RE: Audi TT Ultra and Sport: Driven

[ORD]

Baryonyx said:

Booooooring.

I await the arrival of Scherzkeks from his usual 'free fellatio for all Audi staff' schedule to defend this latest TT TDi duffer.

I love that the brutal ad hominem attacks now come even before the guy says a word!

[J4CKO]

I think the tdi version is just for company drivers and the BIK, plus some companies still have a diesel only policy.

[AbyssRS]

E65Ross said:

Your engine of choice in a TT would be this diesel? So you'd genuinely WANT it over the one in the TT-S? Or would you want it to save money at the pumps? Or do you genuinely prefer the diesel?

i should of said that it would be my engine of choice between the tdi and the 2.0 230PS, the TTS is a total different kettle of fish

[Chris Y]

I'd prefer a kettle of fish to a diesel!

[Lost soul]

Gandahar said:

Shambler said:

In fairness the mpg quoted for the diesel is a bit silly! I have the same engine in my Octavia vrs and struggle to get 45mpg

They are getting ridiculous aren't they. At some point, around 2018-2019 they will be claiming 160 or 170 mpg and everyone will just instantly knock the 1 off the front to see what we will actually be getting.

What kind of driving are you guys doing , I have a 07 3lt TDi A5 and am averaging 41mpg over the last 8k miles , and that's not nursing it

[E65Ross]

AbyssRS said:

E65Ross said:

Your engine of choice in a TT would be this diesel? So you'd genuinely WANT it over the one in the TT-S? Or would you want it to save money at the pumps? Or do you genuinely prefer the diesel?

i should of said that it would be my engine of choice between the tdi and the 2.0 230PS, the TTS is a total different kettle of fish

Just out of curiosity, why? The petrol is quicker, has a good torque curve due to being turbocharged so gear for gear it's faster and sounds a little nicer to boot (if not that good).

Cheers

[AbyssRS]

E65Ross said:

Just out of curiosity, why? The petrol is quicker, has a good torque curve due to being turbocharged so gear for gear it's faster and sounds a little nicer to boot (if not that good).

Cheers

sorry I'm comparing the tuned 184 (running 237 and 520nm) over the standard Golf GTI we have here too..

[daytona365]

So, these days 6 second to 60 coupes have to be 'excused'...We all know deep down that even getting to and maintaining 60mph for any distance, is but a fond memory for those of a certain age !

[ORD]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Yes, but everyone knows that those BMW 4 pot diesels are actually the work of the devil - they produce genuinely astonishing power for the emissions and consumption figures (even the real world ones).

[E65Ross]

AbyssRS said:

E65Ross said:

Just out of curiosity, why? The petrol is quicker, has a good torque curve due to being turbocharged so gear for gear it's faster and sounds a little nicer to boot (if not that good).

Cheers

sorry I'm comparing the tuned 184 (running 237 and 520nm) over the standard Golf GTI we have here too..

But what about a tuned petrol running more power? Compare standard with standard, as let's face it, they almost all will be.

[jimjim150]

pjv997 said:

...My experience is that because the TT doesn't handle as well as other cars we have owned, there is actually some real pleasure in getting towards it's limits and trying to avoid the dreaded Understeer whilst hustling it along...

So the reason it's a good car is because its not a very good car.

Got it.

[ORD]

jimjim150 said:

So the reason it's a good car is because its not a very good car.

Got it.

I agree that there is a certain pleasure in driving a slow car and even a car with low grip limits generally - see, for example, standard hatches that can be quite fun to hussle along red-lining in each gear just to keep up with fast flowing traffic!

However, I cannot see anything to be said for understeer as regards driving enjoyment. My wife's Chevrolet Kalos can be quite good fun in a straight line because you have to murder it just to make progress, but it is nothing short of dire around corners - the only choices are (1) go very slowly indeed or (2) roll and understeer a bit, neither of which is much fun. I would say the same about the C-class that I drove recently, save that it wasn't even fun in a straight line and was too fast for its chassis (despite being only moderately fast).

[kambites]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

The 520d appears to be 127g/km to me?

[GTEYE]

Lost soul said:

Gandahar said:

Shambler said:

In fairness the mpg quoted for the diesel is a bit silly! I have the same engine in my Octavia vrs and struggle to get 45mpg

They are getting ridiculous aren't they. At some point, around 2018-2019 they will be claiming 160 or 170 mpg and everyone will just instantly knock the 1 off the front to see what we will actually be getting.

What kind of driving are you guys doing , I have a 07 3lt TDi A5 and am averaging 41mpg over the last 8k miles , and that's not nursing it

You guys aren't trying...this is from my Beemer

[T0MMY]

ORD said:

I agree that there is a certain pleasure in driving a slow car and even a car with low grip limits generally - see, for example, standard hatches that can be quite fun to hussle along red-lining in each gear just to keep up with fast flowing traffic!

However, I cannot see anything to be said for understeer as regards driving enjoyment. My wife's Chevrolet Kalos can be quite good fun in a straight line because you have to murder it just to make progress, but it is nothing short of dire around corners - the only choices are (1) go very slowly indeed or (2) roll and understeer a bit, neither of which is much fun. I would say the same about the C-class that I drove recently, save that it wasn't even fun in a straight line and was too fast for its chassis (despite being only moderately fast).

Exactly...the whole reason it's fun to drive a car without too much grip is you can drive it on the limit more often and more safely. That means if anything, the on-limit behaviour is more important for a car with limited grip. It's fun battling oversteer at low speed; it's just rubbish battling understeer. Contrast driving an old E30 with driving an old Toyota Carina.

aarondbs said:

I have this engine (I think) in my Amarok. It moves that along reasonably well with 180bhp but the article says it sounds nice.... it really doesn't. It sounds right in the truck but in a car it would sound like a truck should.

Can't see why you would want one in a Golf never mind a TT.

Because you don't buy a TT for the driving experience I guess.

[otolith]

Not powerful enough for 30k, should be sub-20k or 300bhp.

Oh, hang on, it's German.

As you were, bargain.

[E65Ross]

otolith said:

Not powerful enough for 30k, should be sub-20k or 300bhp.

Oh, hang on, it's German.

As you were, bargain.

Wait, what? Did someone say M135i?

[cerb4.5lee]

Lost soul said:

What kind of driving are you guys doing , I have a 07 3lt TDi A5 and am averaging 41mpg over the last 8k miles , and that's not nursing it

I would like them to squeeze that engine into the TT because my mrs likes the TTS we have but its arguably not the best car economy wise to do the 30k miles a year that she does in it, but after experiencing the 4 pot diesel in my old 520d that has managed to put us both off 4 pot diesels but a 3ltr diesel TT could tick the box possibly.

[epom]

I've no doubt they are going to be superb, a diesel one strikes me as an excellent daily driver.

[MJ85]

GTEYE said:

Lost soul said:

Gandahar said:

Shambler said:

In fairness the mpg quoted for the diesel is a bit silly! I have the same engine in my Octavia vrs and struggle to get 45mpg

They are getting ridiculous aren't they. At some point, around 2018-2019 they will be claiming 160 or 170 mpg and everyone will just instantly knock the 1 off the front to see what we will actually be getting.

What kind of driving are you guys doing , I have a 07 3lt TDi A5 and am averaging 41mpg over the last 8k miles , and that's not nursing it

You guys aren't trying...this is from my Beemer