R32 or Audi 3.2
Discussion
I had a spin in a a6 3.2 the other day and the noise has got me hooked. Was there many differences between the Audi 3.2 range ( tt, a3, a4, a6) And the golf r32?
Unfortunately I cannot afford a mk5 r32 and am not keen on the mk4 mainly due to them finishing production around 2003, plus they are a lot more expensive than any of the Audi varients which are newer and have lesser miles. Is there any reason why?
Unfortunately I cannot afford a mk5 r32 and am not keen on the mk4 mainly due to them finishing production around 2003, plus they are a lot more expensive than any of the Audi varients which are newer and have lesser miles. Is there any reason why?
Edited by SBN on Thursday 8th September 22:20
nickdrinkwater said:
Two different engine. The 3.2 in the A6 is a V6 layout, longitudinally mounted, whereas the Golf-sized cars use a VR6 engine mounted transversely. I think I'm right in saying the A4s and A6s have the V6 whilst the Golf, A3 and TT the VR6.
Anyone here driven both?
Absolutely correct. I've driven the R32 and the earlier 2.8 Audi V6, but not the newer 3.2. Personally, I prefer the VR motor.Anyone here driven both?
SBN said:
Ok so I like the a3 3.2 for it's street sleeper looks compared to a r32 but are there any compromises?
Reviews said it was "dull" to drive, but then most journos measure fun based on how sideways they get every time they go to the shops (because they totally do that, they are just that good. Honest.)EDLT said:
SBN said:
Ok so I like the a3 3.2 for it's street sleeper looks compared to a r32 but are there any compromises?
Reviews said it was "dull" to drive, but then most journos measure fun based on how sideways they get every time they go to the shops (because they totally do that, they are just that good. Honest.)
Evo included the mk4 R32 as their best buy for £10k in a recent article an Top Gear said the mk5 R32 was better than the 130i in every way and it was 2 seconds quicker around the TG track.
For me the Audi is a lot more of a sleeper an likely to be set up a lot more neutrally where as the mk4 R32 is set up to be more agile plus they look great in Pearl Blue
aka_kerrly said:
I thought it was just PH that reckon R32s/Quattros are dull
Evo included the mk4 R32 as their best buy for £10k in a recent article an Top Gear said the mk5 R32 was better than the 130i in every way and it was 2 seconds quicker around the TG track.
For me the Audi is a lot more of a sleeper an likely to be set up a lot more neutrally where as the mk4 R32 is set up to be more agile plus they look great in Pearl Blue
I,ve had a A3 3.2 and now have a 130i. IMHO in terms of getting enjoyment out of a drive the BM walks all over it! On a wet day if you want to make progress without driving on the edge the Audi would be the more relaxing drive.Evo included the mk4 R32 as their best buy for £10k in a recent article an Top Gear said the mk5 R32 was better than the 130i in every way and it was 2 seconds quicker around the TG track.
For me the Audi is a lot more of a sleeper an likely to be set up a lot more neutrally where as the mk4 R32 is set up to be more agile plus they look great in Pearl Blue
The 3.2 gets quite breathless as you increase the revs. whereas the 130 really likes the revs!
Breathless! Hardly. Mine zips round the rev counter like a maniac.
OP - the A3 3.2 rides harshly but is a competent enough point and squirt machine. Bit nose heavy, but not enough to ruin things. I find it generally handles well enough although it doesn't have the balance of a BMW.
Driven sensibly it can be quite economical, driven quickly it can be pretty rapid indeed.
Four wheel drive in winter is a boon. Mine was unstoppable even on non winter tyres.
OP - the A3 3.2 rides harshly but is a competent enough point and squirt machine. Bit nose heavy, but not enough to ruin things. I find it generally handles well enough although it doesn't have the balance of a BMW.
Driven sensibly it can be quite economical, driven quickly it can be pretty rapid indeed.
Four wheel drive in winter is a boon. Mine was unstoppable even on non winter tyres.
Had the 2.8 version of the Audi big v6 and it sounded good. Driven a few vr6s, some with induction/exhaust kits sound undoubtedly good, in a unique way. Plenty don't sound that great though. Drove mk2 TT with the 3.2 vr6 a couple of weeks ago and really didn't like the noise. Too loud without being sonorous. Almost artificial. That I didn't expect. Didn't feel fun or quick either. However it was only 20 minutes and in its defence I've always felt you need longer and some time driving the car alone to really judge a car.
EDLT said:
SBN said:
Ok so I like the a3 3.2 for it's street sleeper looks compared to a r32 but are there any compromises?
Reviews said it was "dull" to drive, but then most journos measure fun based on how sideways they get every time they go to the shops (because they totally do that, they are just that good. Honest.)SBN said:
St220 is not a bad shout and I have driven one but inmo the brakes weren't great however everything else about how it drives was good. I just think a Audi or be is a nicer place to be in the cabin.
Brakes are an easy fix. Calipers from a Focus ST, and disk upgrade to 330mm. Same brakes at the R32...Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff