Talk to me about the Mk2 TT
Discussion
So my search for a new car is narrowing down a bit. Pretty far towards the top of the list is a Mk2 TT.
I don't do track days, I commute to work, with the occasional bit of spirited driving on A and B roads - particularly from Bristol to Dorset late nights. I'm 6`4 so I can't have an MX5 (trust me, I went to look at a beautiful 2.0 Sport.. gutted), and after someone on here mentioned how unreliable the 335ci is that's been scratched off the top.
Anyway.. the TT. With a budget of £10k MAX I could get quite a good one. I quite fancy the quattro V6 coupe. Commute is 7.5 miles, and any business mileage is 45p, so I'm not that arsed about the consumption. Tax.. well... unavoidable. The downhill bike can hopefully go on a roof rack. I think you can get some fairly sturdy ones to go on there?
So my questions are:
Does anyone on here have a MK2 TT? Apart from the chap a couple of threads down with a broken S, so how do you find it?
How does the V6 compare with the 2.0 TFSI?
Are the S-Tronic boxes reliable? I would imagine if they go bang they leave a trail of £20 notes in their wake.
Any owners - what did you have before, why did you choose the TT, and would you choose it again?
Is the 3.2 the one to go for?
Is a later Scirocco with the 2.0 TFSI lump a wiser buy?
Thanks
I don't do track days, I commute to work, with the occasional bit of spirited driving on A and B roads - particularly from Bristol to Dorset late nights. I'm 6`4 so I can't have an MX5 (trust me, I went to look at a beautiful 2.0 Sport.. gutted), and after someone on here mentioned how unreliable the 335ci is that's been scratched off the top.
Anyway.. the TT. With a budget of £10k MAX I could get quite a good one. I quite fancy the quattro V6 coupe. Commute is 7.5 miles, and any business mileage is 45p, so I'm not that arsed about the consumption. Tax.. well... unavoidable. The downhill bike can hopefully go on a roof rack. I think you can get some fairly sturdy ones to go on there?
So my questions are:
Does anyone on here have a MK2 TT? Apart from the chap a couple of threads down with a broken S, so how do you find it?
How does the V6 compare with the 2.0 TFSI?
Are the S-Tronic boxes reliable? I would imagine if they go bang they leave a trail of £20 notes in their wake.
Any owners - what did you have before, why did you choose the TT, and would you choose it again?
Is the 3.2 the one to go for?
Is a later Scirocco with the 2.0 TFSI lump a wiser buy?
Thanks
I have a MK2 TT 2,0 TFSI S line
Its a great car, and does me well on short trips and long trips alike, we took it on a 3000mile trip round Europe and afired well.
The usual 2+2 issue of the rear seats only suitable for people under 5ft tall, fair size boot.
I've not had a V6 to compare it too, the only comment would be its a heavier block, so some of the extra power taken to move it... power to weight and all that.
Might be worth joining the TT Forum, loads of opinions on there.
Its a great car, and does me well on short trips and long trips alike, we took it on a 3000mile trip round Europe and afired well.
The usual 2+2 issue of the rear seats only suitable for people under 5ft tall, fair size boot.
I've not had a V6 to compare it too, the only comment would be its a heavier block, so some of the extra power taken to move it... power to weight and all that.
Might be worth joining the TT Forum, loads of opinions on there.
Hi,
Have run a 2.0 TFSI Mk2 from new in 2007, been used largely for commuting on the motorway. It's a lot different to the MX5 you looked at (have one of them as well)- I would class it as more a GT type car, very pleasant for a long trip. I have taken it up the Beacons and must admit I didn't like it on the windy roads, maybe the bushes are getting a bit soft after 90K miles. It's nice and quiet in day to day use but will accelerate nicely and sounds pleasant if you decide to be more enthusiastic. Happily cruises at 85-90 on M4 and gives about 34mpg.
Most reviews when it came out preferred the 2.0 over the V6 saying the increased weight of the engine & additional transmission was not offset by the power increase. Didn't seem worth it when we bought it. Mine is manual & that is now a very light & pleasant change, I do change the transmission oil regularly as I don't trust the 'sealed for life' idea. I haven't experienced the auto version but can't say I like the wife's version in her car. I believe it has to be serviced on a regular basis, can be neglected by time on 3rd, 4th owner.
Bear in mind there are two 2.0 engines, the earliest have the EA113 engine with a cambelt. While the later ones have the chain driven EA888 engine - I believe that one has had issues with excess oil consumption in the vintage you are looking at, it is worth Googling it & checking which one it's got. The windows also give problems so check those. We also had problems with the absorption system caused by overfilling the tank.
It's a comfortable 2 seater, forget getting an adult in the back, It will take a reasonable amount of luggage - I've got a tumble dryer in the back!
The wife bought it originally as she liked the looks, she never felt it was underpowered in day to day life, I inherited it when she bought a Cayman. We prefer the TT for any long trip as it's more civilized.
I had a Mazda3 MPS before it and regard the TT as a nicer drive with far more civilized manners, I'm keeping this one for the foreseeable future as it is still reasonably analogue. Personally I do not like the Mk3 with it's emphasis on electronics & infotainment, I don't see anything that matches it currently that I want. I used to drive 'Hot Hatches' but became disillusioned with the bhp arms race after the MPS.
You can get a Thule roof bar set & cycle rack which fits well, I think it is the Audi one anyway. It happily takes 2 bikes.
Hope this helps
Have run a 2.0 TFSI Mk2 from new in 2007, been used largely for commuting on the motorway. It's a lot different to the MX5 you looked at (have one of them as well)- I would class it as more a GT type car, very pleasant for a long trip. I have taken it up the Beacons and must admit I didn't like it on the windy roads, maybe the bushes are getting a bit soft after 90K miles. It's nice and quiet in day to day use but will accelerate nicely and sounds pleasant if you decide to be more enthusiastic. Happily cruises at 85-90 on M4 and gives about 34mpg.
Most reviews when it came out preferred the 2.0 over the V6 saying the increased weight of the engine & additional transmission was not offset by the power increase. Didn't seem worth it when we bought it. Mine is manual & that is now a very light & pleasant change, I do change the transmission oil regularly as I don't trust the 'sealed for life' idea. I haven't experienced the auto version but can't say I like the wife's version in her car. I believe it has to be serviced on a regular basis, can be neglected by time on 3rd, 4th owner.
Bear in mind there are two 2.0 engines, the earliest have the EA113 engine with a cambelt. While the later ones have the chain driven EA888 engine - I believe that one has had issues with excess oil consumption in the vintage you are looking at, it is worth Googling it & checking which one it's got. The windows also give problems so check those. We also had problems with the absorption system caused by overfilling the tank.
It's a comfortable 2 seater, forget getting an adult in the back, It will take a reasonable amount of luggage - I've got a tumble dryer in the back!
The wife bought it originally as she liked the looks, she never felt it was underpowered in day to day life, I inherited it when she bought a Cayman. We prefer the TT for any long trip as it's more civilized.
I had a Mazda3 MPS before it and regard the TT as a nicer drive with far more civilized manners, I'm keeping this one for the foreseeable future as it is still reasonably analogue. Personally I do not like the Mk3 with it's emphasis on electronics & infotainment, I don't see anything that matches it currently that I want. I used to drive 'Hot Hatches' but became disillusioned with the bhp arms race after the MPS.
You can get a Thule roof bar set & cycle rack which fits well, I think it is the Audi one anyway. It happily takes 2 bikes.
Hope this helps
Had a mk2 TTS for around 6 years after a mk1 225 for 7 years and just bought a mk3 TTS. As you can see, I quite like them.
For a 50 mile round trip commute on the M25 and the back roads of Surrey they are perfect for me. 2 of us so nobody ever uses the back seats unless I want to fold them down to get one of the bikes in the back. It's just a nice place to spend time on the road. Some may not find it that exciting to drive but it works for me and always felt special.
Regular 30mpg from my commute and reasonable servicing/insurance means they okay to own. Tyres at £600 a set every 18 months are probably the dearest thing.
Only thing that ever went wrong with my mk2 was I needed to 2 new magnetic dampers fitted. I know they are wear and tear parts but £800 after 5 years was a bit rich. At least the dealership swallowed the labour costs after Audi UK wouldn't help.
Far better put together than the mk1 - mine was racking up issues after the same amount of time and a much better drive.
Never had a V6 or S-Tronic so can't help you there. I like mine with a turbo and manual.
For a 50 mile round trip commute on the M25 and the back roads of Surrey they are perfect for me. 2 of us so nobody ever uses the back seats unless I want to fold them down to get one of the bikes in the back. It's just a nice place to spend time on the road. Some may not find it that exciting to drive but it works for me and always felt special.
Regular 30mpg from my commute and reasonable servicing/insurance means they okay to own. Tyres at £600 a set every 18 months are probably the dearest thing.
Only thing that ever went wrong with my mk2 was I needed to 2 new magnetic dampers fitted. I know they are wear and tear parts but £800 after 5 years was a bit rich. At least the dealership swallowed the labour costs after Audi UK wouldn't help.
Far better put together than the mk1 - mine was racking up issues after the same amount of time and a much better drive.
Never had a V6 or S-Tronic so can't help you there. I like mine with a turbo and manual.
Bought a 2007 V6 last year, bright red on a 2007 plate for my wife, she absolutley loves it. The 6 speed manual is one of the nicest gearshifts i have ever experienced. Inside cabin quality is good, as others have mentioned rear space is only for dwarves or kids, great seat and steering adjustment mean most people can fit and drive comfortably.
Ours is lowered and on 19" RS4 alloys which the TT seems totally happy with, altough word of warning, when lowered tyres with lots of rim protection will rub the arches, can be sorted by 'adjusting' or cutting off the plastic arch nodules on the inside of the wheel arch.
driving it is composed and easy, the V6 makes a good noise but is certianly not loud, i feel this is way more drivable than the old 1.8 turbo version we used to have. lots of torque everywhere, has enough power to go quickly when required, the £500 a year car tax isn't funny though.
still very nose heavy though, when pushing on it will understeer, no amount of geo changes seem to want to stop that.
ours has the optional fixed rear spolier (like the TTS) and it looks great, these are great looking little cars, and seems to get more attention than the 911. Reported issues are few and far between, only issue i have had is with sticking door handles, liberal amount of silicone spray soon cured that.
[/URL]
Ours is lowered and on 19" RS4 alloys which the TT seems totally happy with, altough word of warning, when lowered tyres with lots of rim protection will rub the arches, can be sorted by 'adjusting' or cutting off the plastic arch nodules on the inside of the wheel arch.
driving it is composed and easy, the V6 makes a good noise but is certianly not loud, i feel this is way more drivable than the old 1.8 turbo version we used to have. lots of torque everywhere, has enough power to go quickly when required, the £500 a year car tax isn't funny though.
still very nose heavy though, when pushing on it will understeer, no amount of geo changes seem to want to stop that.
ours has the optional fixed rear spolier (like the TTS) and it looks great, these are great looking little cars, and seems to get more attention than the 911. Reported issues are few and far between, only issue i have had is with sticking door handles, liberal amount of silicone spray soon cured that.
[/URL]Gren said:
Had a mk2 TTS for around 6 years after a mk1 225 for 7 years and just bought a mk3 TTS.
Oooh, didnt know you had one. Im thinking of a TTS as my next car (to replace the MX5) as i want something that can lug a bike around. I might let you take me for a spin some time to see what its like! 
had a TT mk2 V6 with DSG for 2 years and absolutely loved it. I bought 2008 plate in 2012 for £13.5k (40k miles) trade in value 2 years later of £9k (80k miles) in between times only expense was regular servicing carried out by audi at fairly reasonable prices (for main dealers the flat rate servicing is ok).
real world figures, i got 300-320miles out the tank, generally mixture of driving (towns/ motorways/A roads). I wasnt exactly soft with the right foot either, but for general day to day, consumption was fine.
handling i found pretty good. now i was never expecting the handling to set the world on fire nor was i ever going to be expecting to set nurburgring lap records. for everyday driving it handles really well as a GT type car.
one good thing i found with the DSG/ auto version is- £200ish road tax instead of £400 ish road tax! the auto box knocks it down in the lower emissions banding, which was a help. but onto the DSG box, mine was fine, but maybe getting slighty jerky towards the end (could have been because it was due a service/oil change etc.... for the auto box). but read all stuff you can and make your own decision, if you do go DSG make sure the car has a full service history and the box has been serviced (every 40k i think), also go out a decent test drive, make sure everything is up to temperature, make sure you get some slow pace manouvers if its jerky thats usually a tell tale sign. also if possible try a reverse up a slight incline, this def shows up any faults quickly!
as for the bike, i regularly had my bike in the back, fold down the back seats, whip the wheels off and your fine. i often had the car loaded up, bikes, ski's, canoeing stuff...... has a very good boot space (especially with the seats down, but there next to useless anyway!). also as mentioned, roof bars are no problem at all, thule do decent bars for the TT (there is a slot for these to properly fit in under the door seal), i had a set on mine most of the time as i also canoe and had the boat on the roof at least 2/3 times a week and it was sturdy well up to the speed limit (* cough * and above * cough cough *)
my only suggestion would be to try and find one with the coloured nav screen, it helps make the center console look a bit more modern, i found the red lcd screens were starting to look a little dated.
all in all i was a top car! really really enjoyed my time with it. I only changed to a golf GTI because I needed more space/ room.
real world figures, i got 300-320miles out the tank, generally mixture of driving (towns/ motorways/A roads). I wasnt exactly soft with the right foot either, but for general day to day, consumption was fine.
handling i found pretty good. now i was never expecting the handling to set the world on fire nor was i ever going to be expecting to set nurburgring lap records. for everyday driving it handles really well as a GT type car.
one good thing i found with the DSG/ auto version is- £200ish road tax instead of £400 ish road tax! the auto box knocks it down in the lower emissions banding, which was a help. but onto the DSG box, mine was fine, but maybe getting slighty jerky towards the end (could have been because it was due a service/oil change etc.... for the auto box). but read all stuff you can and make your own decision, if you do go DSG make sure the car has a full service history and the box has been serviced (every 40k i think), also go out a decent test drive, make sure everything is up to temperature, make sure you get some slow pace manouvers if its jerky thats usually a tell tale sign. also if possible try a reverse up a slight incline, this def shows up any faults quickly!
as for the bike, i regularly had my bike in the back, fold down the back seats, whip the wheels off and your fine. i often had the car loaded up, bikes, ski's, canoeing stuff...... has a very good boot space (especially with the seats down, but there next to useless anyway!). also as mentioned, roof bars are no problem at all, thule do decent bars for the TT (there is a slot for these to properly fit in under the door seal), i had a set on mine most of the time as i also canoe and had the boat on the roof at least 2/3 times a week and it was sturdy well up to the speed limit (* cough * and above * cough cough *)
my only suggestion would be to try and find one with the coloured nav screen, it helps make the center console look a bit more modern, i found the red lcd screens were starting to look a little dated.
all in all i was a top car! really really enjoyed my time with it. I only changed to a golf GTI because I needed more space/ room.
Thanks all for your input. The reason I'm swaying towards the 3.2 is to get the quattro drivetrain. I know it'll be unnoticeable on the road but there's something oddly appealing about it. Shame I can't afford the tfsi later Quattro. Although I didn't know they had oil consumption issues so thanks for pointing that out.
I think I need to go and drive both, ideally with both gearboxes...
I think I need to go and drive both, ideally with both gearboxes...
ManOpener said:
You can get the 2.0 TFSI engine with Quattro too, earlier pre FL/pre-EA888 engine cars came with it as well.
I thought it was only the later 2.0 cars (out of budget) that came in Quattro guise with that engine. Is that incorrect? Was is a fairly rare spec option? If so then yes that is intreaguing. I've heard that the engine remaps well with an intake and exhaust which could be fun. Edited by ManOpener on Thursday 12th May 13:38
vtecyo said:
ManOpener said:
You can get the 2.0 TFSI engine with Quattro too, earlier pre FL/pre-EA888 engine cars came with it as well.
I thought it was only the later 2.0 cars (out of budget) that came in Quattro guise with that engine. Is that incorrect? Was is a fairly rare spec option? If so then yes that is intreaguing. I've heard that the engine remaps well with an intake and exhaust which could be fun. Edited by ManOpener on Thursday 12th May 13:38
To be honest, the FWD 2.0 TFSI is typically a better drive than the Haldex ones anyway.
I have a TTRS with S-Tronic and would never go back. Reasons for choosing it - i liked the styling, the boot is actually a decent size and with seats folded down very practical - kids can fit in the back so that pleased the wife. For me it does 0-60 in 4.1 seconds with a return of 48mpg on cruise control at 75mph. I haven't driven the other models but would guess speed aside they would all be fun, relatively practical and well built.
With s-tronic if it has been well serviced you will be fine, plus the engine can't be over revved unlike a manual. To check its ok engage drive and the pull and engaging of 1st should be quiet and smooth - if not walk away.
The bigger the engine the better - not from a MPG perspective but in that it will take a lot more punishment as they can be lazier rather than a 2l turbo.
The benefits of a turbo is that you can remap it with some great gains.
A sports exhaust will finish the job and sourcing a set of rotors from an RS owner who has gone aftermarket would make it look great.
MSS sports springs would change the handling to sublime for £500.
Good luck in your search.
I had a scirocco r before and it is a great car, rare and looks good but the doors are long which makes it a total pain in the ass to get in and out in car parks or petrol stations as you need to swing them open to get out.
If you do go aftermarket on wheels then concave option like niche intake etc are the way to go.
With s-tronic if it has been well serviced you will be fine, plus the engine can't be over revved unlike a manual. To check its ok engage drive and the pull and engaging of 1st should be quiet and smooth - if not walk away.
The bigger the engine the better - not from a MPG perspective but in that it will take a lot more punishment as they can be lazier rather than a 2l turbo.
The benefits of a turbo is that you can remap it with some great gains.
A sports exhaust will finish the job and sourcing a set of rotors from an RS owner who has gone aftermarket would make it look great.
MSS sports springs would change the handling to sublime for £500.
Good luck in your search.
I had a scirocco r before and it is a great car, rare and looks good but the doors are long which makes it a total pain in the ass to get in and out in car parks or petrol stations as you need to swing them open to get out.
If you do go aftermarket on wheels then concave option like niche intake etc are the way to go.
Edited by Munkeyfeet on Friday 13th May 12:08
daddy cool said:
Gren said:
Had a mk2 TTS for around 6 years after a mk1 225 for 7 years and just bought a mk3 TTS.
Oooh, didnt know you had one. Im thinking of a TTS as my next car (to replace the MX5) as i want something that can lug a bike around. I might let you take me for a spin some time to see what its like! Bit of a thread revival.. sorry.
Been reading up on the S Tronic reliability and mechatronic unreliability. Sorry if this is a stupid question, but do cars come with either the S Tronic, or the mechatronic? Or is the mechatronic just part of the S Tronic gearbox?
If it's the former, what year did it switch from mecha to S? I read that the autos to avoid are in the 3.2 especially, or is this limited to the mk1?
At the moment I understand the one to go for to be the later, chain driven box with the S Tronic box (or a manual), or a 3.2 manual.
Thanks
Been reading up on the S Tronic reliability and mechatronic unreliability. Sorry if this is a stupid question, but do cars come with either the S Tronic, or the mechatronic? Or is the mechatronic just part of the S Tronic gearbox?
If it's the former, what year did it switch from mecha to S? I read that the autos to avoid are in the 3.2 especially, or is this limited to the mk1?
At the moment I understand the one to go for to be the later, chain driven box with the S Tronic box (or a manual), or a 3.2 manual.
Thanks
vtecyo said:
Bit of a thread revival.. sorry.
Been reading up on the S Tronic reliability and mechatronic unreliability. Sorry if this is a stupid question, but do cars come with either the S Tronic, or the mechatronic? Or is the mechatronic just part of the S Tronic gearbox?
If it's the former, what year did it switch from mecha to S? I read that the autos to avoid are in the 3.2 especially, or is this limited to the mk1?
At the moment I understand the one to go for to be the later, chain driven box with the S Tronic box (or a manual), or a 3.2 manual.
Thanks
They're not separate entities.Been reading up on the S Tronic reliability and mechatronic unreliability. Sorry if this is a stupid question, but do cars come with either the S Tronic, or the mechatronic? Or is the mechatronic just part of the S Tronic gearbox?
If it's the former, what year did it switch from mecha to S? I read that the autos to avoid are in the 3.2 especially, or is this limited to the mk1?
At the moment I understand the one to go for to be the later, chain driven box with the S Tronic box (or a manual), or a 3.2 manual.
Thanks
'S Tronic' is just Audi's name for DSG, it's exactly the same gearbox as used in all other 4 cylinder VW group cars. I believe the 3.2 uses it too and the RS has a beefed up version.
'Mechatronics' is the valve & solenoid block that controls the oil flow around the gearbox and again, is the same in all of them.
I wouldn't worry about the horror stories. Always exaggerated on the internet. I would put money on most of the failures being caused by neglect, but owners never own up to that when bashing products on the internet, do they?
If you want noise, the 3.2 is nice.
If you want power, get the 4 cylinder, or the 5 pot RS.
I've had a 3.2 DSG for eight years now, which says something in itself. It's pretty practical, if you think of it as a two seater, and not too big - I looked at a 435d to replace it the other day which is 2' longer with poorer boot access (obviously).
It's been reasonably reliable. I've had both window regulators done, plus an air con compressor and hifi unit under warranty - mine died but the originals had no bass. The iPod connection is useless but the 6cd plays mp3 cds. I'd go for the nav option next time which I think had a SD card slot too.
People rave about the DSG but I'm not that keen. If you're full on, using the paddles, great (unless you choose a gear it's not 'expecting'). But most of the time you're not, so it quickly goes to 6th and does its best to stay there. Maybe it's different in the 2.0 cars. Mpg @ 25-30, much less using the paddles, runs ok on standard unleaded.
I don't think of it as a sports car as such. It's a bit clumsy and not engaging imho. I can see why the poster above had it lowered. I thought about that. As a daily driver on A roads and M Ways it's easy to live with, including long distances and certainly fast enough. Standard headlights weren't very good. Seats could do with more adjustability and memory.
I'm looking to replace mine soon, and will probably have another. I like balance of size, practicality, performance and style, and the sound. I don't like the poor spec, main dealerships, DSG.
Hope that helps, all imho
It's been reasonably reliable. I've had both window regulators done, plus an air con compressor and hifi unit under warranty - mine died but the originals had no bass. The iPod connection is useless but the 6cd plays mp3 cds. I'd go for the nav option next time which I think had a SD card slot too.
People rave about the DSG but I'm not that keen. If you're full on, using the paddles, great (unless you choose a gear it's not 'expecting'). But most of the time you're not, so it quickly goes to 6th and does its best to stay there. Maybe it's different in the 2.0 cars. Mpg @ 25-30, much less using the paddles, runs ok on standard unleaded.
I don't think of it as a sports car as such. It's a bit clumsy and not engaging imho. I can see why the poster above had it lowered. I thought about that. As a daily driver on A roads and M Ways it's easy to live with, including long distances and certainly fast enough. Standard headlights weren't very good. Seats could do with more adjustability and memory.
I'm looking to replace mine soon, and will probably have another. I like balance of size, practicality, performance and style, and the sound. I don't like the poor spec, main dealerships, DSG.
Hope that helps, all imho
Love my 3.2. The other versions are fine cars but unless you're going for a TTS or RS I'd recommend the 3.2 - it's just a bit more interesting. It's certainly not a sports car in the way a Cayman is, but it handles well enough and the 3.2 is a fantastic cruiser. I'd say as far as the manual / DSG debate goes it's down to personal preference - both are very good.
If you can wait till next year I'll sell you mine! Just over 80k on the clock and with almost every extra including mag ride and bi xenon lights with cornering function. It will also have about seven months Audi warranty remaining.
If you can wait till next year I'll sell you mine! Just over 80k on the clock and with almost every extra including mag ride and bi xenon lights with cornering function. It will also have about seven months Audi warranty remaining.
Gassing Station | Audi, Seat, Skoda & VW | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff