Mark 3 TT - How big!

Author
Discussion

Lorne

Original Poster:

543 posts

103 months

Monday 5th September 2016
quotequote all
I have a Mk 1 TT as my daily commuter car. It's a solid little thing with a bit of aggression when you want it, small enough for traffic and with an autobox that's responsive but not neck breakingly sharp on the gear changes. It's not perfect of course; reliability isn't great and changing a light bulb is mindbogglingly awkward, but overall it's perfectly fine and so I've put 80k miles of London commuting on to it over the last 12 years with hardly a dent. Poor thing's never even been outside the M25 and into 'bandit' land.

Shortly after I bought the Mk1 Audi launched the Mk2. Better no doubt but also quite a lot bigger, so immediately fails on the being able to get through traffic stakes. Now I've started to see the new Mk 3 on the roads and sitting behind one today I realised it's absolutely bloody enormous. It's enormous from the side as well, and the front. I measured my Mk1 against it whilst cutting it up and then watched its pretty face as it realised it was too fat to make the bus to taxi gap. Could have driven a bus through that gap, but not a Mk 3 TT. Size wise it has to be on par with the A8 I once had.

I bet the Mk3 is faster, more powerful and more economical than the Mk1, but how much better would it have been if it hadn't grown so lardy with it?

This got me thinking why new versions of cars always have to be bigger than the ones they replace. We all know the Polo is bigger than the original Golf, and so big that VW had to introduce new models below it to fit into the small car gap it left. Even the 911 has evolved from a rather fun if somewhat dangerous when wet, spots car into a portly middle aged grand touring cruise mobile.

Does anyone know a line of cars that has bucked this trend?

Lorne

Original Poster:

543 posts

103 months

Tuesday 6th September 2016
quotequote all
xjay1337 said:
I doubt its actually much bigger externally if you look at the measurments.

It certainly doesn't look much bigger.

Not forgetting the mk2 and mk3 are absolutely leaps ahead of the half mk4 golf TT which was an abomination of a drivers car
I never quite got the 'abomination of a drivers car' remarks about the Mk1 TT. The Golf is an excellent drivers car, and building the firmer and lower CofG TT on it an equally excellent idea that makes a damned good drivers car.

I think the talk about it being a bad drivers car comes from those reviewers who think a car spends 100% of its time squeeling its tyres in 1 g corners or standing on its nose under ABS braking. In other words its from people who take someone elses car out for a good thrashing rather than actually driving a car they own.

MX5 would be a great light weight replacement. Only problem is that I'm middle aged and bald, so the 'bit of a hairdressers' image that hangs around the TT and MX5 is tricky. The only convertible I can drive without looking like a complete dick is an old SL.

Lorne

Original Poster:

543 posts

103 months

Thursday 8th September 2016
quotequote all
I never knew the Mk4 Golf was really a 'fat labrador saddled up for the grand national'. Great phrase, but it's stuck in my mind and now I can't get it out of my head that what I thought was a nice and nippy machine is really a fat old dog.