TT?

I'm nearing the end of my lease, so I'm looking. I think I'd like to own something this time. I'm seeing a lot of cheap early Audi TTs around. They don't have a great rep, but neither does an RX8 or Boxster. How would you rank the TT against the other two?

Pass. Heavy, slow, Audi.

Its fun in a 'smaller and less practical GTI' kind of way. The VR6 models are R32 levels of performance for less money...

I can't hate them, but then again, I'm the kind of guy that likes Audis...

I like Audis, but not TTs. The Haldex system in them is a lot less interesting to drive than the longitudinal quattro system in an S4. They're small, but not particularly nimble, and not fast enough to be all that interesting.

The TT wins on looks.

The Boxster wins on handling.

The Rx-8 wins on… um… magic spinning triangles?

codrus wrote: The TT wins on looks. The Boxster wins on handling. The Rx-8 wins on… um… magic spinning triangles?

My experience was opposite yours as far as boxster vs. 8, I got rid of a boxster to get into my rx8, and back to a miata for my convertible fix... I thought my boxster was pretty lame in the handling department. Coil overs, tires and suspension bits may have fixed that, but the 8 was waaaaayyyyy more entertaining out of the box.. Still a flat 6 sounds great in anger, though!

A coworker has spent a lot of money on his tt's suspension, and says its a lot of fun now, but wasn't great out of the box,.. I haven't ridden in it yet, though, so no comment there..

The advice my buddy Brad always preaches is never buy a transverse Audi and never buy a longitudinal VW.

I always thought that one would look great with a set of 930 style flares and fat tires on the rear. Of course, that would make it an understeering pig. But it would look cool.

And...the baseball glove interior. You'd have to get the baseball glove interior.

This has been asked here before...the answer is pretty much "run." A Boxster or RX8 is a better sports car in every way, TTs are heavy, Haldex sucks, and they have a high roll center. I love the styling dearly and will still own one someday, but it will be with the attitude that the car is living on borrowed time.

https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/grm/going-down-the-audi-tt-roadwhat-to-expect/59328/page1/ https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/grm/anyone-have-audi-tt-quattro-experience/72817/page1/

It is worth noting that build quality improved DRAMATICALLY throughout the production run, so buy the latest model-year you can if you decide to do it.

SlickDizzy wrote: It is worth noting that build quality improved DRAMATICALLY throughout the production run, so buy the latest model-year you can if you decide to do it.

One of our sales guys bought a low mile 2012 TT sport (S-type or something?) last year. He just traded it in on a Dodge Charger after replacing 2 entire rear end assemblies and a transmission. In a year.

So if that's the improved build quality, the early ones will now haunt my nightmares...

In reply to ultraclyde:

I was speaking of the first generation specifically; i.e. a 2005 is a much better built car than a 2000. I know nothing about the newer ones, the styling doesn't turn me on.

TTs are neat looking little cars. On looks alone, I would love to have one.

Funny story, guy I knew from work had a yellow one. He had his head out the window talking to a buddy of his and when he went to drive away, had to turn his head sideways to get it back in.. yes, the window opening is that narrow. As for power.. when I had 900 SEturbo, I remember a TT tried to race me out of the EZPass lanes on the AC expressway. We entered the side by side lanes together and hit the gas at the same time.. even though the 1.8t was supposed to have the same power as the 900, I left it behind

mndsm wrote: Pass. Heavy, slow, Audi.

This. I'd rank it a little above the boxster. The RX8 is not in the same league...it's a great car apart from the fussy gas-guzzling engine, and with the right mods and good maintenance it's not that big of a problem.

Woody wrote: I always thought that one would look great with a set of 930 style flares and fat tires on the rear. Of course, that would make it an understeering pig. But it would look cool. And...the baseball glove interior. You'd *have* to get the baseball glove interior.

Best interior I have ever seen, ever. I sat in one in Cobo Hall. I was amazed.

GameboyRMH wrote:

mndsm wrote: Pass. Heavy, slow, Audi.

This. I'd rank it a little above the boxster. The RX8 is not in the same league...it's a great car apart from the fussy gas-guzzling engine, and with the right mods and good maintenance it's not that big of a problem.

Wait... You're ranking a TT ABOVE a Boxster and say the RX8 is better than both?

I can't stand the RX8 driving experience...

I was thinking in terms of total ownership rather than driving. For driving I'd think it would be Boxster ~= TT > RX8.

My curiosity won't stop, so I'm going to look at one later this week. I'm not going to make any decisions until I've looked at the other two. Sub 5k pricing is compelling, but I'm not looking for trouble.

Thanks for the advice.

Not looking for trouble!

Burrito Enthusiast wrote: The advice my buddy Brad always preaches is never buy a transverse Audi and never buy a longitudinal VW.

I own two longitudinal VWs (they're like transverse VWs but with transmissions made out of metal, not glass) and a TT is the only Audi that I reasonably foresee myself owning, because the only AWD wagons you can get with four rings on the front are either huge, or have Torsen center diffs. A TT is about as impractical as a 4000, since both aren't wagons, and I'd rather have a no diff/Haldex setup than a Torsen like you find on anything longitudinal made after 1991 or so.

TTs seem to be pretty trouble-free electronically and mechanically. They just look goofy, have poor headroom, and they tend to have stupid owners who think TT stands for Twin Turbo.