Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
While I am a strong advocate of manual transmissions, the direction Audi has taken with the TT isn't that of a sports car. To that extent, their decision to drop the manual, while regretable, may not be as surprising.
On the other hand, the Boxster/S, S2000 and M Roadster fall into the high performance sports car category. I doubt they get cross shopped with the Audi TT very often, but perhaps I am wrong.
I also know one person who has seriously cross-shopped a new 225hp quattro ragtop against a used base Boxster.
Since my last post, I checked with a couple of folks who own TT's - two neighbors and a business associate. Interesting that both Roadster buyers (225 versions) cross shopped the CLK convertible and the SLK. When I asked about the Boxster or S2000, they responded "no", they weren't really looking at pure sports cars. As for the 180 coupe buyer, she actually traded a Honda Prelude and her other choices were an Accord Coupe or Audi A4, but decided she wanted a "sportier" looking car. I acknowledge that these three anecdotes hardly make a scientific study, but they do begin to confirm my gut feelings. I would be interested to see an actual survey of buyers of other cars to see what else they shopped. As a new owner of an M5, I would have thought it's biggest competition was an E55, but according to my dealer, it is 911. Go figure.
I am not the authority on the definition of a "sports car" and, more importantly, was never intending to disparage the TT by suggesting it wasn't a high performance oriented roadster. I just think the TT competes on different attributes than raw driving performance. And, based upon the satisfaction I've heard from several owners, it does so very well.
If you happened to cross shop a Corvette and went with the TT instead, it obviously wasn't based upon better raw performance, but rather the refinements and quality of fit and finish that the TT offers. Personally, I think you made the right choice.
As for the M5, its a two ton sedan. It happens to outperform my previous 911, but I would never call it a sports car. Even if it is a heck of a lot "sportier" than the E55 and S8.
My best friend has both an BmwM5, new Mercedes s-500, and Range rover 4.6. I have ridden in all and drive all as I allow him to do the same in our lexus gs430 and tt 225 roadster. I loved the mercedes and would take that above all. The M5 is cool and the engine sounds incredibe. but the interior sucks on the m5. At first I thought it was painted plastic then I saw its supposed to be a wood interior. We had a z3 before the audi and I have to say BMW's have the worst interiors of any car. I love how they drive but how many times do you actually use it to the fullest potential in the US. Granted we got the M5 up to 95mph in town before he slammed on the breaks. Even when my dad was test driving the e-430, 540i, and lexus gs430, the lexus had the superior interior. Call me crazy but don't you spend most of your time in the interior. So why "settle" for an crappy interior when that is where you spend most of your time, unless all you want is for people to see how much you spent on a car?
JB
Since I'm probably about the same age as your dad, perhaps he and I should have a chat. I don't believe in reprimanding other parents' kids, but somebody should get you off whatever you are smoking.
Seriously, if that's your opinion, so be it. I actually agree with you that Lexus makes a great interior. Unfortunately, when you turn the key and actually drive it, its a little too Camry/Avalonish for me. Perhaps when you graduate, get a job and work your way up to affording to buy a car in this league, you'll see what I mean.
Good luck in school. And don't waste your ME degree in the automotive field. Think biotech.
Anyway, our tt is going into the shop tommorow because it is idleing funny and shifting sluggishly. Hopefully we'll get it back soon.
Thats about it
JB
Be nice to the young ppl. JB sounds like a fine young man to me.
JB
I have a TT 180 roadster and this car grows on me. I like the very smooth, reasonably powerful yet refined and very efficient engine that powers my TT. It might not accelerate as quick from 0mph but once it revs up to 2000rpm or above, 5th gear at >40mph, I have ample power/torque to accelerate on almost any road condition, I rarely have to downshift for extra power.
The interior is great too, very sporty and detail-oriented. There is quite a bit of road-noise even when the top is up but that's kinda expected of a roadster anyway.
Overall, I've been really happy with this car. I test-drove the SLK, S2000, Boxster and Z3 before I finally took delivery of my TT and based on what I need, I think TT is by far the best choice for me.
Any feedback would be appreciated.
Anyway, does anyone know what changes are planned for 2003. Is it worth waiting for the new model of should I buy one now. Also, what are the opinions of the 180 hp version vs. the 225. Quattro, or not. I live in the Southeast and I don't plan on driving in snow too often at all. Thanks for any comments.
As far as the quattro 225 vs. the 180 fwd, there's no comparison. Besides the obvious power differential, the usability of the power is much greater in the quattro. Wet or dry the quattro hangs on tenaciously. I lived in FL for 5 years myself and wish that I'd had my quattro on the rain-slicked, seashell-encrusted tarmac. Forget snow--drive them back to back in the rain and see the difference...
Have you visited AudiWorld's TT forum?
I can't give up the dealer's name because I don't want Audi investigating the situation--can't afford to lose that warranty!
Also, I hate to bring up this ancient post that I remember reading here over two years ago, but probably the fastest TT is the 180 fwd coupe. This is because of it being a little over 300 pounds lighter than the 225 coupe with quattro. Add an APR chip and another 35hp and you have a really fast sporty TT. Needless to say the roadster is heavier still. And while my car has quattro and I love it, the fwd TT coupe handles extremely well.
As far as changes for 2003, the only thing I have heard is there will be an automatic transmission in some TT's this time around.
Lastly, for those looking to buy a TT, I would seriously look into the used market. I have just recently come across several used TT's with less than 25k miles that are selling for less than $25,000.
I have complained to dealer a number times and they don't seem to find a problem. I think it is their Blaupunkt system. It is the pits. Alpine, which is used by Acura, is way better.
Any input?
According to Audi's TT brochure, (and verified by Car&driver, Road&Track and Motor Trend magazines tests), the 225 TT is both quicker and faster than the 180hp version. While it's true that the 225 Quattro Roadster outweighs the 180 FWD Coupe by 552 lbs, it still has a superior horsepower to weight ratio (16.23 lbs/hp vs. 15.44 for the Roadster). Add in the Quattro's ability to put all that additional power to the ground and you end up with a serious performance advantage:
180 FWD Coupe 0-60= 7.6 seconds top speed 130*
225 Q Roadster 0-60= 6.7 seconds: top speed 143*
*Top speeds mechanically limited on both cars, but given two cars with virtually identical Cd and similar gearing, top speed is limited primarily by horsepower.
Only the 225 Coupe is quicker than the 225 Roadster and only marginally so: 6.3 secs 0-60.
I won't even begin to get into a discussion of the handling advantages of Quattro versus FWD! What it comes down to is that if you want the quickest, fastest, best-handling TT available, the 225 Q Coupe is the obvious choice. Make it a Roadster and you'll get to enjoy the wind in your hair too.
My main disagreement with you is in vastness of the superiority between the 225cq and the 180c fwd. Keep in mind I own a 2000 180 coupe with quattro.
Let us say as an example, a car traveling at a certain speed has to brake, or slow down to enter a turn and accelerate as it leaves the turn. A car that is 300 plus pounds lighter than another car, all other things being equal, will be able to apply his brakes later into the turn and will be able to start speeding up sooner on its way out of the same turn. Also it should have less momentum than the heavier car in the turn itself and should be able to travel the same arc at a greater speed. If all other things are equal.
Obviously though, the haldex quattro system the TT uses helps the 225, but you should really drive the 180 fwd sometime (if you have not already)it really does handle very well. That is at least on dry surfaces. And while I have no hard evidence other than just seat of my pants experience and feel, I think the two cars are a little closer in performance than you would have us believe. And if one throws in a APR chip, I would love to see how the 180 fwd matches up with the a stock 225 0-60 or otherwise.
Also for the potential buyers, I again assert that there are used TT's out on the market that offer impressive savings and that the original steering feel of the first year is much sought after by lovers of this beautiful car.
Meanwhile, I have probubly one of the slowest TT's, but I too love the quattro. Especially on a night like this in South Florida where it is raining like mad. BTW, I would love to hear you discuss the advantages of the quattro system.
Lastly, are you still living in Florida? If so where?
I hear what you're saying about the lighter car being more nimble. At times I wish my roadster were about 500 lbs. lighter! I've got my car chipped, but a weight loss program would have helped too (so I gave up fast food)! lol
Anyway, I think you'll find that the 225 Q still laps faster because of the overwhelming power advantage, quattro traction, and 6 speed (makes better use of power). If I had the choice of even more power for my Q or less weight, I'd keep the same power and drop the weight. The Quattro roadster IS HEAVY for its size.
I live in Hawaii now, but the Quattro still helps in the rain--lets me run past cars with much more power when the road is wet.
I myself own a 2002 S2000 and have heard that it is possible to get 300 hp with a supercharger. No thanks. I test drove everything out there and bought the S2000 based upon it's merits. I could have bought a pristine 1996 NSX instead, but went with the S2000 for reliability and peace of mind. Why screw that up with an aftermarket modification.
IMHO you should enjoy your new car as is.
Would you, however, mind telling me what chip you used?
In our 2000 TT, we used an MTM stage 1 chip (took the car to 195HP and about 240!!!! lb ft of torque). I have just ordered a 2003 2.7T allroad and am leaning toward another MTM chip, but the press on the APR chips is quite impressive too.
Man -- chipping a 225HP TT must be like strapping a rocket onto it -- it is already quite quick.
I am looking for the "stage one" effect for my Audi turbos -- I understand and appreciate the stage 2 and beyond effect, but don't really see any need for that much extra performance since with the stage one chip effect, the TT (and hopefully the 2.7T allroad) is quicker than virtually anything else on the road -- and besides neither my wife or I plan to drag race.
And, to the warranty issue that is oft discussed. Time and time again I find that the chipping is not and does not cause a warranty issue. As I said, my dealer installed mine and there was no issue or concern that the Audi Advantage would somehow be jeopardized.
I await your chip vendor's name...
I don't have a chip for my new TT Q. I was just trying to get some info on the subject. This is my first Audi, and I know very little about
them! I don't want to "mess things up" by doing
3rd. party mods and void my 4 yr. warranty. So...with that in mind, any help you Audi owners
could provide will be much appreciated. Thank You
Too Much!!!
Stephen
A convertible that you can't drive to the golf course should be outlawed (or at least come with a dash mounted warning sticker).
Sorry it took me so long to respond, but I haven't been checking the board often. Anyway, I have an APR "chip". My dealer installed it, so he continues to honor the warranty. However, they did tell me that if the ECU dies, I'm on the hook for that (big money!). You might want to go to the APR website for more details on their products: WWW.GOAPR.COM.
As far as the earlier post about a "switch" that could turn off a chip and make it undetectable; I seriously doubt any such thing exists. Most high performance chips are soldered into the ECU. the only way to turn it off is to remove the ECU. Any dealer with half a brain and a diagnostic machine would detect the chip's presence in seconds. That's why lots of people buy a spare ECU and "chip" the spare. When they take their cars to the dealer, they put the original ECU back in. Unfortunately, the dealer can still download the ECU and determine that something's amiss.
If Audi can't reduce the weight without losing structural rigidity, why don't they increase the power? I understand why Audi didn't use one of its 6 cylinder engines in the TT, but why not twin turbos?
I can sympathize with you about wanting more performance. But, as I suggested to someone pondering why the SC430 doesn't offer a sport package, I think you need to evaluate philosophy behind the car. You could add power to the TT to improve acceleration, but I doubt its still going to handle as nimbly and precisely as the 600-700 lb lighter Boxster or S2000. And my adding rear speakers to my S2000 helps a bit, but hardly turns it into a Lexus concert hall.
My philosophy is be happy with what you have. In my case, a ground up sports car with no luxury do-dads. In your case a hell of a nice "touring" roadster with very acceptable performance (even in the rain).
I love my TT, but I'd love it even more with 300 hp on tap!
I realize it's not a practical vehicle if one intends to tote children around in. I was wondering if it could be done, should the need arise. Thanks!