Comparison test: Audi Q3, BMW X1, Mercedes GLA and Mini Countryman

GLA was built on the same basis as the new A, but in the premium class it will have to compete with competitors who already have a lot of experience here - because all the participants have already experienced rejuvenation, which is great. the opportunity for manufacturers to eliminate the shortcomings that buyers complained about. And there haven't been that many over the years, which means that, according to the locals, Mercedes has been missing out on a great opportunity to make money all these years.

Of course, late-to-market also has the advantage of learning from competitors' mistakes. After all this time, it is very clear what the customers want, and at Mercedes they have had enough time to make sure not only that the GLA is good, but also that it is affordable.

Even before the GLA was well driven on Slovenian roads (after all, we won't get it to test with a more suitable engine in the Slovenian market until three weeks after the release of Avto magazine), our colleagues from the German magazine Auto Motor und Sport not only put together all four competitors in a heap, but were also taken to the Bridgestone test site near Rome and invited there by editors of related publications and those publications that have collaborated with Auto Motor und Sport magazine for a long time. Thus, on the track and roads, which are as scattered as Slovenian asphalt, we could move from car to car, accumulate kilometers and discuss the advantages and disadvantages. And because automotive markets are different, opinions quickly arose, from markets where there is a lot of focus on capacity and location on the road, to those where price and consumption matter most. This is one of the reasons why, if we collected all the participating journals, we would find that the final results are not the same everywhere.

The test hybrids had petrol engines under the hood. There will be few of them in our country, but that's why the experience was even more interesting. Clashing only a 1,4-litre 150bhp TSI with a 184-litre 1,6bhp BMW turbo and an almost equally powerful but four deciliter smaller Mini engine and another 156-litre but much less powerful (XNUMX”). hp') turbocharged Mercedes were interesting – and in some areas also amazing. But let's go in order - and from the other side.

4.Sorry: Mini Countryman Cooper S

Mini is without a doubt an athlete of the four. This is evidenced by its engine and transmission, which have the most positive movements of all, and at the same time are the shortest in the calculations. Thus, not only good performance at full overclock, but also excellent measurement results (and a feeling of flexibility). However, the Mini's engine (pleasant for sports-sound lovers) is the loudest and also one of the most thirsty - here it is overtaken only by BMW.

The Countryman also proves its sporty chassis. It is by far the strongest among the competition and also the least comfortable. Sitting in the back can be quite uncomfortable on short bumps, plus the plastic sometimes clicks. Of course, there are advantages to such a chassis: together with an extremely precise (for this class of car, of course) steering wheel that gives a lot of feedback, this Mini is best suited for sportier driving. And there is no need to push it to the limits of performance: this chassis reveals all its charms already in (let's say) calm sports driving. The Countryman is by far the most enjoyable of the four in this regard, even though it had the narrowest tires and so the slip limit was actually set to near the lowest. No, speed isn't everything.

The correct and comfortable driving position, but this is important for all four, is easy to find, the seats are quite comfortable, and the rear bench is divided (though not like in BMW) in a ratio of 40:20. : 40. The rear view is a little obstructed by the roof pillar C. The trunk? The smallest of the four, but also the deepest and lowest loading height.

And since we were comparing premium competitors, of course, it should also be noted that the Mini is by far the cheapest, but looking at the materials and workmanship it is also clear why. So much money, so much music ...

3.sad: Mercedes GLA 200

In the Mercedes, they were in no hurry, but already the first kilometers on bad roads showed that in some places they spent it not in the best way. The chassis is rigid. Not as difficult as the Mini, but given the rest of the car, which clearly leans more towards comfort than sportiness, it's a bit too hard. Short bumps, especially in the rear, can shake the cabin a lot, but it's not as loud as the Mini's. In fact, it is interesting that Mercedes is the heaviest among the German "holy trinity". Measurements between the cones and on the track quickly showed that the GLA is not the freest Mini for free: it is also the fastest. True, this (as well as stiffness, of course) is also facilitated by the only one of the four 18-inch tires, which is also (along with Audi) the widest.

Thus, the GLA showed top speed in, say, slalom, as well as top speed when changing lanes. The steering wheel does not help him at all: he does not feel and to achieve such results he has to drive by heart, like on a game console: he needs to know (and hear) how much to turn the steering wheel to make the grip ideal, minimal braking due to tire slippage. The average driver will easily turn the steering wheel too much due to the lack of sensitivity, which does not affect the direction, only the tires are tightened even more. ESP activates quite gently, but then can be very decisive and effective, sometimes even too much, since the car's speed is significantly reduced even at moments when the danger has actually passed. But while the GLA may show noticeable flaws in certain chassis and road positioning disciplines, it is also true that on the open road (if that's not too bad) it turns into a very driver-friendly car in which kilometers travel (beyond this side ) discreetly and calmly.

The 1,6-liter turbocharged petrol engine was the slowest of the four, also due to the rather long gear ratios with noticeable holes in between, so the GLA (along with Audi) is the slowest at 100 kilometers per hour and noticeably the weakest. in terms of measuring flexibility. However, it is quiet, reasonably sleek, and the most economical of the four.

And sitting in the front in the GLA is a pleasure, but the rear passengers will not be happy. The seats aren't the most comfortable, and the top edge of the side windows is so low that, except for the kids in the car, almost no one can see, and the C-pillar is pushed far forward. The feeling is quite claustrophobic, and another third of the rear seat is on the right, which is uncomfortable when using one child seat and demolishing another part at the same time. The GLA's trunk is medium-sized on paper only, otherwise proving to be one of the largest for practical use, including a handy double-bottom space.

And GLA has one more surprise for us: the unpleasant murmur of air around the seals in the driver's door spoiled the otherwise excellent impression made by the rest of the soundproofing.

2.sad: BMW X1 sDrive20i

The BMW was the only car in the test with rear-wheel drive - and it was completely unnoticeable, except when we entered into a deliberate side-slip on a slippery road for fun. Its steering wheel is no more precise and communicative than the Mini's, but it's true that it can evoke the same feeling as the Mini's with a much more comfortable chassis. It's noticeably more comfortable than the Mercedes (but still doesn't lean too much), evokes a greater sense of confidence in how the car will react to a steering wheel repair, but it's not the fastest in the end - ESP helps a bit. , which announces too fast, slightly narrower and "civilized" rubber, and some also narrower and taller shape. The end result is that the sportiest brand's crossover (well, maybe with the exception of the Mini) was the slowest in the slalom, and when changing lanes (or avoiding obstacles) it tied for second place empty and rolled back. A little.

The 1,6-litre turbo is just as powerful as the 100-litre Mini (or even has slightly less torque, but this one is available a little lower). In terms of agility, only because of the short-timed gearbox, only the Mini has surpassed it, and among the three with softer ratios, the BMW is by far the most agile and measurable and completely subjective as it pulls smoothly from the lowest revs. . But the combination of the biggest, most powerful engine and the maximum weight (jumping by almost XNUMX kilograms) also has a not-so-pleasant consequence: fuel consumption was noticeably greater - the difference in liters between the largest amount of fuel is about XNUMX liters. -Efficient Mercedes and the most thirsty BMW. And the transmission could have less elastic and more precise movements.

The most "off-road" shape, of course, is also known in the interior: it is the most spacious and luminous of the four. Taller seats, larger glass surfaces, maximum outer length and certainly maximum wheelbase (despite the loss of inches due to longitudinal engine placement) are all on their own, and if you're buying a car like this for space, BMW is the better choice. The seats are great, the newly redesigned iDrive is almost as simple (and for some, even more) than the Audi MMI, visibility is excellent in the back seat as well, and the trunk, which on paper is smaller than the Audi, is the best. useful in practice. the bottom is a very shallow extra space). It's a shame that the workmanship isn't entirely top notch (and that the narrower third of the rear of the bench is on the right-hand side), here the Audi is slightly ahead. But that's not the only reason the X1 lagged behind the Q3. The real reason is rather that it is the most expensive (according to the price list, of course) and the most greedy of the four.

1st place: Audi Q3 1.4 TSI

Q3 is the weakest in this company, with the exception of Mini, which is the smallest, it has the smallest engine size and the tallest SUV. But he still won. Why?

The answer is simple: nowhere, unlike competitors, there were no noticeable weaknesses. Chassis, for example, the most comfortable of the four, including because of the most "balloon" tires. However, the steering wheel is quite precise (although for the same turn it needs the most steering angle between the four), it gives enough feedback (almost the same as a BMW and much more than a Mercedes), and not too much. nervous. . There's a lot of lean, but that feeling is most pronounced in the cabin, mainly because (what some like and some don't) sits above everyone else. But then again: it's not so strong that it bothers him much, and at the same time, on a bad road, the Q3 is the undisputed champion in both short, sharp bumps and slightly longer waves. It wasn't the slowest in either slalom or lane changes, it was closer to the top than to the bottom of the ladder most of the time, its ESP is the softest but at the same time very efficient, and the final impression is far from what you expect: from a rocking SUV on the road.

The 1,4-liter TSI on paper is actually the least powerful, but the Q3 is no slower than Mercedes in terms of acceleration, and in terms of agility, it is far ahead of it and pretty close to BMW. The subjective feel is a little worse here, especially the Q3 with this engine is not so convincing from the lowest rpm, where BMW is located in thousandths. But at just a few 100 rpm, the engine wakes up, makes a pleasant sporty (but perhaps too loud) sound and rotates to the limiter without unnecessary vibrations and drama, and the movements of the gear lever are short. and accurate.

The Q3 isn't the biggest on paper, but it turns out to be a lot more passenger-friendly than the Mercedes, especially in the rear. There's more room, external handling is also better, although the heavily forward-leaning C-pillar doesn't make it as good as the BMW's, and the trunk is even the biggest on paper. In practice, it turns out awkwardly small, but the interior still deserves a very high rating. The choice of materials and workmanship are also excellent. The Q3 is simply the car that most assembled editors would rather sit in after long, tiring days where it's important that the car gets you home in comfort, economy, and actually as unobtrusively as possible. And Q3 does an excellent job with this task.

Text: Dusan Lukic

Mini cooper s countryman

Basic data

Sales:	BMW GROUP Slovenia
Base model price:	21.900 €
Test model cost:	35.046 €
Calculate the cost of auto insurance
Acceleration (0-100 km / h):	7,9 with
Maximum speed:	215 km / h
Mixed flow ECE:	9,2l / 100km

Technical information

engine:	4-cylinder - 4-stroke - in-line - turbocharged petrol - displacement 1.598 cm3 - maximum power 135 kW (184 hp) at 5.500 rpm - maximum torque 260 Nm at 1.700 rpm.
Energy transfer:	front-wheel drive engine - 6-speed manual transmission - tires 205/55 R 17 V (Pirelli P7).
Capacity:	215 km/h top speed - 0-100 km/h acceleration in 7,6 s - fuel consumption (ECE) 7,5/5,4/6,1 l/100 km, CO2 emissions 143 g/km.
Mass:	empty vehicle 1.390 kg - permissible gross weight 1.820 kg.
External dimensions:	length 4.110 mm – width 1.789 mm – height 1.561 mm – wheelbase 2.595 mm – trunk 350–1.170 47 l – fuel tank XNUMX l.

BMW X1 sDrive 2.0i

Basic data

Sales:	BMW GROUP Slovenia
Base model price:	30.100 €
Test model cost:	47.044 €
Calculate the cost of auto insurance
Acceleration (0-100 km / h):	8,1 with
Maximum speed:	220 km / h
Mixed flow ECE:	9,6l / 100km

Technical information

engine:	4-cylinder - 4-stroke - in-line - turbocharged petrol - displacement 1.997 cm3 - maximum power 135 kW (184 hp) at 5.000 rpm - maximum torque 270 Nm at 1.250 rpm.
Energy transfer:	the engine is driven by the rear wheels - 6-speed manual transmission - tires 225/50 R 17 V (Michelin Primacy HP).
Capacity:	205 km/h top speed - 0-100 km/h acceleration in 7,4 s - fuel consumption (ECE) 8,9/5,8/6,9 l/100 km, CO2 emissions 162 g/km.
Mass:	empty vehicle 1.559 kg - permissible gross weight 2.035 kg.
External dimensions:	length 4.477 mm – width 1.798 mm – height 1.545 mm – wheelbase 2.760 mm – trunk 420–1.350 63 l – fuel tank XNUMX l.

Mercedes-Benz GLA 200

Basic data

Sales:	Autocommerce doo
Base model price:	29.280 €
Test model cost:	43.914 €
Calculate the cost of auto insurance
Acceleration (0-100 km / h):	9,0 with
Maximum speed:	215 km / h
Mixed flow ECE:	8,6l / 100km

Technical information

engine:	4-cylinder - 4-stroke - in-line - turbocharged petrol - displacement 1.595 cm3 - maximum power 115 kW (156 hp) at 5.300 rpm - maximum torque 250 Nm at 1.250 rpm.
Energy transfer:	engine-driven front wheels - 6-speed manual transmission - tires 235/50 R 18 V (Yokohama C Drive 2).
Capacity:	215 km/h top speed - 0-100 km/h acceleration in 8,9 s - fuel consumption (ECE) 7,9/4,8/5,9 l/100 km, CO2 emissions 137 g/km.
Mass:	empty vehicle 1.449 kg - permissible gross weight 1.920 kg.
External dimensions:	length 4.417 mm – width 1.804 mm – height 1.494 mm – wheelbase 2.699 mm – trunk 421–1.235 50 l – fuel tank XNUMX l.

Audi Q3 1.4 TFSI (110 kW)

Basic data

Sales:	Porsche Slovenia
Base model price:	29.220 €
Test model cost:	46.840 €
Calculate the cost of auto insurance
Acceleration (0-100 km / h):	9,0 with
Maximum speed:	203 km / h
Mixed flow ECE:	8,9l / 100km

Technical information

engine:	4-cylinder - 4-stroke - in-line - turbocharged petrol - displacement 1.395 cm3 - maximum power 110 kW (150 hp) at 5.000 rpm - maximum torque 250 Nm at 1.500 rpm.
Energy transfer:	front wheel drive engine - 6-speed manual transmission - tires 235/55 R 17 V (Michelin Latitude Sport).
Capacity:	203 km/h top speed - 0-100 km/h acceleration in 9,2 s - fuel consumption (ECE) 7,4/5,0/5,9 l/100 km, CO2 emissions 137 g/km.
Mass:	empty vehicle 1.463 kg - permissible gross weight 1.985 kg.
External dimensions:	length 4.385 mm – width 1.831 mm – height 1.608 mm – wheelbase 2.603 mm – trunk 460–1.365 64 l – fuel tank XNUMX l.

Overall rating (333/420)

• Exterior (12/15)

• Interior (92/140)

• Engine, transmission (54
  
  
  / 40)

• Driving performance (64
  
  
  / 95)

• Performance (31/35)

• Security (39/45)

• Economy (41/50)

Overall rating (340/420)

• Exterior (12/15)

• Interior (108/140)

• Engine, transmission (54
  
  
  / 40)

• Driving performance (64
  
  
  / 95)

• Performance (29/35)

• Security (40/45)

• Economy (33/50)

Overall rating (337/420)

• Exterior (13/15)

• Interior (98/140)

• Engine, transmission (54
  
  
  / 40)

• Driving performance (62
  
  
  / 95)

• Performance (23/35)

• Security (42/45)

• Economy (45/50)

Overall rating (349/420)

• Exterior (13/15)

• Interior (107/140)

• Engine, transmission (56
  
  
  / 40)

• Driving performance (61
  
  
  / 95)

• Performance (25/35)

• Security (42/45)

• Economy (45/50)