RE: Audi TT S facelift: Driven

[andrewparker]

JMF894 said:

For a new 2+2 'sports car' I wouldn't call 1460 kgs light by any measure tbh. In fact I'd call it rather lardy. It's only 90 kgs lighter than my old 9-5 Aero barge!

What's the weight of a current Golf R by comparison?

1361kg for a 3 door DSG Golf R.

[anonymous-user]

cerb4.5lee said:

bulldong said:

£45k for a TT is serious money.

I remember paying £42k for a new TTS back in 2012, this one is quicker and with a much fancier interior. I know they don't drive that well but I do still have a bit of a soft spot for them.

They are nice cars, no doubt about that. £45k is a lot of money, that's all.

[JMF894]

E65Ross said:

I don't think it's strictly fair to compare new with old. This car has a LOT more tech in it, 4WD, more safety crash structure stuff and it's STILL 90kgs lighter

Where do you draw the line.....this weighs more than an original BMW 7 series....etc etc.

Oh - despite being "only" 90kgs lighter, I bet it feels a lot lighter than the Saab.

Hmmmmm. Yes it's got more tech and 4wd but............................. it's aluminium and a 2+2. Much smaller car and my old 9-5 had every conceivable extra at the time. How much does 4wd add compared to heated seats front and rear, ventilated seats and a sunroof?

If a Golf R 3dr is 1361 then i'll stand by initial thoughts. It'd bloody lardy.

Oh, and with 320bhp and a quaife the Saab didn't feel heavy at all

[Tuvra]

andrewparker said:

JMF894 said:

For a new 2+2 'sports car' I wouldn't call 1460 kgs light by any measure tbh. In fact I'd call it rather lardy. It's only 90 kgs lighter than my old 9-5 Aero barge!

What's the weight of a current Golf R by comparison?

1361kg for a 3 door DSG Golf R.

No chance, mine was well over 1400 when I put it on a calibrated weighbridge!

[E65Ross]

JMF894 said:

E65Ross said:

I don't think it's strictly fair to compare new with old. This car has a LOT more tech in it, 4WD, more safety crash structure stuff and it's STILL 90kgs lighter

Where do you draw the line.....this weighs more than an original BMW 7 series....etc etc.

Oh - despite being "only" 90kgs lighter, I bet it feels a lot lighter than the Saab.

Hmmmmm. Yes it's got more tech and 4wd but............................. it's aluminium and a 2+2. Much smaller car and my old 9-5 had every conceivable extra at the time. How much does 4wd add compared to heated seats front and rear, ventilated seats and a sunroof?

If a Golf R 3dr is 1361 then i'll stand by initial thoughts. It'd bloody lardy.

Oh, and with 320bhp and a quaife the Saab didn't feel heavy at all

I didn't think these produced anywhere near 300bhp? Or are we talking mapped? Either way, still heavier and slower than the TT

[cerb4.5lee]

JMF894 said:

For a new 2+2 'sports car' I wouldn't call 1460 kgs light by any measure tbh. In fact I'd call it rather lardy. It's only 90 kgs lighter than my old 9-5 Aero barge!

What's the weight of a current Golf R by comparison?

The 4wd for the TTS does seem to add a chunk of weight, the current 2.0 FWD TT only weighs 1230kg which isn't bad at all.

[Helicopter123]

cerb4.5lee said:

JMF894 said:

For a new 2+2 'sports car' I wouldn't call 1460 kgs light by any measure tbh. In fact I'd call it rather lardy. It's only 90 kgs lighter than my old 9-5 Aero barge!

What's the weight of a current Golf R by comparison?

The 4wd for the TTS does seem to add a chunk of weight, the current 2.0 FWD TT only weighs 1230kg which isn't bad at all.

To put that i context, according to Wikipedia, the Lotus Evora has an unladen weight of 1,383 kg, with the automatic version weighing in at 1,442 kg.

For a mass produced car with all of today's safety kit on-board, 1230kg is pretty good.

[2Btoo]

mcpoot said:

yonex said:

I don’t understand the TT. All the compromises of a two seater but none of the benefits?

What's to understand? The main "benefit" of a two seater coupe over an equivalent four seater is the looks. If you don't like the looks of the TT then fair enough but obviously many thousands of owners do.

I'm firmly with Yonex and the debate is nothing to do with looks. A four-door compromises the mechanicals into a sub-optimal layout with the engine, gearbox and driven wheels at the front and the engine (usually) some way in front of the front wheels. The rear suspension is similarly compromised to get a large boot with a low loading lip and big cabin space. All is geared around the occupants and luggage at the expense of the driving dynamics, which are 'fine' if you have never experienced anything better.

If you are happy with a compromised number of seats (2), small boot, high loading lip and cramped cabin then you can have a proper longitudinal engine layout, drive to a differential between the rear wheels and RWD, with niceties such as proper wishbone suspension, vertical dampers and a number of other things. All of which makes a vastly much better machine to drive but not as practical to sit in or as good to carry luggage in.

The TT is the worst of both worlds; poor vehicle dynamics as a result of being fundamentally a hatchback layout and poor ergonomics and practicality as a result of being 2 seater with a small boot. However people lap them up as they don't know anything better in terms of quality of drive and they think they are 'sporty'. Why the masses spend their money as they do is a mystery to me but I guess it's theirs to (mis-)spend as they choose.

[WJNB]

Are we REALLY REALLY sure the TT in whatever form is purchased for its dynamic abilities & speed?
Since its launch I have never seen one driven with verve or enthusiasm let alone ability.
More a Golf Coupe for those for whom the Golf is a boring box verging on blue-collar or too common & need to been seen in something pretty stylish & shapely to avoid being a social pariah.
Is it not just an Audi alternative to an SLK or budget toy trinket such as the Fiat 500, in baby blue of course.

[Helicopter123]

WJNB said:

Are we REALLY REALLY sure the TT in whatever form is purchased for its dynamic abilities & speed?
Since its launch I have never seen one driven with verve or enthusiasm let alone ability.
More a Golf Coupe for those for whom the Golf is a boring box verging on blue-collar or too common & need to been seen in something pretty stylish & shapely to avoid being a social pariah.
Is it not just an Audi alternative to an SLK or budget toy trinket such as the Fiat 500, in baby blue of course.

I think you are correct, but why phrase this is such a derogatory way?

Audi sell TT's to people who like the idea of a TT. They won't be weekend track warriors. I think we all know this.

[mcpoot]

2Btoo said:

I'm firmly with Yonex and the debate is nothing to do with looks. A four-door compromises the mechanicals into a sub-optimal layout with the engine, gearbox and driven wheels at the front and the engine (usually) some way in front of the front wheels. The rear suspension is similarly compromised to get a large boot with a low loading lip and big cabin space. All is geared around the occupants and luggage at the expense of the driving dynamics, which are 'fine' if you have never experienced anything better.

If you are happy with a compromised number of seats (2), small boot, high loading lip and cramped cabin then you can have a proper longitudinal engine layout, drive to a differential between the rear wheels and RWD, with niceties such as proper wishbone suspension, vertical dampers and a number of other things. All of which makes a vastly much better machine to drive but not as practical to sit in or as good to carry luggage in.

The TT is the worst of both worlds; poor vehicle dynamics as a result of being fundamentally a hatchback layout and poor ergonomics and practicality as a result of being 2 seater with a small boot. However people lap them up as they don't know anything better in terms of quality of drive and they think they are 'sporty'. Why the masses spend their money as they do is a mystery to me but I guess it's theirs to (mis-)spend as they choose.

I'll just ask this question. Have you actually driven or even sat in one?
Poor ergonomics? That's one thing a modern Audi doesn't suffer from.
Lack of practicality is arguable too as the TT is actually a 2+2 so the rear seats fold providing a quite reasonable amount of space.
You drive a Porsche 944, a car designed back in the mid 70's so I'm not sure you're the best judge of vehicle dynamics in the modern era. Many would question your choice of where to spend your money. Maybe you don't realise there is a lot better out there in terms of quality of drive yourself. I know 'sporty' is about more than performance but your old 944 wouldn't see which way a modern hot hatch went.

[F1GTRUeno]

Can't comment on the TTS but a family member does have a standard 2.0 TT that I use fairly often.

It's a lovely place to be but it's the first time I've ever driven a car and believed what magazine/test drivers say about 'feel' and about a car's steering being 'numb'.

it's an incredibly odd car to drive.

As something to just travel in it's very nice but I've thought about taking it down to the triangle or any other nice roads around Wales and I'm really not sure I'd feel comfortable in it. Like it says in this, it's not exactly confidence inspiring.

[2Btoo]

mcpoot said:

I'll just ask this question. Have you actually driven or even sat in one?
Poor ergonomics? That's one thing a modern Audi doesn't suffer from.
Lack of practicality is arguable too as the TT is actually a 2+2 so the rear seats fold providing a quite reasonable amount of space.
You drive a Porsche 944, a car designed back in the mid 70's so I'm not sure you're the best judge of vehicle dynamics in the modern era. Many would question your choice of where to spend your money. Maybe you don't realise there is a lot better out there in terms of quality of drive yourself. I know 'sporty' is about more than performance but your old 944 wouldn't see which way a modern hot hatch went.

Mcpoot,

Not going to rise to your eMail. If you want a reasoned discussion I'm happy to oblige. If you want an argument then please try someone else.

Ahm Ooot.

[JMF894]

E65Ross said:

I didn't think these produced anywhere near 300bhp? Or are we talking mapped? Either way, still heavier and slower than the TT

And over £40k cheaper too......................................

Mine was proper sorted and mid range far quicker than most would realise too. Think current S4, M140i etc. Anyway it was a giggle if ultimately flawed.

I thought 4wd on these was only worth around 40-50kgs?

[va1o]

J4CKO said:

I would have another TT but it is a pain not being able to take more than one passenger, was ok spending a couple of grand on one, and I looked at what I got for just over 20 grand, a 230 bhp TT didnt cut it when you could get an M135i with lower miles and newer.

Cost me £1k to swap my 2013 M135i with 29k miles for a 2015 TT with 11k miles. Although with 230bhp the TT is clearly less powerful I do definitely prefer it. From a driver's perspective I think they handle really nicely as it weighs so little and has a nice feeling chassis. As a car I find it much more modern and better looking compared to the BMW. There is only 1s between them 0-60 and both are limited to 155mph so still more than fast enough! All I'm missing really is the 6-cylinder soundtrack. Agree it's annoying not being able take more than one passenger, but the 1-series isn't exactly renown for its practicality either.

[cerb4.5lee]

F1GTRUeno said:

Can't comment on the TTS but a family member does have a standard 2.0 TT that I use fairly often.

It's a lovely place to be but it's the first time I've ever driven a car and believed what magazine/test drivers say about 'feel' and about a car's steering being 'numb'.

it's an incredibly odd car to drive.

As something to just travel in it's very nice but I've thought about taking it down to the triangle or any other nice roads around Wales and I'm really not sure I'd feel comfortable in it. Like it says in this, it's not exactly confidence inspiring.

The mk2 TTS I had was just like how you describe, the steering feel was none existent and even though it had 4wd it didn't give you any confidence going quickly around corners.

I did like the looks/interior/performance alot though. I really like the shape of this current one, and I always think they look good out on the road when I see them.

[mcpoot]

2Btoo said:

mcpoot said:

I'll just ask this question. Have you actually driven or even sat in one?
Poor ergonomics? That's one thing a modern Audi doesn't suffer from.
Lack of practicality is arguable too as the TT is actually a 2+2 so the rear seats fold providing a quite reasonable amount of space.
You drive a Porsche 944, a car designed back in the mid 70's so I'm not sure you're the best judge of vehicle dynamics in the modern era. Many would question your choice of where to spend your money. Maybe you don't realise there is a lot better out there in terms of quality of drive yourself. I know 'sporty' is about more than performance but your old 944 wouldn't see which way a modern hot hatch went.

Mcpoot,

Not going to rise to your eMail. If you want a reasoned discussion I'm happy to oblige. If you want an argument then please try someone else.

Ahm Ooot.

So you throw out some fairly insulting assertions about people who've chosen to buy a TT and when I call you out on it and address them in a reasonable fashion you take your ball and run off home.

Just in case you should rejoin for an adult discussion I'll just point out I have driven a 944 and a TT as well as a few other sports car so I like to think I do know a little about a car "in terms of quality of drive".

[Cloudy147]

Looks very nice indeed. But also very expensive.

Whilst this might be the ol' new vs used thing, I can't help but think:

2007 Audi TT (Small Loan)



2017 Audi TTS (Small Mortgage)


Is it really worth that much more?

[E65Ross]

Cloudy147 said:

Looks very nice indeed. But also very expensive.

Whilst this might be the ol' new vs used thing, I can't help but think:

2007 Audi TT (Small Loan)



2017 Audi TTS (Small Mortgage)


Is it really worth that much more?

Yes, the old vs new thing.

Do you post the same drivel when any new Porsche comes out? What about a Bentley? Or Mercedes?

Cars depreciate and manufacturers price their new cars as new, not 2nd hand.

[DamnKraut]

Apart from the piss take on pricing, why does it have these ridiculous air vents in the rear bumper? Is it to cool the rear brakes? Seems overdone same as the four exhaust pipes for a measly 310hp.