# Ohh dear Whos been upsetting RCZ owners



## corradoman

http://peugeotrczforum.co.uk/drivers-t1053.html


----------



## Guest

> Had my first TT moment yesterday sat at traffic lights in Cardiff and round the corner comes a 60 plate TT he then nearly drove into the oncoming traffic because he was staring at Lawrence!! Ha! BTW Lawrence has been cleaned and I am polishing him today!


just lol.


----------



## oceans7

manphibian said:


> Had my first TT moment yesterday sat at traffic lights in Cardiff and round the corner comes a 60 plate TT he then nearly drove into the oncoming traffic because he was staring at Lawrence!! Ha! BTW Lawrence has been cleaned and I am polishing him today!
> 
> 
> 
> just lol.
Click to expand...

 Lawrence! Lawrence! who calls their bloody car Lawrence? Mine is called Brutus and he's a right bastard!

LMFAO at the RCZ forum BTW.


----------



## Guest

oceans7 said:


> manphibian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Had my first TT moment yesterday sat at traffic lights in Cardiff and round the corner comes a 60 plate TT he then nearly drove into the oncoming traffic because he was staring at Lawrence!! Ha! BTW Lawrence has been cleaned and I am polishing him today!
> 
> 
> 
> just lol.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lawrence! Lawrence! who calls their bloody car Lawrence? Mine is called Brutus and he's a right bastard!
> 
> LMFAO at the RCZ forum BTW.
Click to expand...

I believe his full name is Lawrence Llewellyn Bowen


----------



## Wolfsburger

oceans7 said:


> LMFAO at the RCZ forum BTW.


Every one make forum suffers from delusional fools. Yes, even this one.

In the past few weeks on here somebody has said that a TTRS is motoring nirvana. It`s a decent car alright, but _motoring nirvana?_


----------



## richieshore

I stare at RCZ's when I see them, stare and think - who is the person who's bought that ugly piece of crap when they could've had so much more! :lol:


----------



## Fictorious

> 1. The RCZ is a beautiful looking car whereas the TT is now showing it's age
> 2. The RCZ is exclusive whereas the TT is a very common site
> 3. The TT image is being tarnished as the 8N Mk1's are now affordable for the chav generation
> 4. The RCZ handling is on par with the TT
> 5. The RCZ Build Quality is on par with the TT (Just ask the TT driver where his car is built , and also do they consider the Aston MArtin Rapide and the BMW X series to be poor builds (as Steyr build these also))
> 6. The RCZ performance is on par (excepting the larger capacity units) but more importantly smaller turbo engined cars are the future ...my A6 only does 15mpg around town if I'm lucky !!!!
> 7. The overall RCZ package is better economically, environmentally, visually and is simply a great great car
> 
> To summarise the TT is a good car but the RCZ is the future . I'm Audi through and through but it is time for a change. If you get get an abusive TT driver and it's a Mk1 just smile and compliment him on the modifications he has made to his VW Beetle


1. TT is 12 years old and looks as "current gen" as the RCZ, way to go on the style front Peugeot!
2. TT is 12 years old so will have sold 12 years worth of cars, and "exclusive" doesn't count when your cars overpriced for what it is and falls apart so people don't buy it.
3. Slight truth in the chav bit but wouldn't say it's tarnished unless you regularly look for TT abominations.
4. haha
5. HAHAHA, you serious? They are even less reliable than a TT, and the dash rattled on the dealers car my dad looked at and the plastics felt cheap and nasty, amazing build quality!
6. If by "larger capacity units" you mean 1.8t and above then you're correct
7. Maybe more economical, better for environment but that doesn't make a coupe great now does it.


----------



## richieshore

The best thing is that in comparison with the new TT the RCZ's most powerful 1.6 doesn't even come close performance wise and it's least powerful is actually less economical than the TT's 2.0!

I find it funny when people use blatant lies when slagging things off, it makes them look foolish when people actually check the stats out!


----------



## BLinky

are they all delusional weird phyco women?


----------



## sniper-sam

I've just read through that thread and I find it hard to believe that so many of them have had "TT moments".
To much of a coincidence for my liking.


----------



## BLinky

are we allowed to start forum wars?


----------



## Wallsendmag

oceans7 said:


> manphibian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Had my first TT moment yesterday sat at traffic lights in Cardiff and round the corner comes a 60 plate TT he then nearly drove into the oncoming traffic because he was staring at Lawrence!! Ha! BTW Lawrence has been cleaned and I am polishing him today!
> 
> 
> 
> just lol.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lawrence! Lawrence! who calls their bloody car Lawrence? Mine is called Brutus and he's a right bastard!
> 
> LMFAO at the RCZ forum BTW.
Click to expand...

My MkI was called laurent quite sensible really Laurent Robert who played for Newcastle was from Reunion Island near Mauritius and the car was Mauritius Blue simples


----------



## Dash

BLinky said:


> are we allowed to start forum wars?












I remember a misspent summer flaming on Usenet as a teenager. Can't beat multi-threaded trolling...


----------



## roddy

jeez, some of you peeps really take the biscuit, what a nice change to read some pleasant crits about other peoples cars instead of the usual childish bitchy comments on here from some some of you deluded audi snobs ,, good god,,its only a bloody car !!!


----------



## Wolfsburger

roddy said:


> jeez, some of you peeps really take the biscuit, what a nice change to read some pleasant crits about other peoples cars instead of the usual childish bitchy comments on here from some some of you deluded audi snobs ,, good god,,its only a bloody car !!!


Well said that man. There really are some prize bell-ends on here.


----------



## sniper-sam

Wolfsburger said:


> roddy said:
> 
> 
> 
> jeez, some of you peeps really take the biscuit, what a nice change to read some pleasant crits about other peoples cars instead of the usual childish bitchy comments on here from some some of you deluded audi snobs ,, good god,,its only a bloody car !!!
> 
> 
> 
> Well said that man. There really are some prize bell-ends on here.
Click to expand...

And the fact that the RCZ forum member can read this thread just adds fuel to their fire.
If your gonna put provokative remarks your actually better saying nothing as it really does make us look like bellends, when I actually quite like the car, still rather gave my TTS but the TT is not the holy Grail. 
That is all


----------



## Fictorious

Rather be a bell end that be someone who names their car and cuddles it at night time.


----------



## sniper-sam

Fictorious said:


> Rather be a bell end that be someone who names their car and cuddles it at night time.


 :lol: do you not cuddle yours?


----------



## Guest

Come on boys, i think we all just need to hug it out!

We'll show those Peugeot fannies who the real men are


----------



## UKTTv6

manphibian said:


> Come on boys, i think we all just need to hug it out!
> 
> We'll show those Peugeot fannies who the real men are


LOL "who the real men are" do you not know your user name is somewhat unmanly as "phibians" (from amphibians) contain members that are asexual meaning they can change from male to female as required to reproduce.

Also as a TT driver, A6 driver and soon to be RCZ driver (but keeping my Audis) where do you put me then ?


----------



## ecko2702

I'm sorry but being excited and bragging about having an RCZ is like bragging about have a 2inch c*ck. :lol: :lol:


----------



## Wolfsburger

ecko2702 said:


> I'm sorry but being excited and bragging about having an RCZ is like bragging about have a 2inch c*ck. :lol: :lol:


And here lies the problem. Do you really care what others think about their car (or yours for that matter)?

Grow up and enjoy what you have, and let them enjoy what they have.


----------



## Spandex

Oh the irony... TT owners telling other people their car choice isn't very manly


----------



## Fictorious

Spandex said:


> Oh the irony... TT owners telling other people their car choice isn't very manly


Says the man with trophy wife targa


----------



## wallstreet

Cardinal they're only children!


----------



## Spandex

Fictorious said:


> Spandex said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh the irony... TT owners telling other people their car choice isn't very manly
> 
> 
> 
> Says the man with trophy wife targa
Click to expand...

Exactly my point!! I've also owned hairdressers Z4s and TTs. The point is, I don't make a big noise about other peoples cars being girly. Pretty obvious from the number of RCZ posts on here that TT owners have a massive chip on their shoulder.

People in glass houses, etc...


----------



## BLinky

Targa is nice ^^ one of the few 911s I enjoy seeing ^^


----------



## BLinky

maybe we should invite them for a meet, a bowling party or something.


----------



## Fictorious

Spandex said:


> Fictorious said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spandex said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh the irony... TT owners telling other people their car choice isn't very manly
> 
> 
> 
> Says the man with trophy wife targa
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Exactly my point!! I've also owned hairdressers Z4s and TTs. The point is, I don't make a big noise about other peoples cars being girly. Pretty obvious from the number of RCZ posts on here that TT owners have a massive chip on their shoulder.
> 
> People in glass houses, etc...
Click to expand...

Can't say for others but I've not called the RCZ a hairdressers car, plus not a TT owner


----------



## Spandex

Fictorious said:


> I've not called the RCZ a hairdressers car


Not sure why you're quoting me - I never said you did call it a hairdressers car. In fact, i didn't make any comment about you at all. I said TT owners who were talking about other peoples cars not being manly. Is that you?


----------



## Guest

Spandex said:


> Fictorious said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've not called the RCZ a hairdressers car
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure why you're quoting me - I never said you did call it a hairdressers car. In fact, i didn't make any comment about you at all. I said TT owners who were talking about other peoples cars not being manly. Is that you?
Click to expand...

Are you depressed Spandex? Would you like to talk about it?


----------



## Spandex

manphibian said:


> Are you depressed Spandex?


I'm enjoying myself, actually. How are you?


----------



## Guest

Spandex said:


> manphibian said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you depressed Spandex?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm enjoying myself, actually. How are you?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty good  You just seem to have been deliberately inflammatory this week, even more so than usual  Just checking you're ok :lol:


----------



## Spandex

manphibian said:


> Spandex said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> manphibian said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you depressed Spandex?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm enjoying myself, actually. How are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm pretty good  You just seem to have been deliberately inflammatory this week, even more so than usual  Just checking you're ok :lol:
Click to expand...

All these RCZ forum bashing threads are inflammatory. I'm just pointing out the irony of it all. How many threads have you seen on here where people moan about how the TT is referred to as a hairdressers car, and yet everyone is so happy to do the same to other people. The strutting, chest-beating talk about 'manly' TTs just comes across as laughable.


----------



## Guest

Spandex said:


> All these RCZ forum bashing threads are inflammatory. I'm just pointing out the irony of it all. How many threads have you seen on here where people moan about how the TT is referred to as a hairdressers car, and yet everyone is so happy to do the same to other people. The strutting, chest-beating talk about 'manly' TTs just comes across as laughable.


True, it's fun though. I hate French cars. I actually think the rear and roof of the RCZ is great, the fact they stuck the exact same nose on it as the 307 is just ridiculous. Plus it's totally overpriced.

tbh i can't remember any threads where people moan about people saying their TT is a hairdressers car. Nobody has ever said that about mine.

The thing that's great about 'girly' cars, is that girls love them! The TT is a bit of a 'fanny magnet' if truth be told. Roll up in an M3 or a Nissan GTR and most of them wouldn't look twice.


----------



## BLinky

+1.


----------



## hooting_owl

you have to be brave/wealthy/foolish to put £30K into any french car. but i am glad that some people are
as i like to see them on the road in the same way i liked to see lancias and alfas as a kid.

the RCZ can appear striking from most angles, depending on colour. saw a black one and it 
looked nothing - then saw one in white and yes, it looked very appealing.

will go and have a closer look at one at the pug dealer when i am bored one afternoon.

there is a 'shocking pink' rcz in the window of robins and day in bristol city centre. not one for those 
with weak constitutions...


----------



## BLinky

i don't know the truth, but are most RCZs owned by girls? because that would explain a lot.


----------



## senwar

Youd think the TT was the best looking and performing car in the world when you read some posts.

The arrogance is sad. Although this is not a new thing, I remember thinking the same re certain posters back when
I bought mine in 2003. Everyone has a different opinion on cars - I can't stand the look of the Mk2 but wouldn't laugh or criticise anyones choice to fork out on it. Not everyone likes the Mk1 either.

So what if the owners of the pugs love their cars. Good on them. As for dissing the brand, the may not make the nicest motors but they have a great heritage, making one of THE greatest hot hatches of all time.


----------



## sniper-sam

senwar said:


> Youd think the TT was the best looking and performing car in the world when you read some posts.
> 
> The arrogance is sad. Although this is not a new thing, I remember thinking the same re certain posters back when
> I bought mine in 2003. Everyone has a different opinion on cars - I can't stand the look of the Mk2 but wouldn't laugh or criticise anyones choice to fork out on it. Not everyone likes the Mk1 either.
> 
> So what if the owners of the pugs love their cars. Good on them. As for dissing the brand, the may not make the nicest motors but they have a great heritage, making one of THE greatest hot hatches of all time.


 [smiley=thumbsup.gif]


----------



## Figo

Glimours of hope among the forum! 

Good job too as the lil miss has her heart set on a Mk1 TT to replace the Fiat she learned to drive in so looks like ill be in the fortunate position to be able to drive both on a regular basis  And coming back here for advice when the time comes.

Glad to see that some folks have their diplomatic caps


----------



## Super Josh

senwar said:


> As for dissing the brand, the may not make the nicest motors but they have a great heritage, making one of THE greatest hot hatches of all time.


Which one would that be then? 

Josh


----------



## senwar

Super Josh said:


> senwar said:
> 
> 
> 
> As for dissing the brand, the may not make the nicest motors but they have a great heritage, making one of THE greatest hot hatches of all time.
> 
> 
> 
> Which one would that be then?
> 
> Josh
Click to expand...

Is that a serious question?


----------



## roddy

senwar said:


> Super Josh said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> senwar said:
> 
> 
> 
> As for dissing the brand, the may not make the nicest motors but they have a great heritage, making one of THE greatest hot hatches of all time.
> 
> 
> 
> Which one would that be then?
> 
> Josh
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is that a serious question?
Click to expand...

well just in case it is, for their benefit, and any others whose historical knowledge of cars is similarly lacking there was the 205 gti and the 306,, ( not even mentioning other french makes) both leaders in their time..


----------



## Matt B

Wasn't just the GTI that was a great car. i had the pleasure to drive about in a 205 xs and it was a fantastic car. about 800 kgs with a 1.4 that was fitted with twin weber carbs and went like a bat out of hell.
It was also cool as f**k, never let me down.

I loved that car! And it was the vehicle that fully turned me to a petrolhead.


----------



## leenx

I don't mind saying it - the RCZ is a complete cheapo copy of the TT and and is a true hairdressers car in every sense of the word IMO

Naming your car Lawrence :lol: :lol:


----------



## BLinky

leenx said:


> I don't mind saying it - the RCZ is a complete cheapo copy of the TT and and is a true hairdressers car in every sense of the word IMO
> 
> Naming your car Lawrence :lol: :lol:


rubbish, even hairdressers know it's a 308cc with a bubble roof.


----------



## Super Josh

senwar said:


> Super Josh said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> senwar said:
> 
> 
> 
> As for dissing the brand, the may not make the nicest motors but they have a great heritage, making one of THE greatest hot hatches of all time.
> 
> 
> 
> Which one would that be then?
> 
> Josh
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is that a serious question?
Click to expand...

Yes it was serious question. Although I may have been playing devils advocate as this is my weekend toy 










Josh


----------



## UKTTv6

leenx said:


> I don't mind saying it - the RCZ is a complete cheapo copy of the TT and and is a true hairdressers car in every sense of the word IMO
> 
> Naming your car Lawrence :lol: :lol:


and Leenx I dont mind saying you are childish, ill informed and obviously not a lover of cars.


----------



## uzzieman

I quite like the RCZ. I've only recently seen the advert for it on the telly and I think it looks stunning. Anyone who says that the MK1 TT still looks better or as current as any other motors out there needs a reality check, the MK1 is starting to show its age now. Don't get me wrong, it's a fun car to drive and it's kitted out quite well .. it certainley isn't anything special though.

Easy to slate build quality and so forth but even Audi's have their problems. Maybe slightly overpriced but it does look sexy and they have done something right with it.

I'd say an MK1 TT is more of a hair dressers car than the RCZ, but thats just my opionion.


----------



## BLinky

once again... 308cc...


----------



## KimTT

a huge "lol" at this! not much else to say!
hehe
they are just angry that they were stupid enough to spend more than 20k on a french piece of Merde that tried to be a TT but isn't. 8) 8) 8)


----------



## davelincs

Well every one to there own
but after seeing one in the flesh last week, 
here,s my opinion for what its worth
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Hark

Isn't the RCZ just for show and no actual go? So to speak. Someone mentioned a 1.6 engine. -_-

In that respect i guess it's similar to diesel mk2s and mk1 150 or 180 owners?


----------



## KimTT

yes..all show..NO go indeed but i do have to admit i like it from the side! looks cool 8) but really dont from the front and rear as it just looks like a typical peugeot  but side view is good


----------



## senwar

Super Josh said:


> Yes it was serious question. Although I may have been playing devils advocate as this is my weekend toy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Josh


 

Lovely.

And that was the particular model I was referring to.

Cracking that.


----------



## UKTTv6

There are some right chavs on here. I own a TT, I have an A6 3.0TFSI, previously owned an S4, A4, and an S3 (the old 3.2 version) so have had quite a few Audi's. I have also had French cars and as a few educated people have said on here they have made some cracking cars. I have had to spend more on repairs on my Audis than I ever did with my french cars..fact

I will also soon be an RCZ owner and it will sit in my garage next to my TT. Each are great cars, each has their plus points, each have their bad points.

To some on here they cant see beyond their TT (so obviously not car lovers) . All they want to do is slate off other manufacturers..it just shows them up as insecure and possibly threatened by what others see as a better looking car (RCZ coupe of the year- Top Gear, Autocar etc etc) . My wife calls the TT the hairdressers car and I have had years of that joke, and that is public perception...and I still drive my TT

So to summarise

Both the TT and RCZ are good cars
It seems this forum has it's fair share of wanabee chavs


----------



## leenx

UKTTv6 said:


> There are some right chavs on here. I own a TT, I have an A6 3.0TFSI, previously owned an S4, A4, and an S3 (the old 3.2 version) so have had quite a few Audi's. I have also had French cars and as a few educated people have said on here they have made some cracking cars. I have had to spend more on repairs on my Audis than I ever did with my french cars..fact
> 
> I will also soon be an RCZ owner and it will sit in my garage next to my TT. Each are great cars, each has their plus points, each have their bad points.
> 
> To some on here they cant see beyond their TT (so obviously not car lovers) . All they want to do is slate off other manufacturers..it just shows them up as insecure and possibly threatened by what others see as a better looking car (RCZ coupe of the year- Top Gear, Autocar etc etc) . My wife calls the TT the hairdressers car and I have had years of that joke, and that is public perception...and I still drive my TT
> 
> So to summarise
> 
> Both the TT and RCZ are good cars
> It seems this forum has it's fair share of wanabee chavs


Wanabee chavs eh? I love my cars and during my years have spent a fair load on them, incidently I'm in process with my Father in restoring an old Carerra, so it would be fair to say I have a love for cars. The RCZ is a turd on wheels end of :lol:

So to summarise

The RCZ is a turd on wheels. :lol: :roll:


----------



## UKTTv6

leenx said:


> UKTTv6 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are some right chavs on here. I own a TT, I have an A6 3.0TFSI, previously owned an S4, A4, and an S3 (the old 3.2 version) so have had quite a few Audi's. I have also had French cars and as a few educated people have said on here they have made some cracking cars. I have had to spend more on repairs on my Audis than I ever did with my french cars..fact
> 
> I will also soon be an RCZ owner and it will sit in my garage next to my TT. Each are great cars, each has their plus points, each have their bad points.
> 
> To some on here they cant see beyond their TT (so obviously not car lovers) . All they want to do is slate off other manufacturers..it just shows them up as insecure and possibly threatened by what others see as a better looking car (RCZ coupe of the year- Top Gear, Autocar etc etc) . My wife calls the TT the hairdressers car and I have had years of that joke, and that is public perception...and I still drive my TT
> 
> So to summarise
> 
> Both the TT and RCZ are good cars
> It seems this forum has it's fair share of wanabee chavs
> 
> 
> 
> Wanabee chavs eh? I love my cars and during my years have spent a fair load on them, incidently I'm in process with my Father in restoring an old Carerra, so it would be fair to say I have a love for cars. The RCZ is a turd on wheels end of :lol:
> 
> So to summarise
> 
> The RCZ is a turd on wheels. :lol: :roll:
Click to expand...

ohhh big words from someone who has probably never driven one


----------



## richieshore

UKTTv6 said:


> ohhh big words from someone who has probably never driven one


Probably too embarrassed to be seen in one! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Seriously though, I have no problems with the RCZ whatsoever and if people like it then it's up to them, personally I can't understand how people think it's such a masterpiece but have never mentioned the 308cc which is identical in almost every single way, and god knows what the RCZcc is going to look like??

Anyway - the only thing that bothers me is when people think that the RCZ is better than the TT, it clearly isn't, not in any single way, I can understand people buying it over the TT purely because it's cheaper, but to genuinely believe that you're driving a superior car you must either be extremely delusional or not have a clue about about cars!


----------



## leenx

richieshore said:


> UKTTv6 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ohhh big words from someone who has probably never driven one
> 
> 
> 
> Probably too embarrassed to be seen in one! :lol: :lol: :lol:
> 
> Seriously though, I have no problems with the RCZ whatsoever and if people like it then it's up to them, personally I can't understand how people think it's such a masterpiece but have never mentioned the 308cc which is identical in almost every single way, and god knows what the RCZcc is going to look like??
> 
> Anyway - the only thing that bothers me is when people think that the RCZ is better than the TT, it clearly isn't, not in any single way, I can understand people buying it over the TT purely because it's cheaper, but to genuinely believe that you're driving a superior car you must either be extremely delusional or not have a clue about about cars!
Click to expand...

And that it's made from tin foil :lol:


----------



## leenx

UKTTv6 said:


> leenx said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UKTTv6 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are some right chavs on here. I own a TT, I have an A6 3.0TFSI, previously owned an S4, A4, and an S3 (the old 3.2 version) so have had quite a few Audi's. I have also had French cars and as a few educated people have said on here they have made some cracking cars. I have had to spend more on repairs on my Audis than I ever did with my french cars..fact
> 
> I will also soon be an RCZ owner and it will sit in my garage next to my TT. Each are great cars, each has their plus points, each have their bad points.
> 
> To some on here they cant see beyond their TT (so obviously not car lovers) . All they want to do is slate off other manufacturers..it just shows them up as insecure and possibly threatened by what others see as a better looking car (RCZ coupe of the year- Top Gear, Autocar etc etc) . My wife calls the TT the hairdressers car and I have had years of that joke, and that is public perception...and I still drive my TT
> 
> So to summarise
> 
> Both the TT and RCZ are good cars
> It seems this forum has it's fair share of wanabee chavs
> 
> 
> 
> Wanabee chavs eh? I love my cars and during my years have spent a fair load on them, incidently I'm in process with my Father in restoring an old Carerra, so it would be fair to say I have a love for cars. The RCZ is a turd on wheels end of :lol:
> 
> So to summarise
> 
> The RCZ is a turd on wheels. :lol: :roll:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ohhh big words from someone who has probably never driven one
Click to expand...

 :lol:


----------



## UKTTv6

This superior comment makes me laugh. I adore Audi's but dont go round saying my car is better etc etc. I like Audis because they suit my driving needs and I like the style. The best Audi I have ever owned is my current A6 3.0TFSI..

People buy cars for different reasons and good on them. My friend for example has a moded Renault Turbo 2 which would eat TTRS' for breakfast ..but he doesnt go around saying his car is better than a Ferarri.

It seems that we have quite a few snobs on this board who seem to think if they drive a TT (as I do) they are in some kind of motoring elite. As I said before I worked in germany for 6 years and Audis are seen as top of the range VW's with BMW and Mercedes seen as the premium cars.

Anyway I love both the TT and the RCZ and below is Richard Hammond from Top Gear's review of the RCZ

Peugeot RCZ review: Hot and sexy car as fast as it looks..

By Richard Hammond 8/10/2010

I can hear you saying it now: "Hammond you clot, you've already written about the Peugeot RCZ back in May."
And you'd be right because I did, on the 21st to be exact.
But that car was the 156bhp 1.6 THP and the one you're looking at now is the 200bhp 1.6 THP.
You might think that this one is going to be a bit faster. But you'd be wrong.
This more powerful version is as different from the standard car as would be an RCZ fitted with a one-cylinder diesel engine from a dumper truck that you started with a handle.
This car looks just as sexy as the less powerful RCZ and is indeed considerably faster. But there's more to it than that because Peugeot has done a lot of fiddling under the RCZ's sexy body that you can't actually see.
First of all the 200bhp RCZ is fitted with wider and stronger hubs from the Peugeot 407 saloon.
The result is a more precise feel from the front of the car when you're bunging it into a corner, and stacks more grip.
There's also a thicker anti-roll bar at the front that cuts roll (as you might have guessed) and also gives the car quicker reactions.
There's more... The brakes are bigger to cope with the extra performance and the gear ratios in the top three gears have been brought closer together to give the car more Usain Bolt factor in fourth, fifth and sixth gear. The result is that this RCZ feels miles faster than the car we drove in May.
It's in a different league, in fact. Inside, the RCZ 200 is fitted with a smaller steering wheel and a gear lever with a short throw - both of which give this RCZ a much sportier feel.
Top speed of the hot RCZ is 147mph and 0-62mph takes 7.5 sec.
Now the RCZ actually goes as fast as it looks. My only grumble is that the throttle response from the 1.6-litre turbocharged engine is rather abrupt. Fine when you're giving it the beans on a country road but not so good when you're trying to accelerate in town.
I'd love the Peugeot RCZ even if it was fitted with a dumper truck engine because it looks so fantastic.

However, with the extra performance from the 200bhp engine and the chassis changes, this new 1.6 THP 200 Sport is really the only RCZ model you should consider.

THE RIVALS
Audi TT 2.0 TFSI 211
This is the car the RCZ is aimed at. Does everything well but isn't as good to look at as the French car.


----------



## leenx

UKTTv6 said:


> This superior comment makes me laugh. I adore Audi's but dont go round saying my car is better etc etc. I like Audis because they suit my driving needs and I like the style. The best Audi I have ever owned is my current A6 3.0TFSI..
> 
> People buy cars for different reasons and good on them. My friend for example has a moded Renault Turbo 2 which would eat TTRS' for breakfast ..but he doesnt go around saying his car is better than a Ferarri.
> 
> It seems that we have quite a few snobs on this board who seem to think if they drive a TT (as I do) they are in some kind of motoring elite. As I said before I worked in germany for 6 years and Audis are seen as top of the range VW's with BMW and Mercedes seen as the premium cars.
> 
> Anyway I love both the TT and the RCZ and below is Richard Hammond from Top Gear's review of the RCZ
> 
> Peugeot RCZ review: Hot and sexy car as fast as it looks..
> 
> By Richard Hammond 8/10/2010
> 
> I can hear you saying it now: "Hammond you clot, you've already written about the Peugeot RCZ back in May."
> And you'd be right because I did, on the 21st to be exact.
> But that car was the 156bhp 1.6 THP and the one you're looking at now is the 200bhp 1.6 THP.
> You might think that this one is going to be a bit faster. But you'd be wrong.
> This more powerful version is as different from the standard car as would be an RCZ fitted with a one-cylinder diesel engine from a dumper truck that you started with a handle.
> This car looks just as sexy as the less powerful RCZ and is indeed considerably faster. But there's more to it than that because Peugeot has done a lot of fiddling under the RCZ's sexy body that you can't actually see.
> First of all the 200bhp RCZ is fitted with wider and stronger hubs from the Peugeot 407 saloon.
> The result is a more precise feel from the front of the car when you're bunging it into a corner, and stacks more grip.
> There's also a thicker anti-roll bar at the front that cuts roll (as you might have guessed) and also gives the car quicker reactions.
> There's more... The brakes are bigger to cope with the extra performance and the gear ratios in the top three gears have been brought closer together to give the car more Usain Bolt factor in fourth, fifth and sixth gear. The result is that this RCZ feels miles faster than the car we drove in May.
> It's in a different league, in fact. Inside, the RCZ 200 is fitted with a smaller steering wheel and a gear lever with a short throw - both of which give this RCZ a much sportier feel.
> Top speed of the hot RCZ is 147mph and 0-62mph takes 7.5 sec.
> Now the RCZ actually goes as fast as it looks. My only grumble is that the throttle response from the 1.6-litre turbocharged engine is rather abrupt. Fine when you're giving it the beans on a country road but not so good when you're trying to accelerate in town.
> I'd love the Peugeot RCZ even if it was fitted with a dumper truck engine because it looks so fantastic.
> 
> However, with the extra performance from the 200bhp engine and the chassis changes, this new 1.6 THP 200 Sport is really the only RCZ model you should consider.
> 
> THE RIVALS
> Audi TT 2.0 TFSI 211
> This is the car the RCZ is aimed at. Does everything well but isn't as good to look at as the French car.


 :lol: With all due respect, Richard Hammond knows as much about cars as Steve Mclaren did about managing England.

This is the car the RCZ is aimed at. Does everything well but isn't as good to look at as the French car.[/quote] - This is just not true IMO and this is purely from a cosmetic stance and deasign.

I suggest we beg to differ on this one. I am certainly not a car snob, I was driving a Renault Megane for 5 years, and a very grey import 350Z (Fairlady Z) after that - far from superior brands. I just don't like the RCZ - but will refrain from now on about going overboard on my comments.


----------



## richieshore

UKTTv6 said:


> This superior comment makes me laugh.
> People buy cars for different reasons and good on them. My friend for example has a moded Renault Turbo 2 which would eat TTRS' for breakfast ..but he doesnt go around saying his car is better than a Ferarri.


No and there's good reason for that, it clearly isn't! If he went round saying his car is quicker than a TTRS then that's fine but saying it's better would make him an idiot. Just like me saying that if I tuned up my TT it would be better than a Porsche because it's quicker would make me an idiot, but I'm not saying that, I'm saying that the TT is better than the RCZ because not only is it considerably quicker, it's also better on fuel, has a nicer more quality interior, is better looking and better made and produces lower emissions!

The TT is better in every single way, it's nothing at all to do with being a snob, it just is. This is why it's entry model costs more than the RCZ's top model.

I'm sure the RCZ is much better than a lot of other cars but it really isn't in the same league as the TT and it actually makes me laugh that you think that.

And as for Richard Hammond liking it - :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## oceans7

Richard Hammond.....is'nt he the bloke that does Total Wipeout? Could explain his penchant for the RCZ.


----------



## garyc

It seems that some of the current crop of TT drivers can be quite a catty bunch.

For all those vehemently slating the RCZ, which it appears that very few here have driven, the Bard's old adage springs to mind:

_<<"The lady doth protest too much, methinks." -- From Hamlet (III, ii, 239), William Shakespeare

It is not often that I quote from the world's literature, but I believe this quote is so common that it is worth addressing (compare with Acts 17:28). The oft-used quote "Me thinkest thou doth protest too much" is a paraphrase of the above quote from William Shakespeare. This quote is so commonly used because of how accurate it is seen to be in daily life. For example, I recall a certain "minister" who was regularly preaching against *********. He would give impassioned sermon after impassioned sermon against this one sin and rarely dealt with any other sins. Even though he spoke with a lisp and had very effeminate mannerisms this preacher appeared to have this one sin as the focal point of his life. What happened next has been repeated hundreds of times over the years: it later was exposed that the man was seeing a male prostitute and was actively partaking of this sin that he was so often preaching against.>>_

So, just maybe there are some latent and suppressed desires hiding here for RCZ ownership here -behind that emphatic distain? Anyone want to Come Out?

:-*


----------



## UKTTv6

richieshore said:


> UKTTv6 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This superior comment makes me laugh.
> People buy cars for different reasons and good on them. My friend for example has a moded Renault Turbo 2 which would eat TTRS' for breakfast ..but he doesnt go around saying his car is better than a Ferarri.
> 
> 
> 
> No and there's good reason for that, it clearly isn't! If he went round saying his car is quicker than a TTRS then that's fine but saying it's better would make him an idiot. Just like me saying that if I tuned up my TT it would be better than a Porsche because it's quicker would make me an idiot, but I'm not saying that, I'm saying that the TT is better than the RCZ because not only is it considerably quicker, it's also better on fuel, has a nicer more quality interior, is better looking and better made and produces lower emissions!
> 
> The TT is better in every single way, it's nothing at all to do with being a snob, it just is. This is why it's entry model costs more than the RCZ's top model.
> 
> I'm sure the RCZ is much better than a lot of other cars but it really isn't in the same league as the TT and it actually makes me laugh that you think that.
> 
> And as for Richard Hammond liking it - :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Click to expand...

A bristol costs 5 times more than a TT so you are saying thats a better car !!!!..Looks like you'll soon be playing catch up with Skoda when they finally get approval for their £50K car. As a side note When the SR1 is launched (the 2 door aston martin lookalike from Peugeot next year) they are considering putting the same hybrid into the RCZ which will mean 0-60 in 4.7 seconds and 50-75mph in 3.0. So then you'll have an RCZ in TTRS territory

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peugeot_SR1


----------



## leenx

garyc said:


> It seems that some of the current crop of TT drivers can be quite a catty bunch.
> 
> For all those vehemently slating the RCZ, which it appears that very few here have driven, the Bard's old adage springs to mind:
> 
> _<<"The lady doth protest too much, methinks." -- From Hamlet (III, ii, 239), William Shakespeare
> 
> It is not often that I quote from the world's literature, but I believe this quote is so common that it is worth addressing (compare with Acts 17:28). The oft-used quote "Me thinkest thou doth protest too much" is a paraphrase of the above quote from William Shakespeare. This quote is so commonly used because of how accurate it is seen to be in daily life. For example, I recall a certain "minister" who was regularly preaching against *********. He would give impassioned sermon after impassioned sermon against this one sin and rarely dealt with any other sins. Even though he spoke with a lisp and had very effeminate mannerisms this preacher appeared to have this one sin as the focal point of his life. What happened next has been repeated hundreds of times over the years: it later was exposed that the man was seeing a male prostitute and was actively partaking of this sin that he was so often preaching against.>>_
> 
> So, just maybe there are some latent and suppressed desires hiding here for RCZ ownership here -behind that emphatic distain? Anyone want to Come Out?
> 
> :-*


Did he drive an RCZ? :lol: :lol: :roll:


----------



## leenx

UKTTv6 said:


> richieshore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UKTTv6 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This superior comment makes me laugh.
> People buy cars for different reasons and good on them. My friend for example has a moded Renault Turbo 2 which would eat TTRS' for breakfast ..but he doesnt go around saying his car is better than a Ferarri.
> 
> 
> 
> No and there's good reason for that, it clearly isn't! If he went round saying his car is quicker than a TTRS then that's fine but saying it's better would make him an idiot. Just like me saying that if I tuned up my TT it would be better than a Porsche because it's quicker would make me an idiot, but I'm not saying that, I'm saying that the TT is better than the RCZ because not only is it considerably quicker, it's also better on fuel, has a nicer more quality interior, is better looking and better made and produces lower emissions!
> 
> The TT is better in every single way, it's nothing at all to do with being a snob, it just is. This is why it's entry model costs more than the RCZ's top model.
> 
> I'm sure the RCZ is much better than a lot of other cars but it really isn't in the same league as the TT and it actually makes me laugh that you think that.
> 
> And as for Richard Hammond liking it - :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A bristol costs 5 times more than a TT so you are saying thats a better car !!!!..Looks like you'll soon be playing catch up with Skoda when they finally get approval for their £50K car. As a side note When the SR1 is launched (the 2 door aston martin lookalike from Peugeot next year) they are considering putting the same hybrid into the RCZ which will mean 0-60 in 4.7 seconds and 50-75mph in 3.0. So then you'll have an RCZ in TTRS territory
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peugeot_SR1
Click to expand...

Sounds lovely :lol:


----------



## richieshore

UKTTv6 said:


> A bristol costs 5 times more than a TT so you are saying thats a better car !!!!..Looks like you'll soon be playing catch up with Skoda when they finally get approval for their £50K car. As a side note When the SR1 is launched (the 2 door aston martin lookalike from Peugeot next year) they are considering putting the same hybrid into the RCZ which will mean 0-60 in 4.7 seconds and 50-75mph in 3.0. So then you'll have an RCZ in TTRS territory
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peugeot_SR1


Like a Bristol Fighter? Yes I would most certainly say it was better than a TT and would swap mine in an instant, 8.0 V8, 200mph+, 0-60 in less than 4, not too mention the build quality and the fact it's absolutely stunning! I don't think it's worth 200k+ but that's another argument, not really sure what you're trying to get at here...??

That SR1 looks gorgeous, will they ever make it and will it actually look anything like that if/when they do? I very much doubt it, and putting that engine in an RCZ to make it competition for the RS, will that also result in RS prices? If so then it'll still be ridiculous, if it had that engine and was still sub 30k then it might be worth it, but they won't.

Not sure what you're on about with a 50k skoda either?

It's not the price, the performance, the looks, or the brand that makes one car better than another, it's the package, the combination of all of these things. Find me a car that looks better, performs better, is as economical, just as high quality and is the same price or less than the TT and I'll be impressed, but you won't, because if there was I'd have bought it.


----------



## garyc

leenx said:


> garyc said:
> 
> 
> 
> It seems that some of the current crop of TT drivers can be quite a catty bunch.
> 
> For all those vehemently slating the RCZ, which it appears that very few here have driven, the Bard's old adage springs to mind:
> 
> _<<"The lady doth protest too much, methinks." -- From Hamlet (III, ii, 239), William Shakespeare
> 
> It is not often that I quote from the world's literature, but I believe this quote is so common that it is worth addressing (compare with Acts 17:28). The oft-used quote "Me thinkest thou doth protest too much" is a paraphrase of the above quote from William Shakespeare. This quote is so commonly used because of how accurate it is seen to be in daily life. For example, I recall a certain "minister" who was regularly preaching against *********. He would give impassioned sermon after impassioned sermon against this one sin and rarely dealt with any other sins. Even though he spoke with a lisp and had very effeminate mannerisms this preacher appeared to have this one sin as the focal point of his life. What happened next has been repeated hundreds of times over the years: it later was exposed that the man was seeing a male prostitute and was actively partaking of this sin that he was so often preaching against.>>_
> 
> So, just maybe there are some latent and suppressed desires hiding here for RCZ ownership here -behind that emphatic distain? Anyone want to Come Out?
> 
> :-*
> 
> 
> 
> Did he drive an RCZ? :lol: :lol: :roll:
Click to expand...

No but I think Peter Tatchell may have been tossing up between both marques. Heaven knows what side he would come down on.


----------



## roddy

BMW Ser 1 M
Mitsbutsi Evo
Subaru,,, aint far behind
and all look better !!!!! ( well maybe not the Evo !! )


----------



## richieshore

roddy said:


> BMW Ser 1 M
> Mitsbutsi Evo
> Subaru,,, aint far behind
> and all look better !!!!! ( well maybe not the Evo !! )


Are these supposed to be cars comparable to the TT?? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

They're all a completely different type of car for a start, I won't even mention economy and as for all look better!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

The 1 series M coupe is a nice try but it actually costs more, isn't much quicker and much worse on fuel much more on tax.

Scooby's and Evo's, well I'm not a chav for a start but apart from that they're both hideously ugly and that's before you step inside to be greeted with the great Jap interior! And as for MPG! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Any more efforts?


----------



## Spandex

richieshore said:


> Find me a car that looks better, performs better, is as economical, just as high quality and is the same price or less than the TT and I'll be impressed, but you won't, because if there was I'd have bought it.


New BMW Z4?


----------



## rustyintegrale

Has anyone actually driven an RCZ? I have to say, that apart from the guppy front end I quite like it. 8)

I suppose it's posible to mod it like we do to make the TT the car it should've been? :roll:

So it could be remapped to make it quicker. :roll: 
Have suspension mods to make it more stable and corner better. :wink: 
Bigger wheels to make it sit better. :twisted: 
Better brakes (although every Pug I've driven has great brakes).

In other words it could be modded to make a great car. I don't know, I've never driven one. What I do know is the first time I drove a TT I wasn't overly impressed, but I got out of my Integrale and into that so it's hardly surprising it felt like an under performer.

But driving my TT now compared with the stock version at the Audi dealer is like comparing chalk with cheese. I'd suspect that a similarly modded RCZ might prove to show a similar improvement, so I wouldn't write the pug off as a pup quite yet.

Cheers

Rich


----------



## Fictorious

Can't take a "performance" FWD car seriously unless it has a proper mechanical LSD.


----------



## Spandex

Fictorious said:


> Can't take a "performance" FWD car seriously unless it has a proper mechanical LSD.


So where does that leave the TT? It's not a full on 4wd...

This actually leads nicely into a question I wanted to ask on here but couldn't be arsed to start a new thread - Hijacking this one won't exactly be a loss for the world:

If Audi had made a RWD version of the Mk1, do you think it would have been more popular? I don't think it would have got the same sales figures, as there may have been a perception of it being less safe, but I'm fairly sure it would have received a completely different reception in the press, and would have avoided all the 'hairdresser' taunts.

I'll happily admit I'm not a fan of 4WD in most cars. It saps power and adds weight and I've never had enough of a problem with RWD to really hanker after the extra grip (when I was looking at A6s years ago, I was actively avoiding any of the Quattro models). I've always thought the QS should have been RWD...


----------



## rustyintegrale

Fictorious said:


> Can't take a "performance" FWD car seriously unless it has a proper mechanical LSD.


No of course not. :roll: That's why it won the WRC 6 times running...


----------



## rustyintegrale

Spandex said:


> Fictorious said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can't take a "performance" FWD car seriously unless it has a proper mechanical LSD.
> 
> 
> 
> So where does that leave the TT? It's not a full on 4wd...
> 
> This actually leads nicely into a question I wanted to ask on here but couldn't be arsed to start a new thread - Hijacking this one won't exactly be a loss for the world:
> 
> If Audi had made a RWD version of the Mk1, do you think it would have been more popular? I don't think it would have got the same sales figures, as there may have been a perception of it being less safe, but I'm fairly sure it would have received a completely different reception in the press, and would have avoided all the 'hairdresser' taunts.
> 
> I'll happily admit I'm not a fan of 4WD in most cars. It saps power and adds weight and I've never had enough of a problem with RWD to really hanker after the extra grip (when I was looking at A6s years ago, I was actively avoiding any of the Quattro models). I've always thought the QS should have been RWD...
Click to expand...

Perhaps he meant 'front wheel drive' like the standard Delta... :wink:


----------



## richieshore

Spandex said:


> richieshore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Find me a car that looks better, performs better, is as economical, just as high quality and is the same price or less than the TT and I'll be impressed, but you won't, because if there was I'd have bought it.
> 
> 
> 
> New BMW Z4?
Click to expand...

Again it's not bad, I like it but it's slightly more expensive, slightly slower and not as good on fuel more on tax etc...

Although I do think it looks nice, the mile long bonnet puts me off and I do think the TT is a better looking car.


----------



## jampott

I don't personally like the RCZ for a number of reasons - the main one being the clearly obvious copy-cat styling, only 10+ years late...

However, claiming the TT is "clearly superior" is extremely subjective, and is an argument nobody is likely to win.

Having the desire to offload my TTR in 2004, I picked up a brand new 350z to replace it. Cue endless comments about how the 350z was a "worse car in every respect" to the TT, mostly from ill-informed and uneducated TT owners who had never bothered to drive one. In some respects, I preferred the 350z to the TTR it had replaced, and was sorry to get rid (when circumstances necessitated an S4 Avant) a mere 10 months (and 24k miles) later.

I've honestly never met such brand-snobs as TT owners. There wasn't much "sportscar-ish" about the MK1 (given its run-of-the-mill underpinnings, it was never going to match a Boxster / Cayman in the handling / feedback stakes) and the MK2 (even the TTS/TTRS variants) hasn't quite managed to bridge the gap properly - at least not whilst Audi likes to claim the lower ground with weedy, underpowered (and diesel) versions.

So, for those of you who still dream about playing "Car Top Trumps" with the RCZ owners, and insist that "your" marque / model is "better in every way", it might be worth having a bit of a think about what you are actually intending to achieve. If you want to show the world the TT is "better", then good luck to you... but you won't be able to win that battle, I'm afraid. If you want to show the world what a bunch of cocks drive TTs these days, then this is a far more likely outcome.

Besides, the TT is just a poor man's R8. In fact it isn't even that. :lol:


----------



## leenx

jampott said:


> I don't personally like the RCZ for a number of reasons - the main one being the clearly obvious copy-cat styling, only 10+ years late...
> 
> However, claiming the TT is "clearly superior" is extremely subjective, and is an argument nobody is likely to win.
> 
> Having the desire to offload my TTR in 2004, I picked up a brand new 350z to replace it. Cue endless comments about how the 350z was a "worse car in every respect" to the TT, mostly from ill-informed and uneducated TT owners who had never bothered to drive one. In some respects, I preferred the 350z to the TTR it had replaced, and was sorry to get rid (when circumstances necessitated an S4 Avant) a mere 10 months (and 24k miles) later.
> 
> I've honestly never met such brand-snobs as TT owners. There wasn't much "sportscar-ish" about the MK1 (given its run-of-the-mill underpinnings, it was never going to match a Boxster / Cayman in the handling / feedback stakes) and the MK2 (even the TTS/TTRS variants) hasn't quite managed to bridge the gap properly - at least not whilst Audi likes to claim the lower ground with weedy, underpowered (and diesel) versions.
> 
> So, for those of you who still dream about playing "Car Top Trumps" with the RCZ owners, and insist that "your" marque / model is "better in every way", it might be worth having a bit of a think about what you are actually intending to achieve. If you want to show the world the TT is "better", then good luck to you... but you won't be able to win that battle, I'm afraid. If you want to show the world what a bunch of cocks drive TTs these days, then this is a far more likely outcome.
> 
> Besides, the TT is just a poor man's R8. In fact it isn't even that. :lol:


I owned a 350Z before the TTS, the TTS is a much better car - A LOT better! and I don't miss for one minute going over bumps in the road and thinking I've got a bucket of nails in the back! :lol: As said before it's nothing to do with badge snobbery, I just hate the RCZ, why do you always come to these kind of conclusions that it's to do with car/badge snobbery when it isn't?


----------



## Spandex

leenx said:


> I just hate the RCZ, why do you always come to these kind of conclusions that it's to do with car/badge snobbery when it isn't?


Because if you've never even driven one, then how can it be anything else? You can't 'hate' a car based on some photos and a few pre-conceived ideas about Peugeots build quality..


----------



## leenx

Spandex said:


> leenx said:
> 
> 
> 
> I just hate the RCZ, why do you always come to these kind of conclusions that it's to do with car/badge snobbery when it isn't?
> 
> 
> 
> Because if you've never even driven one, then how can it be anything else? You can't 'hate' a car based on some photos and a few pre-conceived ideas about Peugeots build quality..
Click to expand...

I have no plans to drive one, why would I want to? when I think the styling both exterior and interior is cheap and tacky? You could pick up a 350Z for cheaper and it's three times the car even if it does rattle like a bag of nails! Ok I don't hate it :wink: But I sure don't like it!


----------



## jampott

leenx said:


> I owned a 350Z before the TTS, the TTS is a much better car - A LOT better!


In YOUR opinion. That's precisely my point.



leenx said:


> and I don't miss for one minute going over bumps in the road and thinking I've got a bucket of nails in the back! :lol: As said before it's nothing to do with badge snobbery, I just hate the RCZ, why do you always come to these kind of conclusions that it's to do with car/badge snobbery when it isn't?


[/quote]

Because so many of the comments are from people who haven't driven one, and who are repeating endlessly copied "arguments" based on other people's stereotypical judgments of what French cars used to be like in the 80's and 90's.

Does that mean the RCZ is a good car? Of course not. Does it mean it isn't a bad car? Hell no.

Car ownership is totally subjective. I preferred a lot of aspects of the 350z to the TTR it replaced. You preferred the TTS to the 350z. Does that make the TT a better car than the 350z? In your opinion it does, in my opinion it doesn't.

But if anyone thinks they can "win" the argument is just laughable. Does anyone honestly think that RCZ owners are going (en masse) to wake up one day and say "Actually, this car is shit. I wish I'd bought a TT." Of course not.

When you drive an Audi TT, arguing the fact that your car is "superior" to everyone else's just makes you look like a tool. Of course you think your car is superior. That's because you decided to spend £20k-£45k on it. If you thought the RCZ was superior you would have bought one. Obvious fact is obvious. Likewise, most RCZ owners could have bought a TT if they wanted. They didn't. Which means they think the RCZ is a better car. Who are you to think your opinion is somehow more important than theirs, especially if you haven't even seen / driven / experienced an RCZ first hand, and are content to roll out the same old drivel in every argument.


----------



## UKTTv6

jampott said:


> leenx said:
> 
> 
> 
> I owned a 350Z before the TTS, the TTS is a much better car - A LOT better!
> 
> 
> 
> In YOUR opinion. That's precisely my point.
> 
> 
> 
> leenx said:
> 
> 
> 
> and I don't miss for one minute going over bumps in the road and thinking I've got a bucket of nails in the back! :lol: As said before it's nothing to do with badge snobbery, I just hate the RCZ, why do you always come to these kind of conclusions that it's to do with car/badge snobbery when it isn't?
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Because so many of the comments are from people who haven't driven one, and who are repeating endlessly copied "arguments" based on other people's stereotypical judgments of what French cars used to be like in the 80's and 90's.

Does that mean the RCZ is a good car? Of course not. Does it mean it isn't a bad car? Hell no.

Car ownership is totally subjective. I preferred a lot of aspects of the 350z to the TTR it replaced. You preferred the TTS to the 350z. Does that make the TT a better car than the 350z? In your opinion it does, in my opinion it doesn't.

But if anyone thinks they can "win" the argument is just laughable. Does anyone honestly think that RCZ owners are going (en masse) to wake up one day and say "Actually, this car is shit. I wish I'd bought a TT." Of course not.

When you drive an Audi TT, arguing the fact that your car is "superior" to everyone else's just makes you look like a tool. Of course you think your car is superior. That's because you decided to spend £20k-£45k on it. If you thought the RCZ was superior you would have bought one. Obvious fact is obvious. Likewise, most RCZ owners could have bought a TT if they wanted. They didn't. Which means they think the RCZ is a better car. Who are you to think your opinion is somehow more important than theirs, especially if you haven't even seen / driven / experienced an RCZ first hand, and are content to roll out the same old drivel in every argument.[/quote]

spot on. a good post. Both cars are good


----------



## garyc

Fictorious said:


> Can't take a "performance" FWD car seriously unless it has a proper mechanical LSD.


But you have haldex which is electronically control viscous cuopling managed by software, and not mechanically controlled? You'd therfore need a torsen-equipped Audi quattro to take it seriously?


----------



## roddy

to " rusty ",,, be fair mate,,, the Integrally, of which i am also a big fan,, which won so convincingly at the hands of Kankunen and others, was a much modified 4x4,,, the only fwd car which could ever compete with the full on 4x4,and only on tarmac, was a much modified formula 2 peugeot 306 !!!! (and was not allowed to score points in WRC ) oops, i guess there are some people on here who dont want to know that !! the only time Audi were competetive was when they had 4x4 and no one else did!!!

to " spandex" .. i am not so sure that the sales figures would have been down on a RWD TT,, it may , supposing the handling was up to standard, have appealed to more than just the hairdresser brigade,,,,, why oh why did they not do it properly and make it mid engine 4x4,, :? :?


----------



## Astonmartini

Well here is the definitive answer

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... sers%20car


----------



## Fictorious

rustyintegrale said:


> Fictorious said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can't take a "performance" FWD car seriously unless it has a proper mechanical LSD.
> 
> 
> 
> No of course not. :roll: That's why it won the WRC 6 times running...
Click to expand...

Nice try, firstly the Delta HF Integrale there is 4WD, but on dirt an LSD is redundant due to the maximum grip of the wheels being exceeded almost all the time when cornering (especially with FWD). FWD with LSD is the only way to manage 200+ bhp without it handling like stink on _road_. You will not find a current FWD race car that doesn't have a LSD.



Spandex said:


> So where does that leave the TT? It's not a full on 4wd...


That's why the TT isn't a performance car and it never will be (with the exception of the DTM machines but that's not exactly fair comparison)

Referring to your question about RWD TT, I think it wouldn't have sold well as the target market would have been completely different, by putting RWD in your car you're saying you care about performance first and foremost, whereas the TT was about looking sharp and modern, performance was secondary. It was a nice looking, fairly quick coupe for the masses.

Realistically they were never going to make a RWD version as they didn't have a platform that the TT could share, at the time the TT was really a niche product so development costs for RWD drivetrain would have been (in VAG's opinion) not worth it. The QS _should_ have been RWD, but it also should have had at least the V6 twin pot brakes, uprated suspension, better engine internals, more aggressive map etc. etc. but in reality it was just a cash-in on a very well selling product.


----------



## richieshore

Astonmartini said:


> Well here is the definitive answer
> 
> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... sers%20car


Certainly makes it definitive if it's written in the chav dictionary! :lol:


----------



## andyTT180

UKTTv6 said:


> richieshore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UKTTv6 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This superior comment makes me laugh.
> People buy cars for different reasons and good on them. My friend for example has a moded Renault Turbo 2 which would eat TTRS' for breakfast ..but he doesnt go around saying his car is better than a Ferarri.
> 
> 
> 
> No and there's good reason for that, it clearly isn't! If he went round saying his car is quicker than a TTRS then that's fine but saying it's better would make him an idiot. Just like me saying that if I tuned up my TT it would be better than a Porsche because it's quicker would make me an idiot, but I'm not saying that, I'm saying that the TT is better than the RCZ because not only is it considerably quicker, it's also better on fuel, has a nicer more quality interior, is better looking and better made and produces lower emissions!
> 
> The TT is better in every single way, it's nothing at all to do with being a snob, it just is. This is why it's entry model costs more than the RCZ's top model.
> 
> I'm sure the RCZ is much better than a lot of other cars but it really isn't in the same league as the TT and it actually makes me laugh that you think that.
> 
> And as for Richard Hammond liking it - :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A bristol costs 5 times more than a TT so you are saying thats a better car !!!!..Looks like you'll soon be playing catch up with Skoda when they finally get approval for their £50K car. As a side note When the SR1 is launched (the 2 door aston martin lookalike from Peugeot next year) they are considering putting the same hybrid into the RCZ which will mean 0-60 in 4.7 seconds and 50-75mph in 3.0. So then you'll have an RCZ in TTRS territory
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peugeot_SR1
Click to expand...

The SR1 will never go into production no ones stupid enough to pay that much for a peugeot :lol:

I'v seen the RCZ in the flesh the exterior looks ok from the back the side it looks poor because the boots too long, the fronts just awful the interior is basically a 308 interior with some cheap faux leather over it, since when did taking a cheap hatchbacks interior and fitting some plastic leather over it make it a quality car? It didnt even touch the mk1's interior let alone the mk2's. The seats were so thick they look like they should have been in a big saloon and the steering wheel was massive. I never drove it but even if it was a great drive it was still a hideous car. Overall It was a poor car the design looks very dis-jointed, its far too fussy and doesnt have the TTs smooth lines

I'd much rather have a hyundai coupe at least its good value and looks better


----------



## UKTTv6

SR1 goes on sale 2012. Dealers will be getting brochures for pre order late 2011


----------



## andyTT180

UKTTv6 said:


> SR1 goes on sale 2012. Dealers will be getting brochures for pre order late 2011


well it better be cheap because no one in their right mind would pay the proposed over 40k for the SR1 :lol: :lol:

all expensive french cars are total flops

Citreon C6
Peugeot 607
Renault velsatis

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/ ... ?logcode=p

The RCZs are already dropping in value in two years this will be lucky to be worth £6k :lol:


----------



## UKTTv6

andyTT180 said:


> UKTTv6 said:
> 
> 
> 
> SR1 goes on sale 2012. Dealers will be getting brochures for pre order late 2011
> 
> 
> 
> well it better be cheap because no one in their right mind would pay the proposed over 40k for the SR1 :lol: :lol:
> 
> all expensive french cars are total flops
> 
> Citreon C6
> Peugeot 607
> Renault velsatis
> 
> http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/ ... ?logcode=p
> 
> The RCZs are already dropping in value in two years this will be lucky to be worth £6k :lol:
Click to expand...

You need to get your facts right before spouting b******t

Industry pundits are predicting residual values of around 46% with the Audi TT coming in at a slightly better 48% .The figures are supplied by CAP the industry leader in forecasting vehicle residuals.


----------



## andyTT180

UKTTv6 said:


> andyTT180 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UKTTv6 said:
> 
> 
> 
> SR1 goes on sale 2012. Dealers will be getting brochures for pre order late 2011
> 
> 
> 
> well it better be cheap because no one in their right mind would pay the proposed over 40k for the SR1 :lol: :lol:
> 
> all expensive french cars are total flops
> 
> Citreon C6
> Peugeot 607
> Renault velsatis
> 
> http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/ ... ?logcode=p
> 
> The RCZs are already dropping in value in two years this will be lucky to be worth £6k :lol:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You need to get your facts right before spouting b******t
> 
> Industry pundits are predicting residual values of around 46% with the Audi TT coming in at a slightly better 48% .The figures are supplied by CAP the industry leader in forecasting vehicle residuals.
Click to expand...

what did I possibly say that was bullshit?

all those cars were flops and you know deep down the RCZ's going to be worthless in a few years :lol: 
If im right that RCZ is the top spec which would have been £23,245 new so for being the current "it" coupe as you say its a bit strange that its lost nearly £5500 in 6 months and that RCZs been on autotrader for over a month so they dont seem to be so popular. Theres currently 113 RCZs on autotrader and according to information on the RCZ forum around 2000 RCZs are coming to the UK in its first year so that doesnt sound like its too popular does it? If it was such a big hit people would be paying a premium just to get one. :roll:

You've mentioned in many of your posts that TT owners are snobs who only like audi, thats not true I think the nissan 350z, alfa brera, porsche cayman and BMW z4 are all lovely cars and I'll consider all of them when I decide to change my car


----------



## MarcusR

C6 is a fantastic car, very different, very french, i've driven both C6 and Vel Satis and liked them. They depreciate badly.. like most large cars and Audi arent immune from that , I quite fancy an S8 V10, they were loosing 45-60k in 3 years.

Im actually surprised there is so few RCZ on autotrader, there must be 300+ peugeot dealers all with a demo car for sale?

If i read the autotrader advert right that guy needs to get shot of his car quickly as hes been given a company car. His circumstances reflect in the price so isnt a clear comparison, i would hazzard a guess that if you needed to sell a 8 month old TT fast it wouldnt be a fantastic financal experience.

Like UkTT said CAP the black book people reckon the RCZ will be a few percent behind the TT, they have years of experience and their residual value estimates are used by the big fleet companies so they tend to be spot on.


----------



## BLinky

I can never afford to run a S8


----------



## Spandex

andyTT180 said:


> If im right that RCZ is the top spec which would have been £23,245 new so for being the current "it" coupe as you say its a bit strange that its lost nearly £5500 in 6 months


Here's a 2010 TT roadster for £20k...

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201051375892887

What would that have been new? £25k? And that's from a dealer too, so if that was a private sale you could knock a grand or two off...

Fortunately, you don't have to take my word for it as whatcar have a handy depreciation graphing tool that lets you compare cars. If you think the two models I chose aren't a good comparison you can add up to a total of four cars onto this graph:

http://www.whatcar.com/car-deprecia...keId=5289&modelVersionId=5671&editionId=34292

Seems to me that they track each other fairly well at the start, although the Audi does a little better... But in years two and three the RCZ definitely flattens out more than the TT.


----------



## rustyintegrale

Fictorious said:


> rustyintegrale said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fictorious said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can't take a "performance" FWD car seriously unless it has a proper mechanical LSD.
> 
> 
> 
> No of course not. :roll: That's why it won the WRC 6 times running...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nice try, firstly the Delta HF Integrale there is 4WD, but on dirt an LSD is redundant due to the maximum grip of the wheels being exceeded almost all the time when cornering (especially with FWD). FWD with LSD is the only way to manage 200+ bhp without it handling like stink on _road_. You will not find a current FWD race car that doesn't have a LSD.
Click to expand...

I don't understand your point. Are you trying to claim the Integrale cannot be considered a performance car? Point-to-point in all weathers, it is the most capable car I've ever driven and I have no doubt that is down to the 4WD system.

Cheers

Rich


----------



## leenx

andyTT180 said:


> UKTTv6 said:
> 
> 
> 
> SR1 goes on sale 2012. Dealers will be getting brochures for pre order late 2011
> 
> 
> 
> well it better be cheap because no one in their right mind would pay the proposed over 40k for the SR1 :lol: :lol:
> 
> all expensive french cars are total flops
> 
> Citreon C6
> Peugeot 607
> Renault velsatis
> 
> http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/ ... ?logcode=p
> 
> The RCZs are already dropping in value in two years this will be lucky to be worth £6k :lol:
Click to expand...

The more I look at the RCZ, the more I dislike it, simply because it's ugly and it has blatantly taken it's shape and design from the TT, 350Z, and Hyundai coupe - very original! :lol: How people can say it's cutting edge and a car from the future is simply a joke! It may well be a good car to drive (I don't know - as people on here have pointed out several times :roll: ) But I wouldn't want to.


----------



## garyc

Astonmartini said:


> Well here is the definitive answer
> 
> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... sers%20car


LOL :lol:

"Has more show than go." Not sure about inclusion of s2000 though, which actually had more go than show and is one of the great oversteerers of the last 15 years crop of sports cars. Hard to get quick around the track on the limit of grip too. As such, a drivers car. Obviously not as manly as the TT..... :twisted:


----------



## jampott

garyc said:


> Astonmartini said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well here is the definitive answer
> 
> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... sers%20car
> 
> 
> 
> LOL :lol:
> 
> "Has more show than go." Not sure about inclusion of s2000 though, which actually had more go than show and is one of the great oversteerers of the last 15 years crop of sports cars. Hard to get quick around the track on the limit of grip too. As such, a drivers car. Obviously not as manly as the TT..... :twisted:
Click to expand...

The S2k had the highest output NA 2L engine of it's time, and probably still holds that record. Hardly for hairdressers.


----------



## andyTT180

Spandex said:


> andyTT180 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If im right that RCZ is the top spec which would have been £23,245 new so for being the current "it" coupe as you say its a bit strange that its lost nearly £5500 in 6 months
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a 2010 TT roadster for £20k...
> 
> http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201051375892887
> 
> What would that have been new? £25k? And that's from a dealer too, so if that was a private sale you could knock a grand or two off...
> 
> Fortunately, you don't have to take my word for it as whatcar have a handy depreciation graphing tool that lets you compare cars. If you think the two models I chose aren't a good comparison you can add up to a total of four cars onto this graph:
> 
> http://www.whatcar.com/car-deprecia...keId=5289&modelVersionId=5671&editionId=34292
> 
> Seems to me that they track each other fairly well at the start, although the Audi does a little better... But in years two and three the RCZ definitely flattens out more than the TT.
Click to expand...

Peugeot has limited the number of RCZs so if they were so popular they wouldnt be dropping any value at all. The mk2 TTs been out since 2006 so there a plentiful supply of cars. Generally a car which is a "big" and has low numbers of cars imported by the manufacturer sell for very near the new cost :roll: Those whatcar residuals are wrong I can almost guarantee that in three years time the RCZ will be worth £6-7K



quattrorr said:


> C6 is a fantastic car, very different, very french, i've driven both C6 and Vel Satis and liked them. They depreciate badly.. like most large cars and Audi arent immune from that , I quite fancy an S8 V10, they were loosing 45-60k in 3 years.
> 
> Im actually surprised there is so few RCZ on autotrader, there must be 300+ peugeot dealers all with a demo car for sale?
> 
> If i read the autotrader advert right that guy needs to get shot of his car quickly as hes been given a company car. His circumstances reflect in the price so isnt a clear comparison, i would hazzard a guess that if you needed to sell a 8 month old TT fast it wouldnt be a fantastic financal experience.
> 
> Like UkTT said CAP the black book people reckon the RCZ will be a few percent behind the TT, they have years of experience and their residual value estimates are used by the big fleet companies so they tend to be spot on.


Theres many RCZs for 17-18k and you missed my point if it was a big hit it would be sold. You think if only 2000 cars are being brought to the UK in its first year and this is only january so there wont be 2000 in the market yet that 3000 cars should be for sale, the dealers cant shift them I'v kept an eye out on autotrader for a while and its all the same cars that have been for sale for months.

Back to comparing the RCZ to the TT which has been on the market for 10 years if the RCZ was a big hit and the next big thing people would be paying the new price just to get their hands on one, The audi S8 is a large V8 which always have poorer residuals, the large french cars are usually sized to compete with 5 series sized cars and arent too bad on fuel so why are they such a flop? Because they are french :roll:


----------



## Fictorious

rustyintegrale said:


> I don't understand your point. Are you trying to claim the Integrale cannot be considered a performance car? Point-to-point in all weathers, it is the most capable car I've ever driven and I have no doubt that is down to the 4WD system.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Rich


I guess you might have got confused between FWD (Front Wheel Drive) and 4WD (Four Wheel Drive)? The comment I made was only aimed at FWD, saying that without a mechanical LSD the front wheels can't drive and steer effectively on roads, whilst this is also true for 4WD cars to an extent, it's far less of a problem and you'll only see the same kind of troubles when you're getting ~400bhp on a 50-50 split 4WD car, but I can't think of any 400bhp 4WD performance cars that don't have a mechanical LSD.


----------



## Spandex

andyTT180 said:


> Peugeot has limited the number of RCZs so if they were so popular they wouldnt be dropping any value at all. The mk2 TTs been out since 2006 so there a plentiful supply of cars. Generally a car which is a "big" and has low numbers of cars imported by the manufacturer sell for very near the new cost :roll: Those whatcar residuals are wrong I can almost guarantee that in three years time the RCZ will be worth £6-7K


 I don't know where to start with this. Pretty much every statement goes against all evidence of how cars depreciate. The RCZ is behaving the same as pretty much every normal car out there, but for some bizarre reason you're trying to claim this is evidence of it being a poor performer. As for your 'guarantee', I'm afraid it carries a lot less weight than all the industry experts opinions.



andyTT180 said:


> Back to comparing the RCZ to the TT which has been on the market for 10 years


The TT that the RCZ is being compared to has been on the market for 5 years.


----------



## andyTT180

Spandex said:


> andyTT180 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Peugeot has limited the number of RCZs so if they were so popular they wouldnt be dropping any value at all. The mk2 TTs been out since 2006 so there a plentiful supply of cars. Generally a car which is a "big" and has low numbers of cars imported by the manufacturer sell for very near the new cost :roll: Those whatcar residuals are wrong I can almost guarantee that in three years time the RCZ will be worth £6-7K
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know where to start with this. Pretty much every statement goes against all evidence of how cars depreciate. The RCZ is behaving the same as pretty much every normal car out there, but for some bizarre reason you're trying to claim this is evidence of it being a poor performer. As for your 'guarantee', I'm afraid it carries a lot less weight than all the industry experts opinions.
> 
> 
> 
> andyTT180 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Back to comparing the RCZ to the TT which has been on the market for 10 years
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The TT that the RCZ is being compared to has been on the market for 5 years.
Click to expand...

The RCZs residuals will react exactly the same 407 coupe's. badly

I dont think the RCZ compares to any TT on the market, I'd genuinely buy a Hyundai Coupe before I'd buy an RCZ if I had to buy a new car, It looks far better and will arguably be better built


----------



## Fictorious

andyTT180 said:


> The RCZs residuals will react exactly the same 407 coupe's. badly
> 
> I dont think the RCZ compares to any TT on the market, I'd genuinely buy a Hyundai Coupe before I'd buy an RCZ if I had to buy a new car, It looks far better and will arguably be better built


The top of the range RCZ most compares to a front wheel drive, 2.0TFSi with no options ticket in terms of price, so I'll be impartial. These are all taken from what car comparisons so if you feel the data is wrong blame them not me.

*Equipment*

Standard equipment that RCZ 1.6 GT has that TT 2.0 TFSi Sport doesn't:
Cruise control
Power Folding Mirrors
Bluetooth

Standard equipment that TT 2.0 TFSi Sport has that RCZ 1.6 GT doesn't:
Front Fog Lights
On/Off Passenger Airbag
Marked Parts (?)

*Performance & Costs*
TT RCZ
BHP *208/6000* 197/5500
lbft Torque *258 * 203 
Boot space/L 290 *384*
Weight/kg *1260* 1421 
0-60mph *6.1 * 7.6 
Max Speed *152* 146 
Average MPG *42.8* 40.9
Insurance Group *33* 34 
3yr Servicing £1,100 *£976*
% Value (3yrs) *51* 43 
Cost New £27,130 *£25,595* 
Cost 3yr £13,836 *£11,005*
Depreciation *£13,294* £14,590

So without me looking at what the cars look like, how they drive etc. and just taking those statistics into account as equal weighting, the TT beats the RCZ by 9-4.
TT is:
More powerful & quicker to 0-60
More economical
Cheaper to insure (theoretically)
Retains more value
Depreciates by less

RCZ is:
More practical (in terms of boot space)
Cheaper to service
Cheaper to buy new
Cheaper to buy used

So taking out looks and drive-ability (two very important factors for a coupe really) the TT is the smarter buy, lose less money when selling on, better performance and cheaper to run with exception of servicing.

Obviously this comparison isn't complete as the way something looks and drives would probably be my main concern if I was buying one, along with reliability and power, so only 1 of the 4 things I'd look for in a coupe is really covered there.


----------



## jampott

Do people really draw up a little comparative table when deciding what car to buy next?


----------



## Spandex

jampott said:


> Do people really draw up a little comparative table when deciding what car to buy next?


If they do, they certainly don't apply equal weighting to all the factors and they don't ignore looks and how it drives... So, I'm not sure how useful that table is in proving the TT is the better buy for any given person.


----------



## rustyintegrale

This must be doing wonders for interest in Peugeot. Has anyone actually taken a look at the website? I just did and specced up a car how I'd have it. It comes in at just shy of £32k inclusive of VAT

Now that represents pretty good value for money given the options I chose... 8)


----------



## MarcusR

Fictorious said:


> andyTT180 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The RCZs residuals will react exactly the same 407 coupe's. badly
> 
> I dont think the RCZ compares to any TT on the market, I'd genuinely buy a Hyundai Coupe before I'd buy an RCZ if I had to buy a new car, It looks far better and will arguably be better built
> 
> 
> 
> The top of the range RCZ most compares to a front wheel drive, 2.0TFSi with no options ticket in terms of price, so I'll be impartial. These are all taken from what car comparisons so if you feel the data is wrong blame them not me.
> 
> *Equipment*
> 
> Standard equipment that RCZ 1.6 GT has that TT 2.0 TFSi Sport doesn't:
> Cruise control
> Power Folding Mirrors
> Bluetooth
> 
> Standard equipment that TT 2.0 TFSi Sport has that RCZ 1.6 GT doesn't:
> Front Fog Lights
> On/Off Passenger Airbag
> Marked Parts (?)
> 
> *Performance & Costs*
> TT RCZ
> BHP *208/6000* 197/5500
> lbft Torque *258 * 203
> Boot space/L 290 *384*
> Weight/kg *1260* 1421
> 0-60mph *6.1 * 7.6
> Max Speed *152* 146
> Average MPG *42.8* 40.9
> Insurance Group *33* 34
> 3yr Servicing £1,100 *£976*
> % Value (3yrs) *51* 43
> Cost New £27,130 *£25,595*
> Cost 3yr £13,836 *£11,005*
> Depreciation *£13,294* £14,590
> 
> So without me looking at what the cars look like, how they drive etc. and just taking those statistics into account as equal weighting, the TT beats the RCZ by 9-4.
> TT is:
> More powerful & quicker to 0-60
> More economical
> Cheaper to insure (theoretically)
> Retains more value
> Depreciates by less
> 
> RCZ is:
> More practical (in terms of boot space)
> Cheaper to service
> Cheaper to buy new
> Cheaper to buy used
> 
> So taking out looks and drive-ability (two very important factors for a coupe really) the TT is the smarter buy, lose less money when selling on, better performance and cheaper to run with exception of servicing.
> 
> Obviously this comparison isn't complete as the way something looks and drives would probably be my main concern if I was buying one, along with reliability and power, so only 1 of the 4 things I'd look for in a coupe is really covered there.
Click to expand...

I think that you missed a few bits.....Standard equipment that RCZ 1.6 GT 200 has that TT 2.0 TFSi Sport doesn't: (info taken from the Peugeot and Audi configurators)

19" Alloys (£1,690 Audi option) 
Tyre Pressure Sensors (£75)
Full leather (£560)
Electric seats with driver memory (£740)
Heated Seats (£255)
Interior Light package (£125)
Sport Suspension (£435)
Hill Hold (£90)
Short Shift Gear Change (£155)
USB connection(£185)
Comfort pack - Cruise Control , Auto Lights & Wipers , Rear Park Aid(£510) 
Front park Aid - no price given on Audi site

Whoops thats like five grands worth...whatever you think of the RCZ it does highlight that Audi are a rip off for spec and options [smiley=bigcry.gif]


----------



## andyTT180

quattrorr said:


> Fictorious said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> andyTT180 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The RCZs residuals will react exactly the same 407 coupe's. badly
> 
> I dont think the RCZ compares to any TT on the market, I'd genuinely buy a Hyundai Coupe before I'd buy an RCZ if I had to buy a new car, It looks far better and will arguably be better built
> 
> 
> 
> The top of the range RCZ most compares to a front wheel drive, 2.0TFSi with no options ticket in terms of price, so I'll be impartial. These are all taken from what car comparisons so if you feel the data is wrong blame them not me.
> 
> *Equipment*
> 
> Standard equipment that RCZ 1.6 GT has that TT 2.0 TFSi Sport doesn't:
> Cruise control
> Power Folding Mirrors
> Bluetooth
> 
> Standard equipment that TT 2.0 TFSi Sport has that RCZ 1.6 GT doesn't:
> Front Fog Lights
> On/Off Passenger Airbag
> Marked Parts (?)
> 
> *Performance & Costs*
> TT RCZ
> BHP *208/6000* 197/5500
> lbft Torque *258 * 203
> Boot space/L 290 *384*
> Weight/kg *1260* 1421
> 0-60mph *6.1 * 7.6
> Max Speed *152* 146
> Average MPG *42.8* 40.9
> Insurance Group *33* 34
> 3yr Servicing £1,100 *£976*
> % Value (3yrs) *51* 43
> Cost New £27,130 *£25,595*
> Cost 3yr £13,836 *£11,005*
> Depreciation *£13,294* £14,590
> 
> So without me looking at what the cars look like, how they drive etc. and just taking those statistics into account as equal weighting, the TT beats the RCZ by 9-4.
> TT is:
> More powerful & quicker to 0-60
> More economical
> Cheaper to insure (theoretically)
> Retains more value
> Depreciates by less
> 
> RCZ is:
> More practical (in terms of boot space)
> Cheaper to service
> Cheaper to buy new
> Cheaper to buy used
> 
> So taking out looks and drive-ability (two very important factors for a coupe really) the TT is the smarter buy, lose less money when selling on, better performance and cheaper to run with exception of servicing.
> 
> Obviously this comparison isn't complete as the way something looks and drives would probably be my main concern if I was buying one, along with reliability and power, so only 1 of the 4 things I'd look for in a coupe is really covered there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think that you missed a few bits.....Standard equipment that RCZ 1.6 GT 200 has that TT 2.0 TFSi Sport doesn't: (info taken from the Peugeot and Audi configurators)
> 
> 19" Alloys (£1,690 Audi option)
> Tyre Pressure Sensors (£75)
> Full leather (£560)
> Electric seats with driver memory (£740)
> Heated Seats (£255)
> Interior Light package (£125)
> Sport Suspension (£435)
> Hill Hold (£90)
> Short Shift Gear Change (£155)
> USB connection(£185)
> Comfort pack - Cruise Control , Auto Lights & Wipers , Rear Park Aid(£510)
> Front park Aid - no price given on Audi site
> 
> Whoops thats like five grands worth...whatever you think of the RCZ it does highlight that Audi are a rip off for spec and options [smiley=bigcry.gif]
Click to expand...

packing a car with spec doesnt make it a good car, manufacturers only do it to detract from what is essentially a lackluster car, I think the new audi TT is well priced for what you get a premium branded good to drive, fast, economical, fairly practical great looking car. The RCZ is overpriced for what is essentially a 308 with a 308 interior, 308 front end with a mini engine. I think if the RCZ was a better performer than the TT with a more powerful engine then it would merit its price tag but frankly its worse on every criteria than the TT :roll:


----------



## leenx

quattrorr said:


> Fictorious said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> andyTT180 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The RCZs residuals will react exactly the same 407 coupe's. badly
> 
> I dont think the RCZ compares to any TT on the market, I'd genuinely buy a Hyundai Coupe before I'd buy an RCZ if I had to buy a new car, It looks far better and will arguably be better built
> 
> 
> 
> The top of the range RCZ most compares to a front wheel drive, 2.0TFSi with no options ticket in terms of price, so I'll be impartial. These are all taken from what car comparisons so if you feel the data is wrong blame them not me.
> 
> *Equipment*
> 
> Standard equipment that RCZ 1.6 GT has that TT 2.0 TFSi Sport doesn't:
> Cruise control
> Power Folding Mirrors
> Bluetooth
> 
> Standard equipment that TT 2.0 TFSi Sport has that RCZ 1.6 GT doesn't:
> Front Fog Lights
> On/Off Passenger Airbag
> Marked Parts (?)
> 
> *Performance & Costs*
> TT RCZ
> BHP *208/6000* 197/5500
> lbft Torque *258 * 203
> Boot space/L 290 *384*
> Weight/kg *1260* 1421
> 0-60mph *6.1 * 7.6
> Max Speed *152* 146
> Average MPG *42.8* 40.9
> Insurance Group *33* 34
> 3yr Servicing £1,100 *£976*
> % Value (3yrs) *51* 43
> Cost New £27,130 *£25,595*
> Cost 3yr £13,836 *£11,005*
> Depreciation *£13,294* £14,590
> 
> So without me looking at what the cars look like, how they drive etc. and just taking those statistics into account as equal weighting, the TT beats the RCZ by 9-4.
> TT is:
> More powerful & quicker to 0-60
> More economical
> Cheaper to insure (theoretically)
> Retains more value
> Depreciates by less
> 
> RCZ is:
> More practical (in terms of boot space)
> Cheaper to service
> Cheaper to buy new
> Cheaper to buy used
> 
> So taking out looks and drive-ability (two very important factors for a coupe really) the TT is the smarter buy, lose less money when selling on, better performance and cheaper to run with exception of servicing.
> 
> Obviously this comparison isn't complete as the way something looks and drives would probably be my main concern if I was buying one, along with reliability and power, so only 1 of the 4 things I'd look for in a coupe is really covered there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think that you missed a few bits.....Standard equipment that RCZ 1.6 GT 200 has that TT 2.0 TFSi Sport doesn't: (info taken from the Peugeot and Audi configurators)
> 
> 19" Alloys (£1,690 Audi option)
> Tyre Pressure Sensors (£75)
> Full leather (£560)
> Electric seats with driver memory (£740)
> Heated Seats (£255)
> Interior Light package (£125)
> Sport Suspension (£435)
> Hill Hold (£90)
> Short Shift Gear Change (£155)
> USB connection(£185)
> Comfort pack - Cruise Control , Auto Lights & Wipers , Rear Park Aid(£510)
> Front park Aid - no price given on Audi site
> 
> Whoops thats like five grands worth...whatever you think of the RCZ it does highlight that Audi are a rip off for spec and options [smiley=bigcry.gif]
Click to expand...

Don't forget the additional 12V socket in drivers side to plug mobile hair-dryer in :lol: :lol:


----------



## MarcusR

leenx said:


> Don't forget the additional 12V socket in drivers side to plug mobile hair-dryer in :lol: :lol:


 :lol:


----------



## Dash

Fictorious said:


> Referring to your question about RWD TT, I think it wouldn't have sold well as the target market would have been completely different, by putting RWD in your car you're saying you care about performance first and foremost, *whereas the TT was about looking sharp and modern, performance was secondary. It was a nice looking, fairly quick coupe for the masses.*


Is this not precisely what the RCZ is?

Albeit, slightly slower, slightly cheaper, slightly less-prestige brand name.


----------



## Fictorious

Spandex said:


> jampott said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do people really draw up a little comparative table when deciding what car to buy next?
> 
> 
> 
> If they do, they certainly don't apply equal weighting to all the factors and they don't ignore looks and how it drives... So, I'm not sure how useful that table is in proving the TT is the better buy for any given person.
Click to expand...

You are right, but if you look at the numbers you get the impression (that I would consider to be true) that the RCZ is cheaper and better specified, more boot space, cheaper to service, not as quick as the TT and may depreciate more.

Then if you look at how it drives, I'll take Evo as a fairly reliable judge of handling;


> How does it compare?
> It makes the base Audi TT feel a bit woolly (but not under-powered), and the base BMW Z4 laden with character but less able. Both those rivals look like the entry-level models they are, while all RCZs look top-of-the-range spangly. Closest rival is the Volkswagen Scirroco, which is vastly more practical as a four-seat coupe, because despite the RCZ's gorgeous double-bubble roof/rear screen, its tiny rear seats are largely cosmetic.


They both recieved 4/5 rating, so nothing to split them there.

So it would come down to looks, value, reliability & badge snobbery.

Looks are always subjective so I'm not going to point one way or the other on that.

Value, I'd imagine the RCZ is better value in terms of spec/£, but in terms of material qualities etc. there is still a gap between Peugeot and Audi. I took 2 "real" pictures of the RCZ and TT to compare. You can see where the TT has leather in the centre console etc. the Peugeot has plastic, both look similar though.


















I include reliability because if you look at the PSA 1.6 turbo unit over its application ranges, there's been quite a few problems with the engine reliability (cold start problems, turbos going etc.), I don't know about the 2.0TFSi but I haven't heard anything bad about it.

The RCZ does stack up well in comparison to the base TT across the board if you like the looks, but when you look closely it does kind of feel that their design ethos was "as close as we can get to the TT's quality/performance whilst still being cheaper", I don't really want to buy a car that's just trying to be as good as another, I'd rather have one that tries to be the best, or be different.

I certainly wouldn't buy one as I'm not keen on the looks, wouldn't trust the reliability & just plain wouldn't buy a Peugeot, whether you think I'm right or not is your opinion.


----------



## garyc

jampott said:


> Do people really draw up a little comparative table when deciding what car to buy next?


Evidently yes. 

Many just read a few tests, drive one, then read a couple of forums for the inside line, before making up mind.  I think it is at the forum stage that many falter and start listening to views they may ordinarily dismiss were they cornered in a pub by some dribbing anorak type R bore. It is worth pondering whether there an inverse relationship between the strength of any character's negative view on a given car, and his liklihood of actually having driven/owned that same car.

On the RCZ I am ambivalent, although i agree that the front end looking same as a 308 et al, let's it down and is styling weakpoint. But then again the front of a TTii also looks the same as most other curenet generation Audi's, and is also a styling weakness.

Deuce.


----------



## Astonmartini

The only hairdressers car is the TT..well known for it. In fact Audi were once asked would they be launching a saloon version of the TT..it could then be called the Vidal Saloon

I have been watching this thread and have to laugh..I'd have an RCZ over an overpriced TT anyday. Anyway your TTS isnt up to much

*Aston Martin Vantage N420*


----------



## Guest

Astonmartini said:


> The only hairdressers car is the TT..well known for it. In fact Audi were once asked would they be launching a saloon version of the TT..it could then be called the Vidal Saloon
> 
> I have been watching this thread and have to laugh..I'd have an RCZ over an overpriced TT anyday. Anyway your TTS isnt up to much
> 
> *Aston Martin Vantage N420*


hi cock. :roll:


----------



## roddy

manphibian said:


> Astonmartini said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only hairdressers car is the TT..well known for it. In fact Audi were once asked would they be launching a saloon version of the TT..it could then be called the Vidal Saloon
> 
> ..I'd have an RCZ over an overpriced TT anyday.
> 
> are we to accept you are reffering to a Mk2 ,,, which is as we all know , is not a hairdresser car but that of an air steward / ess, ( do your homework !!)
Click to expand...


----------



## corradoman

OMG what has this thread turned into :lol: you lot should be ashamed of youselves!! The school playground with a pack of top trumps is where you lot should go :lol: come on The RCZ forum will probably be laughing there cocks of at us lot and thinking we are a bunch of deluded idiots who think no other brand exists, I think we should let them enjoy there RCZ`s like we enjoy our TT`s, I have only had my TT for 3 months now and the amount of negative comments i get from people telling me they are Hairdressers cars and are slow and dated and don`t handle and just generally don`t seem to like it is unbeleivable but i couldn`t care less, I would like a run in an RCZ before i pass comment, So come on guys give them a break and chill out before you start threatening to beat each other up :lol:


----------



## UKTTv6

corradoman said:


> OMG what has this thread turned into :lol: you lot should be ashamed of youselves!! The school playground with a pack of top trumps is where you lot should go :lol: come on The RCZ forum will probably be laughing there cocks of at us lot and thinking we are a bunch of deluded idiots who think no other brand exists, I think we should let them enjoy there RCZ`s like we enjoy our TT`s, I have only had my TT for 3 months now and the amount of negative comments i get from people telling me they are Hairdressers cars and are slow and dated and don`t handle and just generally don`t seem to like it is unbeleivable but i couldn`t care less, I would like a run in an RCZ before i pass comment, So come on guys give them a break and chill out before you start threatening to beat each other up :lol:


well said. I own a TT and soon an RCZ also , each have their plus points. Maybe as suggested earlier the 2 forums should have a day out together (coupe day ?) so we can show that car enthusiasts can get together and have a good time instead of as this thread suggests at each others throats. On the RCZ forum you will find that most are complimentary of the TT as being a great car


----------



## Fictorious

Astonmartini said:


> The only hairdressers car is the TT..well known for it. In fact Audi were once asked would they be launching a saloon version of the TT..it could then be called the Vidal Saloon
> 
> I have been watching this thread and have to laugh..I'd have an RCZ over an overpriced TT anyday. Anyway your TTS isnt up to much
> 
> *Aston Martin Vantage N420*


----------



## AudiDoDatDen

Astonmartini said:


> The only hairdressers car is the TT..well known for it. In fact Audi were once asked would they be launching a saloon version of the TT..it could then be called the Vidal Saloon
> 
> I have been watching this thread and have to laugh..*I'd have an RCZ over an overpriced TT anyday*. Anyway your TTS isnt up to much
> 
> *Aston Martin Vantage N420*


Like all things, you get what you pay for. Buy cheap and buy twice.


----------



## KammyTT

Oh dear!!! Roddy the TT ain't just a car  or my last 5 years have been a sham 

There will always be people that put the TT down but they don't drive it so their opinion is unfounded


----------



## Wolfsburger

KammyTT said:


> There will always be people that put the TT down but they don't drive it so their opinion is unfounded


Just like the guys on this thread who probably haven`t driven the RCZ?


----------



## KammyTT

What's a bloody rcz anyway? A peugeot I gather


----------



## KammyTT

Just looked on google and it looks like Peugeot have tried to copy the TT in the looks department


----------



## BLinky

Wolfsburger said:


> KammyTT said:
> 
> 
> 
> There will always be people that put the TT down but they don't drive it so their opinion is unfounded
> 
> 
> 
> Just like the guys on this thread who probably haven`t driven the RCZ?
Click to expand...

no but some of us have been in 308s ^^


----------



## KammyTT

I've driven a 106...... Can't say. It was upto much


----------



## rustyintegrale

Well it had to happen. How could I resist? :wink:

Contains a little bad language so please do not watch if easily offended. 






Cheers

Rich


----------



## Guest

:lol: Good work mate


----------



## roddy

KammyTT said:


> Oh dear!!! Roddy the TT ain't just a car  or my last 5 years have been a sham
> 
> There will always be people that put the TT down but they don't drive it so their opinion is unfounded


Kam...i am not putting the TT down,, not at all,,,, my post was aimed at those who are so far up their own jacksies that they cant just leave other people to enjoy their own choices, or at least not to need to be so childish and arrogant in their comments,,, i have not bothered to look on the RCZ forum,, but i would be surprised if the same level of ignorance and arrogance abounds over there . and Kam,, i know there is a bit of a fraternity within the TT ownership,, but i am sure you didnt just buy a car to join a club...


----------



## oceans7

rustyintegrale said:


> Well it had to happen. How could I resist? :wink:
> 
> Contains a little bad language so please do not watch if easily offended.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Rich


 Quality Rich. LMAO. :lol:


----------



## rustyintegrale

Cheers guys!


----------



## Toshiba

MKIers do seem particular sore about the RCZ, reality setting in boys... :lol:


----------



## rustyintegrale

Toshiba said:


> MKIers do seem particular sore about the RCZ, reality setting in boys... :lol:


I think that is largely because the RCZ bears a closer resemblance to the Mk1 than the Mk2.

At the end of the day progress is progress. We all (even Mk1 owners) have to accept that change is inevitable and desirable, but I think the comparisons between the two cars must be expected when the two share such similarities in the visual department.

For what it's worth I like the RCZ. If I have an opportunity to drive one I shall take it. Only once sampled can you truly criticise or compare a car with another. So for now my mind is completely open and I would really like to be surprised by the RCZ.

My memories of Peugeot automotively speaking are all in a 205 Gti, both the 1.6 and the 1.9. My girlfriend of the time had both and both trounced my 1800 Mk1 GTi... 

Cheers

rich


----------



## Figo

jampott said:


> Do people really draw up a little comparative table when deciding what car to buy next?


I did :lol: but then again im sure id be classed as crazy on here for placing my cash frog Side in the end. :roll:


----------



## Astonmartini

Have to laugh at the TT forum...your ongoing slating of the RCZ just makes you look like cocks. Obviously the Mk1 owners feel threatened. From what I have heard the RCZ is a head turner whereas the Mk1 is old hat...get over it


----------



## oceans7

Astonmartini said:


> Have to laugh at the TT forum...your ongoing slating of the RCZ just makes you look like cocks. Obviously the Mk1 owners feel threatened. From what I have heard the RCZ is a head turner whereas the Mk1 is old hat...get over it


 and yet here you are on the TT forum. Wonder what that makes you?
Undoubtedly you definitely do not own the first part of your name, but without doubt you do drink the second part of your name. Says it all really.


----------



## Astonmartini

Im on here as not only do I own my Vantage but also own (well wife drives) a TT. So why wouldnt I be on the board ?


----------



## oceans7

Astonmartini said:


> Im on here as not only do I own my Vantage but also own (well wife drives) a TT. So why wouldnt I be on the board ?


 :lol: :lol: :lol: of course you do. And if you click your heels twice you'll get to OZ. Don't tell me, you're the MD of peugeot uk. :lol: 
Just had to take time out of your busy day to come onto the TT forum and throw some mud. Fool. :lol: at you.


----------



## Astonmartini

oceans7 said:


> Astonmartini said:
> 
> 
> 
> Im on here as not only do I own my Vantage but also own (well wife drives) a TT. So why wouldnt I be on the board ?
> 
> 
> 
> :lol: :lol: :lol: of course you do. And if you click your heels twice you'll get to OZ. Don't tell me, you're the MD of peugeot uk. :lol:
> Just had to take time out of your busy day to come onto the TT forum and throw some mud. Fool. :lol: at you.
Click to expand...

If you havent anything constructive to say , dont say it

Typical TT forum chav behaviour..just because I have an Aston Martin you belittle it or doubt it...grow up. I come on here as I brought my wife a TT which is a nice car. My comments are about your attitude towards other cars. I havent driven an RCZ but it does look good and many of my friends have said the same..it is a head turner. I like cars (took me years to save up for my Vantage) , but unlike you I am not one dimensional and love cars across the spectrum.

And No I am not the MD for Peugeot but would willingly take the job on knowing the salary that it is likely to attract


----------



## richieshore

Astonmartini said:


> oceans7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Astonmartini said:
> 
> 
> 
> Im on here as not only do I own my Vantage but also own (well wife drives) a TT. So why wouldnt I be on the board ?
> 
> 
> 
> :lol: :lol: :lol: of course you do. And if you click your heels twice you'll get to OZ. Don't tell me, you're the MD of peugeot uk. :lol:
> Just had to take time out of your busy day to come onto the TT forum and throw some mud. Fool. :lol: at you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If you havent anything constructive to say , dont say it
> 
> Typical TT forum chav behaviour..just because I have an Aston Martin you belittle it or doubt it...grow up. I come on here as I brought my wife a TT which is a nice car. My comments are about your attitude towards other cars. I havent driven an RCZ but it does look good and many of my friends have said the same..it is a head turner. I like cars (took me years to save up for my Vantage) , but unlike you I am not one dimensional and love cars across the spectrum.
> 
> And No I am not the MD for Peugeot but would willingly take the job on knowing the salary that it is likely to attract
Click to expand...

Typical chav grammar, I find it funny how not even Aston Marin owners know the difference between bought and brought and your and you're. What is this world coming too hey!

And as for your previous comment about the TT being overpriced, I'll go back to my own previous statement and ask you to find me a better equivalent car for the same price or cheaper. 

Very jealous of your Aston by the way, one of my favourite cars.


----------



## oceans7

Astonmartini said:


> Have to laugh at the TT forum...your ongoing slating of the RCZ just makes you look like cocks. Obviously the Mk1 owners feel threatened. From what I have heard the RCZ is a head turner whereas the Mk1 is old hat...get over it


 That is your quote is it not? If it's so old hat, you know where the pug forum is, why not just go on there and post about your love for the rcz, you can even slag off the TT (that you apparently own) and it will receive a warm reception no doubt.
Slagging it off on the TT forum is not going to win too much applause (did you think it would? :? )
As for owning an Aston, if that's true then I'm Enzo Ferrari.
Run along now billy bullsxxt. Oz is thattaway [smiley=bigcry.gif] :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## leenx

Astonmartini said:


> Have to laugh at the TT forum...your ongoing slating of the RCZ just makes you look like cocks. Obviously the Mk1 owners feel threatened. From what I have heard the RCZ is a head turner whereas the Mk1 is old hat...get over it


Is this guy a cock or what! :lol: :lol:


----------



## leenx

[quote="I havent driven an RCZ but it does look good and many of my friends have said the same..it is a head turner. I like cars (took me years to save up for my Vantage) , but unlike you I am not one dimensional and love cars across the spectrum.

It's a head turner for all the wrong reasons my friend :lol: :lol:


----------



## Ikon66

Sorry chaps but this isn't going any further :?


----------

