Audi Q3Audi seem to be on the crest of a wave. In the past five years, they have introduced no fewer than twelve completely new models. Sales have been healthy and the Audi brand image has, according to independent surveys, put them at the top of the prestige pile. The range covers pretty well every customer need or desire, so how does the Q3 fit in?Driving two versions in beautiful North Yorkshire recently revealed that, as ever, the cars appear very well made and do the job you’d expect. (Most cars these days could claim the same).The particular versions I tried made for an interesting comparison. The first was the more powerful of two 2.0-litre TDIs on sale, with a seven-speed auto gearbox as standard. The diesel engine has 177 PS and performs typically of such diesels; that’s to say, it’s pretty refined, smooth and reasonably quiet. Audi expects diesels to make up 50% of all Q3 sales. The other version was the less powerful of the two 2-litre petrol FSI cars, with a six-speed manual gearbox. It has 170 PS, plenty enough, as it proved on some testing ascents and descents that our test route provided.In the development of the Q3, Audi laid down the basic requirements: including ground clearance, driver assistance systems, varied infotainment selection (to use industry jargon that is perhaps becoming second-nature to new-car customers), 2000kg trailer towing capability, and best-in-class performance and efficiency. The last is something that only time will (or won’t) prove.On the road, the diesel car, negotiating Yorkshire moors roads through thick fog, with one or two stops (it has start-stop engine technology) and some faster driving nearer the coast, returned 36.6mpg, according to the car’s own trip recorder.On a similar route, the FSI got through 27.1mpg. These results, even given that the cars were new and not completely run in, which may make a small difference, were disappointing, compared with the official combined cycle fuel consumption figures (54.3 in the diesel’s case, 38mpg for the petrol engine).As far as general performance and road manners were concerned, both cars were impeccable, even if it may have just been possible to detect when the transfer of power to the rear wheels in certain slippery conditions, was detectable. Of course, we’re talking Quattro here in both models.The petrol-engined car was definitely my choice at the end of the drive. In the UK, with fuel prices slightly in favour of petrol cars, you may still get fewer miles to the gallon, but the feel of the car, for me, was appreciably more pleasant and refined. It was brisk enough for any situation, with zero to 62 mph in 7.9 seconds, a little faster than the diesel.Both cars, with their different front-end weights, provided a very good ride. The diesel engine was discernible not only when pressed hard; on the other hand, the petrol car’s transmission was discernible. So in the noise stakes you takes yer money and gets yer choice; in neither case, however, was this irksome.Outward visibility is very good, thanks in part to a nice high driving position. Interior space is good too, with two adults very comfortably fitting into the rear and even a third perhaps not feeling too squashed, thanks to the transmission tunnel being less bulky than some. There’s very good luggage space in the boot. Handling and braking were exemplary, and given that these cars are not cheap (£32,000 and £31,000 respectively for the two as tested with their optional extras), you should expect nothing less. Useful engine braking downhill was a particularly noticeable feature in the diesel auto.The Q3 range will start at £24,500 with the front-wheel-drive model available in December. As usual, it’s very unlikely that anyone will pay just this; so many features and options are available to varying specifications that few cars will sell for less than £30,000. Buyers will no doubt feel that they have bought well: Audi claims impressive onboard technology and outstandingly low running costs. Latest technology start-stop; free-wheeling when the system detects that the engine is not needed, and other leading edge technology are available, depending on the model. Weight-saving aluminium used in the body helps reduce fuel usage, too, without compromising strength. Insurance ratings are very competitive, compared with its competitors. If owners are like me, they may not feel particularly inspired by the Q3, but should certainly find it to be a practical all-rounder, able to take on any driving situation with assurance and, according to Audi, with cheaper running costs than competitors.Size: 4.39m x 1.83mEngines: 2.0 litre petrol – 170 & 211PS2.0 litre diesel – 140 & 177PSGearbox: 6-speed manual / 7-speed auto FWD/4WDBest Consumption: 140PS diesel – 54.3mpgPrice: from £24,560Full details of the Q3 are available on the manufacturer’s website: www.audi.co.ukTom Scanlan - Nov 2011
Audi Q3
Audi seem to be on the crest of a wave. In the past five
years, they have introduced no fewer than twelve
completely new models. Sales have been healthy and
the Audi brand image has, according to independent
surveys, put them at the top of the prestige pile. The
range covers pretty well every customer need or
desire, so how does the
Q3 fit in?
Driving two versions in
beautiful North
Yorkshire recently
revealed that, as ever,
the cars appear very
well made and do the
job you’d expect. (Most
cars these days could
claim the same).
The particular versions
I tried made for an
interesting comparison.
The first was the more
powerful of two 2.0-litre
TDIs on sale, with a
seven-speed auto
gearbox as standard.
The diesel engine has
177 PS and performs typically of such diesels; that’s to
say, it’s pretty refined, smooth and reasonably quiet.
Audi expects diesels to make up 50% of all Q3 sales.
The other version was the less powerful of the two 2-
litre petrol FSI cars, with a six-speed manual gearbox.
It has 170 PS, plenty enough, as it proved on some
testing ascents and descents that our test route
provided.
In the development of the Q3, Audi laid down the basic
requirements: including ground clearance, driver
assistance systems, varied infotainment selection (to
use industry jargon that is perhaps becoming second-
nature to new-car customers), 2000kg trailer towing
capability, and best-in-class performance and
efficiency. The last is something that only time will (or
won’t) prove.
On the road, the diesel car, negotiating Yorkshire
moors roads through thick fog, with one or two stops (it
has start-stop engine technology) and some faster
driving nearer the coast, returned 36.6mpg, according
to the car’s own trip recorder.
On a similar route, the FSI got through 27.1mpg.
These results, even given that the cars were new and
not completely run in, which may make a small
difference, were disappointing, compared with the
official combined cycle fuel consumption figures (54.3
in the diesel’s case, 38mpg for the petrol engine).
As far as general performance and road manners were
concerned, both cars were impeccable, even if it may
have just been possible to detect when the transfer of
power to the rear wheels in certain slippery conditions,
was detectable. Of course, we’re talking Quattro here
in both models.
The petrol-engined car was definitely my choice at the
end of the drive. In the UK, with fuel prices slightly in
favour of petrol cars, you may still get fewer miles to
the gallon, but the feel of the car, for me, was
appreciably more pleasant and refined. It was brisk
enough for any situation, with zero to 62 mph in 7.9
seconds, a little faster than the diesel.
Both cars, with their different front-end weights,
provided a very good ride. The diesel engine was
discernible not only when pressed hard; on the other
hand, the petrol car’s transmission was discernible. So
in the noise stakes you takes yer money and gets yer
choice; in neither case, however, was this irksome.
Outward visibility is very good, thanks in part to a nice
high driving position. Interior space is good too, with
two adults very comfortably fitting into the rear and
even a third perhaps not
feeling too squashed,
thanks to the transmission
tunnel being less bulky
than some. There’s very
good luggage space in the
boot.
Handling and braking were
exemplary, and given that
these cars are not cheap
(£32,000 and £31,000
respectively for the two as
tested with their optional
extras), you should expect
nothing less. Useful
engine braking downhill
was a particularly
noticeable feature in the
diesel auto.
The Q3 range will start at
£24,500 with the front-wheel-drive model available in
December. As usual, it’s very unlikely that anyone will
pay just this; so many features and options are
available to varying specifications that few cars will
sell for less than £30,000. Buyers will no doubt feel
that they have bought well: Audi claims impressive
onboard technology and outstandingly low running
costs. Latest technology start-stop; free-wheeling
when the system detects that the engine is not
needed, and other leading edge technology are
available, depending on the model. Weight-saving
aluminium used in the body helps reduce fuel usage,
too, without compromising strength.
Insurance ratings are very competitive, compared with
its competitors. If owners are like me, they may not
feel particularly inspired by the Q3, but should
certainly find it to be a practical all-rounder, able to
take on any driving situation with assurance and,
according to Audi, with cheaper running costs than
competitors.
Size:
4.39m x 1.83m
Engines:
2.0 litre petrol – 170 & 211PS
2.0 litre diesel – 140 & 177PS
Gearbox:
6-speed manual / 7-speed auto
FWD/4WD
Best Consumption:
140PS diesel – 54.3mpg
Price:
from £24,560
Full details of the Q3 are available on the manufacturer’s
website: www.audi.co.uk
Tom Scanlan - Nov 2011
l
l
l
l
Home
New Models
Industry
Green News
Odds n’Ends
