RE: Audi RS Q3 | Driven

[DoubleD]

Drl22 said:

Onehp said:

Personally I dislike big weights. This is still faily OK. And with rally mudflaps and some smaller rims, probably quite a hoot on an unpaved road, just need to add a hydraulic handbrake...

And that is my point, with the extra weight comes extra size/practicality because this isn’t a big car it has no more space inside really than the RS3 hatchback so it makes it even more pointless than any heavier SUV.

The RS3 hatch has 335 litres of boot space, the RS Q3 has 550, thats quite a big difference.

[novus]

Drl22 said:

And that is my point, with the extra weight comes extra size/practicality because this isn’t a big car it has no more space inside really than the RS3 hatchback so it makes it even more pointless than any heavier SUV.

Me and the wife have the current shape S3 and this new model Q3
Space inside and load space is considerable better in the Q3

[otolith]

sxmwht said:

I think I would be fking terrified in one of these, or any performance SUV. Think I would just be too scared that it was going to fall over

Like this: https://youtu.be/NIzrVcZH07w

According to current PH lore you would have to be a racing driver for this to happen, because nobody else is able to know or care how high the CoG is.

[nickfrog]

otolith said:

According to current PH lore you would have to be a racing driver for this to happen, because nobody else is able to know or care how high the CoG is.

Yes perhaps. Personnnaly I have never rolled a SUV so will carry on using them as I find them brilliant and CoG height is of zero importance for mere road use for me . But they would be rubbish on track days so I take something else for that.

[Jex]

nickfrog said:

otolith said:

According to current PH lore you would have to be a racing driver for this to happen, because nobody else is able to know or care how high the CoG is.

Yes perhaps. Personnnaly I have never rolled a SUV so will carry on using them as I find them brilliant and CoG height is of zero importance for mere road use for me . But they would be rubbish on track days so I take something else for that.

I understand that some people choose SUVs because they think they are safer. The video shows a rollover when turning in one direction, which is unusual, the more common scenario is the S-curve manoeuvre, e.g. on a motorway you see an object on the road in front of you, you swerve to avoid it, but steer more than you need to in the emergency situation. You are then heading off the road so you swerve back. The shift from one side to another can cause SUVs to turn over when conventional cars are much less likely to (you really need to overdo it in a conventional car so it can 'trip over' its front wheel, unless it hits a kerb or something). Saying that because you have never rolled one means they are ok is a false argument - I have never had a crash in which an airbag has gone off, so I don't need airbags?

[nickfrog]

Jex said:

Saying that because you have never rolled one means they are ok is a false argument - I have never had a crash in which an airbag has gone off, so I don't need airbags?

You're right, I was just being sarcastic, so let me rephrase it. For me the added lateral weight transfer in high centrifugal / centripetal cornering situations and the inherent added risk of roll over is negligible and offset by the benefits of SUVs. Not unlike someone who finds that
the added lateral weight transfer in high centrifugal / centripetal cornering situations of an estate and the inherent added risk of roll over compared to a Caterham is negligible and offset by the benefits of an estate.

In other words, different people make different compromises for different needs.

[981C]

Jex said:

When did petrol particulate filters become a thing?
Do they have the same problems as diesel particulate filters?

They do seem to sap power. Both the TTRS and RS3 WLTP updates claim same peak power but demonstrably slower.

[Jex]

nickfrog said:

Jex said:

Saying that because you have never rolled one means they are ok is a false argument - I have never had a crash in which an airbag has gone off, so I don't need airbags?

You're right, I was just being sarcastic, so let me rephrase it. For me the added lateral weight transfer in high centrifugal / centripetal cornering situations and the inherent added risk of roll over is negligible and offset by the benefits of SUVs. Not unlike someone who finds that
the added lateral weight transfer in high centrifugal / centripetal cornering situations of an estate and the inherent added risk of roll over compared to a Caterham is negligible and offset by the benefits of an estate.

In other words, different people make different compromises for different needs.

Fair enough

[Drl22]

nickfrog said:

Define "big". It looks like boot space is 335l vs 530l. Would you call that "no more space"?

I stand corrected but I still don’t see how this car can be loved and a larger performance SUV demonised.

[Dave Hedgehog]

novus said:

Drl22 said:

And that is my point, with the extra weight comes extra size/practicality because this isn’t a big car it has no more space inside really than the RS3 hatchback so it makes it even more pointless than any heavier SUV.

Me and the wife have the current shape S3 and this new model Q3
Space inside and load space is considerable better in the Q3

yeah the Q3 is way bigger inside, same as the GLA over the A

[nickfrog]

Drl22 said:

nickfrog said:

Define "big". It looks like boot space is 335l vs 530l. Would you call that "no more space"?

I stand corrected but I still don’t see how this car can be loved and a larger performance SUV demonised.

I don't know either.

[gigglebug]

nickfrog said:

Drl22 said:

nickfrog said:

Define "big". It looks like boot space is 335l vs 530l. Would you call that "no more space"?

I stand corrected but I still don’t see how this car can be loved and a larger performance SUV demonised.

I don't know either.

Is it because it is just as fashionable for many to be offended by certain things as it is for others to find the very same thing fashionable in the first place? Large SUV’s are the focus of hate for many, some folks can actually justify their hatred where as others just say they hate them because they think that it would be right thing to do.

[9k rpm]

gigglebug said:

nickfrog said:

Drl22 said:

nickfrog said:

Define "big". It looks like boot space is 335l vs 530l. Would you call that "no more space"?

I stand corrected but I still don’t see how this car can be loved and a larger performance SUV demonised.

I don't know either.

Is it because it is just as fashionable for many to be offended by certain things as it is for others to find the very same thing fashionable in the first place? Large SUV’s are the focus of hate for many, some folks can actually justify their hatred where as others just say they hate them because they think that it would be right thing to do.

Also in the same way people like to ridicule those who “rent” cars; the damn pcp brigade eh. Woe betide anyone who rents a performance SUV. Certainly a special place in hell for them!

Don’t get me started on the stupidity of sinking cash into a deprecating asset especially a brand new one....

Edited by 9k rpm on Friday 6th December 15:04

[anonymous-user]

ChevyChase77 said:

Mxjamie said:

That looks terrible imo.

It looks great IMO

[otolith]

ELUSIVEJIM said:

ChevyChase77 said:

Mxjamie said:

That looks terrible imo.

It looks great IMO

I think Smeg do a nicer one in brushed steel.

[DoubleD]

otolith said:

ELUSIVEJIM said:

ChevyChase77 said:

Mxjamie said:

That looks terrible imo.

It looks great IMO

I think Smeg do a nicer one in brushed steel.

That would be funny if it looked like a fridge.

[otolith]

Big boxy gloss white thing.

[eftiem64]

Another utterly ridiculous and pointless way to empty people’s wallets. A joke, surely.

[nickfrog]

eftiem64 said:

Another utterly ridiculous and pointless way to empty people’s wallets. A joke, surely.

Don't worry, it's not your wallet. I am sure you have very interesting ways of emptying it.

[Mxjamie]

ChevyChase77 said:

Mxjamie said:

That looks terrible imo.

Each to their own if we were all the same it would be a boring world . I wasn’t a huge fan on looks I think the new one is more deserving of the rs badge as styling wise the old one was very bland, but at the same time it was part of its appeal. One pipe was cool too, but it didn’t produce enough sound and the only aftermarket valves option was a supersprint at the time still it was a very capable car who dropped some highly regarded metal.

Edited by Mxjamie on Friday 6th December 19:29