RE: Audi TT S: Review
Discussion
SuperchargedVR6 said:
Gardus said:
SuperchargedVR6 said:
As with nearly all VAGs, I find their engines more interesting than the cars they are in.
280lbft @ 1800rpm from a 2.0 petrol turbo is impressive, but unlike a diesel, it holds it to nearly 6000rpm. So the point of diesel again, is, erm?
Agreed. The latest TFSI is really amazing, a lot of torque around 2000 rpm but it pulls up to 6000+, even as stock.280lbft @ 1800rpm from a 2.0 petrol turbo is impressive, but unlike a diesel, it holds it to nearly 6000rpm. So the point of diesel again, is, erm?
I had the chance to test drive a S3 8V with a full exhaust and a MTM piggyback unit, it was pushing around 350 hp and it was the fastest 2.0 turbo I experienced in straight line, faster than an RS3 8P. No Evo or STI with the stock turbo is as quick from still IMHO. My Megane is a snail by comparison...but still more fun to throw around.
Shame really because with the VAG's technical know-how and enormous financial clout, they really could produce something remarkable if they wanted to. Even the R8 is known to be an under steer monster on track, and that nanny state VAGness has infected Lamborghini as well.
It's a corporate machine making decisions on behalf of it's customers. Yes, our customers love and want under steer, debate closed, decision made. Rubber stamp - dumphh.
I bet the new TT still uses the 'understeer bushes' in the front wishbones. Instead of solid rubber, they have voids in them which 'give' when you corner hard, causing the car to plough straight on. There was a fix for that with MK1 TTs, but I'm haven't studied the new platform yet.
mrclav said:
...why is an MX-5 seen as a great "drivers" car when they are regularly driven by hairdressers for example?
Because it's a great car to drive? 
The hairdresser accusation will stay with the TT for as long as it remains an uninvolving drive. Nothing really wrong with it though, 95% of car buyers couldn't care less about handling and from some of the sarcastic "driving god" comments on here it seems that most people don't even believe anyone actually exploits the limits of their car apart from F1 drivers.
Ultimately Audi know their market and they'd be stupid to scare them silly by giving them a car that requires a bit of skill to drive quickly.
scherzkeks said:
"Forget the racetrack"
Why? It's the best place to remind yourself that you've bought one of the most rapid and flattering driving machines in its class.
How would you know ? Is that what your instructor told you when you were exploring the limit at 6/10ths ? Why? It's the best place to remind yourself that you've bought one of the most rapid and flattering driving machines in its class.
I apologise but I thought of you when I read this bit of the article :
"it flatters mediocre abilities and it's unlikely to punish idiots. Even on racetracks."
As for the TT, it looks like a great package indeed and that interior is nothing short of spectacular. No way it will be so close to £40k when a M235i (a proper 4-seater) is £34k...
Edited by nickfrog on Tuesday 9th September 22:24
Dave Hedgehog said:
EdJ said:
GranCab said:
TT vs Golf = Apples vs Oranges - you either want one or the other ...
Exactly, the idea that the typical TT buyer would think about buying a Golf for a little less money is ridiculous. The looks (including the interior) are a huge part of the buying decision for these people. I think the new TT looks great. I wouldn't buy one, but I can understand why people do.
Similarly does anyone really reckon that anybody looking at a TT has any knowledge whatsoever that it shares a platform and other things with a Golf?
F1GTRUeno said:
Dave Hedgehog said:
EdJ said:
GranCab said:
TT vs Golf = Apples vs Oranges - you either want one or the other ...
Exactly, the idea that the typical TT buyer would think about buying a Golf for a little less money is ridiculous. The looks (including the interior) are a huge part of the buying decision for these people. I think the new TT looks great. I wouldn't buy one, but I can understand why people do.
Similarly does anyone really reckon that anybody looking at a TT has any knowledge whatsoever that it shares a platform and other things with a Golf?
Beyond enthusiasts most folk buy or admire what they like the look off... My neighbours love my TTS because it's an Audi. When I point out I like but don't love it they can't understand why... It's fast, loads of grip, not as bad as some think but ultimately not much fun... But it is cheap to run... The ultimate compromise. I'd love a Cayman S, but expensive and running costs.
I notice some say by the time you've spec a TTS you may as well by a Cayman... But then to get what you want you have to spec that up too... Some of us owners know exactly what understeer is but also know what else comes with Porsche ownership.
bozzy101 said:
An M235i would be a better alternative to a Golf R. It would be the car I'd prefer if I had 30k (or so) to spend on a small, sporty coupe.
It's just a shame that BMW have turned the Z4 into a boulevard cruiser rather than a Boxster / Cayman rival. If they put as much effort into a small sports car as they do when chasing emissions figures for 4-pot diesels, they'd have something truly special on their hands.T0MMY said:
mrclav said:
...why is an MX-5 seen as a great "drivers" car when they are regularly driven by hairdressers for example?
Because it's a great car to drive? T0MMY said:
Ultimately Audi know their market and they'd be stupid to scare them silly by giving them a car that requires a bit of skill to drive quickly.
Audi doesn't need to make a car for the masses that requires skill to drive quickly. Lawsuits would inevitably follow as a result of deaths from accidents.BHC said:
Lost soul said:
They also build (used loosely ) some of the most unreliable cars on the market
As opposed to Volkswagen?Admittedly it measures repair costs rather than reliability, but Renault are 21st and Audi are 34th on warranty direct's index.
mrclav said:
Yes it's a great car to drive. My point is that it is regularly driven by actual hairdressers and I'm pretty certain that the main reason they drive it is NOT because it's a great car to drive more than say, it's cheap to run, it looks cute and it's a convertible.
But the point is people realise there's more to them than image (not that they look good anyway really). They certainly do still get the hairdresser jibes but more from the non petrolheads I'd say. TT's are the other way round...normal folk think they're a proper sportscar whilst enthusiasts generally think they're a fashion acccessory.I don't think I've ever been on a trackday that didn't have at least 3 MX5s going round whilst conversely I can honestly say I've literally never seen a TT at one which tells you something I guess.
T0MMY said:
mrclav said:
Yes it's a great car to drive. My point is that it is regularly driven by actual hairdressers and I'm pretty certain that the main reason they drive it is NOT because it's a great car to drive more than say, it's cheap to run, it looks cute and it's a convertible.
But the point is people realise there's more to them than image (not that they look good anyway really). They certainly do still get the hairdresser jibes but more from the non petrolheads I'd say. TT's are the other way round...normal folk think they're a proper sportscar whilst enthusiasts generally think they're a fashion acccessory.I don't think I've ever been on a trackday that didn't have at least 3 MX5s going round whilst conversely I can honestly say I've literally never seen a TT at one which tells you something I guess.
A lot of the guys on the forum are enthusiasts AND know there are better cars in the class but then there is what we want and ultimately what fits out life and pocket. It's not rocket science why the TT or a Megane or whatever sells no matter what anyway thinks.
The TT is simply a very good everyday sporty car. It's especially good if you do a lot of miles as its a nice place to be. If you have to drive whatever the weather, slimy B road pace is hard to beat in any car short of a GTR or something else 4WD and v fast.
It will be different from a Golf R because the centre of gravity will be lower. Having just sold a 2011 3dr S3 to move to a lowered and modified B7 A4 quattro I am really surprised how much better the A4 drives - it's all down to the suspension set up and lower centre of gravity.
I've owned a lot of Audi's. They are not the best cars in the world for feel, experience etc but as very good, fast and capable everyday smart cars they are hard to beat.
The whole hairdresser nonsense and haldex lines which are rolled out on all these Audi threads are so tedious. I don't get why people can't see the cars for what they are and accept they are very good in that context.
It will be different from a Golf R because the centre of gravity will be lower. Having just sold a 2011 3dr S3 to move to a lowered and modified B7 A4 quattro I am really surprised how much better the A4 drives - it's all down to the suspension set up and lower centre of gravity.
I've owned a lot of Audi's. They are not the best cars in the world for feel, experience etc but as very good, fast and capable everyday smart cars they are hard to beat.
The whole hairdresser nonsense and haldex lines which are rolled out on all these Audi threads are so tedious. I don't get why people can't see the cars for what they are and accept they are very good in that context.
PJBTOV said:
I don't get why people can't see the cars for what they are and accept they are very good in that context.
I think most of us do. I criticise them because they're not what I want in a car but I also accept they're fit for purpose.Of course that acceptance should work both ways...
scherzkeks said:
It's a very good track car as well, particularly if you are interested in going fast.
...and that's how the TT bashing begins.T0MMY said:
...and that's how the TT bashing begins.
The numbers speak for themselves, and they are quite popular on the big tracks here in DE. Worth noting for the latest model is that the weight balance is now just below 55/45, which is just about perfect for an AWD chassis. Looking forward to seeing what the cooking models can do.big_rob_sydney said:
It has the performance of a 20+ year old sti/evo, and costs about 10 times as much. Welcome to 1994 performance, but with new millenium pricing.
Still the fashion victim.
Meh.
To be fair, it's better equipped, arguably better looking and likely a far nicer drive when cruising about. It's also lower tax, better MPG and cheaper servicing. Still the fashion victim.
Meh.
I still wouldn't buy one though!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff