# TT2 v S3



## TT Law (Sep 6, 2003)

I drove the S3 over the weekend and I am now very tempted!

I have driven both 3.2 & 2.0 TT's and the S3 feels a hell of a lot quicker. Its road holding is exceptional for a hatch and the feel of the 265bhp 2.0T is stunningly quick.

Anyone else driven one?

Steve


----------



## Necroscope (Apr 9, 2006)

Yep, a couple of months ago.

Very impressed.... if you check back i liked it back then. The engine note still isnt and never will be as good as the 3.2. Performance was amazing and grip equal to the quattro TT.

BUT it looks pants, i walked past a black S3 only this weekend and never realised until it was pointed out.

Now looking at your TT i would say it wouldnt be special enough for you (might be wrong).

If i was you i would keep hold of your beuty until the engine turns up in the TT. PLUS it will be even quicker due to the TT being lighter and you may be able to get DSG.

Another point Â£800 gets that engine about 300 bhp


----------



## TT Law (Sep 6, 2003)

Necroscope said:


> Yep, a couple of months ago.
> 
> Very impressed.... if you check back i liked it back then. The engine note still isnt and never will be as good as the 3.2. Performance was amazing and grip equal to the quattro TT.
> 
> ...


The looks are the attraction with 'S' models. They are understated and are meant to be that way.

I know what you mean about mine though. I havent tired of the looks but I have been offered an exceptional deal for the S3. It would mean that I would get a Mk1 Roadster to replace our Golf so would have the best of both worlds.

Its only Â£500 to get beyong 300bhp in the S3!

Steve


----------



## Necroscope (Apr 9, 2006)

It's your call its an excpetional car no doubt, but i couldnt step back from a TT into an S3. Especially a white TT with RS4's.


----------



## TT Law (Sep 6, 2003)

Ironically it really is a step up if you look at the list prices. Saying that the S3 is a little overpriced.

Steve


----------



## Necroscope (Apr 9, 2006)

I think your dead right. When that engine hits the TT it needs to fall inbetween the current 2.0T and the 3.2. That means between 24K and 29K, given this makes the S3 overpriced as you say.

Regardless of price i still dont look at the S3 as being better than the TT :?


----------



## digimeisTTer (Apr 27, 2004)

It's a personal decision Steve

both are lovely motors. I was fully intending to buy a new TT just deciding between the 2.0 and 3.2 was the only issue. After test driving both i spotted the new S3 demo tucked away in the corner and asked for a spin.

the rest is history..

It is pricey but it's not a hot hatch it's an Uber hatch! The performance is phenominal as you already know, I'm looking forward to getting it chipped now :twisted:

I agree it's more of a sideways move rather than a step down and with the money i saved on Xenons i bought satnav+ 

I personally like the fact that it's the understated Wolf in Sheeps clothing.


----------



## Johnnywb (May 31, 2006)

I think in reality, it's wrong to compare the TT and the S3. The TT is a sports coupe, whilst the S3 is, in reality a hot hatch. I think that really, they're intended for two different audiences.


----------



## Necroscope (Apr 9, 2006)

IMO they are closer than Audi would like to admit. Granted the S3 would be more practical, in as much as the back seats and boot are more usable.

And yes maybe the best way to look at it, is as a side step, BUT seeing as you have a lovely TT i would still wait for that engine in the TT. Just my opinion though


----------



## danieltt (Oct 23, 2006)

I went into Reading Audi this morning to drop my TT off to have the spoiler fixed and they had a S3 in WHITE at the front of the showroom with what looked like uprated wheels. Looked Stunning i have to say.


----------



## Janker (Oct 27, 2006)

Why not just remap your 2.0 FSI and get the same 250-260 BHP (only lag free)? - OK so you won't get 4WD,better brakes or 300BHP but the TT is a far better looking car. The S3 looks like an A3 3.2 S Line IMHO

The RS3 I was told will be worth waiting for! :twisted:


----------



## ChinsVXR (Apr 14, 2006)

Johnnywb said:


> I think in reality, it's wrong to compare the TT and the S3. The TT is a sports coupe, whilst the S3 is, in reality a hot hatch. I think that really, they're intended for two different audiences.


Dont know if your correct. One TT owner has moved to one, another is tempted and I'm thinking it through as well.

Its the quattro that attracts me


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

just looks like every other 1.6 A3.


----------



## ChinsVXR (Apr 14, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> just looks like every other 1.6 A3.


In the same way the TT 3.2 looks like the TT 2.0T


----------



## TT Law (Sep 6, 2003)

Toshiba said:


> just looks like every other 1.6 A3.


Thats the point with 'S' cars.

I have to say though that it does not look like a normal 1.6 A3. Although subtle the bodykit does mark it out. The interior is also very well trimmed and the one I'm looking at has Silver/Black two tone seats with contrasting stitching. Looks really smart!

Decisions...Decisions

Steve


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

ChinsVXR said:


> Toshiba said:
> 
> 
> > just looks like every other 1.6 A3.
> ...


Cant resist can you :evil:


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

TT Law said:


> Toshiba said:
> 
> 
> > just looks like every other 1.6 A3.
> ...


Good luck with the flip of the coin :wink: 
What wheels do you get on it?


----------



## sandhua1978 (Sep 11, 2006)

ChinsVXR said:


> Johnnywb said:
> 
> 
> > I think in reality, it's wrong to compare the TT and the S3. The TT is a sports coupe, whilst the S3 is, in reality a hot hatch. I think that really, they're intended for two different audiences.
> ...


Interesting....is that why you have put your car up for sale on piston heads?

Steve.. tough choice, but prob means you can exchange cars for very little money... something that happens very rarely when it comes to buying & selling cars.


----------



## Janker (Oct 27, 2006)

Their offering you a storming deal for a reason - they can't shift em for the Â£Â£Â£! - get a eval copy of the Revo or AMD code loaded and take your TT for a spin.. its up too you dude, but the S3 looks like an A3... yawn!


----------



## TT Law (Sep 6, 2003)

sandhua1978 said:


> ChinsVXR said:
> 
> 
> > Johnnywb said:
> ...


Thats the dilemma! Virtually straight swap for the S3 which has a list Â£3k more than my TT. As more TT's hit the roads the chances for this happening again will be gone.

The other consideration for me is how will the 2.0Tq hit residuals? Audi are on 3 shifts at Gyor producing TT's for the first time ever so the market will be full of them - more available = lower residuals!

Steve


----------



## TT Law (Sep 6, 2003)

Toshiba said:


> ChinsVXR said:
> 
> 
> > Toshiba said:
> ...


At least they don't do a V6 & 2.0T S3 :lol:

Steve


----------



## eko (Nov 5, 2006)

I had a 24 hour test drive in a S3 last week.

Thought it was brilliant and I'm also considering changing.

It feels really planted on the road and I like the discreet looks.

As far as the price goes, add on the heated leather to a R32 and there's not such a difference.

If only they would make a five door, then I would order tomorrow.

The three door I need to think about.


----------



## Necroscope (Apr 9, 2006)

Does you TT have 5 doors?


----------



## eko (Nov 5, 2006)

Necroscope said:


> Does you TT have 5 doors?


As somone else as said they are not exactly like for like competitors.

The only way I could justify the extra expense would be to have the S3 as our main car and buy something else for the second.

Hence the need for it to be 5 door.


----------



## Necroscope (Apr 9, 2006)

OK fair comment, now you put it like that 

BUT i had an A3 2.0TDI (3-door) and getting in the back wasnt that bad. If you want one as bad as it sounds like you do, dont let a lack of doors get in the way.


----------



## eko (Nov 5, 2006)

Necroscope said:


> OK fair comment, now you put it like that
> 
> BUT i had an A3 2.0TDI (3-door) and getting in the back wasnt that bad. If you want one as bad as it sounds like you do, dont let a lack of doors get in the way.


I did think about it, but I think I would soon tire of butting the seats back and fore, although your correct about the space, thats OK.


----------



## ChinsVXR (Apr 14, 2006)

Necroscope said:


> Does you TT have 5 doors?


Mine doesnt, but neither does the S3.


----------



## ChinsVXR (Apr 14, 2006)

When I have spoken to people in the trade about the S3, they feel the market is limited for the car and after its initial period 3-6 months, it will suffer heavy depreciation in the same way a 130 M sport has. Most S3's tend to be spec'd at Â£28+K.

I like the fact it can be tuned to over 300bhp easily - a car that really need 4wd, all be it a pretend version. Agree with other comments, S Cars are subbtle. If you like your cars, you'll know what it is, if you dont who cares.


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

Janker said:


> Why not just remap your 2.0 FSI and get the same 250-260 BHP (only lag free)? - OK so you won't get 4WD,better brakes or 300BHP but the TT is a far better looking car.


or just wait a few more months till the TTS is finally available and ends that catch-22


----------



## digimeisTTer (Apr 27, 2004)

ChinsVXR said:


> When I have spoken to people in the trade about the S3, they feel the market is limited for the car and after its initial period 3-6 months, it will suffer heavy depreciation in the same way a 130 M sport has.


Well the 130M is fugly and has a 3.0 straight six with RWD, the last S3 has held it's value as well if not better than the TT and i should know  - so for me there is no comparison in the 2nd hand market as running costs will be a high priority to potential purchasors.

but you pay your money and buy the car that suits you best - residuals don't bother me that much - buying any new car is a mugs game and i'm the biggest mug around 

I just want to drive the best car for ME in the budget available.


----------



## caney (Feb 5, 2004)

TT Law said:


> and the feel of the 265bhp 2.0T is stunningly quick.
> 
> Steve


imagine what it's like with a remap!,5uperchips have already got it 306bhp :twisted: the 2.0t engine is gonna be much more tuneable than the old 1.8t unit at a fraction of the cost :roll: Â£500 for a remap gets you 300+bhp,the old s3 (1.8t) Â£4000 would get you 300+bhp ! exciting times ahead


----------



## jam225 (Jun 24, 2003)

I recall this debate raging on and on, on audi-sport.net back in 1999 8)

Seems like nothing much has changed. S3 is the stealth bomber, the TT wears the party frock


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

strange thread

You waited so long for you MK2, and now you already want to get rid of it, and than comes the big laugh.......for a Audi A(S)3 ????

Sorry, but i think you should never bought a TT in the first place.
Good luck with your "difficult" dissicion.

ChinsVXR is your car also for sale? Let me gues, you want a 3.2 V6?

I love this forum...


----------



## Philr (Oct 10, 2006)

S3 is a lovely car in many respects but the TT has the looks.


----------



## TT Law (Sep 6, 2003)

Sorry Rebel but the TT is not much different to the S3. Both based on Golf chassis. Both quick. One stealthy and one look at me.

As I said earlier in this thread the S3 is a better drive than the TT in my opinion and that is both 3.2 and 2.0T.

I am glad it amuses you anyway. Why it should is beyond me but hey.

Owning a TT is not the crowning achievement in life as it seems to be for you. At the end of the day its my choice to make and no hard feeling intended you are the last person I would seek advice from after you have shown such balanced views in the past!

Steve


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

TT Law said:


> Both based on Golf chassis.


iirc the MK2 has a newer base than the golf.


----------



## tehdarkstar (Jul 24, 2006)

Personally, I preferred the TT over the S3 because it feels more like cutting edge technology. Things like MR, S-Tronic and ASF won me over other options. I'm also coming from an A3 and although the S3 feels plenty special compared to the standard models, it is still a hatchback and I didn't want another one.


----------



## Philr (Oct 10, 2006)

I understood that the TT mk I was based on the golf chasis but the mk II wasn't?


----------



## Johnnywb (May 31, 2006)

Philr said:


> I understood that the TT mk I was based on the golf chasis but the mk II wasn't?


Yep, as far as i remember, the Mk2 TT shares very little with the golf platform,


----------



## T3 (Sep 24, 2006)

Im not one to take reviews too seriuosly, but there havent been that many postive reviews of the S3. Mainly price and lag as the let down.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

MKII does not share its platform with the golf. A3 does.


----------



## eko (Nov 5, 2006)

My understanding was that the TT has a modified Golf platform.

If not what other cars does the TT share it's platform with?

I can't see any car within the VW group getting it's own completely seperate platform.

Not at this price level at least.


----------



## Speed Racer (May 21, 2006)

digimeisTTer said:


> ChinsVXR said:
> 
> 
> > When I have spoken to people in the trade about the S3, they feel the market is limited for the car and after its initial period 3-6 months, it will suffer heavy depreciation in the same way a 130 M sport has.
> ...


As a future S3 owner, you'll appreciate this (if you haven't seen it already). I'd buy an S3, unfortunately Audi NA won't bring it over.

http://www.fourtitude.com/news/publish/ ... 2757.shtml


----------



## YOGIBEAR (Oct 4, 2005)

Steve, i know about hard decisions as you know and while i dont envy your decision i wish i did, the s3 and the tt are both similar and very different depending on what you need to use the car for. As you would buy a TTR as well i would go for the s3. I know a mk1 is not like the mk2 in many ways but its still the tt experience that counts.
Hope it all works out
Fraser


----------



## digimeisTTer (Apr 27, 2004)

Speed Racer said:


> As a future S3 owner, you'll appreciate this (if you haven't seen it already). I'd buy an S3, unfortunately Audi NA won't bring it over.
> 
> http://www.fourtitude.com/news/publish/ ... 2757.shtml


Nice one! I hadn't seen that but i had read the EVO review - they loved it too, everyone else just moaned about the lag and price!

This car IMO is worth the premium, that's all i can say - it cruises round town like a Â£50+k car - handles as well, if not better than the anything in it's class and most of all is the most exhilarating car i could buy for the money - NO QUESTION!

But i bought it because it brought a bigger smile to my face than anything else i was considering and that's all that matters.


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Steve i hope you will choose for the S3.
It's alway's nice to have a S3 driver on the forum...

And off corse the quattro pipes miltek exhaust with the "home-made/do it yourselve" " rear valance would also look nice on a S3 :wink:

Like i said before, a TT isn't just a car.....it's a lifestyle..


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

digimeisTTer said:


> Rebel - you could drive it like you stole it but i'd still cane your ass


You first have to catch me ... :wink: 
Your heavy S3 is doing 5.7....
My light TT is doing 5.8... (according Abt / + DSG)

Could be a long run 8)


----------



## demi_god (Apr 7, 2006)

TT Law said:


> Sorry Rebel but the TT is not much different to the S3. Both based on Golf chassis. Both quick. One stealthy and one look at me.
> 
> As I said earlier in this thread the S3 is a better drive than the TT in my opinion and that is both 3.2 and 2.0T.
> 
> ...


Hear hear....but not too loud around hear mate... :wink:


----------



## T3 (Sep 24, 2006)

eko said:


> My understanding was that the TT has a modified Golf platform.
> 
> If not what other cars does the TT share it's platform with?
> 
> ...


Old TT was based on the Golf 4 platform
New one has a new ASF platform that will eventually share with the A5.
So enough withthe Golf comparisons. Thats over.


----------



## eko (Nov 5, 2006)

T3 said:


> eko said:
> 
> 
> > My understanding was that the TT has a modified Golf platform.
> ...


If thats the case then fair enough, although sharing the floorpan withe the golf would be no hardship.

Although in the bumf from the dealer it states " loosly based on a VW Golf, like it's predecessor". This is from the Autocar reprint.

Seem to remember reading it somewhere else as well but can't remember where.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Don't believe everything you read. Last mag i read said the 0-60 was 5.5 on the 3.2!

It would be a hardship - golf chassis is only medioka, i don't want any cast offs. Other components are shared, like the engine and the technology/convenience items.


----------



## eko (Nov 5, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> Don't believe everything you read. Last mag i read said the 0-60 was 5.5 on the 3.2!
> 
> It would be a hardship - golf chassis is only medioka, i don't want any cast offs. Other components are shared, like the engine and the technology/convenience items.


The golf chassis is a long way from where you describe it.

The TT's a good car for the money but lets net not get carried away, it's better than a GTI but it's no giant leap.


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

A TT is icon, it has passion for design.

A Golf is a car for driving from a to b...
It's a box with four wheels....

A A3 looks ten times better than a Golf. 
Golf 3, Golf 4 , Golf 5 they are all the same....all boxes on wheels
My parrents can't see the difference.

If you want a box with a fast engine, buy a Golf GTI, or a R32.
If you like nice quality clothes and if you have eye for detail and design, as well in your home, or funiture and you also like car's .......buy a TT.

But hey, what would you expect on a TT forum? ....should we lie and say the Golf is a great car? I wouldn't drive a Golf for free...


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

eko said:


> Toshiba said:
> 
> 
> > Don't believe everything you read. Last mag i read said the 0-60 was 5.5 on the 3.2!
> ...


well its not best in class, beaten by focus, Astra no doubt the next civic too. I'd call that medioka.


----------



## TT Law (Sep 6, 2003)

Toshiba said:


> eko said:
> 
> 
> > Toshiba said:
> ...


True as you say but the TT2 was beaten by the older Z4 on the chassis stakes so its hardly a good measure. Would still have a TT over the Z4 anyday.

Steve


----------



## T3 (Sep 24, 2006)

eko, not dissing the Golf at all ( at least in GTI form) Was actually my second choice. I think it has a superb chassis.

But yes, the only similarities are a few shared components, and of course the brilliant 2.0 TFSI thats already won so many awards.

Even the way the shared components are used are TT unique. Take for example the steering rack. Yes its the same as the Golf or A3, but in the TT, the rack pivots are mounted alot higher, which means the steering is more precise and react quicker to imputs, so although the ratio on the rack is the same, the ratio at the wheels is more direct. Easy comparison to test as well. Just drive the 2..

So yes, shared stuff, but the old line of "TT is a golf in langerie" can no longer be applied.

Vastly different from ground up.

Belive it or not, but the TT actaully has more shared components to the R8. I started a post a few months back on just the visible stuff they share.

Cant remember the whole list now, but the count was 15 or 20 things..
Same seats, same steering wheel, same side mirrors, same air con controls ( R8 uses a little more aluminium), same door handles, same petrol cap, just different embossing...etc...the list will shock you the deeper you go.

Its more true to call the TT a baby R8, than calling it a glorified GTI.


----------



## T3 (Sep 24, 2006)

TT law. As chassis go, I really think the TT has it won. As far as a track car goes ( and this is what I think you're trying to say) I'd still take the Z4.. A great chassis doesnt automatically make it the best on track car, and visa versa.


----------



## jam225 (Jun 24, 2003)

Rebel said:


> A TT is icon, it has passion for design.
> 
> A Golf is a car for driving from a to b...
> It's a box with four wheels....
> ...


Thats a shame Rebel because according to Autocar last week when they ran a feature between 2.0T versions of the Audi TT, Golf GTI, Seat Leon and Skoda Fabia their verdict was that the Golf was the best car with the 2.0T engine [smiley=thumbsup.gif]


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

jam225 said:


> Rebel said:
> 
> 
> > A TT is icon, it has passion for design.
> ...


Weird though 'cos they waxed lyrical about the TT and then picked the Golf :?


----------



## mjbTT (Nov 11, 2006)

they're only matching the cars based on rough price bands - the same reason you may see 3.2Q pitched against Porche or the like. Bottom line is, with the exception of the obvious benefits a Quattro delivers in certain conditions, there's very little difference in day-to-day driving performance. If the Golf wins that contest, don't assume the Q is that far ahead


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

jam225 said:


> Rebel said:
> 
> 
> > A TT is icon, it has passion for design.
> ...


Why didn't you bought the Golf R32 ? :wink:

If you want a 3.2 V6 engine and your name is Stevie Wonder, i would understand that choice ...


----------



## elisiX (Jul 12, 2006)

If this 265HP 2.0T is put in the TT, wont that be the TT-S.

Otherwise, wont there be too many TT models.. TT 2.0T 200HP, 265HP plus the 3.2 and then you have the TT-S / RS models.. thats 5 models!

And even if the 265HP in the TT is the TT-S, thats still 4 models for a relatively niche vehicle.


----------



## jam225 (Jun 24, 2003)

Rebel said:


> jam225 said:
> 
> 
> > Rebel said:
> ...


Because I already own a MK5 GTi [smiley=thumbsup.gif]


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

Rebel said:


> Like i said before, a TT isn't just a car.....it's a lifestyle..





Rebel said:


> If you like nice quality clothes and if you have eye for detail and design, as well in your home, or funiture and you also like car's .......buy a TT.


That has to be two of the funniest things I have read for a looooong time. I don't know whether to feel sorry for you or laugh.... or both!

I have to ask.... do you really genuinely believe that?!?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

dear mod that you finally pass by,

while you delete the above post and ban the spammer, please also make this thread sticky: http://www.********.co.uk/ttforumbbs/vi ... hp?t=77841


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

der_horst said:


> dear mod that you finally pass by,
> 
> while you delete the above post and ban the spammer, please also make this thread sticky: http://www.********.co.uk/ttforumbbs/vi ... hp?t=77841


Deleted the spammer, and also made the thread sticky for you.


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

thanks


----------



## tehdarkstar (Jul 24, 2006)

Coincidentally I will have an S3 for a day next week while my dealer fixes a rattle on my car, so I will be able to write up my findings if anyone wants to know!


----------



## michut (Jan 18, 2007)

Steve, I'm having exactly the same dilemma, and it's good to know that I'm not alone! A problem shared is a problem halved - or maybe quartered as there seem to be a couple of others on here torn between TT & S3 too.

This is my first time on this forum, and I came here hoping to find others discussing the same issue.

I'm reluctantly selling a TT225 after 3.5 years - easily the best car I've ever owned and will indeed be missed. I usually keep my cars for 3 years at least, as I don't particularly like the aggro that goes with buying/selling cars, (nor the depreciation!!) therefore I want to make sure I make the right choice with my next car.

Loved driving the new TT - more so than the CLK280 Sport I picked up today for the weekend - but I can't wait to get behind the wheel of the S3. I'm hoping my local dealer can sort this out for me in the next few days. Like others have said, the S3 looks more subtle than the TT, and for me, this is a big plus (though the new TT is still a very handsome car).

Dark Star, I'd certainly be interested to hear what you have to say about your experience with the S3. The only thing I know for sure right now is that my next car will definitely be an Audi - the CLK's great, but Audi's, for me, are much better...

Cheers,

Mick


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

kmpowell said:


> Rebel said:
> 
> 
> > Like i said before, a TT isn't just a car.....it's a lifestyle..
> ...


Every word .... 8)


----------



## tehdarkstar (Jul 24, 2006)

michut said:


> Like others have said, the S3 looks more subtle than the TT, and for me, this is a big plus (though the new TT is still a very handsome car).


I have to see an S3 in the metal, but from the pictures I think they ruined a bit the understated (quite elegant) look of the A3 with the deeper, bolder front bumper. Everything else look good, though.

I'm also very curious to drive this car. I remember my A3 as having a high driving position compared to the TT and no other A? car that I have driven so far has had a suspension to match that of the TT, but then I have never driven an S? car.

Does anyone know how is the power split on the S3's quattro, BTW?


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Quattro on the S3 is the same one as used on the MKII TT.


----------



## TT Law (Sep 6, 2003)

Same as new TT I believe.

They say the Haldex has been tuned so that may just be a built in Gen 2 upgrade.

The Haldex system is not capable of sending anymore than 50% torque rearward unles the front wheels are spinning in which case it can be upto 90%.

The tuning just brings the haldex clutch in earlier.

Steve


----------



## digimeisTTer (Apr 27, 2004)

did you get my PM

or just being rude :?


----------



## TT Law (Sep 6, 2003)

Sorry Digi,

Missed the new message sign.

You have PM.

Steve


----------



## digimeisTTer (Apr 27, 2004)

NP m8


----------



## tehdarkstar (Jul 24, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> Quattro on the S3 is the same one as used on the MKII TT.


Yeah, I found out in the net yesterday that it was the same power split as the MK2 TT. I don't know, I will give it a try and I want to like it, but you know my opinions about the front biased quattro, don't you?


----------



## TT Law (Sep 6, 2003)

Well the TT is going on Monday.

I finally gave in to temptation on the S3.

I will miss the looks of the TT. The performance of the S3 is the attraction. At least I can say I have owned and enjoyed the TT2 and one day may return to one in a more powerful guise. As I have said before I enjoy the rush of a turbo engine and the S3 has this in buckets.

I am hoping to soon swap our diesel golf for a Classic TTR so will be on the main board once more.

Steve


----------



## Speed Racer (May 21, 2006)

TT Law said:


> Well the TT is going on Monday.
> 
> I finally gave in to temptation on the S3.
> 
> ...


Smart choice. Wish I could have one. Front end just looks so mean and ready to eat anything in its path. Best single frame grille front end in the lineup IMO.


----------



## digimeisTTer (Apr 27, 2004)

Congratulations Steve

I'm sure you'll enjoy it.


----------



## LazyT (Apr 13, 2006)

elisiX said:


> If this 265HP 2.0T is put in the TT, wont that be the TT-S.
> 
> Otherwise, wont there be too many TT models.. TT 2.0T 200HP, 265HP plus the 3.2 and then you have the TT-S / RS models.. thats 5 models!
> 
> And even if the 265HP in the TT is the TT-S, thats still 4 models for a relatively niche vehicle.


Don't forget about the yet-to-be released 2.0TQ with 230 hp.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

and the 170 diesel.


----------

