RE: Audi TT quattro Sport | PH Used Review

[1781cc]

Nors said:

I don't think anyone is going to buy one of these or any other Mk 1 TT as an out and out performance car or especially a track car.

ha ha ha ha... I disagree, there are plenty of us successfully running these as track cars, from my one below to some 600bhp G25-660 powered versions with flat shift sequential gearboxes. As for the chassis, I think you'd be surprised if you came along for a ride in mine...

[dollyboy]

was8v said:

article said:

It's the permanent kind, too, unlike later generations that switched to Haldex hardware.

Um nope, it's definitely a haldex system, not sure if the QS had different firmware to the standard car.

Yep definitely haldex, same as other cars on this platform. Rather basic mistake, did the author actually drive one before writing the article?

[mooseracer]

moonigan said:

Extracting more power from the QS is an exercise in futility as there is no map for that specific car so all you do is end up with a standard 225 re-map which will give you at best another 10-15 BHP on what you had before.

Custom map.

[Maldini35]

1781cc said:

ha ha ha ha... I disagree, there are plenty of us successfully running these as track cars, from my one below to some 600bhp G25-660 powered versions with flat shift sequential gearboxes. As for the chassis, I think you'd be surprised if you came along for a ride in mine...

That looks sensational.
Any in car vids of it on track?

[1781cc]

Maldini35 said:

That looks sensational.
Any in car vids of it on track?

I have quite a few but not online, I thankfully when google free about 5 months ago so had to sacrifice my youtube channel, when I figure out where I will dump my videos I'll let you know.

I have a build thread here: https://www.ttforum.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25...

Its a huge read though... and its not up to date either lol

[J4CKO]

mooseracer said:

moonigan said:

Extracting more power from the QS is an exercise in futility as there is no map for that specific car so all you do is end up with a standard 225 re-map which will give you at best another 10-15 BHP on what you had before.

Custom map.

Indeed, these engines are very tunable, that you cant get a specific map isnt a problem, so much you can do, it just gets expensive, 500 bhp or more isnt unheard of.

Probably better to keep a QS standard and mess with a normal 225.

[Nors]

1781cc said:

Nors said:

I don't think anyone is going to buy one of these or any other Mk 1 TT as an out and out performance car or especially a track car.

ha ha ha ha... I disagree, there are plenty of us successfully running these as track cars, from my one below to some 600bhp G25-660 powered versions with flat shift sequential gearboxes. As for the chassis, I think you'd be surprised if you came along for a ride in mine...

Stunning!! Of course I meant in showroom spec!

[Ructions]

1781cc said:

Maldini35 said:

That looks sensational.
Any in car vids of it on track?

I have quite a few but not online, I thankfully when google free about 5 months ago so had to sacrifice my youtube channel, when I figure out where I will dump my videos I'll let you know.

I have a build thread here: https://www.ttforum.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25...

Its a huge read though... and its not up to date either lol

That’s my afternoon reading sorted.

Haven’t been on the TT Forum in years, was always a great source of info and help when I had a TT

[ZX10R NIN]

mooseracer said:

moonigan said:

Extracting more power from the QS is an exercise in futility as there is no map for that specific car so all you do is end up with a standard 225 re-map which will give you at best another 10-15 BHP on what you had before.

Custom map.

As above a custom map will see you into the 280bhp with ease, plus I'd always recommend having a custom map over a generic one everytime.

[TartanPaint]

Modern Classics has a feature on this car in the current issue. I wasn't convinced reading their glowing review either.

[Jon_S_Rally]

1781cc said:

ha ha ha ha... I disagree, there are plenty of us successfully running these as track cars, from my one below to some 600bhp G25-660 powered versions with flat shift sequential gearboxes. As for the chassis, I think you'd be surprised if you came along for a ride in mine...

I'm not sure your rear wing is quite big enough

[thelostboy]

Looks ridiculous. And just making a car grip more doesn't mean it handles better - they're not the same thing.

[Nors]

thelostboy said:

Looks ridiculous. And just making a car grip more doesn't mean it handles better - they're not the same thing.

But more grip would make it quicker.

[RenesisEvo]

I had one for around 18 months / 10k miles. Didn't have the bucket seats, instead heated sports seats, which were better for long distance comfort. The rear seat brace was a pain as you couldn't load big objects, but no rear seats was never a problem for me.

It was a good 'starter' performance vehicle - you wouldn't immediately scare yourself and you could work up to exploring its potential, and running costs were quite reasonable given the power output (often saw north of 35mpg, near 40 on a run). Very capable wet or dry, although the rear does get a bit light at speed even with the bigger V6 spoiler it came with. I just found it too tiring for long distance work, but not quite engaging enough the rest of the time to make up for it. Too stiff and moved around too much on the motorway to be a relaxing GT, but with none of the precision and feedback you'd want in return. A few reliability issues too, mostly common VAG / 1.8T stuff. I had to re-cover the alcantara steering wheel as it ages badly; after that it still wasn't great for long drives, leather a far better choice. Turned heads and impressed everyone who saw/rode in/drove it, but the substance didn't run very deep. Probably the best TT, yes, and an interesting choice, but I think if the process of driving interests you, you'll be a little disappointed. As rare-groove take on a surefire modern icon with great all-weather, brain-out pace, it might make some sense.

Interesting to see where prices have gone, I struggled to get shot of mine for £6k at 70,000 miles. It might have been the lack of buckets, who knows - it's only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. At the time lots were around advertised 8-10k, but they weren't necessarily selling.

Edited by RenesisEvo on Monday 19th August 15:05

[xjay1337]

Who the fk would pay 10k for a TT Mk1 HAHAHAHA

You can buy a normal TT 225 for 1500 quid
R-tech remap for £250 and pair of used Pole Positions for £1200 and you have the same car 1/3rd the advertised price.

[anonymous-user]

1781cc said:

Nors said:

I don't think anyone is going to buy one of these or any other Mk 1 TT as an out and out performance car or especially a track car.

ha ha ha ha... I disagree, there are plenty of us successfully running these as track cars, from my one below to some 600bhp G25-660 powered versions with flat shift sequential gearboxes. As for the chassis, I think you'd be surprised if you came along for a ride in mine...

How much money have you spent turning one into a decent track car?

[Court_S]

The original TT has aged pretty well considering how old they are. They’ll never be the best handling car, but this version is pretty cool if for nothing other than those seats.

I think you’d need to be a real TT fan to buy this over a Boxster.

[1781cc]

ruprechtmonkeyboy said:

How much money have you spent turning one into a decent track car?

I think I am at about £8K so far, but that includes another set of wheels with semi slicks to go with the set of slicks, WMI, Cage, Porsche brakes, two sets of good seats, motorsport clutch, wing, suspension, baffled sump and loads of other bits, its been a process of evolution over 3 years, I've also sold on about £2K worth of parts and interior bits as well, bringing net outlay to about £6K which isn't bad for the performance the car gives me on track.

I can see where you are going with this, but most people who have track cars don't stop at one thing, they are an ever evolving beast with associated costs. I agree that straight out of the box the handling isn't as good as some other cars, but thats not my point of view, I am saying with some fettling there is a lot of potential in the MK1 chassis, its not all about grip, its balance, directional change, pliability over bumps and uneven surfaces, I am more than happy with the way the car handles and stops, but I admit it could do with more power as its current 270bhp isn't cutting it on the straights, I got overtaken by straight-line cars and held up behind them in corners because they can be so slow by comparison.

[Caddyshack]

moonigan said:

Leon R said:

I have this exact engine in one of mine, it currently has 100,000 on the clock and has been remapped for almost 9 years and 70,000 of those miles.

No large bang yet.

Remapped to what? Any other supporting hardware other than map?

My one is also remapped and has been like that for most of its 93,000 miles. The engine is BONE Stock other than the map. I think mine is a little shy of 280 but that is common.

The understeer is pretty small in my opinion and is easily tuned out by changing simple bushes. Pre-recall it was rated alongside the Boxster for handling and feedback, the recall really dulled them but it is easy to go back to pre-recall.

I have a Haldex controller on my one too.

[monzaxjr]

Really like the 3.2 in these. Have contemplated buying one many times but the horror stories I've read regarding the timing chain have always put me off. Had a look online at various sites for a low mileage minter with evidence of the chain being done but most appear to be pretty rough or have patchy histories.