Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Audi TT



  • I would really appreciate any help or suggestions anyone cares to give me. Currently my husband is ill, and I am having to deal with some problems on his 2001 TT. In the past two years we have had 14 tires put on the car. It has been alinement twice. The car has 225 engine. I am being told the tires only last for 12,000 to 15,000 miles and that the car comes out of alinement very easily. We are very careful about how we drive the car, and this seems excesive in terms of maintenance. Thanks.
  • 8u6hfd8u6hfd Posts: 1,391
    It's most likely true about the tires. Performance tires, tend to sacriface longevity for traction. It's hard to find a longer wearing tire in the 225/45r17 size.

    I may be wrong on this, but I believe the smallest diameter rims for TT is 16". Downgrading to 16" (and using 205/55 r16 tires) will sacriface traction, but also will allow you greater flexible in tire choices, allowing you to pick a "Touring All-season" tire. You'll need to purchase a new set of rims though. You can get say Michelin Energy MXV4, which has a tire wear warranty of 80,000 miles.

    Hope this helps you.
  • While we are on the subject of tires...I have a 2002 TT 180FWD Roadster. I have the 17 inch high performance tire. I also live in the NE. All the Audi marketing material say not to use these tires in cold weather, ice or snow.

    Although the snows of the last few years have been few I am concerned about driving with these tires in the NE winter. Do any of you change tires for winter? Do you have separate wheels or do you mount winter tires on the same wheel?
  • ugly1ugly1 Posts: 52
    Believe the manual. I live in the Cleveland area and have a ball driving in the snow. I opted to have a dedicated set of tires and wheels for the winter. If you like your stock rims you should consider the same move. You can run 17" snow tires on the stock rims but you can also run 16" snow tires on 16" rims. You won't ruin your beautiful Audi wheels and the 16" tires will be considerably less than 17's. Try BTW 16" rims are the stock rim for TT's w/o the performance package. At least it was in '01. If I remember my calculations right the difference in height between the 16 & 17 is 0.025".
  • I'm seriously considering the purchase of a 2002 Audi TT Coupe, 180 HP FWD (possibly the AWD) but I'm hesitant based on some owner-feedback. Granted, once you spend upwards of 30K on vehicle, you'll probably defend it with your life (kinda like buying a Macintosh, which I have and will continue to do, regardless of the inflated prices and slower processors) which is why it's hard to get an un-biased opinion. The reports of electrical failures on the TT are a bit unsettling since I live in the city, and I would prefer to have my windows stay UP when they're supposed to, and the alarm system active when I'm OUT of the car. After reading all these posts, checking out Edmunds own reviews along with Consumer Reports, the TT appears to be more of a neat looking toy than a fully functioning automobile. I am in no way trying to "dis" the TT, so please don't take that statement as an offensive remark. I've driven one, and I was pleased with the look and feel, except for the fact that you can't really see out the side windows, and if you're too far under a stop light, well, I guess you're out of luck (i.e. can't see the stop light anymore). I'm not interested in a 2003 Tip model. I enjoy manual transmission, and if that feature is discontinued, I'm wondering how well those models (with manual trans) will be supported mechanically (Audi doesn't seem to a have a very good "rap" when it comes to service). So... I'm starting to consider the S2000, but the lack of any trunk space whatsoever bothers me. I'd at least like to fit something other than myself in the car. Ideally I'd like to purchase an Audi TT used, but I can't seem to find a used TT Coupe in the Baltimore/D.C. area. Have most of the problems of the TT been resolved with the 2002 model(s)? I didn't notice any turbo lag when driving the car, but then again, I've never driven a car with turbo. I don't plan on racing anyone, but I would like a car with a bit of a pickup. The S2000 seems to be more of a rocket-on-wheels, but Honda doesn't seem to make cars which are mechanically unreliable (I've owned many, which is why I would purhcase one again). Of course money comes into play, and I'm trying to keep this whole transaction below (or close to) 30K. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    "The lack of any trunk space whatsoever"??

    Are you sure you were looking at an S2000? On a recent golf trip, I got my clubs, garment bag, small duffle bag and various other odds and ends in the trunk. Another time, I actually got two sets of clubs in the trunk, albeit one was a travel bag. The S2000 trunk isn't huge, but it does a lot better than a Miata or SLK.

    As for deciding between the TT and S2000, their driving characteristics are about as far apart as you can get in the two seat roadster category. Both are excellent in their own right, just make sure you get the one that compliments your style / preference. Our neighbors bought an early vintage Boxster a few years ago then traded it for a TT 225 roadster after about the 5th time the Boxster top got stuck in the "down" position. Now they are considering trading the TT for an S2000 or M Roadster, ostensibly to get back some of the "sports car feel" they had with the Boxster. When I asked them if either had driven an S2000, they said "no, but we like the looks of yours"! Wonder what they will get next.
  • "Are you sure you were looking at an S2000? On a recent golf trip, I got my clubs, garment bag, small duffle bag and various other odds and ends in the trunk. Another time, I actually got two sets of clubs in the trunk, albeit one was a travel bag. The S2000 trunk isn't huge, but it does a lot better than a Miata or SLK."

    I'm more concerned with the electrical problems reported with the TT. Although it does seem the TT has more trunk space, that probably isn't very useful if the car is being repaired every 30 days. So I'm looking for reliability first, practicality second.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    The reliability reputation of Honda was a factor that caused me to select the S2000 over the Boxster S. I was nearly prepared to pay the $25k premium for the Porsche, but got increasingly concerned about the maintenance and repair factor. Since this was to be a "fun" car, visiting the dealership frequently to resolve problems would have defeated the purpose.

    I have not heard of specific reliability problems with the TT, but if that is your primary concern, you can't do much better than Honda. In addition to being fairly bulletproof, there is a much better dealer network. And, from my experience, S2000 owners are treated like royalty. The one minor problem I had when the car was new (broken top latch) resulted in two calls from the Honda regional representatives to make sure I was happy with the fix.

    I still think the S2000 and TT are very different cars from a driver's perspective, but if you are going to make your choice based upon reliability, that's up to you.
  • How's the outside noise with the S2000? If i purchased one, I'd opt for the Hard Top since I'm not really interested in a convertible/top down. The introduction of Tiptronic only in the 180 HP models of the TT is a serious drawback.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    Noise can be an issue in the S2000 with the top up. This is a high strung sports car. Even in 6th gear, it's running at 4,000 rpm at 70 mph. I suspect that even with the hard top option, the TT coupe would probably be quieter at highway speeds. I myself don't find the noise objectionable, but I have a Nissan Maxima to fall back on, if I'm carting around one or more business associates.

    If you really don't want a convertible, perhaps you should consider the Nissan 350Z or Infinity G35 Coupe as alternatives. From what I've heard, the Nissan/Infiniti are a step down from the S2000 in handling precision, but they make thier power through lower reving (i.e. quieter) V-6's. Again, I personally liked the fact that the S2000 was a limited production, mostly hand built "sports" car, and would have probably opted for a Boxster S rather than go the mass market GT/coupe route. But they may be worth your consideration.
  • brucewgbrucewg Posts: 5
    I recently purchased a 2002 coupe, 180FWD, so you'll know in advance where I'm coming from. I was looking for a comfortable car that I would enjoy driving, not necessarily the "ultimate" sports car, and the TT fits my expectations very nicely. From my research I would say that the majority of issues with the TT were on the 2000's, some on the 2001's, and the 2002's have been very reliable. My initial (two week old) experience has been fine - a minor issue with the CD changer is my only issue to date.

    The trunk of the coupe is quite good for a sports car.

    You absolutely cannot find a car near this price range with the interior style of the TT. If that aspect is high on your list it's in a class by itself, and it should continue to delight for the lifetime of the car.

    The Audi dealer/service experience is mixed. If you can find a dealer/service department you are pleased with stick with them, and they do exist, but just not in the vast majority. A few are really bad from what I've researched, a few are outstanding, most are about average at best.

    Right now is a great time buy in my opinion - many local (SF Bay Area) dealers seem to have lots of TT's on the lot, sales are slow, and deals can be found. You should be able to get your TT for invoice (*not* MSRP) plus $500 - $800 (plus tax and license).

    The car just plain feels good, tight, a of high quality - I've not experienced any rattles, etc.

  • vinnynyvinnyny Posts: 780
    I compared virtually every mid-priced sports car before I bought my TT. I came up with five finalists: Audi TT Roadster, BMW M Roadster, Honda S2000, Porsche Boxster S, and Corvette.

    BMW M Roadster: a great performer, but the interior was too cramped. It was the only car that I couldn't drive in the rain without getting a wet elbow.

    Porsche Boxster S: I loved this car! If it had been $10k cheaper and the maintenance costs weren't insane, I would have bought one in a heartbeat! Porsche should stop charging extra for items that are standard on every competitor.

    Corvette convertible: best performer by a wide margin, but the dashboard looked too cheap. It even had the same radio as my 02 Tahoe (not to mention my old 97 Z28). I've always wanted a Vette, but just couldn't pull the trigger when I finally was in a position to buy one. I'll wait for the C6...

    Honda S2000: this car rocked! Great handling, brakes, and acceleration. However, when driven at high rpm (the ONLY way to drive it) the engine noise was almost unbearable. "Cacophony" is the word that comes to mind. If the sound were more like the Boxster, the Porsche never would have entered my mind. A great third car, but I just couldn't live with it as my daily driver.

    Audi TT: the poorest performer of the finalists--heaviest, least powerful, most body roll. Even with the stage 1 mod, my TT can't run with the others. However, the nicest interior, Quattro grip, free maintenance, best warranty and unique styling put it over the top for me. I've had the car for 15 months and haven't had any problems (or regrets for that matter). If ultimate performance isn't your #1 priority, then the TT is worth considering.

    Good luck with your decision...
  • I have heard of the 03TT having an auto box as option. This is sooo wrong! The TT is Audi's only sports car. A true sports car needs to stay with manual. (though even the Boxster offers the tiptronic system)
    And will the next gen. TT have less body roll to compete with the Z4, Boxster, and S 2000?
    TTs Rule!
  • leonivleoniv Posts: 120
    A common problem with the 225 TT roadsters, and probably with the other TT's as well, is the instrument cluster failing. Not the entire cluster, but one little gauge not working constitutes a new cluster. It's also common in the new A4's as well. I had mine replaced at 5k miles on my 02 TT 225 roadster b/c of the fuel gauge not working. Dealer said it's been a common problem. The car is extremely tight around corners (not as tight as an S2k) with the Quattro and the brakes are incredible, on par with the boxster and s2k. You must be careful how hard you brake though b/c some idiot drivers like to ride your tail and they'll end up in your trunk if you brake too hard. I had to pull over into a grass median to avoid someone skidding into me. No complaints here though.

  • 8u6hfd8u6hfd Posts: 1,391
    Isn't the Porsche 911 available with an automatic transmission?
  • nyccarguynyccarguy Stamford, CTPosts: 7,111
    unfortunately, yes!

    2001 Honda Prelude Type SH/ 2011 BMW 328xi / 2011 Honda Pilot EX-L w/ Navigation

  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    Unfortunate indeed - help me out over at the SL500 forum!!
  • nyccarguynyccarguy Stamford, CTPosts: 7,111
    we usually see eye to eye on things being stick shift fans and honda owners, but you're on your own over in the SL500 I'll come check it out, but I have to warn you, I think the SL500 is so beautiful (as are most Mercedes) that I would buy that car with the 2.3L Kompressor 4cyl:) besides...whatever manual transmission MB comes up with isn't going to do the rest of the car justice:)

    2001 Honda Prelude Type SH/ 2011 BMW 328xi / 2011 Honda Pilot EX-L w/ Navigation

  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    I agree on the SL500 and wasn't suggesting it isn't a great car, automatic transmission and all. The SL forum got into a side debate on how you would spend $250k to fill your garage. "merc1" responded with the SL55, S55 and BMW M3 with SMG. I just let the idea of three automatic transmissions get to me, I guess. At least he could have picked the M3 as a 6-speed and given his left foot something to do on occassion!

    Thanks for your moral support though. I'd hate to see all manual transmissions eliminated by European makers who look down on us Americans as too wimpy or ignorant to appreciate "driving" a car.

    If you think we're "fanatics", you should hear one of my neighbors, "Manfred" who is a Daimler Chrysler exec transplanted from Germany. He drives a vintage 350 SL w/ 4-speed and claims that it's all the fault of "you Americans" that he can't get a stick in the current crop of higher end Mercedes offerings.

    P.S. Sorry to muck up the TT forum with this digression; it's now out of my system.
  • nyccarguynyccarguy Stamford, CTPosts: 7,111
    but I gave a somewhat candid response on the SL500 board. Watch out for those OT side debates...the hosts get pretty ticked off when those happen, so I decided not to get into it. I agree with you though that if you're somewhat of a "car guy" you've got to want at least 1 car in your dream garage have a stick shift.

    The numbers don't lie though, especially in the high end market. 3 out of 4 Ferrari 575 Maranellos will roll off the factory with this type of transmission. The 12 Cylinder Aston Martin Vanquish comes equipped only with this type of transmission. Transmissions like the SMG (that have an electronic clutch, not an auto w/ torque converter) shift quicker than even the mosty highly skilled race car driver (and certainly quicker than you or I) provide the speed and control of a stick shift with the ease of an automatic when needed. They even blip the throtte on downshifts for you for christs' sake.

    I agree that even though it does things better that it will never provide the feel and fun to drive factor of a manual transmission.

    Back to the topic at hand though...The Audi TT. I rarely see a Black one cruising around, and there's one in my parents' neighborhood. The black is very sleek, sexy, and super stealthy.

    2001 Honda Prelude Type SH/ 2011 BMW 328xi / 2011 Honda Pilot EX-L w/ Navigation

Sign In or Register to comment.