Audi vs. Volvo vs. Subaru

[etoiles]

Ok, I know those are different beasts... but we need to buy a new car and can't decide, and I know a lot of people here have strong opinions when it comes to cars :)

My girlfriend and I are looking to buy a new car. We live in southern california, but love to go snowboarding in the winter. So basically, we are looking for a car that has room for 3 or 4 people and ski/snowboard equipment, and is nice to drive on freeway (my commute) and mountain roads (US mountain roads... still pretty comfortable by European standards). It should also have decent gasmileage. We'd like to stay well below $30K... and would keep our current VW GTI as a second car (ideally the two cars would complement each other).

Personally, I also enjoy stylish interiors... but can't be too picky, I guess.

Cars that we have been looking at:
-Audi A3
-Volvo V50 (they have an oversea purchasing program, where they fly you out to the factory and offer cheaper prices)
-Subaru Impreza 2.5 wagon
-?

Any comments ? Feedback would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks

[Swarmlord]

I own a Subaru AND a Volvo and I recommend them 100%. My Subaru is a 2002 Impreza WRX and it's wicked fast, fun and sure footed as a rabbit. The Volvo is an XC90 and probably the nicest vehicle I've ever owned.

I don't think you can go wrong with either brand as long as the sticker price of the Volvo isn't an issue. The Subarus are priced quite fair as far as I'm concerned.

[jacg]

I have an Impreza. They handle really well and reliability is great but check fuel economy if you are going to be doing a lot of miles.

[RugoseCone]

I'll voice my support for the A3. I've got an '02 A4 and it's easily the best purchase I've ever made outside of real estate. The weight and AWD will be good for driving in slick conditions and taking those mountain curves.

On ice the AWD doesn't make any difference IMO, but in the rain driving my car is like being on dry roads.

As for safety, Audi is getting great safety ratings and in some instances better than Volvos.

Although I've read some complaints about electrical issues online, they seem to have overcome the problems that plagued their cars in the 80's. My vehicle has been incredibly reliable for four years, but it could be that I'm just not used to that based on some of my old cars…

[strider42]

I can't comment on the Audi or the volvo as I've never driven or owned them. I'm sure theya re good cars, though I'd be a bit worried about reliability of the audi. VW/Audi have not fared particularly well in reliability recently, nor have any of the german manufacturers for that matter.

As for subaru, I can totally recommend them. I haven't had an impreza, but my family is on its third legacy/outback, and they all have the same basic engine architecture. The first one went 10 years and 240k miles beofre being sold off. The second is still going after 12 years and over 200k miles. The third is brand new and is really super nice. Subaru's reliability has always been top notch, their engines are proven, and you get a lot of great standard features. I don't think you'd have any trouble going with the subbie.

You do of course have a lot of other options. Not the same market segment, but thinking of the kinds of things you say you would use it for, a small, car based SUV might do you very well (honda CR-V for instance, available with 4wd and pretty rock solid, cheap. Lots of others out there as well). Check out edmunds.com for lists of cars/suv's under 30k, and start narrowing down possibilities from there. Lots of possibilities.

[quagmire]

I would go with the Volvo. I am not a fan of the new Impreza look, and Audi=VW= reliability hell with the electrical system, etc. And to chime in a 3rd party vehicle, the Saturn Aura is pretty decent. It has a good interior, and the DOHC 3.6 V6 and 6 speed tranny with tapshift is a nice combo on the XR trim.

[yg17]

I love Audis, so I say A3, but I've never driven any of them, or even been in one of them, so don't consider me a reliable source of info :D

[MacFan25863]

I own a Volvo, and I have to say I feel like I'm driving a tank when I'm inside. I love the piece of mind knowing that if something goes wrong, I'll be protected in a giant marshmellow of airbags.

Not to mention that even the base sound system is pretty sweet. It's a very simple car, no wizbang features or fancy graphics. Very easy to handle, and since it's a turbo, nice and quick on the road.

Mine is a '06 S60, but I've driven the V50 too and it has most of the same features I just described above.

Only thing about Volvos is the turning radius sucks and they have finnicky onboard computers. I've had my firmware updated twice because the computer thought something was wrong when there wasn't.

[etoiles]

Thanks for the quick replies !
I guess the Subaru would be the most 'reasonable' choice from a price perspective, but as I hinted before, I am a sucker for European car interiors ;).

I have been trying to stay away from SUVs because of efficiency issues, but the C-RV has a similar gas mileage than the other cars I listed, so I might have to look further into it.

The Volvo seemes really nice inside, but I will have to see it in person... it would also be a big jump in size, but then there is plenty of room on US roads and parking lots :)

So far, I have only test driven the Subaru... trying to get more informed before 'facing' the car dealers.

[DJ OJ]

My Mom used to have an Audi. Nice car, not so fun to drive. Right now she has a volvo cross country XC70. More FUn to drive. Don't know about Subaru. sry about quick reply.

[rdowns]

If reliabilty and low repair costs are a factor, Subaru hands down.

[etoiles]

I own a Volvo, and I have to say I feel like I'm driving a tank when I'm inside. I love the piece of mind knowing that if something goes wrong, I'll be protected in a giant marshmellow of airbags.

safety is definitely high on my list, too... I have been hit by other cars twice. Once on the freeway, when traffic came to a complete stop (guy behind me was distracted and didn't brake in time), and once when a driver didn't stop at a right light. My cars got totalled both times.

My point ? You don't have to be a bad driver to love airbags !

[Lord Blackadder]

The A3 is a very nice car, but the cheaper models are bad value compared to the new Golf/Rabbit, and once you start adding options they get too pricey.

The Subaru Impreza is quite ugly. But in WRX form it is a true sportscar for the common man - an awesome drive.

I don't have much recent experience with Volvos - as far as I've seen they are pretty solid cars but not particularly cheap to buy or own.

[Cube54]

I would check out 'Consumer Reports' before you buy etoiles

The Volvo V50 has some seriously bad info. The other 2 were fine. The A3 was the winner, except for the need for 'Premium Fuel' & milage. The Sub. was okay too, except for the no fold-down rear seat option which means -> roof rack for you if you're going skiing.

[JeffTL]

If you want Volvo engineering without the expense, check out the Ford Five Hundred. I find the Five Hundred to be very comfortable and it handles the Nebraska winter well with AWD; also, the trunk is huge. The Freestyle is essentialy a Five Hundred wagon, if you want the wagon format, and the Mercury Montego is basically the same vehicle.

[etoiles]

Interesting... I will sign up to get those consumer reports.

So do you get Volvo engineering in a Ford, or do you get a Ford in a Volvo ? Does it matter (I have not been terribly impressed by Ford in the past) ?
cheers

[JeffTL]

Ford bought Volvo Cars in 1999, and the Five Hundred uses the platform of the 1998-2006 Volvo S80. Our '05 Five Hundred is a lot nicer than the '99 Taurus it replaced, which cost us about the same amount of money; the ride quality is smooth, power is sufficient for any practical purpose other than towing (still best to get a truck for that), and the safety ratings are very good.

[MacFan25863]

Interesting... I will sign up to get those consumer reports.

So do you get Volvo engineering in a Ford, or do you get a Ford in a Volvo ? Does it matter (I have not been terribly impressed by Ford in the past) ?
cheers

Volvo uses modified Ford bases for their cars. Basically, the Volvo engineers take the Ford provided frame, modify it to Volvo standards, and then build a car around it. Most cars these days are all built on a standard frame (for instance, you will find the same frame in a Jaguar that you find in a Volvo or a Lincoln, since the are all made by Ford. Same with other companies).

[Cube54]

If you want Volvo engineering without the expense, check out the Ford Five Hundred. I find the Five Hundred to be very comfortable and it handles the Nebraska winter well with AWD; also, the trunk is huge.

You've got to be kidding, right???

Ford 500 - Try a *fat man's golf-cart that steers like a Sherman Tank in a bad rain storm on a sunny day*.

The reason the trunk is so large is 'cause it holds all your Walmart Specials & extra food !!

[clayj]

Go with the Audi.

(I own an Audi TT and I *love* it.)

[misam]

We have four all wheel drive cars, a 1998 Volvo V70 XC, 2004 Mercedes E320 4-matic, 2005 BMW 325xi, and 2006 VW Passat 3.6. We ski every weekend and have a 70 mile or so drive each way. I can't reccomend the Volvo, we have had way too many problems with it, but it was the first year of AWD for Volvo. I have driven a loaner V50 and it was OK, not great, certainly not as nice as the A4 and 3 series, or even the Passat. You could probably get a new 328xi for low 30k's which would be an awesome car, and comes with free maintenance for the first four years. We just got the Passat, and we seriously looked at the Subaru Outback 2.5xt and A4 2.0t. I don't know how much the A3 costs, but you can get a Passat 3.6 4motion for about 30-32k, and it's a lot bigger than the A3 and a lot faster than the Legacy 2.5i. So if I were in your position I would cross out the Volvo, and look at the A3 (doesnt the 2.0t only come with FWD?), Legacy 2.5i/xt, and Passat 3.6 4motion.

[Yakamoto]

But the audi is better, legendary AWD, traction control, beutifull interior,
really cool red lights in console.... Plus all this about being problamatic is like saying Apple is no good because it needed to be fixed. Mine works great
2004 Audi a4 and 2002 Jetta Wolfsburg, Plus the audi has great service.
Good luck on whatever you choose though.

[Lord Blackadder]

Remember also that the base Audi A3 is front wheel drive. If you want Quattro you must get the V6 and the price starts at $33k. :eek:

[sth]

Remember also that the base Audi A3 is front wheel drive. If you want Quattro you must get the V6 and the price starts at $33k. :eek:
You can get the 2.0 TFSI (200hp) and two of the Diesels with Quattro as well.

The Volvo probably has the most space of the cars. Volvos are very practical cars. They are pretty comfortable as well bit a bit boring...

I would definitely go for the Audi if the price is not a problem.

[Lord Blackadder]

You can get the 2.0 TFSI (200hp) and two of the Diesels with Quattro as well.

Not in the US, unfortunately. :(

There are only two engines, the 2.0 turbo and the V6. Quattro is only available with the V6 - which is stupid because Quattro is one of Audi's selling points. A FWD Audi these days is basically an overpriced Golf.

[John Jacob]

Obviously, Subaru.... Petter Solberg RULZ!!! Actually I've never even been in any of them, but I'd still have no hesitations in recommending the Scooby... They ROCK!! :D

[etoiles]

I was actually thinking about the 2wd A3 and Volvo. Where we go skiing, there is usually only a few miles of potential snow on the road (Mammoth Lakes)... and the rest of the year, we live in a no snow, no rain area.

4wd would be a nice luxury, but we have to balance the comfort (not having to step out to mount chains) against the added cost (initial/fuel/tire wear). We are still looking for a 'stable' car that sticks to the road, though, and have not ruled out 4wd in those more expensive cars.

I went skiing in Switzerland for about 15 years and never once drove a 4wd. Only had to put on chains once. But then again, we used good winter tires.


So the Subaru seems to be a strong contender from a technical side (not really keen on looks, but hey...).
Sounds like the Audi 2wd is overpriced, unless I can find a 'special' deal.
The Volvo is getting mixed ratings here...I will have to check out customer reviews and test-drive.
I should probably consider the Honda CR-V.
The Passat Wagon looks very roomy...but is the 2.0T ok (3.6 gets a bit pricey) ?
I need to stop saving for a house and just put the money into a nice car :D


Thanks for all the insightful feedback

[sth]

...
You need to test-drive all of the cars. There's no other way to make a good decision.

For the Passat: Remember that the Passat is bigger than an Audi A4 (it actually shares the platform of the Audi A6!) so it's very good value for money. The 2.0t should be pretty okay in the car.


Not in the US, unfortunately. :(

There are only two engines, the 2.0 turbo and the V6. Quattro is only available with the V6 - which is stupid because Quattro is one of Audi's selling points.
Bad...

A FWD Audi these days is basically an overpriced Golf.
Not true. Test drive an A3 and a Golf and compare for youself.

[Lord Blackadder]

Not true. Test drive an A3 and a Golf and compare for youself.

I did. The A3 has a great interior and I like the transmission. Performance is pretty good with the turbo, and I've always been a huge fan of the Audi/VW sixes. The ride is pretty crashy over bad pavement, especially with the bigger wheel package the model I tested had. Don't get me wrong - it's a very nice car - but I don't think it's worth the extra few thousand over a GTI. Audi should offer the Quattro as standard like Subaru does.

Other than value though both the GTI and A3 are great cars.

I think that a WRX sportwagon is the best bet - the only real downside is that they're not attractive. But they are very fast, competitive in price, have AWD and are roomy.

[alywa]

Though the Audis are very nice, their reliability is definately subpar. The v50 would be a cool choice, especially with the trip to Sweden, but reliablity will still be an issue.

While not exciting, my wife and I own a 2003 Subaru Forester. It handles great in rain and snow, is convenient to haul stuff around in, and gets decent (not great) mileage. Had the turbo been offered when we purchased it, we would have gotten it (even though it makes mileage worse).

We've had no mechanical problems with the car. We got rear-ended (while parked) by a snowplow, which crunched up the passenger-side rear end. (Of note, this is where the fuel door is)... we got it fixed, but have had persistant problems with the "check engine" light coming on. It is always due to vacuum loss in the fuel system. Subaru has been really good about trying to track down the problem, and has replaced most of the parts related to the situation, but it still occasionally occurs. I feel this is entirely due to the accident, however, and don't blame the manufacturer. The car runs fine, it is just that the "check engine light" is really annoying to look at. Fortunately, autozone with check and reset the light for us, so it isn't a huge issue (happens 1-2 times / year).

For the overall cost of ownership, the Subaru is a good bet. They also keep their resale well (better than the Volvo, likely on par with the audi), so if you want to trade up / down in the future you can easily.

Good luck, have fun, and make sure you sleep on it when you are ready to make a decision.

[sth]

I did. The A3 has a great interior and I like the transmission. Performance is pretty good with the turbo, and I've always been a huge fan of the Audi/VW sixes. The ride is pretty crashy over bad pavement, especially with the bigger wheel package the model I tested had.
Some 2004 models had a problem with bumpy suspension but it was fixed in later models.
Generally Audis are known for their hard ride but I don't think it's bad. It has a certain sporty feel and you can do things which most american cars can't - like driving around a corner without getting seasick :) I also prefer the lower driving position in the A3.

Don't get me wrong - it's a very nice car - but I don't think it's worth the extra few thousand over a GTI. Audi should offer the Quattro as standard like Subaru does.

Other than value though both the GTI and A3 are great cars.
Okay, the GTI is of course a different beast than the standard Golf. I always forget that Golf almost always means Golf GTI in the US.

I think that a WRX sportwagon is the best bet - the only real downside is that they're not attractive. But they are very fast, competitive in price, have AWD and are roomy.
I can't say anything about the Subaru since I never drove one.

[jayb2000]

We have a 2002 1.8L Turbo Passat Wagon and its been great.
Almost 90k miles and still going strong. Biggest pain is that all the B5 and B5.5 models (think 96-2005, with the update in 2001.5) have weak CV boots.
So keep an eye on those, and be prepared to drop around $400 bucks to replace them. You can replace just the boots, but at that point, the labor is the same as replacing the axels as well, which is what I did. it would have been about $350 to do just the boots.

However, the car is very comfortable, we regularly do 3+ hour trips every few weeks from Maine to Rhode Island, and it is great. We still get close to 30pmg highway, even with the big silver Thule box on the roof.

The new ones look pretty sharp and with the 2.0 I would guess they would be a bit peppier, but unless you care about drag racing, the 1.8 has been fine. Easy to stomp it to get on the highway, cruises at 80 very comfortably, etc.

As for the front wheel drive vs. all wheel drive, you are right. Get good snowtires and you will be fine. We live in Maine (4 seasons, Winter, Winter, Winter, and mud) and get through the snow easily. I have the Blizzaks, they have been very smooth.

Plus, for the money, it is much bigger than the A4 or the V50. I drove a V70 Cross Country for a week and actually found the Passat to be more comfortable.

We looked at Subaru's when we bought this one, but to add A/C, Leather, etc, made the Subaru just as expensive if not more than the Passat. Not sure how much that has changed, but be sure to configure with all the options you want/need and then compare.

Also, as "sth" said, be sure to do some test drives. The VW felt much more solid than the Subarus.

Good Luck!

[Phat Elvis]

The 2.0 T engine is excellent. Great gas mileage and great pick-up. In an A3 it's more than enough power. Try to get the AWD - it's worth it for the handling alone.

VW's and Audi's are very different - from engineering to manufacturing - so I don't know if I would compare the two so much. Just because they share an engine doesn't mean it's the same car.

I also don't think that subaru is any less expensive. They seemed to have jacked up their prices to be the same as Audi, and I couldn't fit in their back seats.

[crdean1]

Not sure if this has been posted, but I would recommend buying one that is two years old with about 20 to 30 thousand miles. You can get a better car for a cheaper price. It is a good way to shave about $7K off of the purchase price.

That way, you might be able to get the car you really want, with the 4 wheel drive or the quattro engine.

[true777]

I vote for the Audi A3, followed by the Volvo. Both should be excellent cars. I find the Subaru far less impressive.

[4JNA]

similar situation in 2001, also (then) living in so cal, and bought an outback wagon loaded with every option. can say it has been the best car i have ever owned. in 5 years, trips all over the country (alaska to florida) i have had only a stuck thermostat at 50k miles, and out of adjustment windows (no frames, wind noise) at 60k miles. gas, oil, tires, thats it. runs great on the highway, have been in snow up to the door handle level with no problem, and have been amazed by this car that you just get in and go. anywhere. anytime.

i can also admit to being a sucker for the cross country though...the interior is amazing!

[dpaanlka]

This is an awfully weird comparison. I'm surprised nobody mentioned that Subaru isn't really in the same class as Audi and Volvo.

Subaru is a higher-end economy brand. Volvo and Audi are luxury brands.

[RugoseCone]

Sounds like the Audi 2wd is overpriced, unless I can find a 'special' deal.
The Passat Wagon looks very roomy...but is the 2.0T ok (3.6 gets a bit pricey) ?

Thanks for all the insightful feedback

If you give any consideration to the Audi/VW brand, this website is an excellent resource for reviews of dealerships…

http://1.8t.org/dealers/

No matter what car you ultimately decide on, do plenty of homework before buying. I utilized Edmonds.com before the purchase of my A4 and it really helped me to not only make the decision, but to negotiate a fair price.

[etoiles]

This is an awfully weird comparison. I'm surprised nobody mentioned that Subaru isn't really in the same class as Audi and Volvo.

Subaru is a higher-end economy brand. Volvo and Audi are luxury brands.

I know, it is like comparing apples and p... I mean oranges :)
It is a left brain vs. right brain vs. heart kind of thing...

I would love to travel in style (Audi, Volvo...) but can only afford the low end of those brands (without financing). On the other hand, I could get a cheap looking and feeling car (Subaru), that is more affordable, reliable and performant (at same price level). The second choice is probably more 'reasonable' (hey, we are also saving for a house), but then again, fellow Mac users will understand my style dilemma...

To make things worse, I have thrown the Honda CR-V (gasp) and Mazda3 Wagon into the equation... and fallen in love with the BMW 328 SportsWagon. Oh lordy, I am hopeless :D

[jbernie]

My girlfriend and I are looking to buy a new car. We live in southern california, but love to go snowboarding in the winter. So basically, we are looking for a car that has room for 3 or 4 people and ski/snowboard equipment, and is nice to drive on freeway (my commute) and mountain roads (US mountain roads... still pretty comfortable by European standards). It should also have decent gasmileage. We'd like to stay well below $30K... and would keep our current VW GTI as a second car (ideally the two cars would complement each other).

Give some thought to a Saab 9-2x, as they are no more the dealers should be wanting to offload them, will give you a more refined Impreza but for what should be a very reasonable price.

A 9-3 is also nice, though a 2.0T engine is more in your price range. They are offering about $4000 in dealer cash and the 07s are arriving so the 06s need to go. Also the 2.0T gets a bit better gas mileage, though fmy Aero was getting around 34mpg the other night on a relatively flat highway run (65 miles).

[dpaanlka]

My Saab 9-5 Aero generally gets around 30mpg on the highway, which is excellent for how large and powerful of a car it is. That probably isn't really in your price range though.

Saabs have very well done interiors. In fact, they're famous for their traditional "cockpit" styling, which hasn't changed much since the 1980s (1987 Saab 9000 dash is almost identical to the 2007 9-5). It's very Saab, and now that so many brands have moved on to bulbous bubbly interiors, it really stands out as a refreshing alternative. Saab seats are also very supportive and considered among the best.

60250

If you were to buy a Saab, i'd recommend a real Saab (the 9-3 or the 9-5) over the Impreza-based 9-2x.

[Xeem]

Of the top 10 most reliable car brands (according to the 2006 consumer reports list), 9 of them were Japanese, including Subaru at #5. Although you might be tempted by the style of the Audi, realize that Audi often occupies the 10 most UNreliable car brand list. Although you might be tempted by the, um, something, of the Volvo (safety?), realize that the Impreza's probable better handling (I can't say for sure because I've only driven the Subaru, not the Vovo) will offset any safety features that Volvo can claim. Also realize that people generally make fun of Volvo owners behind their backs, although not so viciously as they go after the Saab crowd (no offense anyone, that's just how it is!).

The Impreza is the smartest choice on your list.

[dpaanlka]

Also realize that people generally make fun of Volvo owners behind their backs, although not so viciously as they go after Saab owners.

Those are usually the people who, like you, never drove either of the Swedish brands. Most european car drivers make fun of the Japanese brands, because regardless of how reliable they are, they're just not as cool.

[jonnyblobby]

If your needing a car with some extra room than what your VW has, then something like an A3 is not going to be any different.
I drive a A3 myself, and wouldn't be if I didn't win the car.
The VW Golf my a friends drives is almost exactly the same (in fact nicer with leather and better Stereo) and there are really due to them using the same body, but selling at half the price. Okay, so you don't get the little extra's like heated door handles, but you save a few extra bucks on the same car (somehow I think the VW's last longer and run cheaper...)

[iJaz]

Those are usually the people who, like you, never drove either of the Swedish brands. Most european car drivers make fun of the Japanese brands, because regardless of how reliable they are, they're just not as cool.

Toyota has a very good reputation here in Sweden, very reliable cars although, as you say, a bit boring. We mostly make fun of the big big, gas hungry, poorly built, unsafe, ugly American cars! ;)
Enough OT, Audi came in first place in a recent satisfaction survey here in Sweden and Volvo came in second place. So I guess either will be alright, even though I vote in favour for the V50. I wanted one but had to do with a V40 this summer, it is nice though.

[RugoseCone]

Unreliability can be a subjective thing though. Look at Mac users freaking out over a dead pixel or two. Could these reliability surveys be similar? European car buyers just tending to be more finicky and complaining about things more than purchasers of Japanese brands? Now that's not to say there aren't more scientific studies on reliability. But what are we talking about? A window that won't open or a car that is immobile due to failure? I'm not disputing there are issues, just taking some of the reports with a grain of salt.

In four years of owning an Audi it's been in for a recall on the ignition coil (despite no symptoms), standard scheduled maintenance, a cracked seat back, malfunctioning lumbar support (which led to the cracked seat back due to dealer error), and an electrical issue related to me not cleaning leaves out of the engine compartment sufficiently. This led to water getting behind the fire-wall and shorting some things out. All but the last were covered under warranty, even scheduled maintenance.

Otherwise the vehicle has been a tank and my only complaint would be the crappy rubber finish applied to several surfaces on the interior (which they no longer use). Over time it has a tendency to peel away a bit in areas handled; like the door handle, turn signal, center console. After four years, most people ask if the car is new or if they know I've had it a while, they marvel at it's condition.

[dpaanlka]

Unreliability can be a subjective thing though. Look at Mac users freaking out over a dead pixel or two. Could these reliability surveys be similar?

Possibly...

People always tell me my SAAB is unreliable, even though it's now at 120,000 miles and the worst thing that has ever gone wrong was some pixels are dead on the SID display.

People always tell me BMWs are amazing, but at 36,000 miles my mom's X5 blew it's entire transmission, also had a faulty CD changer replaced like 10 times, none of the power outlets worked except the ones in the trunk, the windows rolled themselves up and down randomly, and paint was coming off a lot of interior parts.

My friend's Nissan Sentra breaks down constantly, my Dad's Saturn has never broke down ever (at 120,000 miles also), my Aunt's Miata is pretty strong for a 1994, my Dad's girlfriend's 2002 Dodge Caravan is horrible...

I think it has as much to do with the driver as the cars themselves...

[Baron58]

I'm not going to take all the time to rebut all the misinformation about the A3 here. People are talking crap about poor reliability of the A3 that they have no first-hand experience with. You can't compare it to much older models - the new Audis are more reliable than the other premium German brands now.

Is AWD a must-have for you? If so, stop thinking about it and get the Subaru. In my case, I was equally torn between AWD and hatch, and since I hated the WRX wagon (too much of a wagon, not a hatchback) that narrowed me down to the A3 & GTI. The A3 and GTI share the same chassis, engine and transmission. You can save a few $ by getting the GTI, and deal with the horrible VW dealer customer service. You can spend a little more on the A3 to upscale the ride, and get much better Audi customer service. If 2 doors are more important, get the GTI. If 4 doors are more important, the GTI is available as a 4-door which is a more direct comparison to the A3.

Once I drove both a new GTI and a sport-package (now 'S-Line') A3, I was set on the A3.

Read all through my site, it may help you out: http://oooo-a3.blogspot.com/

[Xeem]

My friend's Nissan Sentra breaks down constantly, my Dad's Saturn has never broke down ever (at 120,000 miles also), my Aunt's Miata is pretty strong for a 1994, my Dad's girlfriend's 2002 Dodge Caravan is horrible...

I think it has as much to do with the driver as the cars themselves...

I'll say that's true to a point, but I think the quality of the product is more important in the end. I drive my grandma's 1993 Explorer (it was my free, and I'm a poor college student) with 230,000 miles on it, and it has never broken down. That isn't very unusual for a 91-94 Explorer, but it would be very unlikely to get over 200,000 miles problem-free miles out of any Explorer made after that. My parents' 2001 Grand Caravan blew its transmission last year. When they talked to a mechanic, he was amazed that anyone had managed to really go above 100,000 miles on the factory transmission of a 2000-1 Caravan.

Some cars are just made better than others. I still recommend the Impreza based on its reliability.

[Phat Elvis]

There are lots of people that have had "reliable cars" that were unreliable (and the other way around). It's difficult to tell who/what ratings to trust. We had a honda that blew a transmission at 4 years and turned out to be covered by a 'soft' recall (total BS, it was a known problem in that year's Accord but they only fixed it if you were having problems). Companies can cheat to avoid recalls and therefore have fewer dings on their reliablility scales. Also cars made for the European market are most likely a different species than the US market - for better or worse.

Go for good customer service. Sooner or later you're going to need it. Ask around near you to find out which dealers have good service departments and factor that into your decision. Then get the Audi because I love the A3 :D . Red. AWD. Sunroof.

[jbernie]

This is an awfully weird comparison. I'm surprised nobody mentioned that Subaru isn't really in the same class as Audi and Volvo.

Subaru is a higher-end economy brand. Volvo and Audi are luxury brands.


It all depends on what exactly you are comparing... interior quality, performance, efficency etc. Depending on which aspect you focus on depends on what competes. A responsible driver can get 30+mpg out of a 400hp Corvette on a highway, which is as good as some 200hp v6 sedans.

Definately agree on your distinction between economy and luxury. It is a wierd thing about cars, set a $30-35k price range and it is amazing now what brands fall into your field of view.

[sth]

A responsible driver can get 30+mpg out of a 400hp Corvette on a highway
Not in germany :D

[etoiles]

Alright, it has been a while... but we finally settled for a new car. Well actually not quite new, since we decided to get a used 05' Subaru Outback 2.5 XT Ltd. It is an automatic... but the 250hp should get us up the mountain :)

The leather interior is very nice, the only thing missing is an iPod hook-up. But since it is not a new car, I don't mind doing a bit of installation work myself.

Thanks again for everybody's input.

[marioman38]

nvm... woulda gone for the audi, but subaru is good with AWD and all......