# Auto Trader TT Review



## sherry13 (Oct 8, 2013)

Summary: It's a good car blah blah, don't buy the TTS blah blah, oh look here's a Virtual Cockpit blah blah, takes some getting used to blah blah.






Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App


----------



## can_quattro (Jun 11, 2009)

sherry13 said:


> Summary: It's a good car blah blah, don't buy the TTS blah blah, oh look here's a Virtual Cockpit blah blah, takes some getting used to blah blah.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


A good summary of this review sherry13. When a reviewer says go for FWD instead of quattro.. that really says it all. :?


----------



## leopard (May 1, 2015)

sherry13 said:


> Summary: It's a good car blah blah, don't buy the TTS blah blah, oh look here's a Virtual Cockpit blah blah, takes some getting used to blah


I think it's fair to say that not every review is going to be a gushing novel of expletives as everyone is going to have a different opinion on the TT, however this was ok.

It's always been known with the mk2 that the journalists' opinion was to go for the the front wheel drive as this was seen as the better deal and remember quattro is predominantly front wheel drive anyway.It seems then nothing has changed in this regard for the mk3 as far as the main stream reviewers go.

I think alot of people are seeking affirmation in the next review that comes along.If you like something then go for it and use a review as a guide and not a certainty.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

But mainstream reviews always weigh heavy on value and that's why the bottom of the range cars are always the one they say to go for.

everyones different but the ones that go for the fwd car are normally on a budget and thats the main focus of their decision.
form over function.. The Mk1 was the 180bhp fwd car too.


----------



## Shug750S (Feb 6, 2012)

Toshiba said:


> everyones different but the ones that go for the fwd car are normally on a budget and thats the main focus of their decision.


As you say, everyone's different. I just wanted a reasonably good looking and reasonably refined 2 seater roadster, so after trying a few chose the mk2 FWD. at one point was considering the mx5 but although great value was not in the same league of comfort or space.
Only do about 3k miles per year, as out of the UK a lot, plus car I got will easily exceed the legal speed limit and is plenty fast enough for me. Also have a decent bike so performance is not really the driver on a car, as long as it can keep up with most.

Agree if driving on the limit or in snow etc regularly Quattro may have made sense, and always thought even the Quattro was in FWD majority of the time anyway. I live in outer London and don't drive if there's snow around, walk / use public transport instead. My view is it's not me I worry about, done various advance driving skills training including escape & evasion (for work) and skid pan stuff. It's the other muppet hitting me as he / she loses control.

Could have bought anything (up to £50k or so) as annual bonus covered it that year so SWMBO didn't care, and FWD worked for what I wanted.

Always amuses me on here (and other forums) that many seem to only rate the fastest / bestest / modified cars, when the normal ones are perfectly okay for most drivers. Doubt many people can actually get anywhere near the real top end performance of their car safely, unless tracking regularly anyway. Maybe it's the old 'willy waving' at play?


----------



## Mr R (Mar 1, 2015)

Shug750S said:


> Always amuses me on here (and other forums) that many seem to only rate the fastest / bestest / modified cars, when the normal ones are perfectly okay for most drivers. Doubt many people can actually get anywhere near the real top end performance of their car safely, unless tracking regularly anyway. Maybe it's the old 'willy waving' at play?


Well said! [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

A few people have commented to me recently via PM about the utterly ridiculous comments that are made on here. Buying FWD because you're on a budget... :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## ChrisH (Jul 19, 2007)

Toshiba said:


> But mainstream reviews always weigh heavy on value and that's why the bottom of the range cars are always the one they say to go for.
> 
> everyones different but the ones that go for the fwd car are normally on a budget and thats the main focus of their decision.
> form over function.. *The Mk1 was the 180bhp fwd car too*.


Maybe the reason behind their conclusion is the MKIII now has 230 bhp in a lighter chassis and more than in the MK I Quattro.
Suits me fine but not tried the TTS yet.


----------



## Shug750S (Feb 6, 2012)

Seriously that being on a budget really cracked me up.

Maybe I do have a cheaper end TT, but car to me is just that, a car. I like a fairly decent one (or two) keep it nice and take care of it, but plenty of things are higher priority.

Many people today judge others by their car, not realising that everything is on credit.

I'm quite happy with my base TT, spend a lot more money on houses (got 3 at present and no mortgages) and other things (holidays etc) over the years


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Sure its budget... and priorities, why not just go for an R8 then?
Its stated above "I just wanted a reasonably good looking". I couldn't agree more with the credit comment, but thats just an industry coming up with more ways to move products to a market that it wouldn't normally be able to sell it.

Take a TTS, remove quattro, remove various trim and options what do you end up with? a car designed to meet AUKs fleet market (thats what they want and why FWD was added). Im sure the same conversation will be had when the RS lands about which model. Its just VFM and how you perceive that. Only the dick 'eds are doing the traffic light GPs...

The real test would be ok, ignore price, 2 cars - the one of the left is a TTS one on the right is a TT which are you going home in.. :lol: 
In the same why as why people go TDi over Petrol. The press also recommend the sport model, not the sline...!
If you look at other makes, Golf, the recommend model is the 150bhp TDI match... its all VFM!!! nothing more.


----------



## Mr R (Mar 1, 2015)

Toshiba said:


> The real test would be ok, *ignore price*, 2 cars - the one of the left is a TTS one on the right is a TT which are you going home in.. :lol:


Yeah, that's a real good test... top marks for thinking of that :lol:


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

:roll: so it's budget then :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Which is fine, it's talking about VFM. They are not trying to boil the ocean or define the "best" in the same way if you go and look at tech products they would be recommend one 8GB MBA over say a 16GB rMP with i7, (VFM)

Both do the same thing, do you need the retina? do you need SSD, do you need i7, do you need....
they have a range for a reason... in the same way they have options..


----------



## Shug750S (Feb 6, 2012)

Toshiba said:


> Sure its budget... and priorities, why not just go for an R8 then?
> Its stated above "I just wanted a reasonably good looking". I couldn't agree more with the credit comment, but thats just an industry coming up with more ways to move products to a market that it wouldn't normally be able to sell it. .


Yeah, you're right, it was about budget as I didn't buy the R8. :lol: plus a new one was >£50k, so would have been a fun discussion with SWMBO, who thinks a golf is expensive and no need for one so she drives around in an old corsa  but at least she doesn't get stressed about marks and scratches (or washing it) :lol:

Priorities, that's the key. I have other priorities for my hard earned, not just cars.

End of the day it's irrelavent what others think, it all comes down to the individual choice / priority / need at the time.

Sure this applies to many things in life.


----------



## Mr R (Mar 1, 2015)

Toshiba said:


> :roll: so it's budget then :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
> 
> Which is fine, it's talking about VFM. They are not trying to boil the ocean or define the "best" in the same way if you go and look at tech products they would be recommend one 8GB MBA over say a 16GB rMP with i7, (VFM)
> 
> ...


I think you're comparing Apple and Oranges....

16Gb RAM, i7 and SSD will all give faster throughput when processing, for example large data sets or doing stuff like 3D-modelling calculations with "cubed data" or virtualisation. An entry level MBA would struggle with that kind of thing. Turnaround of processing and output results can be important, therefore in some instances having better hardware is genuinely important and beneficial.

Of course, if you're a real "power user", you'd have a 6-Core / Dual GPU 3.5GHz / Xeon E5 processor :wink: 8)


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

No both apples.. :wink: 
In the same way if i was a "power driver" i'd have the V10, but its not offered in the body i want - just like the CPU, but cores only mean speed if the programs are wrote to optimise the query. SSD is only about the ingest time of data to RAM, processing is always from RAM. But the analogy is the same for cars, if you don't want/use the "extras" on the other model then thats where the reviews are going.

Cubed or aggregate data is a thing of the past, if you need to do play with large datasets then talk to me - i was part of the project the built the largest data warehouse.


----------



## LunaBear (May 11, 2015)

Toshiba said:


> No both apples.. :wink:
> In the same way if i was a "power driver" i'd have the V10, but its not offered in the body i want - just like the CPU, but cores only mean speed if the programs are wrote to optimise the query. SSD is only about the ingest time of data to RAM, processing is always from RAM. But the analogy is the same for cars, if you don't want/use the "extras" on the other model then thats where the reviews are going.
> 
> Cubed or aggregate data is a thing of the past, if you need to do play with large datasets then talk to me - i was part of the project the built the largest data warehouse.


Did I just log into the ITtforum by mistake?


----------



## Mr R (Mar 1, 2015)

LunaBear said:


> Did I just log into the ITtforum by mistake?


Well there is a fair bit of tech behind the VC you know...  :lol:


----------



## sherry13 (Oct 8, 2013)

If you are after a regular TT, the review is basically a rave. I mean, Audi could have written it. I don't think anyone would need affirmation on anything after that notice' Mr L.

Personally, I find the UK reviews very predictable. Mind you, the wrath tends to be aimed at the RS, last described online as "not that much fun" and somewhat intriguingly, "stiff and tiring". Rather like my posts.

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App


----------



## Mr R (Mar 1, 2015)

sherry13 said:


> "stiff and tiring". Rather like my posts.


 

:lol:


----------



## TortToise (Aug 22, 2009)

leopard said:


> sherry13 said:
> 
> 
> > Summary: It's a good car blah blah, don't buy the TTS blah blah, oh look here's a Virtual Cockpit blah blah, takes some getting used to blah
> ...


Worth noting that at this time, going FWD on the Mk3 means no S-Tronic, manual only. (Equally of course, going Quattro means no manual gearbox, only S-Tronic - TTS excepted).

I've no doubt that the top selling variation will be either the 1.8 FWD petrol or the (also FWD) TDi, simply because of low upfront price or lower running costs. Personally I would want _at least_ 2.0 Sport Quattro or preferably TTS with S-Tronic.


----------



## leopard (May 1, 2015)

TortToise said:


> Personally I would want _at least_ 2.0 Sport Quattro or preferably TTS with S-Tronic.


Come on,that's a bit light weight.It's got to be at least the forthcoming 2.5 ltr RS


----------



## ChrisH (Jul 19, 2007)

leopard said:


> TortToise said:
> 
> 
> > Personally I would want _at least_ 2.0 Sport Quattro or preferably TTS with S-Tronic.
> ...


For everyday supermarket, motorway driving even runs to the dump I find the FWD 230 Manual Sl Line quite adequate.
The advent of the 2.5L RS is something else entirely, but I'm told it will be £50-55k and so you pays your money and takes ya choice.
Can't wait though...!


----------



## ZephyR2 (Feb 20, 2013)

I feel that there is a slight difference in the TT vs IT analogy. The majority of motorists would not want to or even dare to push a TTS to its limits on the road and even fewer would be interested in taking it on to a track. And therefore paying the premium for those extras is just not worthwhile.
Conversely many PC users would benefit from high end processors, more RAM and SSD as these will speed up their computing experience, even if they are not using demanding software / processes and also ultimately will keep the PC future proofed for longer. And therefore are worth investing in.


----------



## Mr R (Mar 1, 2015)

ZephyR2 said:


> I feel that there is a slight difference in the TT vs IT analogy. The majority of motorists would not want to or even dare to push a TTS to its limits on the road and even fewer would be interested in taking it on to a track. And therefore paying the premium for those extras is just not worthwhile.
> Conversely many PC users would benefit from high end processors, more RAM and SSD as these will speed up their computing experience, even if they are not using demanding software / processes and also ultimately will keep the PC future proofed for longer. And therefore are worth investing in.


Exactly. [smiley=thumbsup.gif]


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

First of all have you worked out the "premium" between the two once you level the specs?

And its 100% still true, it does not matter if you push or track the car at all in the same way it doesn't matter if you do 3D modelling or whatever on your IT device. Yes some will get the mac pro example i gave for the hell of it, but if you was serious about that stuff a 13" rMP is not the correct tool.

Nothings changed the reviews have alway a) been opinion and people always get drawn to those that support their point of view and b) are mainly above VFM and people buy based on VFM or budget.


----------



## Roller Skate (May 18, 2015)

I knew I shouldn't have read this thread. Might have just cost me a lot of money. :lol:


----------



## leopard (May 1, 2015)

I take it you did your homework and got 10%+ discount then


----------



## Mr R (Mar 1, 2015)

leopard said:


> I take it you did your homework and got 10%+ discount then


Yeah, you certainly get good VFM on the TTS with these big discounts eh? :wink: :lol:


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

As always facts and fiction are not the same thing...
from your favourite internet brokers...

Audi TT 2.0T FSI Quattro Sport 2dr S Tronic Petrol Coupe RRP 32,860	Disc 29,661	%90.3
Audi TT 2.0T FSI S Line 2dr S Tronic Petrol Coupe RRP 33,945	Disc 30,633	%90.2
Audi TT 2.0T FSI Sport 2dr Petrol Convertible RRP 32,100	Disc 28,973	%90.3
Audi TT 2.0T FSI S Line 2dr Petrol Convertible RRP 34,650	Disc 31,268	%90.2
Audi TT 2.0T FSI Quattro TTS 2dr S Tronic Petrol Coupe	RRP 40,310	Disc 38,338	%95.1
Audi TT 2.0T FSI Quattro TTS 2dr Petrol Convertible RRP 41,125	Disc 39,117	%95.1

You girls on a budget play nice with your shopping carts, let the men get the real cars. :lol:


----------



## leopard (May 1, 2015)

Toshiba said:


> You girls on a budget play nice with your shopping carts, let the men get the real cars. :lol:


Quite,that rules you out then :lol: :lol:


----------



## Mr R (Mar 1, 2015)

Toshiba said:


> As always facts and fiction are not the same thing...
> from your favourite internet brokers...
> 
> Audi TT 2.0T FSI Quattro Sport 2dr S Tronic Petrol Coupe RRP 32,860	Disc 29,661	%90.3
> ...


Not sure where you got those figures from, but a few people on here have got 10% off the TTS via CarWow (someone even mentioned 11%), so that puts the TTS on 89-90 %


----------



## Shug750S (Feb 6, 2012)

Got a mail from my local Audi garage today

£4,000 Deposit Contribution on all new TT Coupe and TT Roadster models

Presume this is now the starting point if looking for a mk3?


----------



## Mr R (Mar 1, 2015)

Autohouse website also showing 11% discount possible...


----------



## leopard (May 1, 2015)

It seems that way.One of the posters on the finance thread showed his example with a 4K deposit and then 48×350 but that was for a R-Line,not a tts.

When you think about it,it's alot of money for something you don't own and if you do pay the final payment with the interest then you've paid well over rrp so no discount.

Don't do it myself,prefer to pay cash or wapp it on the c/c and get the discount up front.


----------



## Mr R (Mar 1, 2015)

And remember, over 4 years is even more interest! Way too long. :roll:


----------



## leopard (May 1, 2015)

Definitely.

There is a bit of a sideways move.As long as you pay 51% of the finance agreement you're entitled to hand it back,but as to how that would affect your relationship with VWFS,I don't know as I haven't done it.


----------



## Shug750S (Feb 6, 2012)

In the past I've managed to get virtually the same deal as main dealers were offering for finance and paid cash. Just got to be prepared to walk if they won't play, but normally they will try and meet you somewhere near the deal

Know with Ford and others you can do the finance deal, get the deposit contribution on top of whatever deal you can negotiate, and after paying the first payment can call the finance company and pay the finance off for a £50 fee. (We did this on my daughter's car and got a great deal. We were paying cash and dealer suggested we take finance for this reason, even called us after a few weeks to remind us to cancel the finance. Saved another £1500, which in a £10k car already with £1,500 negotiated off list was a blinding deal)

Wonder if same rules with VWFS?


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

I got over 10% on the RS before it was launched, it changes or means nothing - these are just trim levels. I'm not saying 10% is not possible, I'm saying its not heres 10%. The dealer discounts for TTs are around 4-6% (regardless of trim) without having an angle, be that a relationship, pictures or leverage. The RS TT was not even made by the RS division either .

The numbers are from Orange, but look on carfile and the TTS is 40310 vs 38723 4% disc, Sport 29810 vs 27645 9%


----------



## TortToise (Aug 22, 2009)

leopard said:


> It seems that way.One of the posters on the finance thread showed his example with a 4K deposit and then 48×350 but that was for a R-Line,not a tts.
> 
> When you think about it,it's alot of money for something you don't own and if you do pay the final payment with the interest then you've paid well over rrp so no discount.
> 
> Don't do it myself,prefer to pay cash or wapp it on the c/c and get the discount up front.


Yeah, I had an offer from my local dealer, 2.0 TFSi S-Line:

Duration 49 months
48 monthly payments of £349.00
Customer deposit £3,000.00
Centre Deposit Contribution £3,228.46
Total Deposit £6,228.46
Recommended on the road £32,464.99
Amount of credit £26,236.53
Optional final payment £14,748.75
Total amount payable £34,560.75
Acceptance fee* £125.00
Option to purchase fee** £60.00
Representative APR 6.5%
Fixed rate of interest 3.22%
Excess mileage 7.2p per mile

So, 3 grand up of your own up front along with £185 quid of one-off 'fees' (ripoff) followed by £349 a month for four years _and then_ £14,748.75 if you want to keep your now 4 year old front wheel drive, manual car .... Not really that appealing IMO.


----------



## leopard (May 1, 2015)

TortToise said:


> Yeah, I had an offer from my local dealer, 2.0 TFSi S-Line:
> 
> So, 3 grand up of your own up front along with £185 quid of one-off 'fees' (ripoff) followed by £349 a month for four years _and then_ £14,748.75 if you want to keep your now 4 year old front wheel drive, manual car .... Not really that appealing IMO.


Yep,having something on the "knocker" becomes a real drag once the honeymoon period is over that's for sure.

Whoever thought up the acceptance fee and right to buy fee needs a boot in the stones too :mrgreen:


----------

