RE: Audi RS Q3 Performance: Review

RE: Audi RS Q3 Performance: Review

Author
Discussion

CABC

5,575 posts

101 months

Monday 11th July 2016
quotequote all
CerberusRogue said:
I have an RS Q3. I love it, it's really a good car for what I wanted and ticked all the boxes for what I was after. Bought it for me, based on my likes, don't give a toss whether anyone else likes it or not. I agree with the earlier comment, I drove the RS3 and liked it but found the ride too hard for a daily driver. The RS Q3 was much nicer as a daily driver.
fair enough, but what were those boxes and likes? what else did you consider? that would take the thread further. thx

Dave Hedgehog

14,550 posts

204 months

Monday 11th July 2016
quotequote all
Hi Stu X said:
I know you only have eyes for a B7 RS4 and won't consider anything else at all. And yes, any car that isn't a B7 RS4 must be rubbish because you say so. And yes, blah blah blah your B7 RS4 is better. YAAAAAWWWWWWNNNN, you bore.
the RS4 V8 is a truly terrible daily driver engine biggrin

Housey

2,076 posts

227 months

Monday 11th July 2016
quotequote all
Hi Stu X said:
Andy20vt said:
You mean how Discovery's are normally bought by country types who live out in the sticks or by families perhaps towing caravans to take kids on trips to the beach etc, whereas RR sports often have their windows blacked out and appear to be driven by people of dubious morals?

Having driven the RS3 it's the most uninspiring of all the RS cars I've driven. Only thing good going for it is the 5cyl engine - otherwise it's a pretty poor job. Hobble it further with a higher centre of gravity, increased weight, paint in 'look at me white', up the price, and see the self important queueing up round the corner to buy it!
No, you dickstink. Stop with all the generalisations and contribute to the conversation rather than being such a fkwit.

The Q3 is not simply a jacked up A3. Yes, it shares a platform with it, but it's not the same car. Same way the Octavia is not a Golf even though they are on the same platform. Same way the RR Sport is not a Discovery even though they are on the same platform.

I know you only have eyes for a B7 RS4 and won't consider anything else at all. And yes, any car that isn't a B7 RS4 must be rubbish because you say so. And yes, blah blah blah your B7 RS4 is better. YAAAAAWWWWWWNNNN, you bore.

When I drove the RS3 I loved it, really loved it, but the ride was way too stiff for my liking, I imagine the RS Q3 would be a great car to drive. Just because you didn't like it (no doubt compared to your B7 RS4) doesn't mean it's fair to rubbish so bluntly. "Pretty poor job" is absolutely not true as the car is well rated, it's an amazing car but was not too your liking. "Pretty poor job" is better applied to your submissions to this forum.

Your retarding assumptions and Audi bashing are boring.
Seriously, stop feeding him. It's what people like that get a hard on about. And to be fair if an Audi driver bummed my dad I'd be upset too.

Bladedancer

1,269 posts

196 months

Tuesday 12th July 2016
quotequote all
CharlieAlphaMike said:
Bladedancer said:
CharlieAlphaMike said:
toppstuff said:
Not if you have dodgy knees and prefer a high driving position - or prefer a high driving position anyway.

Just because you want a small SUV does not mean you have to put up with a boring diesel, does it?
Save yourself £20K and buy a Golf R (or equivalent) and a cushion + a 2nd hand Range Rover (with a petrol V8) for when you really want to utilise the true capabilities of an SUV.
RR isn't a SUV, its a proper off-roader. SUVs aren't really meant for off-road use and most won't ever see off-road, especially the alloys they usually use.
Thus they have 1 thing going for them - high riding position. Ok and in some cases 7 seats.

This is simply a higher riding, heavier and much more expensive RS3.
'SUVs aren't really meant for off-road use and most won't ever see off-road'? 'Higher riding, heavier and much more expensive RS3' (and worse to drive than an RS3)? £53K just to sit a little higher?

Plus, it's chassis (PQ35) is Golf MK 5/6 (old tech).

Like I said...totally pointless!
RS3 is said to start at 40k, This RSQ3 at 46k. This being a German premium brand means add 20% for your extras.
I do think that SUVs are fairly pointless and personally I would prefer an estate, but many people like them for whatever reason. Every one to its own I guess.

CharlieAlphaMike

1,137 posts

105 months

Wednesday 13th July 2016
quotequote all
In summary. It's just a Skoda Yeti in a party frock and expensive running shoes byebye

Worthyone

2 posts

90 months

Tuesday 11th October 2016
quotequote all
I have the 340PS version so an academic 0.4s slower than the Performance version here.

I've had a lot of quick Audi cars over the years and the RSQ3 is a real oddity, it's looks grow on you, it's possible to have fun in it below the legal limit and it's a massive contradiction. It ought to be a mumsy, school run SUV and yet it is capable of being completely bonkers.

The 1st one I drove (bought mine used/3,000 miles/9 months old after the 1st owner had taken a £17k shower...was, how can I put this? Underwhelming....quiet, quickish and really quite civilised, not a head case RS at all.

The 2nd one I drove (and bought) was considerably quicker though also smooth and refined and the proverbial penny dropped....you can drive an RSQ3 normally and it is super refined and sophisticated. However if you prod the pedal a little more aggressively a completely different car appears and that one is a lot of fun. They are rare and always attract a lot of attention from petrol-heads, strange for Audi's RS ugly duckling... The final point is that despite the performance on tap they are cheap to insure too.

RSQ3PERFORMANCE

1 posts

73 months

Thursday 8th March 2018
quotequote all
I have owned my RSQ3 Performance for 18 months and it still puts a huge smile on my face every time I drive it.