Audi A3 or VW Golf

ccookieman

Hi
I have the option of an audi A3 or a VW Golf both in either 1.9 Diesel or a 1.6 petrol. What would you prefer.

For Forks Sake

ccookieman wrote: »

Hi
I have the option of an audi A3 or a VW Golf both in either 1.9 Diesel or a 1.6 petrol. What would you prefer.

Year/Price/Spec/etc etc????

All things being equal, a nice spec A3 with the 1.9TDi

GTE

For Forks Sake wrote: »

Year/Price/Spec/etc etc????

All things being equal, a nice spec A3 with the 1.9TDi

This.

richardsheil

bbk wrote: »

This.

I know the OP didn't suggest it but what about the 2.0 Tdi 140BHP model?

Seems like a cracker to me.

Nissan doctor

ccookieman wrote: »

Hi
I have the option of an audi A3 or a VW Golf both in either 1.9 Diesel or a 1.6 petrol. What would you prefer.

They are both the same car so it comes down to which one has the engine/spec/price that best suits your needs IMO.

GTE

richardsheil wrote: »

I know the OP didn't suggest it but what about the 2.0 Tdi 140BHP model?

Seems like a cracker to me.

I'd say it would be a nice engine but I wonder about the reliability of those. I hear so much about failing parts of the newer TDI's.

If the 1.9 is old enough then he would have a very good car in terms of that.

sean1141

either in diesel. 1.6 petrol are a crap engine

si_guru

Diesel.. more relaxed driving and easier overtaking.

Nissan doctor

sean1141 wrote: »

either in diesel. 1.6 petrol are a crap engine

The 1.6 single cam engine in those is vastly more reliable then the newer 16v engines.

djPSB

What would the difference be in price for motor tax be between a 1.4 and a 1.9 TDI????

sean1141

around 400

teednab-el

Surely the vw golf can't be compared as being the same car as the Audi A3. They have similar characteristics but the Audi is a better built and finished car, it has to be, sure why is it a dearer car to buy than the golf?

Top Dog

djPSB wrote: »

What would the difference be in price for motor tax be between a 1.4 and a 1.9 TDI????

Will depend on the year registered - if they're emmissions based there may not be much difference at all

sean1141

teednab-el wrote: »

sure why is it a dearer car to buy than the golf?

so badge snobs can buy an octavia with a small boot . there might be a small bit of difference in build quality on the interior but very little. the important bits are all the same

Top Dog wrote: »

Will depend on the year registered - if they're emmissions based there may not be much difference at all

i keep forgetting about the 08+ tax system

mccabecc

I think if You want to have solid car and want to pay less than take Skoda/Vw, they are cheaper and you shouldn't see too much differencein build quality, maybe some interior things will be better in Audi but still i don't it's worth it.

Leonard Hofstadter

bbk wrote: »

I'd say it would be a nice engine but I wonder about the reliability of those. I hear so much about failing parts of the newer TDI's.

If the 1.9 is old enough then he would have a very good car in terms of that.

The 2.0 TDI PD is a crap engine. Oil pumps, turbos etc all go wrong (The oil pump can stop working in them:eek:). The 1.9 TDI is much, much better.

The newer 2.0 TDI CRs are reliable by modern diesel standards. It probably won't be as good as the venerable 1.9 TDI, but it's far superior to the older 2.0 TDI PD.

Nissan doctor

teednab-el wrote: »

Surely the vw golf can't be compared as being the same car as the Audi A3. They have similar characteristics but the Audi is a better built and finished car, it has to be, sure why is it a dearer car to buy than the golf?

Good to know there are still people being sucked in by marketing.

It isn't a comparison, they ARE the same car, same engines, gearboxes, suspension, brakes, electrics and all other mechanicals. Only difference body design and specs.

And to further dissapoint you, the Seat Leon and Skoda Octavia are the same car too, as are several other VAG group cars.

They are all made by the same company, the price difference is purely down to marketing, Audi is market as the 'premium' brand, VW the every day, Skoda the economy and Seat the sporty

The german brands strive on badge snobs who would be happy to pay a premium just to have 4 rings on their grill instead of a VW badge.

-Chris-

IMHO they actually drive quite differently, both from a handling point of view and from a "driving experience". I'd think it's definitely worth driving both so you can see which you prefer.

teednab-el

Nissan doctor wrote: »

Good to know there are still people being sucked in by marketing.

Nissan doctor wrote: »

Good to know there are still people being sucked in by marketing

The german brands strive on badge snobs who would be happy to pay a premium just to have 4 rings on their grill instead of a VW badge.

They are paying a premium because the Audi is a superior class car not another Audi wannabe like a VW or Skoda. Car looks and style alone are enough to merit investment never mind extras and hi specs. I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with VW or Skoda but they will always come second when comparing them to an Audi. They are the next best thing to it simple as.

EPM

teednab-el wrote: »

They are paying a premium because the Audi is a superior class car not another Audi wannabe like a VW or Skoda. Car looks and style alone are enough to merit investment never mind extras and hi specs. I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with VW or Skoda but they will always come second when comparing them to an Audi. They are the next best thing to it simple as.

I had to LOL.

Bar better perceived quality the run of the mill models are identical. You have really fallen for the marketing. I test drove most of the VAG cars in my price range and there was little between any of them bar the Audis feeling higher quality.

GTE

-Chris- wrote: »

IMHO they actually drive quite differently, both from a handling point of view and from a "driving experience". I'd think it's definitely worth driving both so you can see which you prefer.

I agree. Even taking a look at the older Octavia and its sister car the mark 4 Golf. The Skoda had drum brakes on the rear when the Golf had all discs. And when the Golf got a suspension upgrade in 2002ish I wouldn't be surprised if the Skoda took a while longer to avail of that gear.

I would say there are a few little differences like that between them. They would have the same basic chassis and engines but I think I read somewhere that the Skoda 2.0 common rails in the Suburb are not the newest ones that you would get in the Passat, at least not straight away anyway.

The differences are probably more so between a VW/Skoda and an Audi then a VW and a Skoda.

A lot of that is speculation on what I saw with the braking systems but I don't see the sense in VAG having the exact same components fitted across their various makes and models. The same basic platform with different suspensiony bits as an example makes much more sense. Having said that being based on the same chassis would keep a fair chunk of similarity there between them.

teednab-el

EPM wrote: »

I had to LOL.

Bar better perceived quality the run of the mill models are identical. You have really fallen for the marketing. I test drove most of the VAG cars in my price range and there was little between any of them bar the Audis feeling higher quality.

That's your opinion and I gave you mine. I have driven all types and I prefer the Audi by a mile.

Nonoperational

While I agree that they are essentially the same car, I particularly dislike the Leons interior. So much so that it stopped me buying one.

Nissan doctor

teednab-el wrote: »

They are paying a premium because the Audi is a superior class car not another Audi wannabe like a VW or Skoda. Car looks and style alone are enough to merit investment never mind extras and hi specs. I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with VW or Skoda but they will always come second when comparing them to an Audi. They are the next best thing to it simple as.

:eek:


Just as an aside, would you prefere an Audi a4 or a Seat exeo?

teednab-el

Nissan doctor wrote: »

:eek:


Just as an aside, would you prefere an Audi a4 or a Seat exeo?

Audi A4

PaulKK

teednab-el wrote: »

Surely the vw golf can't be compared as being the same car as the Audi A3. They have similar characteristics but the Audi is a better built and finished car, it has to be, sure why is it a dearer car to buy than the golf?

Because it has 4 little rings on the grill.

spiggotpaddy

Nissan doctor wrote: »

The 1.6 single cam engine in those is vastly more reliable then the newer 16v engines.

just curios, what is the weak points on the twin cam?

teednab-el

PaulKK wrote: »

Because it has 4 little rings on the grill.

If 100 people were offered the choice of choosing between an Audi A3 or Golf? You would have a ratio of 70:30 going for the Audi. And Why?

Because the Audi is a nicer looking and much nicer finished car. VW's look average and nothing to cheer about. Its nothing to do with just the rings on the grill. Yes they have the same engines and parts etc. but VWs are not as well finished and a well finished and nice looking car is a must for me.

PaulKK

teednab-el wrote: »

If 100 people were offered the choice of choosing between an Audi A3 or Golf? You would have a ratio of 70:30 going for the Audi. And Why?

Because the Audi is a nicer looking and much nicer finished car. VW's look average and nothing to cheer about. Its nothing to do with just the rings on the grill. Yes they have the same engines and parts etc. but VWs are not as well finished and a well finished and nice looking car is a must for me.

I'd take a Highline Golf before a crap spec A3 anyday.
I'd also definitely have a Highline Passat over a crap spec A4 too.

As is often said, looks are subjective, but I definitely think the Passat is a nicer looking machine than the bland A4, the finish in my opinion is comparable.

A good spec golf is much nicer looking than a boggo A3 too:

Nissan doctor

teednab-el wrote: »

Audi A4

But they are also the same car, in fact, some of the machinery and robots that build the a4 were moved to spain and now build the exeo so build quality is identical. The only difference is the head and tail lights.

The exeo is also better specced for the price then the a4.

So given that you say you would buy the audi because its a better built car, not for the badge then obviously you'd now choose the Seat exeo as its identical, in every way, but cheaper?

Or do you think, as with the golf etc, that VW have hired people to put all the same parts toghether a little bit arseways so they can charge more for the Audi?




On an aside, You have to hand it to the VAG group for how they market though.

They sell Audi's which are almost all identical to VW's but at higher prices by convincing people they are getting a 'premium' product. Then at the oposite end of the scale, sell countless Skodas by actually telling you that your getting an identical car to a VW but for LESS money.

IMO, to those with a brain and no interest in impressing anyone else with a badge, when chosing a normal VAG group car, it comes down to which one you prefare the styling of or which one is cheaper as there is no quality or reliability difference between them.

PaulKK

Nissan doctor wrote: »

..by actually telling you that your getting an identical car to a VW but for LESS money.

IMO, to those with a brain and no interest in impressing anyone else with a badge, when chosing a normal VAG group car, it comes down to which one you prefare the styling of or which one is cheaper as there is no quality or reliability difference between them.

I agree, and i like most vag stuff. I would never buy a new run of the mill audi, i just dont think they are worth it when there are such viable alternatives in the other marques. Some of the higher end stuff however