need help
12-13-2006, 06:40 PM
#12
Ltd sales OK, but then why not bring 2.0T Quattro Manual instead of the 3.2?
The volume is low, agreed, but they don't have to offer all four options: 2.0 and 3.2 in both manual and DSG. If they're only going to sell 10K cars, why not skip the 3.2 offer just the 2.0T in Fronttrack & Quattro and DSG & Manual. They're avoiding the most popular combination (at least according to numerous posts on this board and common sense). The reason has to be the economics of cannibalizing the A4.
12-13-2006, 06:43 PM
#13
That combo specific to A3 only? Couldn't Audi leverage the TT's volume too?
It seems like the right combination for the new TT would be the 2.0T/Quattro/Manual. The 3.2 doesn't help the TT (or the A3's) weight distribution. If the TT wants to be a real sports car contender, a smaller, lighter engine would be better, right?
12-13-2006, 11:22 PM
#17
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you think a 2.0T+QTR+DSG would eat into A3 3.2 sales
given your well written (and persuasive comments) above? I wonder if people would pay extra $$ for a loaded 2.0T if quattro was an option (like the mod-happy folks in the A4 camp who have definitely paid extra for their "4 bangers")?
12-14-2006, 09:13 AM
#20
Given the tiny numbers that would sell and that Audi does not acknowledge chipping, I think offering
the 3.2 was a logical choice as the range topper. It provides variety to the line. Time and time again, having an automatic of some type has proven more popular than offering a stickshift only. They also know everybody will chip that car, and that's the last thing they want from a warranty standpoint.