800rpm compared with the WRX STI's 300lb ft at 4,200rpm.

This means it can pull away from the Subaru out of the corners, even if it gives you fewer options on entry. There's very little emotional connection though and no sense of revs or boost building. Press throttle until desired speed is reached, shift gear and repeat. S Tronic and the ability to blat up and down the 'box via paddles probably suits this binary power delivery better, as is the way with many modern engines.

So in all but the final tenths of the handling envelope the Audi is more than good enough to keep the Subaru honest. And its Q-car invisibility is undoubtedly appealing. Is it enough though?


Subaru WRX STI
Fair play to Subaru. It's seen the threat from the Germans and others and decided attack is the best defence. And attack is the WRX STI's default mode. It's so darned aggressive and hyped up it actually takes a while to adjust and tone down your inputs so as not to dive into the bushes with every tiny application of steering lock.

Yes, it's the same old formula ... and same power
Yes, it's the same old formula ... and same power
Where the Audi takes relatively basic underpinnings and applies a level of electronic garnish Subaru approaches the problem from the other direction. The WRX STI has three different types of mechanical limited-slip differential (helical front/viscous centre/Torsen rear), plus an additional electronically controlled one to control torque distribution fore and aft. It has super fast hydraulically assisted steering and passively damped suspension running fierce spring/damper rates and mounted rigidly to a significantly stiffer body. It then adds torque vectoring, manual torque bias adjustment and a choice of throttle maps into the equation. No wonder there was no budget left to spend on squidgy dash plastics.

And here's the difference. The Subaru is all about the driving. The Audi contrives a convincing enough impression and then devotes itself to soothing and reassuring you the premium was worth paying. The WRX STI is purely about maximum attack, the ghost of McRae and the 'if in doubt, flat out' mentality.

This is a blessing and a curse. Thanks to the complexity the Subaru has a multitude of answers to the same question and the response is only ever as consistent as the input. Meaning a fractionally different approach to the same corner, a smidge later off the brakes, a tad earlier on the throttle, a different setting on the centre diff ... the outcome can vary wildly. But while the Audi resolutely plays it safe no matter what the provocation the Subaru gives you options. And it's playful, responsive to diving into the apex on the brakes, tucking its nose in and adopting a neutral to oversteer stance on the way out if you're brave on the throttle and decisive about your intended direction of travel.

For all the stereotypes it's not actually that flimsy
For all the stereotypes it's not actually that flimsy
And the contact points are so much better. You don't get a huge sense of the road through the wheel but the response and weighting are a reminder of why we bang on about hydraulic assistance. The brake pedal feels almost unservoed in its solidity and is perfectly matched to the throttle for heel and toe. Likewise the tightly gated shift and crisp throttle response. It's geared short and the sweet spot at the top of the rev range is narrow, meaning you're busy with hands and feet to keep it on the boil. Thanks to the charismatic engine and old-school power delivery this is immense fun. When you're in the mood. Assert yourself and the Subaru will happily play along; be timid and it'll feel unpredictable, overly twitchy and demanding.

Whisper it but on that dark rainy night on an unfamiliar B-road the cool glow of the Audi's (optional) LED headlights and its calmer nature will probably be the more comforting place to be. Would you get up early the next morning to take the long way to go and get the papers and milk? Probably not. But for all the superficial similarities in bottom line specs the difference in the character of these two cars is fascinating.


Verdict
It'd be easy to write the Audi off as hiding behind a premium badge and an artfully contrived impression of talents Subaru used to call its own. Like when some X Factor wannabe murders a soul standard by hurling a load of notes at it, hoping nobody notices the Autotuned loss of nuance. Impressive at a superficial level but just missing that, well, x factor.

But it's still rather an appealing car, not least for its combination of understated looks and discreetly blistering pace. Like a less shouty version of the mechanically identical Golf R, it is more than capable at all-conditions fast road pace and surprisingly potent on track too, accepting that, Terminator like, it absolutely will not deviate from its intended plan of attack. For those - and there will be many - who simply can't stomach the scoop'n'wing image of the Subaru it's more than good enough to play the under the radar substitute.

But the WRX STI is still a proper driver's car, full of geeky details and as eccentric and hardcore in engineering as the looks would suggest. OK, so they suggest it should have perhaps another 100hp too. But when you look at the MQB cars' electronic simulations of what Subaru still chooses to do with mechanical components it's refreshingly old-school. And, get this, it's actually a bit of a bargain too.

Remember we kicked off by saying these were both £30K, 300hp cars? Well the Subaru, as tested, is barely nudged over that threshold by the solitary option of its dealer fit Pioneer touchscreen nav unit. And the Audi, already carrying a 10 per cent premium for starters? Driven out of the dealership as seen it's a £40K car. Style, it seems, costs over substance.


For more on this head-to-head see PHTV on Wednesday!


AUDI S3 SALOON
Engine:
1,984cc, 4-cyl turbo
Transmission: 6-speed manual, four-wheel drive
Power (hp): 300@6,200rpm
Torque (lb ft): 280@1800rpm
0-62mph: 5.3sec
Top speed: 155mph (limited)
Weight: 1,430kg
MPG: 40.4mpg (NEDC)
CO2: 162g/km
Price: £32,745 before options (£40,350 as tested comprising Glacier White metallic paint £525; Parade Red design package £895; 19-inch wheels £395; 'advanced key' £425; auto dimming mirror/rain sensor £245; LED headlights £795; interior lighting package £170; ;Technology Package' inc. phone prep £1,795; dimming/heated/powered mirrors £250; Audi Parking System £835; cruise control £225 and Audi sound system £225)


SUBARU WRX STI
Engine
: 2,457cc, flat-4 turbo
Transmission: 6-speed manual, four-wheel drive
Power (hp): 300@6,000rpm
Torque (lb ft): 300@4,200rpm
0-62mph: 5.2sec
Top speed:159mph
Weight: 1,534kg
MPG: 27.2mpg (NEDC)
CO2: 242g/km
Price: £28,995 before options (£30,007 as tested inc. Pioneer touchscreen infotainment/nav unit and dealer installation)













 

Photos: Antony Fraser

Author
Discussion

PhantomPH

Original Poster:

4,043 posts

225 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
I love my S3...but I am starting to think I should have gone for the DSG instead of the manual...

moffat

1,020 posts

225 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
But in our day of PCP / HP / Contract Hire sales I wonder if the Subaru is cheaper?

I would think that with its better residuals, better mpg, lower CO2 the S3 will win out 9 out of 10 times.

I'm glad Subaru still make the STI but it feels to me as if it's a generation behind. I don't doubt it's PH credentials, but it's still lacking in too many areas to ever make it a success.

Uncle John

4,286 posts

191 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
It seems the Subaru uses good old mechanical engineering by the bucket load whilst the Audi uses loads of electrotrickery.

So it's analogue versus digital, builders tea versus Moccalattefrappachino.

I'm not sure what hardware "real" rally cars use these days but the Subaru must still be one of the closest off the shelf products to a WRC car.

I digress, both good cars then, but we will definitely see more S3's on the road IMO.

Mr Whippy

29,039 posts

241 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
God that Audi looks boring in every possible metric you could measure with.

The mpg stats also look completely bks too. 40mpg+ from a 300bhp 2.0 turbo 4 pot?


I'm glad Subaru are making a proper rally rep car again.

Though I'm sure Audi will sell loads more S3 to people who buy cars based on paper performances, those who bother to buy the Subaru will probably be surprised that it achieves near it's rated mpg, and looks interesting, and drives in an interesting way... oh and sounds interesting too.

anonymous-user

54 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
As good as the Subaru is I think most people and me included would go for the Audi.

PhantomPH

Original Poster:

4,043 posts

225 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
I must add that the S3 is the new car (perhaps with the exception of my RX8) that has garnered most positive comments from people. I've been quite surprised by the sheer number of people (male and female) who have said, "Nice car" or similar.

As I said, the only thing before that was the RX8, which (when new) got loads of attention - especially when opening the rear doors as well.

Like it or not, the Audi has a real string to it's bow that the Subaru doesn't and that's in the 'brand' stakes. Interestingly, the saloon body takes away the 'hot hatch' perception as well.

In fact - I feel compelled to post a pic of mine right now! smile



PhantomPH

Original Poster:

4,043 posts

225 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
Mr Whippy said:
The mpg stats also look completely bks too.
Yes. Yes they are.

Dave Hedgehog

14,555 posts

204 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
Mr Whippy said:
God that Audi looks boring in every possible metric you could measure with.

The mpg stats also look completely bks too. 40mpg+ from a 300bhp 2.0 turbo 4 pot?


I'm glad Subaru are making a proper rally rep car again.

Though I'm sure Audi will sell loads more S3 to people who buy cars based on paper performances, those who bother to buy the Subaru will probably be surprised that it achieves near it's rated mpg, and looks interesting, and drives in an interesting way... oh and sounds interesting too.
who would pay £600 a month for a badge when you can get golf for £300?

i to await with interest real world mpg figures


Oddball RS

1,757 posts

218 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
Take away the daft exhaust, and the oddly coloured sectioned seats and the Audi looks nice.

RobM77

35,349 posts

234 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
Mr Whippy said:
God that Audi looks boring in every possible metric you could measure with.
Isn't that the whole point of Audis though? Understated and boring, but effective.

stavers

252 posts

146 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
GravelMachineGun said:
As good as the Subaru is I think most people and me included would go for the Audi.
Which just goes to show that the majority of people today care about style rather than substance.

As one of the few who prefers substance to style, and I admit that I am in the minority, I wonder how much longer before all cars will be all about the style and nothing about the substance. I am glad that people like Subaru still make cars that are all about the substance but I really do worry that it is a dying breed.

Mr Whippy

29,039 posts

241 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
RobM77 said:
sn't that the whole point of Audis though? Understated and boring, but effective.
It's getting worse though.

15 years ago the S4 (equivalent looking sorta thing), had TorSen diffs, longitudinal mounted engine with 6 glorious cylinders signing away.

Today we get transverse engine, bland 4 pot engine that is no doubt feeling gutless until the turbo gets going, and an awd control system that is less about putting down the power you send it, and more about limiting the power you want to send it.


It 'looks' nice, I'll give it that... and if I didn't care a bit about oily bits and going for a blast in one at the weekend, I'd have one no doubt.


Dave

PhantomPH

Original Poster:

4,043 posts

225 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
stavers said:
GravelMachineGun said:
As good as the Subaru is I think most people and me included would go for the Audi.
Which just goes to show that the majority of people today care about style rather than substance.

As one of the few who prefers substance to style, and I admit that I am in the minority, I wonder how much longer before all cars will be all about the style and nothing about the substance. I am glad that people like Subaru still make cars that are all about the substance but I really do worry that it is a dying breed.
Why can't cars be both?

anonymous-user

54 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
stavers said:
GravelMachineGun said:
As good as the Subaru is I think most people and me included would go for the Audi.
Which just goes to show that the majority of people today care about style rather than substance.
Not at all.
The Audi has both and which one will be worth more in 10 years?...

cocopop

1,300 posts

205 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
GravelMachineGun said:
stavers said:
GravelMachineGun said:
As good as the Subaru is I think most people and me included would go for the Audi.
Which just goes to show that the majority of people today care about style rather than substance.
Not at all.
The Audi has both and which one will be worth more in 10 years?...
Just out of interest, I had a look at 10 year old S3 vs 10 year old STi prices. The Subaru is worth getting on for double.

RobM77

35,349 posts

234 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
Mr Whippy said:
RobM77 said:
sn't that the whole point of Audis though? Understated and boring, but effective.
It's getting worse though.

15 years ago the S4 (equivalent looking sorta thing), had TorSen diffs, longitudinal mounted engine with 6 glorious cylinders signing away.

Today we get transverse engine, bland 4 pot engine that is no doubt feeling gutless until the turbo gets going, and an awd control system that is less about putting down the power you send it, and more about limiting the power you want to send it.


It 'looks' nice, I'll give it that... and if I didn't care a bit about oily bits and going for a blast in one at the weekend, I'd have one no doubt.


Dave
To be honest, even when the ingredients are the best they've ever been in terms of a recipe of a balanced enjoyable car, I still find Audis far too dull to ever contemplate owning one. My comment quoted above was an observation of this fact, and a summary of my presumption that Audis are engineered to be dull and effective. Perhaps Audi are just realising that they might as well give up in the dynamic area, because they don't attract that sort of buyer?

Audi make some cars that I respect hugely for their competence: the RS6 is an awesome machine (in the true sense of the word), the A5 that I drove a few years ago impressed me with its all round ability; but I would never contemplate owning one really. For me, owning something like an RS4 or an RS6 would be like selling a sailing boat and buying a motor boat because it was easier to operate and faster - that would completely miss the point for me - motor boats bore me, as do Audis.

Spooge

150 posts

112 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
PhantomPH said:
I love my S3...but I am starting to think I should have gone for the DSG instead of the manual...
Me too! Though I did go for the DSG because I'm lazy but also the rather superficial reason that it makes the burps when it changes gear.

I have to say though the drivers seat has developed a rather annoying creak after only 2000 miles/6 months. I dunno if its due to the fact I opted for the "super sports seats" though, going to have to get looked at by Audi I feel.

anonymous-user

54 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
cocopop said:
GravelMachineGun said:
stavers said:
GravelMachineGun said:
As good as the Subaru is I think most people and me included would go for the Audi.
Which just goes to show that the majority of people today care about style rather than substance.
Not at all.
The Audi has both and which one will be worth more in 10 years?...
Just out of interest, I had a look at 10 year old S3 vs 10 year old STi prices. The Subaru is worth getting on for double.
Indeed but back then Subaru were still a great company! Times have changed and the current Audis are way better and sadly Subaru is not at their level.

Dave Hedgehog

14,555 posts

204 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
Mr Whippy said:
15 years ago the S4 (equivalent looking sorta thing), had TorSen diffs, longitudinal mounted engine with 6 glorious cylinders signing away.

Today we get transverse engine, bland 4 pot engine that is no doubt feeling gutless until the turbo gets going, and an awd control system that is less about putting down the power you send it, and more about limiting the power you want to send it.


Dave
Dont be Daft, you can still buy the S4 with a charged V6 lump

and the B5 S4 was one of the dullest most boring cars to drive audi have ever made, and that takes some doing

CMPunkBITW

180 posts

128 months

Tuesday 7th April 2015
quotequote all
I'll take the Subaru. The Audi's arms are just too short to box with god.