On paper, that the 2.0 T is the better buy seems like a no brainer, but it's not as simple as it seems.
Being front-driven, there is still a slight, though noticeable, interference to the steering when at maximum boost, something you'll need to take into account when powering through a corner. Besides that, there's very little to fault in the A3's dynamic ability. Fitted with the same four-link rear axle as the Golf, the FWD A3 is safe and predictable through the bends, though not quite as involving as the RWD BMW 1-Series, while the A3's ride quality is up there with the best despite it having lowered 'sport' suspension. Practicality is a virtue of the Sportback body style, it being 83mm longer than the 3-door A3 and a good 70mm longer than the VW Golf. Despite it resembling a scaled-down avant in the side profile, the Sportback looks purposeful thanks to its squat and low-slung proportions ? in fact it's more than four centimetres lower than the Golf GTI. Though hardly wagon-like, the Sportback's back can swallow 370 litres worth of luggage, or 1120 litres with the rear seatback folded down. Costing just R15 000 more than the Golf GTI, it should be an enticing alternative for those preferring the more mature and prestigious countenance of the Audi to the Veedub's boy racer image.Keep in mind that the Audi is not as well equipped ? you'll pay extra for the cruise control and seat heating, items that are standard on the GTI. The A3 does offer some other cool options though, like the large-area double sunroof fitted to our tester.
While not quite as much fun as the GTI in overall terms, the A3 2.0 T Sportback offers a more mature alternative, with performance to even match that of the A3 3.2 V6.There might be a small dynamic drawback, as well as a slight lag on take off and you might miss that V6 smoothness, but the 2.0 T has a gem of an engine and it's more economical to boot. Above all, can you really argue with that R74 000 saving?

