2003 Audi A3 vs. 2012 Suzuki Equator
To start off, 2012 Suzuki Equator is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Audi A3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Audi A3 would be higher. At 2,488 cc (4 cylinders), 2012 Suzuki Equator is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Suzuki Equator (152 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 52 more horse power than 2003 Audi A3. (100 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Suzuki Equator should accelerate faster than 2003 Audi A3. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Audi A3 weights approximately 230 kg more than 2012 Suzuki Equator.
Because 2003 Audi A3 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2012 Suzuki Equator. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Audi A3 will offer significantly more control. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2012 Suzuki Equator (232 Nm @ 4400 RPM) has 84 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Audi A3. (148 Nm @ 3800 RPM). This means 2012 Suzuki Equator will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Audi A3.
Compare all specifications:
2003 Audi A3 | 2012 Suzuki Equator | |
Make | Audi | Suzuki |
Model | A3 | Equator |
Year Released | 2003 | 2012 |
Body Type | Hatchback | Pickup |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1595 cc | 2488 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 100 HP | 152 HP |
Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Torque | 148 Nm | 232 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3800 RPM | 4400 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.3:1 | 10.0:1 |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1205 kg | 975 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4210 mm | 5250 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1860 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1750 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 3200 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 5.5 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 9.6 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 7 L/100km | 6.1 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 80 L |