LCR (mk1) vs Audi A3 / S3 / etc

[pdg32]

THe only other car I was toying with (still am a bit perhaps, but you folk may convince me otherwise) buying in the future is an Audi S3 or A3.

What are people's opinion on these cars vs the LCR mk1?

From my research, I believe that the S3, as nice as it is, would be an older (maybe year 2000), high mileage for the same price as a low miles, 05 plate Cupra R. The Cupra R still looks better than the S3 hands down in my view. Same engine I believe, quite a lot of similarities in fact. You don't get leather with the Cupra R.

Then there's the A3 3.2l V6 - that looks an awesome machine, nicer than the S3 perhaps - but again, I'd be looking at a higher mileage example, though I've seen some for same price as a mint Cupra and similar year also.... but they are a little thirstier from what I've read.

Are Audi servicing costs a lot higher than Seat?

Another thing I was wondering - I know that many folk choose to Remap their LCR's - but realistically, is there not a 'sensible' limit to take this to? I believe the standard LCR has more than enough power and will wheelspin if pushed hard enough, that's why I was toying with the idea of the Quattro system - I mean, with 4WD system surely you can then take the power to whatever is possible should you wish, whereas the LCR wouldn't handle it?

Just trying to get my head around that before I make up my mind that it's the LCR I want over the Audi.

 

[Spirit Furtive]

It just seems like you need to work out if you want the quattro system or not, plenty of us run remapped cars with no issues. Do you want the car to do the work for you when you plant your foot or can you deal with feeding the power in?

 

[GMH23]

Don't own a LCR myself but its an interesting point your putting forward.

In terms of running costs I don't think there would be much in it, yes the 3.2 is thirsty but from what people say about their LCRs they're only getting mid 20's mpg in the real world.

The 3.2 will be a lot heavier and probably feel like a lazier car to drive, but they do sound fantastic!

And in terms of servicing, you could always just bring the audi to a VW/Seat/Skoda garage, I'm sure they're just as competant

 

[grahams81]

Really depends on what you want, 4wd or fwd.... There's no doubting the LCR is a better looking car but the 4wd S3 would be better for massive power. Saying that there is loads that can be done to the LCR, better suspension polybushes etc of course sticky wider rubber.

The 4wd is a heavy system so unless your chucking serious power through it a lightened LCR with sorted suspension will pull its pants down...

I wanted both so i've converted a 2001 LC to 4wd

Edit - just a point on the fuel costs... The 1.8t engines are crap for fuel economy, my last car a porsche 911 3.4L had better fuel economy.... Just not the way i drove it ! You might find a NA 3.2 just as bad or if not better.
Best thing to do is search for the official specs and compare a combined figure for both..... Scary tho when you find the figures.

 

[Dannyh]

the 3.2V6 A3 is the same engine as the Mk4 R32, it will do less than 20 mpg no matter how you drive it (a friend has one) it is verry verry quick off the line but the lack of boost becomes apparent on the motoways

the S3 is a good choice but a stage one LCR would be better than a stage 1 S3 the quattro system is a heavy bit of kit and unless your planning on running 300bhp plus i wouldnt bother, a friend was running 280-290 in his LCR before it spat a rod (Looney R) and that diddnt struggle with wheelspin at all, some good coilovers, strut brace and ARB's will put quattro to shame

 

[pdg32]

thanks guys - very helpful info indeed!

the Cupra R still wins it for me.

figures wise - I read 26mpg combined for the 3.2 Audi, and 32mpg or so for the Cupra R...not sure if that tells the real story though?

 

[Dannyh]

You would be lucky for 26mpg combined on the 3.2 lol

im yet to see what the LCR is like on the motoway,

LCR all day every day, better looks and more fun to drive, there is nothing fun about quattro/ haldex

 

[ian_n]

well my FR is only 180 brake standard but similar engine to LCR and if i sit at 70mph on a run i can easily see 38mpg.
if i do floor it then yeah it goes down, so i kind of disagree that the 1.8 engines are shocking on fuel economy.

 

[Spirit Furtive]

Edit - just a point on the fuel costs... The 1.8t engines are crap for fuel economy, my last car a porsche 911 3.4L had better fuel economy.... Just not the way i drove it ! You might find a NA 3.2 just as bad or if not better.
Best thing to do is search for the official specs and compare a combined figure for both..... Scary tho when you find the figures.

Surely not, I mean the 1.8 is no 3 cylinder diesel but worse than the 3.4?

 

[ozzymyster]

Surely not, I mean the 1.8 is no 3 cylinder diesel but worse than the 3.4?

I only have my lcr 3 weeks and completely disagree that they are poor on fuel...I've been running mk3 16v golfs for the last number of years...best I'd get day to day is about 30/33 mpg and it was only 150bhp...I've 300 miles done and estimated 50 left according to the trip computer...not bad considering it's 225bhp...
Mine is standard and find it hard to keep the power down i'n first without lighting the wheels up...imagine the quattro would be great off the lights...
Having said that I like the 5 door option i'n the leon find it a bigger car...swings and roundabouts really

Still going for a remap though

Want that extra grunt for mid range power

Brian

 

[seatcupramad23]

Really depends on what you want, 4wd or fwd.... There's no doubting the LCR is a better looking car but the 4wd S3 would be better for massive power. Saying that there is loads that can be done to the LCR, better suspension polybushes etc of course sticky wider rubber.

The 4wd is a heavy system so unless your chucking serious power through it a lightened LCR with sorted suspension will pull its pants down...

I wanted both so i've converted a 2001 LC to 4wd

Edit - just a point on the fuel costs... The 1.8t engines are crap for fuel economy, my last car a porsche 911 3.4L had better fuel economy.... Just not the way i drove it ! You might find a NA 3.2 just as bad or if not better.
Best thing to do is search for the official specs and compare a combined figure for both..... Scary tho when you find the figures.

graham raised a sensible point thats the dilema i faced , but firstly opted for s3 i always liked how they looks and the 4wd system had much for potential to run silly power but sadly for me i bought a pub so broke it and got LCR 210 which feels noticeable faster than s3 but if you want 300+ bhp i would get a s3 to be honest m there is only only so much the front wheels can take

 

[Dannyh]

to be honest m there is only only so much the front wheels can take

Then you get a Diff, save up and rather than go quattro get an LSD

 

[vwdom]

my lcr did 38mpg going up the m1 to nottingham at a steady 80mph last weekend it normally does around 25-30mpg normal driving but i've had it to low 20's when booting it.

i've been very surprised with how hard it is to get it to wheelspineven in the wet (i've got good new tyres on) my mk2 golf vr6 is always spinning up even in the dry with a lsd the tyres are abit hard though.

i was looking at the same cars as you are and i went for my lcr after driving the s3 and a3 3.2 its much more involving car to drive i think and better value

 

[youngyWHU]

Depends what you want from the car. I also looked between the 3.2 v6 and lcr. I chose the lcr because it looks better, slightly better fuel consumption, still quick but more of a family car because 5 doors which was important. I also use it as a daily driver. The only thing that I preferred the Audi for was the sound of the v6.

 

[ReDBull]

I've been surprised how good my LCR has been on fuel and traction to be honest. Doesn't an s3 weigh 200kg more than an LCR? Thats a lot more mass to move around. Your going to need ££££ to spend on mods to justify carrying around all that extra kit IMO.
I did test drive an s3 and MKV R32 they are very nice cars just to heavy for me.
Even though bits keep falling off my LCR I love it and I've been pleasantly surprised how good it is.

 

[cupra_ahhh]

not sure if this has been said, didn't read the whole thread, but the 3.2 engine is a bit redundant now don’t you think? it sounds great, but its a lot of engine for not a lot of power. And once you're bored with it, what are you going to do....

An LCR has a smaller engine obviously, may be cheaper running costs, servicng etc and can, once you're bored with the standard performance, just play around with it, and a simple remap will take it past the performance of the 3.2. Manufacturers now days are making smaller engines so powerful that the normally aspirated 3.2 is becoming, in my opinion, a complete waste and I’m surprised they're still making it, other than to put it in the Golf R32...


Even then; you look at the Golf R32....compare it to a Golf R...Golf R has more power and will always pull away from the V6

 

[Spirit Furtive]

I don't think they do use it anymore.

 

[6th.replicant]

Yep, S3 and LCR share same engine and gearbox and front subframe, and dashboard but not centre console/HVAC controls.

But, LCR has more powerful brakes and lower/stiffer suspension, which allegedly had its final sign-off/setup tweaked by SEAT Sport. And, IIRC, the LCR also has a quicker steering rack?

S3's 4WD is useful in snow/ice but an LCR on winter tyres is just as effective IMHO.

 

[Mukkyman]

my lcr did 38mpg going up the m1 to nottingham at a steady 80mph last weekend it normally does around 25-30mpg normal driving but i've had it to low 20's when booting it.

what voodoo magic are you doing to get those number

 

[RDS1972]

Jeeez, this makes sobering reading.
I'd be tempted to stay with the Leon mate!

http://www.tyresmoke.net/forum/audi...-s3-1-8t-common-faults-buying-check-list.html