# New Audi Magazine - MK3 TT



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

Hi all

So, like many of you I am sure, I received my latest copy of the Audi Magazine yesterday. To me, the MK3 TT looks great, BUT side profile (or in the 3/4 shot shown) it looks closer to the MK1 than an evolution of the MK2?

Anyone else think the same? Love the interior on it although after all the dashpod woes, how reliable will that electronic instrument cluster be! :?

No offence, but much prefer it to the MK2 - it looks like what the MK1 evolved should have been all along...

Rob


----------



## TortToise (Aug 22, 2009)

RobLE said:


> Hi all
> 
> So, like many of you I am sure, I received my latest copy of the Audi Magazine yesterday. To me, the MK3 TT looks great, BUT side profile (or in the 3/4 shot shown) it looks closer to the MK1 than an evolution of the MK2?
> 
> ...


Mk1-ish rear, mostly Mk2-ish side profile. Front is somewhat new but closer to the Mk2 than Mk1 IMO.


----------



## Hoggy (May 8, 2002)

Hi, Rear 1/4 view looks nice & Exhaust pipes in the correct position. 8) 
Hoggy.


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

I thought the side looked more MK1 with the high crease and the loss of the lower crease that the MK2 has?


----------



## Hoggy (May 8, 2002)

RobLE said:


> I thought the side looked more MK1 with the high crease and the loss of the lower crease that the MK2 has?


Hi, agreed.
Hoggy.


----------



## mono-stereo (Aug 6, 2006)

RobLE said:


> I thought the side looked more MK1 with the high crease and the loss of the lower crease that the MK2 has?


Hi, sorry to sound dim but what do you mean by high crease vs lower crease of the mk2? do you mean the sticky outy bit running along the bottom of the windows?


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

mono-stereo said:


> RobLE said:
> 
> 
> > I thought the side looked more MK1 with the high crease and the loss of the lower crease that the MK2 has?
> ...


Yes. I thought my "high crease" didn't sound very technical, but it's better than "sticky out bit"  Side on, looks as though it could almost be a MKI! Good news for us MKI drivers...when I got my 3.2 someone asked me if it was the new TT...this should keep it looking fresher for even longer!


----------



## Mark Davies (Apr 10, 2007)

I've only just taken a proper look at it and I'm pleasantly surprised by it. It has captured that classic MK1 side profile very well - which was always the defining character of the car. The roof line is very similar, it has those circular wheel arches and the straight sills - all the important elements.

I think the designers have looked at the mistakes of the MK2 and rectified them. The problem with the MK2 was always that it completely abandoned the original design ethos of the MK1 (the _very thing _that set it head and shoulders above its competition) in favour of corporate brand cues. They produced an Audi sports coupe, but it had little to do with the TT that had come before. This time they seem to have remembered what made the TT such a success in the first place. Shame they didn't go the same way with the interior which, fancy digital dials aside, is little different from the MK2; so I think they could have done more to try and recapture the great style of the MK1 dash too.

So in all a much better design effort which is likely to condemn the MK2 to obscurity - but still not certain it will be the classic which is the MK1.


----------



## Audiphil (Oct 23, 2012)

Hi Mark,

I agree the Mk3 looks good though I still fancy a MK1 there are quite a lot of 10 year old plus cars that look great even now there are not many marques that achieve such poise.

Phil


----------



## VerTTigo (Nov 14, 2009)

Mark Davies said:


> I've only just taken a proper look at it and I'm pleasantly surprised by it. It has captured that classic MK1 side profile very well - which was always the defining character of the car. The roof line is very similar, it has those circular wheel arches and the straight sills - all the important elements.
> 
> I think the designers have looked at the mistakes of the MK2 and rectified them. The problem with the MK2 was always that it completely abandoned the original design ethos of the MK1 (the _very thing _that set it head and shoulders above its competition) in favour of corporate brand cues. They produced an Audi sports coupe, but it had little to do with the TT that had come before. This time they seem to have remembered what made the TT such a success in the first place. Shame they didn't go the same way with the interior which, fancy digital dials aside, is little different from the MK2; so I think they could have done more to try and recapture the great style of the MK1 dash too.
> 
> So in all a much better design effort which is likely to condemn the MK2 to obscurity - but still not certain it will be the classic which is the MK1.


What?

I am sorry, but what?


----------



## datamonkey (Jan 23, 2012)

VerTTigo said:


> Mark Davies said:
> 
> 
> > I've only just taken a proper look at it and I'm pleasantly surprised by it. It has captured that classic MK1 side profile very well - which was always the defining character of the car. The roof line is very similar, it has those circular wheel arches and the straight sills - all the important elements.
> ...


Interesting how we all see the same thing differently eh?!


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

Audiphil said:


> Hi Mark,
> 
> I agree the Mk3 looks good though I still fancy a MK1 there are quite a lot of 10 year old plus cars that look great even now there are not many marques that achieve such poise.
> 
> Phil


Agreed - my 10 year old MK1 3.2 still turns heads and has people commenting as to what a nice car it is!


----------

