Audi A3 1.9 TDIe review
by David Finlay (24 November 2008)
The case for a premium compact low-CO2 car isn't as strong as it at first seems. Boris Johnston's decision to scrap plans whereby cars emitting less than 120g/km on the official cycle would be exempt from the London congestion charge removed a lot of their charm, and although there's a certain appeal in paying less tax than you otherwise might, the fact that the VED rating for a vehicle such as the A3 1.9 TDIe is £35 per year rather than £120 tends to get swamped in the amount you have to pay for the car in the first place (of which more later).
Still, the idea of an Audi with a combined fuel economy figure of 62.8mpg is pleasant enough on its own. The TDIe achieves this by various means, starting with the fact that - like several other low-CO2 cars produced by Volkswagen Group manufacturers - it uses the 104bhp version of the 1.9-litre turbo diesel engine.
This is by no means a new unit. I think I'm right in saying that it was being used as a pumping engine in coal mines during the early days of the Industrial Revolution, but don't quote me on that until I've checked. But although it's been around for a long time, and has long since been overtaken by more modern diesels, it's still a decent engine, and one whose noise isn't allowed to penetrate the cabin of the A3 to any great extent.
Following usual practice in the matter of low-CO2 cars, Audi has revised the engine's ECU to help promote fuel economy, and it has also raised the gearing, though not to a ridiculous extent. In fifth gear, the TDIe does about 34mph per 1000rpm, and the engine can deal with that easily. There are aerodynamic improvements too, and the car uses tyres with low rolling resistance to improve things still further.
I can imagine that the resulting figure of 62.8mpg caused several important people in Bavaria to blow chunks, since it's the same as that achieved by the BMW 118d (the A3's most obvious rival) with the help of a start/stop system which the Audi does not have. On the other hand, perhaps BMW isn't too concerned after all, because for the same official fuel economy - not necessarily the same as you'll achieve in real life, but with the same tax implications - the 118d is a lot more powerful and provides much better straightline performance.
Not everyone is interested in performance, of course, so it would be perfectly fine if the TDIe was a pleasant car to drive. Well, it could be, but it isn't. The major issue is that the ride is amazingly harsh - considerably worse, in fact, than that of the R8 sports car (and I speak from experience of having driven both models one after the other). Yes, the R8 has very sophisticated suspension, but even so, shouldn't it be the other way round?
The TDIe's ride knocks a great deal off the perceived value of the car, which is otherwise high thanks to the general feeling of quality and well-builtness. If you're paying the list price of £17,195 (or £500 more than that if you want five doors rather than three), this sense of quality is very impressive, but the test car cost rather a lot more than that.
It was loaded with options, the more expensive ones being satellite navigation, a multi-function steering wheel, adaptive xenon headlights, mobile phone preparation, dual-zone climate control air-conditioning, automatic lights and wipers, a CD changer and the Audi Symphony audio system.
With all these fitted, along with a few other bits and pieces, the cost shoots up to £24,360, and I have to say that the TDIe does not feel anything like a £24,360 car. Apart from anything else, you could get an A3 2.0 TDI, with a more modern engine, better performance and a still-respectable 134g/km CO2 figure for several thousand pounds less if you didn't go too wild with the options.
I like the idea of the TDIe, and I wanted to like the car, but that didn't happen. Audi is producing some wonderful cars these days, but the TDIe isn't one of them.
Add new comment