Audi Q3
Registered from 2011 to 2026.
About this model
The Audi Q3 is a subcompact luxury crossover SUV produced by Audi since 2011. The Q3 has a transverse-mounted front engine. It was unveiled in April 2007 at the Shanghai motor show. A coupe SUV variant has been produced since the second generation, called the Q3 Sportback.
From the Wikipedia article Audi Q3, licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0.
What fails its inspection
Great Britain's MOT record for the 2016 2.0 diesel. 1,882 of 13,841 tests failed, 14%.
Better than 45% of 2016 cars. The typical one fails 13%, across 899 models with enough tests behind them to say.
| Where | Share of failures | Failed tests |
|---|---|---|
| Suspension | 44% | 837 |
| Tyres and wheels | 39% | 729 |
| Brakes | 15% | 289 |
| Lights and electrics | 10% | 187 |
| Visibility | 6% | 122 |
| Body and structure | 5% | 87 |
The defects inspectors cite
- A spring or spring component fractured or seriously weakened
- A tyre seriously damaged
- Tyre tread depth not in accordance with the requirements
- A suspension pin, bush or joint excessively worn
- A brake lining or pad worn below 1.5mm
- A tyre cords visible or damaged
Where it stands out against its peers
- Suspension: failed more often than 90% of 2016 cars — 44% of its 1,882 failed tests, where an ordinary 2016 car has 21%.
Same model year only, at least 30 peer cars, zeros included. Every car has a worst part; this shows which, and how far from ordinary it is. A high share means more to check, not a verdict.
NHTSA's investigations are American; no European regulator publishes an equivalent record, so this section has nothing to draw on for a European car. There is no European equivalent of the service-bulletin register either.
Before you buy one
Built from what this car fails on, not from general knowledge of the model.
- Suspension — 44% of its failures
- A spring or spring component fractured or seriously weakened
- A suspension pin, bush or joint excessively worn
- Tyres and wheels — 39% of its failures
- A tyre seriously damaged
- Tyre tread depth not in accordance with the requirements
- A tyre cords visible or damaged
- Brakes — 15% of its failures
- A brake lining or pad worn below 1.5mm
- Lights and electrics — 10% of its failures
- Visibility — 6% of its failures
- Windscreen washers not working or not providing sufficient fluid to clear the windscreen
When it starts failing
At 140–160k miles this one fails 22% of its inspections, against the 19% an ordinary car of the same age fails.
| Odometer | Failure rate | Rate | Its age | Tests |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0–20k miles | 7% | 6% | 160 | |
| 20–40k miles | 10% | 10% | 1,941 | |
| 40–60k miles | 12% | 13% | 5,237 | |
| 60–80k miles | 16% | 16% | 4,260 | |
| 80–100k miles | 16% | 18% | 1,549 | |
| 100–120k miles | 16% | 19% | 460 | |
| 120–140k miles | 19% | 19% | 154 | |
| 140–160k miles | 22% | 19% | 49 |
13,810 British inspections, grouped by the odometer reading recorded at the test.
Half of these have more than 40k miles on them. That is how far people drive this car, not how long it lasts.
Specification
| Year | Measured |
|---|---|
| 2021 | 1.5 petrol · 148 hp · 1593 kg · 2677 mm wheelbase · 6.4 L/100km (WLTP) |
| 2020 | 1.5 petrol · 148 hp · 1591 kg · 2677 mm wheelbase · 6.6 L/100km (WLTP) |
| 2019 | 1.5 petrol · 148 hp · 1541 kg · 2677 mm wheelbase · 6.5 L/100km (WLTP) |
| 2018 | 1.4 petrol · 1480 kg · 2601 mm wheelbase · 5.7 L/100km (NEDC) |
| 2017 | 2.0 diesel · 146 hp · 1560 kg · 2601 mm wheelbase · 4.4 L/100km (NEDC) |
| 2016 | 2.0 diesel · 149 hp · 1652 kg · 2601 mm wheelbase · 4.9 L/100km (NEDC) |
| 2015 | 2.0 diesel · 153 hp · 1673 kg · 2601 mm wheelbase · 5.1 L/100km (NEDC) |
| 2014 | 2.0 diesel · 150 hp · 1620 kg · 2601 mm wheelbase · 5.6 L/100km (NEDC) |
| 2013 | 2.0 diesel · 152 hp · 1603 kg · 2600 mm wheelbase · 5.6 L/100km (NEDC) |
| 2012 | 2.0 diesel · 155 hp · 1601 kg · 2601 mm wheelbase · 5.6 L/100km (NEDC) |
Recalls
Filed by the manufacturer with a regulator. A recall is repaired free of charge, whoever owns the car now.
A12/00345/21
Due to a manufacturing error, a weld joint between the brake pedal and the brake-pedal plate could break when the brake pedal is suddenly applied.This can result in complete detachment of the brake-pedal plate, increasing the risk of an accident.
Recall of the product from end users
A12/00541/22
Design engine covers installed on all affected vehicles could detach from their fixings depending on the conditions of use (e.g. very sporty driving, or poor road surfaces) and their age. A loose engine cover could come into contact with the hot area of the exhaust gas turbocharger, increasing the risk of burns or fire. The product does not comply with the Regulation on the approval and market surveillance of Motor Vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles.
Recall of the product from end users
A12/01389/21
The bolt of the pressure-input shaft situated between the electromechanical brake servo and the brake pedal may come loose.As a result, the mechanical connection between the brake pedal and thebrake servo would no longer be guaranteed, increasing the risk of anaccident.In the event of an emergency, the vehicle can be immobilised by activating the electronic parking brake. The product does not meet the requirements set out in the Regulation on the approval and market surveillance of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles
Recall of the product from end users
A12/02452/24
The seat belt's retraction mechanism doesn't work properly. This may result in a loose roll and insufficient tension of the seatbelt, increasing the risk of an injury in the event of an accident. The product does not comply with the Regulation on the approval and market surveillance of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles.
Recall of the product from end users
A12/03031/23
A defective welding seam on the front seat back frame can break in the event of an accident. As a result, the person sitting in the seat may hit their head on the B-pillar, increasing the risk of injury. The product does not comply with the Regulation on the approval and market surveillance of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles.
Recall of the product from end users
A12/1252/19
The function control device of the Body Control Module (BCM) may be incorrectly configured. This may cause a malfunction of the front light-emitting diode (LED) turn signal lights (blinkers) without the required warning indicator (acoustic/optical), increasing the risk of an accident.
Recall of the product from end users
SR/02287/26
A joint on the pyrotechnic gas generator in the front seat belt pretensioners may not have been properly welded. In the event of an accident, small parts could detach, increasing the risk of injury to passengers. The product does not comply with the Regulation on the approval and market surveillance of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles.
Recall of the product from end users
SR/02351/26
The seat belt may not be correctly attached to the vehicle body. As a result, the seat belt may not provide adequate restraint in the event of an accident, increasing the risk of injury. The product does not comply with the Regulation on the approval and market surveillance of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles.
Recall of the product from end users