# TTS Embargo Lifted by Audi



## Singletrack (Aug 1, 2007)

Short article from AutoWeek on the Detroit release of the TTS. No real new pics, no real news, except for this rather exciting little bit.....

_Audi also adds a second sport level for the car's electronic stability system that enables the driver to perform controlled drifts._

Now admit it....that sounds like fun in a Quattro  

Please note that references to standards equipment (i.e. mag ride, s-Tronic, etc.) concern the North American market. Link to the full article below.

http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a ... /1024/FREE


----------



## FinFerNan (Feb 28, 2007)

Good spot! Well done 8)


----------



## Guest (Jan 10, 2008)

Lets face it, unless your a 35 year old japanese fella who has his own tyre company, does that really have a use?

Cant see many members on here drifting to their i.t. jobs through the morning traffic.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

I tried this morning!


----------



## Guest (Jan 10, 2008)

Toshiba said:


> I tried this morning!


Drifting or slidning around in the rain?


----------



## T3 (Sep 24, 2006)

http://www.fourtitude.com/news/publish/ ... 3671.shtml


----------



## cedwardphillips (Sep 6, 2005)




----------



## Guest (Jan 10, 2008)

T3 said:


> http://www.fourtitude.com/news/publish/Audi_News/article_3671.shtml


Nice, silk nappa leather seats and new headlights with l.e.d. drl's.
:lol:


----------



## iknight (Jul 4, 2007)

cedwardphillips said:


>


Quality information. Looks very aggressive in red.


----------



## T3 (Sep 24, 2006)

full press release on the fortitude site...
link in my above post.


----------



## iknight (Jul 4, 2007)

T3 said:


> full press release on the fortitude site...
> link in my above post.


Oh yeah! Cheers.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

DUO3 NAN said:


> Toshiba said:
> 
> 
> > I tried this morning!
> ...


Drifting - but not in the 'Fast and Furious' way, more like drifting in and out of sleep.


----------



## TTSFan (Jan 10, 2008)

Looks good impressive numbers but I think its totally overpriced


----------



## cedwardphillips (Sep 6, 2005)

TTSFan said:


> Looks good impressive numbers but I think its totally overpriced


where have you seen the prices?


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

The mags are reporting 34k, However thats not the number i have been told.


----------



## TTSFan (Jan 10, 2008)

Estimated - $60 000 (For the US) -- Link posted first

http://www.fourtitude.com/news/publish/Audi_News/article_3671.shtml


> The hard-top TTS is priced at 44,900 euros and the convertible version at 47,750 euros.


----------



## DXN (May 18, 2002)

dealer just rang me with info but in the middle of a meeting !!! so couldn't take call [smiley=argue.gif]

hes gonna phone me back


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

DXN said:


> dealer just rang me with info but in the middle of a meeting !!! so couldn't take call [smiley=argue.gif]
> 
> hes gonna phone me back


Good job you could still type on here


----------



## DXN (May 18, 2002)

whats more important meeting----forum


----------



## cedwardphillips (Sep 6, 2005)

all the info







we've had from audi uk was in my first post. no prices.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Just stick this on the back, no one will be able to tell.










Â£17 from the TTshop - sorted.
WTF is the Quattro badge, the car must have a quattro badge or i want a refund.


----------



## squiggel (May 16, 2006)

cedwardphillips said:


> all the info
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Good info, wonder when the first demo cars will be arriving. Either that or I think I have to go try an S3 and see what that engine feels like compared to the 3.2.

If this model had been part of the initial line up, it's the one I would have gone for, but in terms of changing cars don't know if it will be a worthwhile change.


----------



## LoTTie (Aug 2, 2005)

My dealer reckons their demo will be with them end of Feb or so. They have specced it up. It might be sooner.


----------



## cedwardphillips (Sep 6, 2005)




----------



## Guest (Jan 10, 2008)

cedwardphillips said:


>


So, what have Sinclair gone for?

I also wonder what the market for this car is within current TT owners?

And within the current financial unrest would it be wise to upgrade for a few more H.P.?

Because from what i've read in this forum its going to be 10k to change from a near new TT to something that really doesnt look like its going to be that special.

Personally its nothing that cant be done for half the price through mods by the end of the year anyway.

And as for residual values i cant see being any more strong than the present TT's in 12 months time.

If we were looking at 350 bhp and an upgraded interior, a more aggressive bodykit, i may have jumped ship.

But as it stands, nothing here i think worth the chop.


----------



## Singletrack (Aug 1, 2007)

DUO3 NAN said:


> If we were looking at 350 bhp and an upgraded interior, a more aggressive bodykit, i may have jumped ship.
> 
> But as it stands, nothing here i think worth the chop.


I have to totally agree.


----------



## Thomas the Spoiler (Aug 1, 2007)

It looks like a half-hearted effort to me. It is daubed with chav jewellery (I don't know where they got the idea that brushed metal wing mirrors were a good idea) and looks like they wanted to find the cheapest way possible to get a bit more power.

I would wait for the R4


----------



## cedwardphillips (Sep 6, 2005)

DUO3 NAN said:


> So, what have Sinclair gone for?


TTS-C - manual, Ice silver, black silk nappa, ext leather (black), symphony.
TTS-R - manual, Sprint blue, black silk nappa, ext leather (black), Sat nav+, Bose, 6CD


----------



## phope (Mar 26, 2006)

solar orange sounds smart 8)


----------



## paulie1 (Mar 6, 2007)

My dealer told me their allocation for the year was 15 cars,is that right?
Are they only selling a limited amount of TTSs per year?


----------



## Guest (Jan 10, 2008)

cedwardphillips said:


> DUO3 NAN said:
> 
> 
> > So, what have Sinclair gone for?
> ...


So, its a 2.0 turbo with a remap, some badges and some bodykit facelift.
The more aggressive brakes with black calipers, are they just painted black? Or are they a real upgrade, like say the 8 piston brembo equipment on the rs4?


----------



## TTSFan (Jan 10, 2008)

I am not sure what to do now I have waited for the TTS thinking it was going to be more powerful and MUCH better priced....

Do I save some money and just get a nice 2.0T TT or do I waste some money and get the TTS -- I like the body but its quite a bit more than the 2.0T TT that can do just fine...


----------



## TTRTWO (Dec 9, 2006)

A few thoughts:

-magnetic ride height lower than the 2/0/3.2 with MR;
-mpg only a tad better than the 3.2;
-why do fortitude say power to weight and then quote weight to power (sorry for being picky but the Germans' do it this way and then express it the wrong way round);
-dealer demo form shows that nav is extra;
-i still think that the S5 is worth going for Â£5/6k extra cash;
-is it top car tax band or not (probably not)? and
-makes an S3 look cheap.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

TTSFan said:


> I am not sure what to do now I have waited for the TTS thinking it was going to be more powerful and MUCH better priced....
> 
> Do I save some money and just get a nice 2.0T TT or do I waste some money and get the TTS -- I like the body but its quite a bit more than the 2.0T TT that can do just fine...


Get a 3.2 and take the middle road.


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

DUO3 NAN said:


> So, its a 2.0 turbo with a remap, some badges and some bodykit facelift.


shh, that's not the way the marketing department likes to hear it:



> Under its hood lies a two-liter TFSI high-performance engine delivering *a mighty 200kW* (272 hp). This *intense power propels the TTS* Coupe to 100 km/h (62.14 mph) from a standstill in just 5.2 seconds and on to a *governor-limited top speed* of 250 km/h (155.34 mph).
> 
> Designed to appeal to a young and dynamic clientele, the *TTS represents the Audi brand's Vorsprung durch Technik* ("advancement through technology") in its very latest form. The TFSI engine in the TTS *takes the two Audi technologies of gasoline direct injection and turbocharging and blends them to form a perfect partnership*. Aside from its output of 200 kW (272 hp), it is its peak torque of 350 Nm (258.15 lb-ft), which is constantly on tap between 2,500 and 5,000 rpm, that makes the compact and lightweight four-cylinder unit *so impressive*.
> 
> Compared to the engine it was derived from, the two-liter *power unit has been reengineered and strengthened in a number of key areas to ready it for operation* in the TTS. Thanks to its excellent efficiency, the *sporty-sounding TFSI* has an average fuel consumption of just 8.0 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers


as we can clearly see it's the perfect car, all decisions audi made were godlike, you'd be a fool not to buy one today.

imo that text is well suited to calibrate your bullshit sensors...


----------



## Guest (Jan 10, 2008)

der_horst said:


> DUO3 NAN said:
> 
> 
> > So, its a 2.0 turbo with a remap, some badges and some bodykit facelift.
> ...


So, you'll be nipping down the Nissan garage then derHorst?


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

DUO3 NAN said:


> So, you'll be nipping down the Nissan garage then derHorst?


if i just knew that yet.  at this time neither the delivery schedule nor the european prices of the GT-R have been revealed, so i don't really know if it's that plan b i was searching for for quite some time.

if the roumors of a late 2008 release and a price ~55k gbp are true it will be hard to convince me to wait another 6+ months for a TT-RS though.


----------



## Guest (Jan 10, 2008)

der_horst said:


> DUO3 NAN said:
> 
> 
> > So, you'll be nipping down the Nissan garage then derHorst?
> ...


Thats if the ttr is to be made and if its released in that timeframe.
Personally, i'd set my heart on the gt-r.
Looks like an awesome bit of kit and probably going to be far more track focused than the ttr would ever be.


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

DUO3 NAN said:


> Personally, i'd set my heart on the gt-r.


well, i'm contemplating that . i try not to fall for it yet as the above two factors can still ruin it, but i've already started to get infos and especially experience reports on those local nissan dealers that will be selling the GT-R


----------



## Guest (Jan 10, 2008)

der_horst said:


> DUO3 NAN said:
> 
> 
> > Personally, i'd set my heart on the gt-r.
> ...


At least its a model thats definitely in production.


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

DUO3 NAN said:


> At least its a model thats definitely in production.


and it was a nice change to get actual information from the vendor in reply to my emails instead of standard text blocks that deny the very existence of plans to build what i'm asking questions about


----------



## Tomuchtoless (May 12, 2007)

Not sure I got these figures right, but my S tronic 2.0T are declared having a fuel consumption of 7.7 liters per 100 km. (around 28,5 mpg)

Compare to the fourtitude numbers:

"a fuel consumption of 7.9 liters per 100 km (29.747 mpg) in the Coupe when partnered by the S tronic transmission"

Thats ONLY a 2.5 % increase for adding 36 % hp.
And equally impressive Quattro to put that power down on track.
(acceleration figures seems to be pretty much in phase with power increase)

I am very impressed. Dynamic is it.

If I could option one without christmas lightening and facedrop I'd be more than happy. 
..ahum.. still want those chrome/aluminium side mirrors... ;-)


----------



## squiggel (May 16, 2006)

Tomuchtoless said:


> If I could option one without christmas lightening and facedrop I'd be more than happy.


Yep, the standard body and lighting are more attractive to my eye as well.


----------



## Alfi Cat (Jan 11, 2008)

Hello All and congratulations on a great site.
Also got my name and deposit down for TT-S and in two minds whether to go for it or not. I think I will just wait until a demo arrives at Cambridge Audi and take it from there. I have no hangups about 4 pot engines as have owned a Caterham and S1 & S2 Elises over the years with an A2 as a 'sensible' car. Decisions, decisions :?


----------



## Snake Pliskin (Apr 11, 2006)

When are demo's likely to hit the Dealers ?


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

March.


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

I have just been in contact with my dealer, and we have agreed to the following:

He will contact me as soon as detailed specs, price and other information is at hand. We will then together see what kind of spec they AND I can agree on for their showroom car (NOT a demo car...) - and mine to be later.

If we can reach a deal, I will sign on the contract for that car and they will have it as a showroom car for some weeks (locked - and for viewing only... 8) ) before delivery to me.... 

Since Norway does not "suffer" for a greater demand than the alotments given to norwegian dealers, I don't think long deliverytime will be any issue - as soon as they start production :wink:

I am looking forward to some "interesting negotiations" in the coming weeks


----------



## conneem (Nov 4, 2006)

What, I'm impressed with is the low CO2 emission, which may deem it feasible for me to own here in Ireland.

At 188g/km compared to 183g/km for the current TFSI, it lies in the same tax and VRT(vehicle reg. tax classified as illegal by the EU but still put on new car purchases here) brackets as my car, and with similar fuel consumption it won't cost any more to run.

These taxes are the reason why the ratio of 2.0 : 3.2 is at least 20:1 judging by what I've seen in garages and for sale second hand


----------



## sico (Feb 6, 2003)

Toshiba said:


> TTSFan said:
> 
> 
> > I am not sure what to do now I have waited for the TTS thinking it was going to be more powerful and MUCH better priced....
> ...


TTS 0-62 is 5.2 seconds and the 3.2 is 5.7 seconds.

(http://www.autocar.co.uk/CarReviews/Fir ... ic/220276/)

Not much in it....


----------



## iknight (Jul 4, 2007)

conneem said:


> What, I'm impressed with is the low CO2 emission, which may deem it feasible for me to own here in Ireland.
> 
> At 188g/km compared to 183g/km for the current TFSI, it lies in the same tax and VRT(vehicle reg. tax classified as illegal by the EU but still put on new car purchases here) brackets as my car, and with similar fuel consumption it won't cost any more to run.
> 
> These taxes are the reason why the ratio of 2.0 : 3.2 is at least 20:1 judging by what I've seen in garages and for sale second hand


Is that figure correct? It seems too good to be true. Full credit to Audi if it's right, there wouldn't be anything else comparable that came anywhere close.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

sico said:


> Toshiba said:
> 
> 
> > TTSFan said:
> ...


Agree, less than the difference between the 20T and the 3.2 (0.8 Vs 0.5)
But you can get Sprint Blue!


----------



## conneem (Nov 4, 2006)

Got the figure from Audi.com website. Click on "Models" over on the right, then in the flash animation click on "Audi TT", then "TTS", doesn't give much info but it was quite interesting to me.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

conneem said:


> These taxes are the reason why the ratio of 2.0 : 3.2 is at least 20:1 judging by what I've seen in garages and for sale second hand


Audi used doesnt support that. Assuming thats what you are saying.
150 used Ts, 107 used Vs for sale. (both TTCs and TTRs)


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> sico said:
> 
> 
> > Toshiba said:
> ...


Well - the difference is 1.3 (or 1.4) sec. between the 2.0T and TTS, and thats a lot...... :wink: Specially if you also take into consideration that the TTS has quattro so it's somewhat heavier - but still they have aprox the same fuel consumption.

I think that is very well done from Audi.... :wink: And when compared to f.ex Cayman S, Z4 M (about the same accelaration figures), it's very good....all taken into consideration.

I am very much looking forward to different tests..... :wink:


----------



## conneem (Nov 4, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> conneem said:
> 
> 
> > These taxes are the reason why the ratio of 2.0 : 3.2 is at least 20:1 judging by what I've seen in garages and for sale second hand
> ...


Sorry I mean in Ireland the ratio is at least 20:1 against the V6


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Two different things are happening here though.

People are talking about value again when looking across the model range. ie is 3k for 0.5 and 25bhp worth it? Each to their own again.

Without going into a big tirade about engines, most people would appear to feel the BMW/Porker approach to sports cars is better than increasing the boost on a 4pots. 
Lets wait until the prices come out on Tuesday, maybe it will be a nice surprise.


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> Two different things are happening here though.
> 
> People are talking about value again when looking across the model range. ie is 3k for 0.5 and 25bhp worth it? Each to their own again.
> 
> ...


This will be somewhat different compared to which country you live in (regarding different tax-systems).

In Norway large engines with high CO-emissions are "punished" with high taxes.

This means that the TTS will be priced at the same or a little lower price than the 3.2. And compared to BMW/Porker sports cars, it will be WAY lower (aprox 25-30.000Â£ price difference compared to Z4M or Cayman S).

So for me living in Norway, Audi has done something brilliant regarding how our tax-system influences the prices - and the choice is very easy..... :wink:


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

Arne said:


> when compared to f.ex Cayman S, Z4 M (about the same accelaration figures), it's very good....all taken into consideration.


but this only works in countries with general speed limits, as nobody cares about 0-200 or 120-200 figures there. for that a 60hp difference does matter as the influence of the weight is getting smaller and smaller in those regions.


----------



## Red21 (Jan 11, 2008)

Full set of TTS phots-
http://www.motoring-news.com/audi-tts/


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

der_horst said:


> Arne said:
> 
> 
> > when compared to f.ex Cayman S, Z4 M (about the same accelaration figures), it's very good....all taken into consideration.
> ...


If you look at actuall measured to the wheel power (and not claimed engine power) you will soon see that the difference is not 60 hp.

Cayman S "to the wheel":256bhp/294Nm (claimed engine=291bhp/340NM)
S3 "to the wheel": 261 bhp/359 Nm (claimed engine=261bhp/350NM)

http://www.rri.se/popup/performancegrap ... artsID=252 (Cayman)
http://www.rri.se/popup/performancegrap ... artsID=735 (S3)

The TTS will be even a bit stronger than the TTS. So which of the Porshe or Audi will be the actual "strongest" car.... :roll:

And for speeds in excess of 100, the weight influence is still a major factor together with airodynamics - where by the way the TT still scores very good.... :wink:


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> ...Lets wait until the prices come out on Tuesday, maybe it will be a nice surprise.


Hmmm I doubt it unfortunately. Are you definitely getting one or just keeping your options open?


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

Arne said:


> If you look at actuall measured to the wheel power (and not claimed engine power) you will soon see that the difference is not 60 hp.


let's just wait for the first real reviews and continue this thought then as i really don't give a f**k about those rri dyno runs. imo even in those cases where they manage to fill in the correct fuel the results are as precise as reading the figures from a handful of sheep innards.



Arne said:


> The TTS will be even a bit stronger than the TTS.


i doubt that


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

der_horst said:


> Arne said:
> 
> 
> > If you look at actuall measured to the wheel power (and not claimed engine power) you will soon see that the difference is not 60 hp.
> ...


ups....a little spelling error.... :roll:

But to the "chase".....as long as you or anybody else can manage to come up with other measures performed by an objective 3. part - this is what I will chose as a reference.... :wink:

And strangly enough - the RRI measures seems constantly to match other measurements IF you compare the differences between two or more models/makes made by other companies.

The results also explain why the TT 2.0T, VW 2.0T, Seat Leon 2.0T etc performs so well in acceleration tests - compared to what claimed weight/power should estimate....

But that is perhaps nothing that you have given any thoughts....?

From where do you get the objective figures that you trust....? :roll:


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Wondermikie said:


> Toshiba said:
> 
> 
> > ...Lets wait until the prices come out on Tuesday, maybe it will be a nice surprise.
> ...


Depends on the price. Becomes a point where the S5 becomes better value for money. Cayman also comes in at S5 money too so Audi need to price this very carefully.

It will be subject to a test drive for sure. I can see the Mags are going to slate it based on cost and performance increase or lack of over a 3.2. Like they have done with the S3. However its all about the drive.

Maybe since Audi has replaced most of the engine over the std version the diesel startup clatter will have gone too.
Shame its not a 300bhp V6 like in the 350z.


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> Shame its not a 300bhp V6 like in the 350z.


Are you shure....? http://www.rri.se/popup/performancegrap ... artsID=637

ps: I know you don't like RRI, but here they have used 98 RON.... :roll:


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Lol, i didnt use the 98ron argument, that was someone else.

Its the sound and feel im getting at not paper numbers.
The V6 is so smooth by comparison. In an ideal world i'd like the S5s engine in the TT, but it will never happen.

The 5 pot might be a good compromise


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

Arne said:


> From where do you get the objective figures that you trust....? :roll:


as i said before: reviews. i'm sure we'll see enough tests in magazines that will give us a pretty real point of view on that matter. and remember, i'm not declining anything that you've said, i'm only saying that a dyno run is not a good indicator to prove it.

taking the test of the 3.2 you could probably argument against your own position without problems.

a good source for numbers was www.einszweidrei.de in the past, all they did was collect measurements from web and print sources and sort them by car model. sadly they shut down due to the tightened german copyright law (the test results are treated as intellectual property of the test magazines and may not be published). the text on that page says they'll be back but i'm not so sure of that...


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> Lol, i didnt use the 98ron argument, that was someone else.
> 
> Its the sound and feel im getting at not paper numbers.
> The V6 is so smooth by comparison. In an ideal world i'd like the S5s engine in the TT, but it will never happen.
> ...


I do understand what you mean - and I would like the S5 engine in the TT as well  But even if it had happened, because of Norways tax-system I would never be able to afford it. The S5 is 110.000Â£ in Norway.... :x


----------



## TTRTWO (Dec 9, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> In an ideal world i'd like the S5s engine in the TT, but it will never happen.


Imagine how light that would be over the back cf the front. It would be like a 911 in reverse.


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

der_horst said:


> Arne said:
> 
> 
> > From where do you get the objective figures that you trust....? :roll:
> ...


I see your point - but also remember that many reviews has put the 2.0T in favour of the 3.2, for different reasons. And one of them being that the 2.0T has proven to be all or more than what expected from the claimed figures....

And I am probabely a bit more than usual in favour of good turbo-engines, because they come out very good regarding prices and the Norwegian tax-system. So in Norway a good turbo-engine is very good value for money - which might color my oppinions.... :roll:

But it is a fact that the 2.0T engines has proven to deliver more than what Audi (and VW) claims..... :wink: It's not only RRI that has come to that conclusion....


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

Arne said:


> http://www.rri.se/popup/performancegraphs.php?ChartsID=637


btw: the GT-R was also on the same dyno some time ago. the output measured was 480bhp at the hubs. as we know the bhp figures manufacturers give are what the engine produces, not what ends up at the hubs. nissan even gave out the number of 15% power loss due to transmission etc., so people calculated backwards and found out that the GT-R has to have more than 550bhp in reality. but nissan specs it at 473. imo that also shows that this dyno is bs and gives you whatever you want. so even if it proves something i'd like to hear i don't accept those measurements


----------



## Guest (Jan 11, 2008)

der_horst said:


> Arne said:
> 
> 
> > http://www.rri.se/popup/performancegraphs.php?ChartsID=637
> ...


The nissan salesman is going to have to work really hard to sell a gt-r to you isnt he? :lol:


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

der_horst said:


> Arne said:
> 
> 
> > http://www.rri.se/popup/performancegraphs.php?ChartsID=637
> ...


The GT-R has never been tested by RRI.

I do agree with you that dyno-numbers should be read with great caution. It all depends on how the measurements are done, and how those who performes it do their jobb.

But I do think you should read a bit more about RRI. This is not any kind of "backyard garage company".... This is a well reputed company that has specialized in different dyno-measurements for profesional users, and are probabely the world leaders in it's kind.... :wink:


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

Arne said:


> but also remember that many reviews has put the 2.0T in favour of the 3.2, for different reasons.


i don't care about the results of reviews, i only want to see the numbers and compare them 



Arne said:


> And I am probabely a bit more than usual in favour of good turbo-engines


i have no problem with turbo engines, i still think the porsche turbo has one of the greatest engines available and if all goes as planned my next car will have a turboed engine as well. but it's always the right combination of displacement and turbos that creates the perfect engine and that's where i see the weak point of the S3 engine.


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

Arne said:


> The GT-R has never been tested by RRI.


no but on the same dyno brand.



Arne said:


> This is not any kind of "backyard garage company"....


i don't doubt the company, i doubt the method works at all. think about the factors that have to be right to reproduce a car driving at 280km/h while standing still. does the engine really get the same amount of air and does the warm air really leave the engine at the same speed? it's very important for the electronic and i can't believe they'll get it right with their method for the whole range of cars they are testing with the same dyno setup.

just for fun take a look at the manuals of other dynos to see the conditions they require, the error predictions they make and the cars they are 'compatible' with.

there's a huge thread about this method on a german board where someone tried to get audi to replace his car based on several dyno results that indicated his RS4 engine had a way to low output.


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

der_horst said:


> Arne said:
> 
> 
> > but also remember that many reviews has put the 2.0T in favour of the 3.2, for different reasons.
> ...


But you can only compare numbers from reviews made at the same place, at the same time and by the same driver - which does not happen too often.... :wink:


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

DUO3 NAN said:


> The nissan salesman is going to have to work really hard to sell a gt-r to you isnt he? :lol:


i think that will be fun anyway. i'm not that old, i don't wear status symbols like a rolex and my clothing style is casual. so to a sniffy salesguy i'm likely someone who provokes thoughts like 'he's probably only here to get a free 2h ride in a 350z. but not on my shift.'


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

der_horst said:


> Arne said:
> 
> 
> > t;]This is not any kind of "backyard garage company"....
> ...


There will always be minor dfferences - also because they test single cars, which again will be different from another car of same make and modell.

RRI calibrates their dynos on daily basis, have controled environment (temp, humidity etc), provides extra air (also controled) via airducts to "match" a fast moving car etc.

In my oppinion the production differenses between two excact equall modells of the same car, will probabely be larger than the errors caused by the measurement system and routines at RRI.... :wink:


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

Arne said:


> But you can only compare numbers from reviews made at the same place, at the same time and by the same driver - which does not happen too often.... :wink:


depends on the results 

let's say you have for the same car a 0-60 value of 5.0, 5.2 and 5.3, then i'm ready to believe that it's somewhere around 5.2 in reallity. that's what i make of tests and then compare. it's not perfect either but imo it's more meaningful than one dyno output number.


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

Arne said:


> In my oppinion the production differenses between two excact equall modells of the same car, will probabely be larger than the errors caused by the measurement system and routines at RRI.... :wink:


there's an easy way to prove to me that the method in question works: get the engine out of the car and dyno it seperately. that's something that doesn't require transformation factors, error buffers and transmission loss figures.

if they can show to me that this fool proof method gives the same results i'm willing to believe their numbers. otherwise it will just be a founded guess to me like all the other dyno methods are.


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

der_horst said:


> Arne said:
> 
> 
> > But you can only compare numbers from reviews made at the same place, at the same time and by the same driver - which does not happen too often.... :wink:
> ...


I do agree that claimed OR measured bhp numbers realy does not say so much. But it's fun to use in argumentations.... :lol:

It's how the power is delivered and how you experience how it is delivered that counts... 

Very few cars actually manage to deliver the claimed 0-60 values - and for some that does, it does not feel that way.

So whats most important? It's all up to the one who is going to buy a car to deceid.... :wink:


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

der_horst said:


> Arne said:
> 
> 
> > In my oppinion the production differenses between two excact equall modells of the same car, will probabely be larger than the errors caused by the measurement system and routines at RRI.... :wink:
> ...


Why should those figures be of special interest? As long as you don't know what the transmission losses are, it want prove anything.

The only figures that should be of interest for the buyers, are the power to the wheels - because that is the only power you can and will use.... :wink:


----------



## squiggel (May 16, 2006)

Arne said:


> The only figures that should be of interest for the buyers, are the power to the wheels - because that is the only power you can and will use.... :wink:


Nope, the figures that matter are the acceleration figures.

My preferred measure would be 40-80 through the gears.

Anything sub six second on 0-60 will do fine.

Never mind theoretical arguements about measuring power, the end result is what matters, and it is easily tested. 8)


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

squiggel said:


> Arne said:
> 
> 
> > The only figures that should be of interest for the buyers, are the power to the wheels - because that is the only power you can and will use.... :wink:
> ...


Thats true as well :wink:

BSR (where I have remapped my 2.0T) tests the standard car versus the remapped car that way.

Just have a look here for an example: http://en.bsrab.se/products/t921/

Sad that they only tests the cars that they make remaps for.... :wink:


----------



## squiggel (May 16, 2006)

Arne said:


> BSR (where I have remapped my 2.0T) tests the standard car versus the remapped car that way.
> 
> Just have a look here for an example: http://en.bsrab.se/products/t921/
> 
> Sad that they only tests the cars that they make remaps for.... :wink:


Now that's the kind of data that would make me part with my money, rather than power figures. Full marks to BSR


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

Arne said:


> It's how the power is delivered and how you experience how it is delivered that counts...


but your experience is easily fooled. just compare a 3.2 and an S3. the S3 will feel way faster due to the turbo lag and the boost that will follow it comapred to the constant, maybe even boring accelleration of the V6.

and concerning the hubs vs. everything: i don't care what's at the hub, i care about the numbers of the whole car, especially those above 60. what does it matter if a car has a high max output but only delivers torque in a small band?


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

der_horst said:


> Arne said:
> 
> 
> > It's how the power is delivered and how you experience how it is delivered that counts...
> ...


I agree in this as well. Thats why graphs are imortant - which RRI delivers :wink:

And BSR as well - who actually calculate the _average power increase_ for their remaps, in bhp and %:

Quote:
"_BSR introduces a new concept â€" average power â€" to better illustrate the difference you will experience when tuning your car! BSRâ€™s stated average power is equivalent to the average power increase within a given rpm interval. The rpm interval normally used in a petrol car is 2500rpm - 6000rpm, and for a diesel car 1500rpm - 4500rpm. The average power is calculated on these intervals.

Indicating the average power increase, and not only the peak output, is a better way to illustrate how the car will behave with BSRâ€™s tuning. During acceleration, for example when overtaking, itâ€™s the area under the power graph in the current rpm interval that determines how fast the car will accelerate. BSRâ€™s stated average power generally tells more about the acceleration than the stated peak output."_

And they also measures % acceleration gains in gears - as well as the measured figures: http://en.bsrab.se/products/t921/

edit: and if you compare the figures from BSR of the TT 2.0T with other cars they have tested, you will see they are surprizingly good even before a remap.... :wink:


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

Arne said:


> I agree in this as well. Thats why graphs are imortant - which RRI delivers :wink:


as do all other dyno methods. ever wondered why they are all different? 

and measuring the accelleration by a small set of test drivers is fool proof, as there is no guessing of real world performance based on some strange figures. rri doesn't even get the effect of wheel diameter and tire type in their results. a normal stop watch does.

measure the car, not the hubs.


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

der_horst said:


> Arne said:
> 
> 
> > I agree in this as well. Thats why graphs are imortant - which RRI delivers :wink:
> ...


It's not fool proof by a long shot. Air temperature, air humidity, air preasure, type of tire, tyre pressure, tyre temperature, friction/grip, track surface temperature etc will vary a lot. And this will effect the measurements/results in many (and major) ways - specially on high performance cars.

So there is no such thing as a "real world performance" as the real world keep changing parameters that will influence on the result.

On a dyno where parameters can be monitored and controlled way better than in the real world, you can get results that are much more comparable.

How your car then will perform in the real world depends on factors mentioned above....which some of them can be adjusted for max performance, and some not..... :wink:


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

der_horst said:


> Arne said:
> 
> 
> > I agree in this as well. Thats why graphs are imortant - which RRI delivers :wink:
> ...


Bloody hell, you pair have been at it since page 6 :lol:

It doesn't matter because Arne is going to buy a TTS because it makes sense in Norway due to tax reasons, and der_horst is going to buy a GTR instead of a TTRS 8)


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

Arne said:


> On a dyno where parameters can be monitored and controlled way better than in the real world, you can get results that are much more comparable.


well then i'd say have fun driving aroung in rri's dyno halls while i drive around in the real world.


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

Wondermikie said:


> It doesn't matter because Arne is going to buy a TTS


but not based on those f**king dyno results, no he isn't! :twisted:


----------



## philbur (Apr 15, 2007)

That's US gallons not imperial.

Phil



Tomuchtoless said:


> Not sure I got these figures right, but my S tronic 2.0T are declared having a fuel consumption of 7.7 liters per 100 km. (around 28,5 mpg)
> 
> Compare to the fourtitude numbers:
> 
> ...


----------



## OZTT (Nov 30, 2006)

The TTS has rekindled my interest in the Audi depending on the price here in Australia i may be a punter , from what i have read the internals of this engine have been altered to handle the extra power is that correct ?

How much more power will the TTS be able to handle with aftermarket tunes than the standard TT ?

Or should i haggle better on the TT and do my own mods / upgrades ?

Cheers
Michael


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

der_horst said:


> Arne said:
> 
> 
> > On a dyno where parameters can be monitored and controlled way better than in the real world, you can get results that are much more comparable.
> ...


My point is that both dynoresults (if properly done) AND real world tests are factors to consider when comparing cars :wink: But always use some common sence and do not only trust ONE test.

I think the TTS will perform well both in dynotests AND in real world tests. But so far all we have are claimed figures (and even different ones) - so we will just have to wait and see.

But my guess is that we (those who probabely will get one) will be happy with what comes....


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

OZTT said:


> The TTS has rekindled my interest in the Audi depending on the price here in Australia i may be a punter , from what i have read the internals of this engine have been altered to handle the extra power is that correct ?
> 
> How much more power will the TTS be able to handle with aftermarket tunes than the standard TT ?
> 
> ...


From what I have heard, it's correct that this 2.0T has been very much altered. And that does make sence, because Audi has always had a pretty good margine regarding what the engines actually can take.

So my guess is that there will still be some 12-15% gain to be made from a stage 1 remap - which will give a result of another 30-45 bhp and another 50-70 Nm of torque.

What I am most curious to know, is how much more torque the Stronic can handle, and have they done any modifications to the exsisting one? Because that one had an "Audi limit" of 360 NM - but could be upgraded to handle way more.....


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

OZTT said:


> from what i have read the internals of this engine have been altered to handle the extra power is that correct ?


you've got to read the marketing propaganda very carefully to spot what they are really saying  when i first read that line i was wondering what they could have possibly done to the S3 engine for the TTS, but then i realized that they talk about changes to the base engine, i.e. the one from the GTI or 2l TT. so what they mean is that the S3 engine was a modified 2l engine, which is of course true, and if you're interested in the details take a look at the old S3 threads or the press release, there you can find a list of modified parts.

but of course the TTS engine is not a modified S3 engine, as it would be stupid to do that for 5 more hp which are resulting from the changes to the exhaust system anyway.

and as the engine is the same the tuning is the same as with the S3 (maybe the DSG implies some additional restrictions, dunno). so if you're interested in chipping expect a 310hp stage for ~1200 euros and a 330hp stage for ~5000 euros.


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

Arne said:


> but could be upgraded to handle way more.....


an upgrade for 650nm costs about 2800 euros from HGP. sure you can do it, but i'd think twice about such expensive modifications. if you add up all the costs for tweaking the little one you might end up at a higher level stock car.


----------



## Guest (Jan 12, 2008)

Tremendous pissing contest.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Release artical on AUK website.

http://www.audi.co.uk/audi/uk/en2/about ... ebuts.html


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> Release artical on AUK website.
> 
> http://www.audi.co.uk/audi/uk/en2/about ... ebuts.html


And even in this article they can not agree if they claim a 0-62mph to 5.2 or 5.0 sec for the TTS Stronic......

Quote:

"(manual): 0-62mph in 5.4 seconds,"

Another quote from the same article:

"Linked to six-speed, close ratio manual, transmission the enhanced unit slingshots the TTS CoupÃ© from rest to 62mph in just 5.2 seconds, and on the German Autobahn it is only curtailed by its electronic limiter at 155mph. With the optional S tronic dual-clutch automatic transmission acceleration times are reduced by a further two-tenths of a second in both the CoupÃ© and Roadster models."

My guess is that it is 5.2 sec that will be the official claims - in the end..... :wink: Not that it matters so much..... :roll:


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

But you said the jurnos are alway right :lol:

OT
T3 Magazine this month quotes the R8 as 0-60 in 6.3 seconds.


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> But you said the jurnos are alway right :lol:
> 
> OT
> T3 Magazine this month quotes the R8 as 0-60 in 6.3 seconds.


Nope - I have always said "don't trust the jurnos" :wink:

Only when a lot of them comes to the same conclusion independent of each other - then it might be worth believing in.... :roll:

The T3 Magazine must be refering to the new version "poor mans R8" - with the 3.2 V6.....*runs and hides....*


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

More images.

Like the colour of the DIS and calipers.


----------



## Singletrack (Aug 1, 2007)

According to Automotive Week...there is a fly in the ointment...

_Look for pricing to range in the $60,000 ballpark. Honda's roadster costs more than $20,000 less and can reach 60 mph just as fast._

How Audi chooses to price this car in the UK and on the Continent is going to be important....might well make it worthwhile to take a 3.2, add a turbocharger and see what it can do with 360 bhp....


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Â£31000-32000

Anymore and its not worth it.
2.5K gets you lots of upgrade for a 3.2 and more power.


----------



## TTSFan (Jan 10, 2008)

is that white DIS available on the normal TT's?


----------



## Jimbo2 (Nov 30, 2006)

Damn, I like the red DIS, and that gear knob looks like a Halfords special


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

You kidding the red DIS looks like something from the 90s. About time Audi sorted it out. Looks to be the same one as on the S5.


----------



## TTSFan (Jan 10, 2008)

So I am in the market right now to buy either the TT or the A\S5. I was waiting for the TTS but with the pricing seeming more and more rediculous the A5 is looking more of a option. The 3.2 isn't really an option as were I live we are very high above sea level and the TT 2.0T is actually quicker than the 3.2.

I want the LED's, the new white DIS and someother features that apparently ONLY the TTS has


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

TTSFan said:


> I want the LED's, the new white DIS and someother features that apparently ONLY the TTS has


the DIS in the S5 is white as well


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

You'd have to get the S5 to get the LED DRLs, not A5. UK cost is 45k once you have the essential options on.

A5 3.0TD?


----------



## TTSFan (Jan 10, 2008)

Yeah I am not a fan of oil burners but it looks like I am going to have to go with the 3.0TDI it has pretty impressive performace stats 

Does the white DIS not come with the standard A5 I am sure I saw pictures with the white DIS. The B7 A4's had an option that you could get COLOR DIS, they were pretty cool to the RED ONE is sooooo 1970's


----------



## VeeDubDan (May 6, 2006)

I would not be surprised if the DIS turns out to be full colour. My brother has a S4 with a colour DIS (with white text).


----------



## leondj (Jan 14, 2008)

Hello all,

I have been monitoring this forum close in the past few months, but this is my first post.

I was looking at getting a 2.0 TT but now I am seriously considering placing a order (pre) for a TTS. I am not sure why people are so negative towards it? I see it as follows:

Take the 2.0 TT and add

Napa leather
Xenon
Magnetic ride
18" wheels
Extended leather pack

and you come to around Â£30k. Then you add the exterior and interior S-line styling which I believe is not available in the UK but for example in South Africa you can order this for roughly:

S Line exterior pack Â£1300 (S Line exterior pack with carbon inlays is Â£1800)

So then we are up to Â£31300.

So what is left.

Quattro
70hp
Better Brakes
Lowered suspension
5.2 (0-62)
Sport Seats
White DIS
LED daylight lights

All for around Â£1700 (assuming Â£33k tag)

Is that worth it.....? Hell yeah!! Especially if you take into consideration that all these optional extras are now part of the base spec which means less devaluation when it comes to resell as we all know you don't get much back for the optional extras. And these are all options I would have included if I was to order a TT 2.0 and I'm sure you all would have included most of these..?


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

You firstly need to add Â£1400 the the spec to get to 5.2, assuming DSG version is 5.2. If the performance is 5.4 with DSG and 5.6 without (spec are conflicting) then in all honesty you are better off getting the 3.2 from a cost/value point of view. You also need to add on the full nappa cost. @Â£500 - thats a guess.

So all of a sudden the 33k you guessed at is more like 35k

Im considering canceling mine as on reflection, i really dont think its good enough from a performance or price point of view if it does end up with the base price weighing in at over 31k.


----------



## TTSFan (Jan 10, 2008)

@leondj -- Assuming you from SA :wink: here we would be paying way more than 32 000k Pounds, expect a TTS Stronic to be R500k+. Yes it does have alot of options but then again is it worth it?

The TTS will be like other "S" models in South Africa and lose its value pretty quickly were as the 2.0 TT is actually keeping its value VERY WELL in the market at the moment. We all know how [email protected] our market is and it's not going to get any better.....

You might not get 5.2 0-100 but with a Revo or FRC you will get pretty close and still save some cash...

Then comes the 3.2 vs. 2.0T TT arguement which I really don't want to start but if you from Johannesburg you know that with the VERY high altitude the 3.2 is pretty usless against the 2.0TT at the coast say Cape Town different story... - the turbo's are just that strong up in JHB.

Personally, Audi quoted me as I secured two spots on in CPT and one in JHB between R420 - R440k which at this point in time I AM REALLLLLLY doubting :wink:

Going to be sad but its just not worth the money.........

I am not saying the car is not worth the cash if you have that type of cash to blow on it by all means but at R500k you are treading into Porsche ground and lets face it --- a Porsche is a Porsche -- Audi might be faster but the slower car still has that Porsche badge on it 8)


----------



## leondj (Jan 14, 2008)

TTSFan...How did you guess? I am actually based in the UK at the moment but I'm aiming to go back to SA early next year. Do you think the TTS will be around by then? What about the 2.0T what is the waiting list like at the moment? Ideally I would like if it could be waiting for me when I return home.

I also worked out about R500k. Yes it is a lot, but if I take the 2.0 and add all the options I want I get very close to that. With regards to risidual value do you really think the TTS will go down the route of the S3 and RS4?

I am from Johannesburg area so turbo is definitely the way to go! 2.0 or TTS...mmm.....

When you say you have secured 2 spots...is that for the TTS? Have they started taking pre-orders in SA?

The Porsche Cayman is very nice yes, but it is just not as practical for a everyday car to me than the TT with regards to ride, space (Can fit baby seat in the back), fuel economy and maintenance costs. If I had another car for every day use, then definitely yes.

Anyway good to find another saffer on the forum...


----------



## TTRTWO (Dec 9, 2006)

http://www.audi.co.uk/audi/uk/en2/new_cars/tt/tts.html


----------



## DXN (May 18, 2002)

TTRTWO said:


> http://www.audi.co.uk/audi/uk/en2/new_cars/tt/tts.html


lots of info and gallery on there now (just gonna post it too!)


----------



## TTSFan (Jan 10, 2008)

@leondj-- The car market is very bad here right now the RS4 has a great resale value if you sell out of hand i.e. You do a private sale, guys are only getting R300+- Trade in for the RS4 on trade in's and thats a R630K car.

Car's are devaluing ALOT, the S3 kept it's value while the order list was long but now they main stream and every Racer Boy in JHB has one so its not that valuable any more....

They are putting your name's down to secure your build spot - Thats what both dealers told me, you sign an offer to purchase and everything BUT no deposit so I am not sure how legal binding that is. I have been assured I have the number 2 build spot for JHB Audi and number 1 build spot for the CPT Audi dealer.

Here if you have the capital and secure a build spot of a wanted car someone like investment cars (for the UK folk thats a car dealer that only deals in "exotic" cars) will approach you and offer you some more cash for your spot. So that was my intention 

I just got off the phone with the dealer from CPT, he told me that the SA price is VERY close to the UK price so I am very interested to see what the UK pricing is (will someone PLEASE post it as soon as they know).

About the 2.0T TT Vs. TTS -- to me the TTS is just going to be way to expensive, the Porsche has the same body build (Not performance handling etc....) as the TT(S) so both can fit a baby seat but your baby is going to be really unhappy with the mid engine Porsche  the TT is not a family car Dood you going to have alot of issues with it I have a mate in the same shoes!!! But other members here might disagree 

The TTS will hold it's value for the first year but again once every tom d1ck and harry owns one it will go down the same route. The 2.0TT is actually holding it's value VERY well!!! You pick one up SECOND hand for say R10k less than new thats GOOD for our market!

Well good to see you coming back man - we need people like you to come back to help our country!!

Make sure you bring a generator .... :wink:


----------



## leondj (Jan 14, 2008)

Well let's hope they keep the waiting list long on the TT and TTS's as that is the only way to keep second hand value up. Historically TT's have always kept their values pretty well. But then Porsches probably even better....

I think I will be contacting a dealer in Centurion soon to place a pre-order..  especially if they are not taking any deposits..

My one mate in SA just had his RS4 and hald his house stolen....makes me a bit nervous. But you need to take as many precautions as possible and it should be OK.....it's like the wild west out there but I still love it...


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2008)

leondj said:


> Well let's hope they keep the waiting list long on the TT and TTS's as that is the only way to keep second hand value up. Historically TT's have always kept their values pretty well. But then Porsches probably even better....
> 
> I think I will be contacting a dealer in Centurion soon to place a pre-order..  especially if they are not taking any deposits..
> 
> My one mate in SA just had his RS4 and hald his house stolen....makes me a bit nervous. But you need to take as many precautions as possible and it should be OK.....it's like the wild west out there but I still love it...


Had his house stolen?


----------



## yangliang (Jul 1, 2006)

DUO3 NAN said:


> leondj said:
> 
> 
> > Well let's hope they keep the waiting list long on the TT and TTS's as that is the only way to keep second hand value up. Historically TT's have always kept their values pretty well. But then Porsches probably even better....
> ...


Maybe he lived in a caravan.


----------



## leondj (Jan 14, 2008)

Oops... 

Meant to say half his house meaning just about everything in it.....


----------



## Mack The Knife (Jun 14, 2007)

Perhaps his car matched his house and he had both stolen together...


----------



## Mysterio (Jan 20, 2006)

What price is the TT-S? Base model?


----------



## cedwardphillips (Sep 6, 2005)

TTS model prices

OTR TTS coupe quattro 272PS 6-speed manual Â£33,380.00

TTS roadster quattro 272PS 6-speed manual Â£35,380.00


----------

