# next TT - 3.2 V6 or Quattro Sport?



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

Hi all,

As some of you may have seen my recent posts, after 18 months of selling my 225 Coupe, thinking of getting another TT! 

Don't really want another standard 225 as it would feel like I wasn't getting something new/different if you know what I mean so was thinking 3.2 V6, although yesterday started wondering about a QS. Whats peoples opinions on which way to go?

See the QS prices have dropped quite a bit, but still not as low as the V6 which seems shockingly good value right now!

Sad I know, but loved the heated seats in my 225 so think I'd miss them on the QS with the Recaros - I know you can have standard seats but if you're going to have a QS, surely Recaro's is a must? Whats in place of the knobs where the heated seat ones are on a standard TT? Are they just blanked out? 

With the 3.2 I love the styling which I'd get to keep on the QS of course (and then some) which is cool, I guess the 3.2 will sound lots better than a QS and seem more like a luxury Coupe beacause of not being so pared down...and maybe the rear seats would be useful. Also not sure about lack of load cover on QS and leaving expensive things 'on show' in the boot?

Love the QS wheels, not so sure about the red boy racer brake calipers (had them on my LE Fiat Coupe - Brembo ones which which suited the car, but not sure on a TT).

I guess as a final option I could pick up a reasonably cheap 225 (and save on road tax!) and mod it a little...don't want something that screams boy racer or cheapens the image though!

Advice please, greatfully received!

Rob.


----------



## davidkoulakis (Jul 21, 2008)

IMO - if you want a luxury coupe, go for 3.2. . . if you want a unique _sports car, go for the QS - in fact go for mine, you wont find a better one, and all the mods you'd want already done :wink:

http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/685214.htm_


----------



## KammyTT (Jun 28, 2006)

wow dave thats a great price and excellent mileage, id buy that in a second


----------



## p1tse (Sep 20, 2004)

hello again.

going through all the options i see.

with not much response of mine, i guess mine doesn't tick the boxes for you (fair enough).

as for the red calipers, it depends on what colour etc. but mine actually has them, and it doesn't shout boy racer at all.

back on topic to v6 vs QS.
if i was to buy a v6 i think i would get one with the DSG, to add to the smoothness of the v6 engine. 
but then i don't think i would buy a small 'sport' type car for the crusing appeal. 
i like the cars to be unique a bit, and with the v6, it's found across quite a few audi and volkswagen ranges. (i know the 225 model was in s3 and lcr's, but that's it i think)

QS is a nice car, it's not boy racer type at all, but if the red calipers are a concern, surely the limited edtion look of the black roof, will have more of an appeal than red calipers.

i agree, if it was a QS, it would have to be recaro's. i've seen people really struggle to sell QS with normal seats. 
i've actually had a nosey at a few QSs, but the alcantara steering wheel, and gear knob, puts me off a bit, due to harder to clean and easier to mark with dirty sweaty hands. 
the recaro's do feel cool though, but the lack of adjusment for seat height etc. doesn't really suit me or the otherhalf. 
also the heated seats are a nice plus, on cold winter mornings.

the reason i brought my 225 coupe, was that i needed the back space at times. to be fair i've hardly carried people in the back, but it doesn't mean i haven't for those quick journeys, for a favour for someone etc, which is handy.
so the rear seats are a bonus on that.

also another bonus with the back seats, is that they fold flat for more load space in the back, a QS wouldn't allow this due to the net (not sure if it can be detatched, but then again it won't be a flat loading space and bar in the way).

i think all have their pro's and con's, but a 225 model was the balanced one for me, and yes the v6 front does look good, so i have one ;-)
thought about the spoiler, but i like the rear as it is, cleaner, smaller colour coded.


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

You really do have 'too much time on your hands'  thanks for the info and replies though, both on here and PM'd.

I actually like the larger 3.2 rear spoiler and the front air intakes look great, especially on a lighter car like silver where they stand out more than say on a Moro Blue or Black Coupe.

Alacantara steering wheel/gearknob also concerned me with reference to sweaty hands and general wear - would it go 'loose' or rub away? Its easy enough to change the gearknob but changing the steering wheel wouldn't be such an easy job.

Yeah, would have to be buckets if a QS - didn't think about lack of height adjustment so thanks for pointing it out! I'm 6'2 so had to have my previous TT seat on its lowest setting and even then felt like I had to lean slightly forward when driving  How low is a QS bucket anyone?

I'm undecided on the black roof - think it looks great against red as it happens but would probably go for an Avus Silver QS as it lends a bit of class. Reckon you're right on people commenting about 'why does it have a black roof' too and wonder if people would think I'd put the buckets in...would I just look like a boy racer at 36 years old???!!! 

Engine wise, think the V6 is going to sound and be smooth as and make it feel like a different car to my previous 225 which is nice...agree regarding DSG - almost seems a requirement on a V6 as much as Recaro's do in the QS!

Hmmm...now should I just save some money and get an older 225, get new wheels, exhuast, 3.2 rear valance.....!!!!!! No...V6 or QS....got to keep telling myself...! :?

Rob.


----------



## SimonQS (Jul 21, 2008)

RobLE said:


> You really do have 'too much time on your hands'  thanks for the info and replies though, both on here and PM'd.
> 
> I actually like the larger 3.2 rear spoiler and the front air intakes look great, especially on a lighter car like silver where they stand out more than say on a Moro Blue or Black Coupe.
> 
> ...


----------



## skiwhiz (Feb 17, 2008)

RobLE said:


> Hi all,
> 
> As some of you may have seen my recent posts, after 18 months of selling my 225 Coupe, thinking of getting another TT!
> 
> ...


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

Thanks for the replies guys, this is how I remember the forum! Beginning to waste(?) quite a bit of time myself here again now! 

How does the load cover work on the QS as it has no rear seats - does it pull from the rear strut brace or what?! Is it a genuine Audi part or some shoddy canvas e-bay thing which sounds ok but doesn't work in practice?!

Wouldn't go for a black QS as my previous TT was black and also because it looks pretty standard apart from the wheels - obviously the roof has no two tone but mores the point you can't notice the spoiler or front air vents so much on darker cars (as with 3.2) I think, so it would have to be blue, red or avus - avus most likely...same colour as I'd go for in a V6 if possible.

Does a QS sound the same as a standard 225 or does it have a different exhuast?

Anyone know where there are any decent QS pics with the different colours/angles/including interior shots?

No one has answered yet regarding the lack of heated seats and what has happened to the knobs on the dash - are they utilitsed for something else, dummy buttons on blanking out plates please?

Yeah, would think a modded 225 the least likely - really think its gotta be a 3.2 or QS this time and sod the extra fuel/road tax! 

Thanks again,

Rob.


----------



## p1tse (Sep 20, 2004)

always having a browse ;-)

not sure on the buttons for heated seats, but this pic looks like it has been blanked off:










as for what to go for QS or v6, go with gut feeling, but from reading, it seems the v6 maybe in front ;-)


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

Thanks for the pic - agreed, looks like they're just blanked off :? bit naff me thinks on a nigh on £30K car! particularly as they still have the silver rings around them!

Think you're right...the V6 is still pulling me for the sound, rear seat and heated front seats :roll: but I've seen a couple of QS's around which seem like relative bargains, one at a main dealer! Seems like they are desperate to shift them.

Either way, think I'm gonna be very happy when I get a V6 or a QS! 

Rob.


----------



## CHADTT (Jun 20, 2007)

Could always put an ENIGNE START button on one of the blank seat heater switch spaces.


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

CHADTT said:


> Could always put an ENIGNE START button on one of the blank seat heater switch spaces.


Thats actually quite a nice idea, would suit the TT QS well! Wonder if an S2000 would fit?


----------



## SimonQS (Jul 21, 2008)

p1tse said:


> always having a browse ;-)
> 
> not sure on the buttons for heated seats, but this pic looks like it has been blanked off:
> 
> ...


The silver rings arnt standard.... and to be honest only add wieght! :roll:


----------



## KentishTT (Jun 28, 2007)

SimonQS said:


> p1tse said:
> 
> 
> > always having a browse ;-)
> ...


----------



## p1tse (Sep 20, 2004)

s2000 button would fit in there, as some members have done that.

but what happended to the none modding route ;-)

how about a v6 dsg roadster?


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

yeah, well an S2000 button is surely just a small mod :wink:

like the roadsters roof down - can't stand the look of them roof up! think the roof line of the coupe, the part from the rear, looks fantastic and even think that may be disguised too much with the two tone paint of the QS for my liking! :roll:


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

The one question really has to be can you live with the seats. You need to be agile to get in and out, and as you quoted your age (sorry I am stereotyping here) you or your regular passenger may find they are difficult. As for comfort I am 6ft and 16+ stone and they are very snug. I have lost over half a stone though as they were getting a little too tight. If you are buying a qS then the Recaros are a MUST.

As for the load cover, the standard parcel shelf will fit and hangs from the tailgate. I have the load-liner from my 225 in the boot and I have used velcro to attach a black towel to the front edge of the liner which I use to cover items in the boot.

I love the look of the qS, it is a totally different animal to my old (year 2000) 225. The only reasons I would consider a V6 over the qS is the sound and the DSG box.


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

mighTy Tee said:


> The one question really has to be can you live with the seats. You need to be agile to get in and out, and as you quoted your age (sorry I am stereotyping here) you or your regular passenger may find they are difficult.


age? :x I'm 36 !!!!! Since when was that old? I go mountain biking, kayaking, surfing and hiking - my girlfriend is 21. You really think we're not agile and would struggle with the seats! Thanks!


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

RobLE said:


> mighTy Tee said:
> 
> 
> > The one question really has to be can you live with the seats. You need to be agile to get in and out, and as you quoted your age (sorry I am stereotyping here) you or your regular passenger may find they are difficult.
> ...


I must put my glasses on... Sorry m8 I read you height as your age (62     )

(stops diggin a hole and crawls into it.... [smiley=oops.gif] )


----------



## OeTT (Nov 10, 2007)

Where abouts in Devon are you? Happy to meet up if you are local enough to help you make your choice 

Stewart


----------



## jbell (May 15, 2006)

sotgn said:


> Where abouts in Devon are you? Happy to meet up if you are local enough to help you make your choice


As am I


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

OK, I will forgive you! 62 indeed! I am 6'2 in height...maybe thats what you read?! Thought saying a 36 year old may not be agile enough to get in and out of a QS was pretty harsh!!!! 

Thanks for the offers of meets, really nice of you - I'm actually in North Devon though so quite a way from you in Torquay unfortunately.

Just been offered a trade in value for my Jeep against a TT QS - they offered me £2,700!!! I told them, in a polite way, where to put their offer. Oh, and of course, they wouldn't reduce the price of the QS if I was doing a trade in! £2,700? I'd rather keep it and buy a cheaper TT than let it go for that!

Rob.


----------



## p1tse (Sep 20, 2004)

is that for the jeep?

crazy!!!


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

p1tse said:


> is that for the jeep?
> 
> crazy!!!


Thats right! It was £23,000 5 years ago and they're offering £2700.00 for it! :x


----------



## qooqiiu (Oct 12, 2007)

So hes offering you a grand below book...welcome to 10/08 car selling


----------



## davidkoulakis (Jul 21, 2008)

qooqiiu said:


> So hes offering you a grand below book...welcome to 10/08 car selling


indeed . . . you need to lop at least a grand off whatever price you think you could get, then if your at a dealer, whack another big chunk off !!

I just sold my A4 last night for £2k less than I first thought id get for it !


----------



## p1tse (Sep 20, 2004)

RobLE said:


> p1tse said:
> 
> 
> > is that for the jeep?
> ...


that's crazy prices. a mate had a dented up c2 1.1 03 50k, interior was shabby too, and got £2-2.5k for a part ex on a used astra not long ago.


----------



## qooqiiu (Oct 12, 2007)

It'll also depend on what your trading it against.


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

qooqiiu said:


> It'll also depend on what your trading it against.


It was against a TT QS which they seem(ed) pretty keen to get rid of!


----------



## SimonQS (Jul 21, 2008)

Rather than go on and on, just test drive both and see which you like.........


----------



## GEM (Jun 21, 2007)

I love my *V6*. Looks good, pulls like a train and sounds great. Plus I'm a big fan of the DSG.
*BUT* I love the QS. Sat in SimonQs one and I felt nice and snug in the Recaro's.  
Mind you I'm only 5' 11'' tall (not 511 years old) and got a small ar5e.
Felt like a real driver's car. I have a great big soft spot for the 2 tone finish and looks. 8)

My perfect Mk 1 TT would be the QS with the *V6* under the bonnet.
As I always say; you need to drive both of them. Either will be a great buy and I'm sure one will tick all the boxes for you.
You've got a tough choice to make.
John.


----------



## golfmadeasy (Aug 22, 2005)

I am one of very few on here that can give advice properly as I have owned a TT 3.2 and i currently own a QS. I have only had to clean the alcantara steering wheel twice in 3 yrs and thats only coz i am very fussy about cleanliness. I find no back seats better than having seats as my golf clubs (can get 2 sets in there) can easily fall in behind the recaros. I use a cover to ensure no one sees inside the car and have not had a break in (touch wood) The engine noise from the 3.2 is impossible to beat but the turbo (remap)and dump valve still give a smile on my face. I get more questions from the QS than from the 3.2 probably in part to the red distinctive colour rather than silver. Passengers find it quite difficult to get out the seats but thats their problem I love the QS alloys. If you want my opinion go for the QS not many about and its good to be different in my opinion.

Cheers


----------



## Morph TT QS (Jan 1, 2008)

Great reading all your view points BOYS, the only one I will agree with is the raising of the seat went the wife want to drive.
As a pensioner, disabled from a brocken hip and leg I find it a little bit of an effort, But its worth it.
Roll on Rockingham on the 19th.

Were there a Will there, ur somethink ells, way is it.
QS for me


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

Thanks for all the info you lot are providing me with! At last, a topic which is getting some interest! Still not sure which way to go - think I'm gonna need to see both properly and drive...!

Agreed, the best would be a 3.2 V6 engine in the QS style - black roof, alloys, two seats...but with the sound and creaminess of that V6. Guess a 3.2 V6 with QS alloys would be quite nice...anyone have this combination?

Still not sure on the Recaro's in the QS, even though I'm contridicting myself slightly now - yes, I think they're great looking in the QS and fit it's image perfectly so to have one without seems like a crime, but not being able to lower them, how uncomfortable they're likely to be on a long journey and lack of heating kinda puts me off - don't seem to be many QS's around with standard leather/alacantara seats though - and are they then heated?

Are the door cards on the QS plastic or are they leather like on a 'normal' TT?

Agree a QS would probably get more interest from joe public and I would imagine it feels more 'special' to own - a real keeper which is sure to become a classic...always thought I'd want an Avus or Blue QS if thats the way I went but think it looks fantastic in Red and the black really offsets it well.

Desicions, desicions!

Rob.


----------



## golfmadeasy (Aug 22, 2005)

HI

I am happy to send you some snaps of my red/ black QS if you like. I normally change cars every year - had a porsche boxster for 10 months, had the 3.2 V6 for 10 months had the QS 3 yrs 1month. That says it all and I will be keeping it for another few yrs then probably go for a TT S or RS depending on costs. You get alot of QS for the money. Send me ure e mail if you want some quality snaps

Regards

Adrian


----------



## GEM (Jun 21, 2007)

RobLE said:


> Agreed, the best would be a 3.2 V6 engine in the QS style - black roof, alloys, two seats...but with the sound and creaminess of that V6. Guess a *3.2 V6 with QS alloys *would be quite nice...*anyone have this combination?*
> Rob.


*V6* with Qs alloys.
John.


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

very nice! definately think its the alloys that really makes the QS - they look fantastic on the TT...are they a straight fit? Are yours the original Audi ones or aftermarket ones?

Thanks for pics.


----------



## GEM (Jun 21, 2007)

RobLE said:


> very nice! definately think its the alloys that really makes the QS - they look fantastic on the TT...are they a straight fit? Are yours the original Audi ones or aftermarket ones?
> Thanks for pics.


Youre welcome Rob. Glad you like them.

They are original QS wheels. No problem with fitting.
Did have BBS RS2 alloys with 15mm Front and 20mm rear spacers.
This put the wheels nicely aligned with the arches.
I'm not very good on the different ET for wheels so when they were fitted I asked 
the TT Shop to put the size spacers on that gave me the same visual look as before.
To me they look like 10mm Front and 15mm Rear. But I might be wrong. 
The QS has 8'' front wheels and 8.5'' rear wheels. The rear wheels have a wider lip/edge to them.
To keep things easy I had 8'' fitted all round.
John.


----------



## davidkoulakis (Jul 21, 2008)

QS has leather door insterts

on the comfortablness of the seats, I find them amazingly comfortable, and so do my passengers . . . have done quite a few london birmingham trips and fit as snug as a bug in rug (?!)

as for heated . . . thats whats the blowers are for !


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

davidkoulakis said:


> QS has leather door insterts
> 
> on the comfortablness of the seats, I find them amazingly comfortable, and so do my passengers . . . have done quite a few london birmingham trips and fit as snug as a bug in rug (?!)
> 
> as for heated . . . thats whats the blowers are for !


Thanks for the info - in the pics I've seen they just didn't look like the stiched leather of a standard TT? Anyone got any closer pics?

What do you think the seats would be like on a longer journey, say England - Switzerland? I guess the 3.2 V6 would be the better car for that kinda distance anyway?

Yeah, I know the blowers do their job but loved the heated seats in my 225 Coupe, and the fact they're so adjustable is superb...most cars just have an on or off for the heating I think, or certainly not the range of adjustment.


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

Hi,

Can anyone answer the questions in my previous post?

My final (hopefully!) QS question, is regarding technical differences between QS & 225 - does the QS have the same gearbox and suspension settings?

Thanks.

Rob.


----------



## jbell (May 15, 2006)

RobLE said:


> Hi,
> 
> Can anyone answer the questions in my previous post?
> 
> ...


Def the same gearbox, I would think the suspension is the same as facelift 225's, the V6 has the older pre-facelift suspension and is 20mm higher than the 225


----------



## YELLOW_TT (Feb 25, 2004)

RobLE said:


> Hi,
> 
> Can anyone answer the questions in my previous post?
> 
> ...


The qS has theame gearbox suspension brakes and haldex as the 225 TT


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

Thanks! Just wanted to clear that up!


----------



## showtime (Mar 29, 2008)

GEM said:


> I love my *V6*. Looks good, pulls like a train and sounds great. Plus I'm a big fan of the DSG.
> *BUT* I love the QS. Sat in SimonQs one and I felt nice and snug in the Recaro's.
> Mind you I'm only 5' 11'' tall (not 511 years old) and got a small ar5e.
> Felt like a real driver's car. I have a great big soft spot for the 2 tone finish and looks. 8)
> ...


get a red 3.2 get blk wheels blk wing mirrors and the roof roof done blk job done only got the roof to do on mine but in two minds


----------



## p1tse (Sep 20, 2004)

jbell said:


> RobLE said:
> 
> 
> > Hi,
> ...


i knew the v6 sits higher, but never knew it was from the pre facelift


----------



## jbell (May 15, 2006)

p1tse said:


> jbell said:
> 
> 
> > RobLE said:
> ...


Thats why I sell so many sets of H&R lowering springs for V6's 8)


----------



## jamal (Nov 16, 2007)

Im pretty sure the QS comes with a R32 gearbox though. I was told this by a QS owner who was having an uprated clutch fitted.


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

bhp786 said:


> Im pretty sure the QS comes with a R32 gearbox though. I was told this by a QS owner who was having an uprated clutch fitted.


Interesting - is it the same as the 3.2 V6 manual then? Is it closer ratio?

I also heard the QS had different suspension settings to both the 3.2 and the 225?


----------



## SimonQS (Jul 21, 2008)

RobLE said:


> bhp786 said:
> 
> 
> > Im pretty sure the QS comes with a R32 gearbox though. I was told this by a QS owner who was having an uprated clutch fitted.
> ...


the broucher does talk about uprated suspension, although I dont know exactly what. I did hear that the ARBs are thicker - but handling wise the QS is a completly different car to my old 225


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

SimonQS said:


> RobLE said:
> 
> 
> > bhp786 said:
> ...


I also heard the exhuast is different on the QS to that of both the 225 and the 3.2? And I don't just mean because its black!


----------



## chrishumes (Jun 16, 2008)

i can't believe that no one on here has not listed the differences between a standard tt 225 and the 240 sport. i have just got a 240 sport and its well hard to find info on here on the qs! mods, differences, problems etc. surely its up to one of the old members with a qs to post up his knowledge!

come on guys!

from what i understand, the 240 sport is a 1.8t 225 with a re-map. same turbo etc.

it has uprated suspension, the brakes and bodykit of the 3.2, stripped out so 50kg lighter, 18" wheels, black roof, no spare tyre, and the fast car i have ever driven!

extras, bose, xenon lights? and air con

can anyone add to this


----------



## mobbster (Mar 5, 2005)

Hi
They brakes are off the 225 only pre-production cars had 3.2 brakes [smiley=bigcry.gif] 
To be honest i think the QS is a lovely car i just wish it had a little more soul and better feed back to the driver when blasting down the B-roads.If tuned to 270bhp ish it is a great car with loads of torque low down the rev range which is one of the best features of the 1.8t engine.
It remains one of my favorite looking cars,i just wish it could sounded like the V6 R32 even the 3.2TT does not sound as good as the R32 which is a bit of a let down. 
Cheers


----------



## Motorhead (Mar 25, 2007)

[quote="mobbster" even the 3.2TT does not sound as good as the R32 which is a bit of a let down. 
Cheers[/quote]

You wanna hear mine then captain....


----------



## qooqiiu (Oct 12, 2007)

No one really knows all the differences between the qS and 225, the car is an enigma :wink:

With regards to the gearbox. The manual says it has the ring form the 3.2V6. It also has a strengthened chassis.I only found this out when i had my haldex oil changed and it made for an awkward job. Don't know about the suspension, the only way to find out is to get a part number and then compare it to a 225`s.


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

chrishumes said:


> i can't believe that no one on here has not listed the differences between a standard tt 225 and the 240 sport. i have just got a 240 sport and its well hard to find info on here on the qs! mods, differences, problems etc. surely its up to one of the old members with a qs to post up his knowledge!


Agreed, no one seems to be able to say much about the QS for some reason!

Not sure why its now said the brakes are from a 225 as every review I have read says they're from the V6?

Still not sure which way to go, V6 or QS - QS does seem special, but V6 like the sensible choice...3.2 V6 sensible?!


----------



## davidkoulakis (Jul 21, 2008)

battery's in the boot for better weight distribution . . . .

i think i said it before, but decision on 3.2 vs QS depends on what your after . . . QS, whilst being very comfortable, its a driver focused sports car . . .and the 3.2, whilst being fast and sporty, is a luxury coupe - IMO

and if fuel economy is a concern, remapped 1.8t beats a 3.2 V6 hands down

personally, the unique look of the QS wins it as TT, given its age, is quite common, but a QS . . . could count on one hand the amount iv seen on the road


----------



## skiwhiz (Feb 17, 2008)

RobLE said:


> chrishumes said:
> 
> 
> > i can't believe that no one on here has not listed the differences between a standard tt 225 and the 240 sport. i have just got a 240 sport and its well hard to find info on here on the qs! mods, differences, problems etc. surely its up to one of the old members with a qs to post up his knowledge!
> ...


when I bought mine new I understood the suspension was lower and stiffer, brakes meant to be same as 3.2, wheels everyone knows, styling GBM kit, never got any booklets that sets out what the package really was so went with salesmans steer and loved the experience of the drive and car package. A number of posts say brakes same as 225 but I am not up on specs of different versions to know the difference and whats right or not.

try one of the other TT sites you may have more luck ie TT-Talk ot tt arena

if I can find anything will post it up


----------



## qooqiiu (Oct 12, 2007)

The brakes are the same as the 225`s - FACT.

I dont see your dilemma. The only this going for the V6 are... the rear seats (do you need those?) And the sound. Thats it. The qS is better in every other way.


----------



## Motorhead (Mar 25, 2007)

qooqiiu said:


> The brakes are the same as the 225`s - FACT.
> 
> I dont see your dilemma. The only this going for the V6 are... the rear seats (do you need those?) And the sound. Thats it. The qS is better in every other way.


The V6 is a far stronger reliable unit..

Duplex chain driven, does not require belt changes.

No yards of rubber hose in the engine bay.

The only real highlighted problem is the DSG box. As you`re looking for a manual this isn`t an issue. V6 owners on this forum do not appear to encounter anywhere near the issues 1.8T owners encounter..I appreciate there is a higher percentages of 1.8T owners registered here but taking that into account the V6 can give years of trouble free motoring.

Information I`ve came accross from men in the motortrade highlight that the V6 compared to the 1.8T shows very few fault codes by comparison on a dianogstic check over a given period of time.

Both nice cars but I cannot comment too much in the 225 or QS as I have never owned one..


----------



## SimonQS (Jul 21, 2008)

chrishumes said:


> i can't believe that no one on here has not listed the differences between a standard tt 225 and the 240 sport. i have just got a 240 sport and its well hard to find info on here on the qs! mods, differences, problems etc. surely its up to one of the old members with a qs to post up his knowledge!
> 
> come on guys!
> 
> ...


The QS is actually 75kg lighter than a 225, making it 125kg lighter than a V6!!! 

Exhaust is different from the turbo as the QS has the same rear floor plan as the V6 (battery in the back etc) but doesnt offer any extra performace over the 225.


----------



## mobbster (Mar 5, 2005)

Hi SimonQS
You seem to be making a big issue about how much ligther the QS is compared to the 3.2 its 104 kgs
but your giving away 10 bhp :wink: 
The difference in performance is nothing really 0.2 over the quater of a mile or 0.5 secs for 0-100.
I bet you if you got 5 owners with the QS and 5 with the 3.2 and performed a drag race 0-100 the 3.2 owners would win  
The reason behind this is the 3.2 IS miles easier to launch quickly off the line !! (before you say anything i have had 225.QS,3.2 & 3.2 DSG) The turbos were always harder to get the launch right when you did get it right the turbos would fly but i think most owners would just end up spinning the clutch up and going know where :!: 
Also once on the move the 3.2 has a good deal of torque to press on in any gear,with the turbo you would have to use the gears a little more to make the same progress.
On the track the QS would out perform the 3.2 as the suspension is lower and stiffer,but as i have said before on here the QS only has the 225 brakes and this in my eyes is the weakest link about the car.
So i would say in real world driving you would not notice the performance between both cars just the noise they make oh and the lack of seats in the QS.
Cheers


----------



## SimonQS (Jul 21, 2008)

Not making a big issue at all, I would bow to your greater knowledge :wink:


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

yeah, glad you two aren't arguing about it! Its interesting though, when the cars are pretty evenly matched on performance - the difference between a V3 3.2 and a 1.8 T - that it is so similar...

...obviously, as we already know, that basically the 3.2 is going to be the better car for long cruises, say for driving across Europe or something, but the QS is going to be the better back road blast...I'm still undecided to be honest although 3.2's seem to be cheaper and I guess I'd get more refinement for my money. Thinking about a 3.2 in Silver or Avus and putting QS wheels on it (cause they're lovely!) and I'm not sure if I like the standard 3.2 wheels anyway. Had nine spokes on my 225 so don't really want the same.

Seems like you can pick up a decent 3.2 for around £11,000 now, even at Audi dealerships, whereas QS's are still hovering around £14,000 - a good price but £3,000 is a fair wedge of cash...!

Long term I would think the QS is the keeper though - the kinda car you could keep forever and have a real possibility of a future classic, seem to be far too many 'normal' TT's around for that to happen with a standard one I would think and a seriously modded one won't become a classic anyway?

The QS is a special car, seems like a genuine alternative to a Boxster, certainly for the money, just a shame it only has a 1.8 engine - I mean, I realise it has the performance, but it has no soul, no soundtrack like a Boxster or Cayman....or even a 3.2 TT?

Oh, desicions desicions!

Rob.


----------



## SimonQS (Jul 21, 2008)

I actually think there is a fair difference in perfoamance, book speeds read as 0-60 in 6.4 secs for the V6 (quicker if you have the DSG due to teh faster gear shifts and launch control style system) and 5.7 secs for the QS


----------



## mobbster (Mar 5, 2005)

Hi SimonQS
Have a look here mate -(link below)
http://www.letstorquebhp.com/4wd.asp
On most of the cars thats what they have been tested to. (Not much difference in performance :wink: )
Cheers


----------



## SimonQS (Jul 21, 2008)

Thanks Mobbster, I wasnt trying to get into a debate, just quoting manufactures figures......

I liked the website on yout link until I found this:

"ALL theory performance figures quoted on the car statistic lists are calculated using the Letstorquebhp.com formulas (calculator), none of them are from any given road test. All the figures are THEORY only and the aim of the site is for a fun comparison between all types of performance cars, standard or modified, and mainly in the UK, although some imports are covered.
1) The Formulas used and statistics shown on letstorquebhp.com theory performance web site and calculator, predict 0-60mph, 0-100mph and ¼ mile times (with the ¼ mile terminal speed) for road legal cars on road legal tyres. To check the accuracy of these figures we recommend you compare them to real life road test figures that you may have come across in magazines and sites.

2) It also calculates a separate Drag ¼ mile (with terminal speed and not in relation to the road figures shown) to show the slightly quicker time on a well gripped Drag Strip approved surface. This figure should be compared with real drag strip times achieved at official events (and not the road figure mentioned earlier). They do not allow for none road-legal drag slicks (which can be up to a second quicker on the 1/4mile if not more depending on the drive type).

3) The formula's only use three items of easy obtainable data to produce the figures, these are Flywheel Power (BHP), Kerb Weight (KG) and Drive type (4WD, FWD or RWD). Formulas do not take into consideration other factors that could also affect real life figures, e.g. torque, gear ratios, aerodynamics, air density, temperature etc, these are not easy obtainable.

4) The 0-60 (and 0-100) quote takes into consideration an average amount of manual gear changes. In real life times can vary if an extra gear change is required before reaching the quoted speed.

5) A "through" 60-100 time is also quoted by subtracting the 0-60 from the 0-100 figure. The real time to cover this segment may well be quicker (due to correct gearing) but the "through" figure shows the time elapsed between 60-100 while covering the 0-100. It gives an indication of a car's comparison performance once moving, and does not confuse the figures with a different amount of gear changes between cars.

6) Average aerodynamics are used and therefore terminal speed and 0-100 can be slightly out; terminals are based on Power and ¼ mile times.

7) Traction difficulties are taking into consideration for each drive type formula, e.g. 4wd can launch very quickly showing an improved 0-60 (and ¼ mile) compared to Fwd which can suffer from reduced traction off the line.

8) The 4WD formula has now been adjusted (times increased) to allow for heavier cars (e.g. over 1500kg) when launching.

9) Formula's have been setup to allow for the real possible traction limits of proven cars, e.g. quickest times possible (for the very highest possible power) for 0-60 are set at 2.5secs for 4WD, 2.7secs for RWD, and 4.0secs for FWD, although careful drag suspension setup and legal drag tyre/wheel choice may well be very important to get anywhere near these times.

10) Road/tarmac ¼ mile terminal speed is connected with the quoted 0-100, i.e. if the terminal speed is exactly 100mph then both times should be the same.

11) The calculator has been set with maximum and minimum parameters to stop users entering unrealistic data for the drive type used, to avoid bikes, and none performance vehicles:

4 Wheel Drive (4WD)
Minbhp - 70bhp, Maxbhp - 1500bhp
Minkg - 700kg, Maxkg - 3000kg
Minbhp/ton - 95bhpton, Maxbhp/ton - 1000bhp/ton

Rear Wheel Drive (RWD)
Minbhp - 70bhp, Maxbhp - 1500bhp
Minkg - 350kg, Maxkg - 3000kg
Minbhp/ton - 95bhp/ton, Maxbhp/ton - 1300bhp/ton

Front Wheel Drive (FWD)
Minbhp - 70bhp, Maxbhp - 700bhp
Minkg - 600kg, Maxkg - 2000kg
Minbhp/ton - 95bhp/ton, Maxbhp/ton - 700bhp/ton

12) All formulas were designed with trial and error using research from proven road tests in magazines, this covered various different levels of cars that were used as a basis for setting the formulas, for example, figures from Hot Hatches like the Clio 172, to Supercars like the McLaren F1 were used as a guide. Also results from official modified car events were used as a guide when allowing for very high BHP per ton.

13) We suggest if you're asking us to predict the time of an extreme highly modified vehicle that has a full dog box then, as a rough guesstimate, please minus a few tenths from the drag 1/4 mile that we calculate, e.g. if the vehicle has 800bhp then minus 0.8 seconds from the drag 1/4 mile, if it has 600bhp then minus 0.6 seconds and so on. A full dog box can make a noticeable difference above 60mph, so we hope to have this option supplied with the calculator soon."


----------



## mobbster (Mar 5, 2005)

Hi SIMONQS
Just to see how accurate it is try this !! 1400kgs 366bhp four wheel drive :wink: 
Yes it was my car when std and its bang on the money with what mitsubishi say  
Si it will only be out by a very small fraction unless like it says cars are modified to silly bhp .


----------



## SimonQS (Jul 21, 2008)

mobbster said:


> Hi SIMONQS
> Just to see how accurate it is try this !! 1400kgs 366bhp four wheel drive :wink:
> Yes it was my car when std and its bang on the money with what mitsubishi say
> Si it will only be out by a very small fraction unless like it says cars are modified to silly bhp .


I am sorry (and I am not naturally argumentitive!) there are too many variables which they must have assumed in thsi speadsheet / formula which would vary the results massivly. Such as drag coeffecient (a TT would be very differnt to a similar powered, weight van!), type of tyres, air temp / density.


----------



## mobbster (Mar 5, 2005)

Hi Si
I give up [smiley=argue.gif] (no educating pork !! :wink: )
No seriously mate did you try it on a few cars to see how accurate it is ?
I tried it on LOADS of cars focus ST a few scoobies and its what the 0-60 should be.
At worst it was only out by a tenth or two. 
The time is states could be doing you a favour because you will never be able to launch 
that QS to get the 0-60 audi say :lol: 
Only kidding mate :wink: 
Cheers :-* :lol:


----------



## davidkoulakis (Jul 21, 2008)

it does take a certain skill to launch the QS ! . . . .thou Simon QS may have that, so you could be wrong !


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

how has my thread for genuine comments/comparisions between a potential purchase of a 3.2 V6 or a QS turned into an arguement regarding specific performance variables and data? this isn't what the thread was about, I was looking for help and advice trying to decide which one to go for...not this!!!!!

please take your issues to a different thread so I can hopefully get some genuine advice as I was before, thanks.


----------



## mobbster (Mar 5, 2005)

Sorry ROBLE 
Me and Si QS were only having a bit of leg pulling !!! (Well i was :mrgreen: )
How much Advice do you need ? 
Your a big boy now or do you want me to hold your hand and show you the way to the stealers (joker) :roll:


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

mobbster said:


> Sorry ROBLE
> Me and Si QS were only having a bit of leg pulling !!! (Well i was :mrgreen: )
> How much Advice do you need ?
> Your a big boy now or do you want me to hold your hand and show you the way to the stealers (joker) :roll:


Yes, indeed I am 'a big boy now' and no hand holding is necessary  Just always interested to hear peoples opinions on both cars, what current owners of them think etc. Thing is, its not too easy for me down in deepest Devon as whilst there is a local dealership, it doesn't have either car - both 3.2 V6's and QS's are few and far between down here to ask anyone locally so it would mean travelling quite a distance to purchase - would be good to know lots of information first.

Rob.


----------



## mobbster (Mar 5, 2005)

You should have said you wanted a QS a few months ago !! I part chopped a red 55 plate one with 7k on the clock fully loaded bose 6 cd etc etc and not a single mark on it with dales of newquay :mrgreen: 
Cheers.
My opinion :wink: if you have had a 1.8t engine before then this time get a 3.2 unless you want to go along the tuning route !
Or get a SLK350 now thats a V6 engine ( & another can of worms :lol: )
Cheers


----------



## p1tse (Sep 20, 2004)

still undecided hey?

i'm guessing your thinking:
QS - 
for- it's looks, uniqueness, recaro's, sporty edge
against - no heated seats, and rear being shown (but i'm sure both can be sorted), but the alcantara middle of recaro's don't get cold like leather and you have a 1.8T before

V6
for - not owned one, dsg, noise
against- not as sporty package

if the above is correct, it really depends which one fits your life style, a complete sporty package or something inbetween


----------



## chrishumes (Jun 16, 2008)

to be honest, when i was looking for a new car i didnt even think about getting a 'normal' tt. i think there too common!

i only considered the qs and if i didnt get one of them it was going to be a m3. i think they are a different class and give people a different impression (i.e. you know your sports cars!).

i await the backlash!


----------



## davidkoulakis (Jul 21, 2008)

chrishumes said:


> to be honest, when i was looking for a new car i didnt even think about getting a 'normal' tt. i think there too common!
> 
> i only considered the qs and if i didnt get one of them it was going to be a m3. i think they are a different class and give people a different impression (i.e. you know your sports cars!).
> 
> i await the backlash!


I AGREE ! it was either a qS or no TT at all


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

Yeah, still undecided :roll:

And yes, basically for the reasons you've stated between the two - 3.2 V6 sound, DSG and heated seats - don't think I'm 'so' concerned about having a back seat and not 'too' worried about anything in the boot being on display, although not ideal for my laptop I guess.

QS - still not 'sure' about the Recaro's - think they look great, especially the body coloured backs if the car is Red or Blue, but shame they're not heated and not sure about how easy to get in/out, the uniqueness overall and how special the car seems to look, the wheels are fab (but aftermarket ones would be an easy upgrade to the 3.2) , the better handling and I guess slighly better on fuel?! Guess I have to decide between overall luxury and sportiness...

No doubt I'll make my mind up soon...eventually?!


----------



## p1tse (Sep 20, 2004)

i think the main thing, is you can only decide once you have tried the recaro's, getting in and out and comfortable driving position. wide range of owners, but for those who want the QS experience live with it, or just find it ok/perfect.

for me, being shorter it would mean sliding the seat back and forward to get out

but the choice of 1.8T and v6 is another personal one.
depends what sort of drive you want.


----------



## SimonQS (Jul 21, 2008)

mobbster said:


> Sorry ROBLE
> Me and Si QS were only having a bit of leg pulling !!! (Well i was :mrgreen: )
> How much Advice do you need ?
> Your a big boy now or do you want me to hold your hand and show you the way to the stealers (joker) :roll:


 :wink:


----------



## SimonQS (Jul 21, 2008)

RobLE said:


> Yeah, still undecided :roll:


Seriously, are you going to spend £15k on a car based on other peoples opinions? [smiley=gossip.gif] Go out there and test drive, it is the ONLY way to make up your mind!


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

SimonQS said:


> RobLE said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, still undecided :roll:
> ...


of course not! However, as I stated previously, its good to know other peoples opinions first - errr, thought that was one of the ideas of a forum???!!!!

its not like I have a local dealership with a QS or a 3.2 in stock, or anyone else in town who has either so I can ask for a go/sit in one - so, if I have to travel say 100 miles to test drive, its good to have already formed something of an opinion before travelling and to know answers to many of my questions....

how do other people find the recaro's with regards to not people able to put the height of them up or down? I'm 6'2 and used to have the seat in my previous TT on its lowest setting...would I have enough headroom in a QS? Sorry, is it ok to ask this question or should I drive 100 miles and go and test drive a QS to find out?!  :lol:


----------



## golfmadeasy (Aug 22, 2005)

Wow this post is still going strong 

My input along with many others is go drive 100 miles test drive both beauties then make a decision. I think you have enough ammunition to help making a start on a decision. Its certainly a buyers market in this financial era so make the most of it. Check pistonheads for any QS's and V6's.

My red/ black QS is flaming awesome, it ticks all the boxes. Its definetely much more special than my previous TT 3.2 V6. It is alot of car for not alot of money (current sales prices) in my opinion and should hold its value well in the future as it comes into affordability of many in the coming years.

I cannot knock my previous TT 3.2 it was great..... both are fab cars and whetever you buy its going to be nice to drive

Good luck and I,m sure your better informed from forum members opinions


----------



## SimonQS (Jul 21, 2008)

RobLE said:


> how do other people find the recaro's with regards to not people able to put the height of them up or down? I'm 6'2 and used to have the seat in my previous TT on its lowest setting...would I have enough headroom in a QS? Sorry, is it ok to ask this question or should I drive 100 miles and go and test drive a QS to find out?!  :lol:


Well I am 6 feet 5 and I am the limit I would say in terms of driver height - I may struggle with a helmet on, but you dont need one of those for the Nurburgring! 8)


----------



## genocidalduck (May 19, 2005)

Having had both, i'd go for the QS... Miss the QS more than the RS4 if im honest.


----------



## jbell (May 15, 2006)

RobLE said:


> its not like I have a local dealership with a QS or a 3.2 in stock, or anyone else in town who has either so I can ask for a go/sit in one - so, if I have to travel say 100 miles to test drive, its good to have already formed something of an opinion before travelling and to know answers to many of my questions....


Newton Abbot Audi have both models sitting on the forecourt, would be worth a drive down to test both at the same time, only one journey then (I know you live in N Devon).

Test them both and then get the one you really want (QS IMO :wink: )


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

jbell said:


> RobLE said:
> 
> 
> > its not like I have a local dealership with a QS or a 3.2 in stock, or anyone else in town who has either so I can ask for a go/sit in one - so, if I have to travel say 100 miles to test drive, its good to have already formed something of an opinion before travelling and to know answers to many of my questions....
> ...


Thanks, knew they had a V6 or two but didn't know they had a QS - may have to do that soon!

To be honest, right now the QS is out in front and the TT I'm leaning towards....!


----------



## jbell (May 15, 2006)

RobLE said:


> jbell said:
> 
> 
> > RobLE said:
> ...


Last time I was there they had an Avus QS on the forecourt, I know they are struggling and let 5 people go in Sept so there will be a deal there to be had


----------



## SimonQS (Jul 21, 2008)

Avis look great on QSs to! 8) wish I had gone for one, but blue is second best.... Although, I dont like the Avis so much on the back of the seats IMHO.


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

SimonQS said:


> Avis look great on QSs to! 8) wish I had gone for one, but blue is second best.... Although, I dont like the Avis so much on the back of the seats IMHO.


Agreed - the seat backs definately look best on blue or red - really stands out and looks 8)

Like the look of the QS in straight silver (not Avus) but haven't seen any for sale anywhere!

Interesting note regarding Newton Abbot Audi - I also see Exeter Audi have reduced a 3.2 V6 which was priced at £11,990 to £10,990 over the weekend - good price, just a shame about the exterior/interior colour combination!


----------



## jbell (May 15, 2006)

RobLE said:


> Interesting note regarding Newton Abbot Audi - I also see Exeter Audi have reduced a 3.2 V6 which was priced at £11,990 to £10,990 over the weekend - good price, just a shame about the exterior/interior colour combination!


Same company (South West Audi) also own Plymouth, Taunton and Barnstaple. Audi are offering 2 years free servicing or 2 year Audi warranty on used cars bought between the 17 and 27 Oct.

People aren't buying the 3.2 at the moment as it uses more fuel than the 4pot

I assume you are talking about the Mauritias/Anis car, stunning IMO http://usedcars.audi.co.uk/carview.aspx?id=600380186


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

jbell said:


> RobLE said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting note regarding Newton Abbot Audi - I also see Exeter Audi have reduced a 3.2 V6 which was priced at £11,990 to £10,990 over the weekend - good price, just a shame about the exterior/interior colour combination!
> ...


Yeah, its a shame regarding Audi's offer - too soon for me to be able to purchase, before 27th October. 

And yes, the Mauritus Blue/Anis - whats IMO? Is that a joke regarding it being stunning? Don't think it looks like a very sporty colour combination when compared to say Avus & Black Leather for example? I'm not sure...!

£10,990 seems like a good price though?


----------



## jbell (May 15, 2006)

RobLE said:


> jbell said:
> 
> 
> > RobLE said:
> ...


IMO - In My Opinion

Blue / Cream is a classy combination, more on the luxury side than Sporty (if that makes sense).

The price is very good, they offered me £10.5k for mine


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

jbell said:


> IMO - In My Opinion
> 
> Blue / Cream is a classy combination, more on the luxury side than Sporty (if that makes sense).
> 
> The price is very good, they offered me £10.5k for mine


Ah, IMO - sorry! Usually ok with this internet slang! Yeah, more luxury if its cream, but isn't Anis more like a yellow beige colour, in which case not sure how it would look with a lighter blue exterior? With Moro Blue or Black maybe, but with Mauritius?

My previous TT was Raven Black with Black leather which looked sporty and cool - not so sure Maritius Blue looks either unless its on a QS with a black roof?!

Do you know where there are any decent pics of this colour combination? The Audi photos are pants!


----------



## jbell (May 15, 2006)

RobLE said:


> Do you know where there are any decent pics of this colour combination? The Audi photos are pants!


Not sure, the thumbnails on the web are ok as they scroll through


----------



## mobbster (Mar 5, 2005)

Hi Golfmadeasy
Hold its future value well :roll: 
A car that cost just shy of 31k now if you see them private 14/17k for 56 plate. Has lost 14/17k in 2 years i know a lot of cars are worse (try E46 M3 NOW :lol: ) But it is not fantastic [smiley=bigcry.gif] Good if your buying one now but i would not even think of future value in the climate we are in now :!: 
Also if roble dont make his pi55ing mind up soon the mark 3 TT will be out  
Cheers


----------



## Morph TT QS (Jan 1, 2008)

SimonQS said:


> RobLE said:
> 
> 
> > how do other people find the recaro's with regards to not people able to put the height of them up or down? I'm 6'2 and used to have the seat in my previous TT on its lowest setting...would I have enough headroom in a QS? Sorry, is it ok to ask this question or should I drive 100 miles and go and test drive a QS to find out?!  :lol:
> ...


Nurburgring! when? I never got there this year, even had the ferry booked.
But Rockingham this weekend will have to do.


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

mobbster said:


> Also if roble dont make his pi55ing mind up soon the mark 3 TT will be out
> Cheers


Ha ha! Made me laugh that one! I know, I know...I'm getting there with my desicion though (I think!)


----------



## SimonQS (Jul 21, 2008)

morph TTS said:


> SimonQS said:
> 
> 
> > RobLE said:
> ...


Watch this space, I will be organising another trip for next May / June 8)


----------



## Guest (Feb 19, 2010)

An old thread now to be trying to topically contribute to now, but this might defuse the non-argument:

Hockenheim Short circuit (www.fastestlaps.com)

Audi TT Coupe Quattro Sport	1m 18.9 s
Audi TT Coupe 3.2 Quattro (8N)	1m 19.8 s
Audi TT Coupe Quattro (8N)	1m 19.9 s

Not a great deal of difference and certainly not enough to sustain a heated pub debate about. :wink: All TT Mk1 variants get resoundingly trounced on lap times by comparably-priced bespoke sports cars with (Z4 3.0 Si, Boxter 2.7, S2000, 350Z) so best we all keep our heads down there I think. Speaking as the owner of a 'heavy' QS (with climate control and regular seats), I just prefer the looks of the QS and cheap tunability of the turbo motor.

Doug


----------



## SimonQS (Jul 21, 2008)

Morph TT QS said:


> SimonQS said:
> 
> 
> > RobLE said:
> ...


We are going to the Ring on the way back from Italy on the Alpina ITTalia trip in May


----------

