RE: New Audi TT RS revealed

[blade7]

ZX10R NIN said:

He does like VAG products he has a Porsche.

I'd like a TT-RS too, but I think aside from the 0-60 it would be less rewarding to drive than my 25 year old 944... in the dry.

[tomjol]

MrBarry123 said:

ORD said:

3.3 seconds? Not with those power figures. I think Audi's numbers look about right. It will be fast to 30 but then nothing special.

Oh do please shut up.

You can't rubbish everything anyone says regarding this car just because you don't like VAG products.

The old TT RS Plus was measured at 0-60mph in 3.6 seconds and this one will go quicker.

[ORD]

MrBarry123 said:

ORD said:

3.3 seconds? Not with those power figures. I think Audi's numbers look about right. It will be fast to 30 but then nothing special.

Oh do please shut up.

You can't rubbish everything anyone says regarding this car just because you don't like VAG products.

The old TT RS Plus was measured at 0-60mph in 3.6 seconds and this one will go quicker.

Get a grip! I do like VAG products.

But the power to weight is not high enough for a 0-60 of 3.3 seconds unless the car is on slicks or tested by the notoriously optimistic American reviewers (that knock about 0.5 seconds of all official times).

[blade7]

ORD said:

Get a grip! I do like VAG products.

But the power to weight is not high enough for a 0-60 of 3.3 seconds unless the car is on slicks or tested by the notoriously optimistic American reviewers (that knock about 0.5 seconds of all official times).

Or there's a cheat in the mapping on the test cars

Edited by blade7 on Wednesday 27th April 16:23

[Beefmeister]

Many people are commenting that you'd be mad to get the TT-RS over the 718 Cayman S, well I find that baffling for two reasons.

1- The Cayman has a flat-four engine. Boring noise and the Audi 5cyl is much more interesting

2- I have a 3yr old, I need rear seats, even if occasional. The Cayman instantly fails.


Also, though the Cayman is likely to be a few hundred quid cheaper I'd wager the TT will come with more standard kit.

[HighwayStar]

Beefmeister said:

Many people are commenting that you'd be mad to get the TT-RS over the 718 Cayman S, well I find that baffling for two reasons.

1- The Cayman has a flat-four engine. Boring noise and the Audi 5cyl is much more interesting

2- I have a 3yr old, I need rear seats, even if occasional. The Cayman instantly fails.

Also, though the Cayman is likely to be a few hundred quid cheaper I'd wager the TT will come with more standard kit.

Everyone saying you'd have to be mad to do this or get that is basically arguing their case from their personal point of view and needs. As you are too.

Why is either baffling? Ok, I get 1 to a point, but 2? I'm going from a MK2 TTS coupe to a 981 Cayman S. I don't need rear seats. Not everyone does you know. You needing them is fine but it find it strange that you find it baffling why someone else would buy a Cayman over a TT.
Me I couldn't careless why people buy what they buy but I'm fascinated the mad, should've bought, why and of course what's it for comments. Most people I know drive stuff that wouldn't be off interest to me but I never ask why they bought it.

[Tuvra]

blade7 said:

ORD said:

Get a grip! I do like VAG products.

But the power to weight is not high enough for a 0-60 of 3.3 seconds unless the car is on slicks or tested by the notoriously optimistic American reviewers (that knock about 0.5 seconds of all official times).

Or there's a cheat in the mapping on the test cars

You should look at the 2015 Nissan GTR to blow all your power to weight theories into the weeds, 313bhp/tonne and 0-60mph in 2.7 seconds.

As a comparison, an Aventador is 399bhp/tonne and "only" does it in 2.7 seconds.

[Porsche911R]

Leo-RS said:

I think you'll be surprised, the last one tested at 3.6 0-60mph with an official Audi 4.1 0-100km/h time

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2012-audi-tt-r...

More to life than 0-60 though and as you say, its the launch that is responsible for that time, 30-100mph wont be as impressive.

we used to turn upto the 30-130 events and beat most things upto 600bhp in 420bhp TTRS's

as I stated a DSG 430bhp TTRS can do 7.2 to a ton , my manual did it in 8.5.

[blade7]

Tuvra said:

You should look at the 2015 Nissan GTR to blow all your power to weight theories into the weeds, 313bhp/tonne and 0-60mph in 2.7 seconds.

As a comparison, an Aventador is 399bhp/tonne and "only" does it in 2.7 seconds.

I don't chuck my keys on the bar in the pub, so fractions of a second don't influence my car choice.

[J4CKO]

Leo-RS said:

I think you'll be surprised, the last one tested at 3.6 0-60mph with an official Audi 4.1 0-100km/h time

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2012-audi-tt-r...

More to life than 0-60 though and as you say, its the launch that is responsible for that time, 30-100mph wont be as impressive.

More to life than 0-60 in the TTRS ?

Oh come on, you have been rattling on about it since 2011

http://www.scoobynet.com/899645-audi-ttrs-3.html


I do like them and they are properly rapid, I like TT's in general but even if it is as fast as <insert more expensive car here> it isnt one, its a TT with a party piece and doesnt make every other car redundant, even if it "humbles" or "embarrasses" them by being a few tenths quicker, its just another option if you have a big wad of cash to spend on a car.

[tomjol]

HighwayStar said:

Beefmeister said:

Many people are commenting that you'd be mad to get the TT-RS over the 718 Cayman S, well I find that baffling for two reasons.

1- The Cayman has a flat-four engine. Boring noise and the Audi 5cyl is much more interesting

2- I have a 3yr old, I need rear seats, even if occasional. The Cayman instantly fails.

Also, though the Cayman is likely to be a few hundred quid cheaper I'd wager the TT will come with more standard kit.

Everyone saying you'd have to be mad to do this or get that is basically arguing their case from their personal point of view and needs. As you are too.

Why is either baffling? Ok, I get 1 to a point, but 2? I'm going from a MK2 TTS coupe to a 981 Cayman S. I don't need rear seats. Not everyone does you know. You needing them is fine but it find it strange that you find it baffling why someone else would buy a Cayman over a TT.
Me I couldn't careless why people buy what they buy but I'm fascinated the mad, should've bought, why and of course what's it for comments. Most people I know drive stuff that wouldn't be off interest to me but I never ask why they bought it.

<pedantry>

Beef said he found the position that "you'd be mad" to get one baffling, not that he found it baffling that other people might choose something else.

</pedantry>

[Carl_Manchester]

Burwood said:

MrBarry123 said:

ORD said:

3.3 seconds? Not with those power figures. I think Audi's numbers look about right. It will be fast to 30 but then nothing special.

Oh do please shut up.

You can't rubbish everything anyone says regarding this car just because you don't like VAG products.

The old TT RS Plus was measured at 0-60mph in 3.6 seconds and this one will go quicker.

Not to fan the flames but the 3.6s time is with a roll-out is it not ? Splitting hairs and all that. It should do 3.3 this time around though....with a roll-out.

[Beefmeister]

tomjol said:

<pedantry>

Beef said he found the position that "you'd be mad" to get one baffling, not that he found it baffling that other people might choose something else.

</pedantry>

You beat me to it, thanks!

[HighwayStar]

Beefmeister said:

tomjol said:

<pedantry>

Beef said he found the position that "you'd be mad" to get one baffling, not that he found it baffling that other people might choose something else.

</pedantry>

You beat me to it, thanks!

Hands up, looking again I can see I totally misread your post.
Apologies Beef.

[ORD]

Does a roll out improve the time for a car with launch control? I think it might even be worse than a standing start, depending on the launch system and other electronic trickery.

[zeDuffMan]

I want the 400hp motor in my RS3. I know I could map it, but I like the warranty...

[JockySteer]

ORD said:

MrBarry123 said:

ORD said:

3.3 seconds? Not with those power figures. I think Audi's numbers look about right. It will be fast to 30 but then nothing special.

Oh do please shut up.

You can't rubbish everything anyone says regarding this car just because you don't like VAG products.

The old TT RS Plus was measured at 0-60mph in 3.6 seconds and this one will go quicker.

Get a grip! I do like VAG products.

But the power to weight is not high enough for a 0-60 of 3.3 seconds unless the car is on slicks or tested by the notoriously optimistic American reviewers (that knock about 0.5 seconds of all official times).

Power to weight is a simple calculation. It doesn't take drive-train into consideration does it? Kind of makes that point defunct.

[ORD]

JockySteer said:

Power to weight is a simple calculation. It doesn't take drive-train into consideration does it? Kind of makes that point defunct.

I'm not sure you understand what 'defunct' means, but it's certainly true that p/w isn't the whole story (as the guy above showed with the figures for the GTR).

[Burwood]

zeDuffMan said:

I want the 400hp motor in my RS3. I know I could map it, but I like the warranty...

Certainly coming. Given the new RS4 will have 500+, the natural BhP gap is maintained. It's all going a bit crazy. Small hatchbacks with 350-400. Mid sized with 500 and sport saloons at 600+ ala new m5 and AMG 63

[JockySteer]

ORD said:

JockySteer said:

Power to weight is a simple calculation. It doesn't take drive-train into consideration does it? Kind of makes that point defunct.

I'm not sure you understand what 'defunct' means, but it's certainly true that p/w isn't the whole story (as the guy above showed with the figures for the GTR).

Don't worry, I do.