# New Diesel Engine coming



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Speaking to a master tech today and they had been told on a TT update course the diesel version is now confirmed and will go into production soon.


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

A 140 or 170 or something else?


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Didnt get given details of the bhp or drive type/spec.


----------



## Pappa (May 22, 2007)

Does this mean there will be forum bickering on which is best (Diesel Tractor or proper fuel engine :lol: ) :?: :!: :?:


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Im hoping diesel TT owner will be banned.


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> Im hoping diesel TT owner will be banned.


 :lol: or at worst there should be a sub-forum of the Mk2.

Problem is that they'll outnumber the petrol cars.


----------



## Iceman (Jul 3, 2004)

Wondermikie said:


> A 140 or 170 or something else?


It will be most certain the 204 hp / 400 Nm 2.0 TDI Bluetec engine shown in the "Audi Cross Coupe Concept"

Hans.


----------



## vagman (Sep 6, 2002)

Iceman said:


> Wondermikie said:
> 
> 
> > A 140 or 170 or something else?
> ...


Good as it is in the A3/A4, the VAG 170 TDi is far too rough/tractorish to go in the TT, and if Audi insist on a diesel version then the Merc engine would be the sensible option.


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

vagman said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Wondermikie said:
> ...


Merc? Is the engine like a joint venture or something then?


----------



## ADB (May 7, 2002)

I was about to reply with an moan about 'what's wrong with Audi, dragging the TT into a different demographic etc' but then stopped. Audi are in this for profit, yes? Then I can see why they would do this, same as with the Mk1 150bhp roadster we all moaned about.

If you want individuality then it certainly isn't with this end of the Audi range :? I suppose even with the S4/RS4, S6/RS6 you are up with BMW, Mercedes etc, none of which have any soul anymore IMO ..........I have to stop and think about the R8, but that's in a new league for Audi so far?

I am glad I didn't go down the Mk2 TT route which I was seriously considering. Even if Audi drop an S-TT or RS-TT in the mix at some point I still think I'll give it a miss 

I am now just holding out for that right Cobra replica........... :roll:

Andy


----------



## vagman (Sep 6, 2002)

Wondermikie said:


> vagman said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...


I suppose calling it a Merc engine a bit misleading.

The technology is more of a joint venture as per the undernoted linky thing.

clickety-click


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

ADB said:


> ...If you want individuality then it certainly isn't with this end of the Audi range :? I suppose even with the S4/RS4, S6/RS6 you are up with BMW, Mercedes etc, none of which have any soul anymore IMO ..........


BMW, with the 130i, Z4 coupe, Z4M, M5, M6, 335d, 335i still have soul IMHO 

A diesel TT will outsell a 300+bhp TT by 30-1 so no point building it is there, not that I agree with that. A 200bhp diesel will become to the TT what the Golf GT TDi 130 was to the MkIV range.


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

vagman said:


> I suppose calling it a Merc engine a bit misleading.
> 
> The technology is more of a joint venture as per the undernoted linky thing.
> 
> clickety-click


Interesting, ta [smiley=thumbsup.gif]


----------



## vagman (Sep 6, 2002)

Wondermikie said:


> ADB said:
> 
> 
> > ...If you want individuality then it certainly isn't with this end of the Audi range :? I suppose even with the S4/RS4, S6/RS6 you are up with BMW, Mercedes etc, none of which have any soul anymore IMO ..........
> ...


Yep.....it's a pity they're gonna introduce a diesel. 

However, Audi will justify it's introduction following the success of the R10.


----------



## ADB (May 7, 2002)

Wondermikie said:


> ADB said:
> 
> 
> > ...If you want individuality then it certainly isn't with this end of the Audi range :? I suppose even with the S4/RS4, S6/RS6 you are up with BMW, Mercedes etc, none of which have any soul anymore IMO ..........
> ...


Same old same..... :?

It's just not worth trying anymore 

Z4 Coupe, TT Coupe, probably even a Golf GTI - could I actually tell which one I was in?

I *KNOW* when I'm in my V8 MGB ............

Andy


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

ADB said:


> ...Z4 Coupe, TT Coupe, probably even a Golf GTI - could I actually tell which one I was in?


Yep, the GTi would be the one torque-steering and wheel-spinning towards the nearest hedge in the usual FWD manner :lol:



ADB said:


> I *KNOW* when I'm in my V8 MGB ............
> 
> Andy


...that's only because the gap between the window and the roof is 20mm and the rain is coming in (or was that just the MGC).

Joking apart, cars like the MGB are great, but no use as a [long term] daily driver, whereas the modern roadsters can double up as a daily driver and a weekend fun car with no problems. The current 2.0T TT in coupe and roadster form is perfect for 90% of buyers.


----------



## Necroscope (Apr 9, 2006)

I am pretty sure i read some where that they are dropping a diesel into the R8 at sme point!

How wrong is that :twisted:


----------



## Arne (Dec 13, 2006)

Well - Audi did winn the 24 hours Le Mans for the second(?) time in a row with a diesel engine...... :wink:


----------



## Wallsendmag (Feb 12, 2004)

Why does the fuel matter? Surely its the end result that matters.


----------



## Necroscope (Apr 9, 2006)

wallsendmag said:


> Why does the fuel matter? Surely its the end result that matters.


Good point, but what about the sound and smell?


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

vagman said:


> However, Audi will justify it's introduction following the success of the R10.


thats a totally valid reason, but not for a 200bhp engine with 400nm. i really dont care about the fuel if the engine is sounding good and offering enough power.

but putting in just another vag-engine they have lying around is a bit annoying imo. seems it's really getting more and more just a golf with a fancier design and not a league of its own.

the only positive aspect i can see is that they need a stronger dsg for the diesel, but if they are as fast putting the diesel engine in as they were chipping the 2l to a so called TTS we might see that dsg on the market by that time anyway.


----------



## markrbooth (Sep 25, 2006)

Necroscope said:


> wallsendmag said:
> 
> 
> > Why does the fuel matter? Surely its the end result that matters.
> ...


Not to mention the plumes of crap expelled from the back every time the loud pedal goes down. And before anyone says filters are much better than they used to be yahde yahde yaddah, all diesels go this way within a year or two.

The number of times I've had to hit air recycle following even fairly new diesels on the motorway.......They make me want to vomit, letalone being moving health hazards to motorcyclists


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

markrbooth said:


> The number of times I've had to hit air recycle following even fairly new diesels on the motorway...


what always impresses me is that the black dust even colorizes grey asphalt: if you launch with a powerful diesel engine you get three lines on the asphalt, two from the wheels and one from the exhaust, at least for the first meters.

another positive aspect: faster cars don't press from behind on the autobahn due to the fog device. maybe that's the new vorsprung 

no really, i don't like them either, but it seems that savings of a few cents per liter are enough for many people to accept all that. demand and supply.


----------



## jam225 (Jun 24, 2003)

A sad thread indeed 

Yet more TT brand dillution, feck me I'd be as well driving a BMW 3 series coupe at this rate [smiley=thumbsdown.gif]


----------



## Karcsi (Mar 6, 2003)

der_horst said:


> markrbooth said:
> 
> 
> > The number of times I've had to hit air recycle following even fairly new diesels on the motorway...
> ...


I've spent almost a grand more on petrol over the first 9000k miles than in the diesel A3. My road tax this year will be twice that last year. Fuel prices will keep on rising, and "environmental" taxes will do likewise. I think there is lots of scope for a diesel TT. If Honda and Ford can make near silent diesels, why can't Audi?

It's a shame that it will be the first 2+2 sports coupe with a diesel engine, but it makes perfect sense.


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

Karcsi said:


> Fuel prices will keep on rising, and "environmental" taxes will do likewise.


dunno how it works in the uk, but in germany diesel is cheaper by ~20 cents per liter. but this difference is static, so the more expensive the fuel gets the less you can save with diesel.

also the environmental aspect is pretty paradox imo, as a diesel-engine is in no way more environment-friendly than an otto-engine. on the opposite. dunno if particulate matter (which is mainly created by diesel engines) is a topic in the uk as well, in germany it's pretty ubiquitous atm. if you concider the effects diesel exhaust has on the human body and the environment one should have to pay more for it...


----------



## jbell (May 15, 2006)

A Diesel TT was always on the cards, The R10s success guaranteed it. Audi are missing the point with the TT, it's supposed to be a Sports Coupe and yet seens to be missing all the good stuff. Audi need to do a serious revamp of specs ASAP IMO and start including options like DAB, MMi etc

As for the engines they need shooting, chucking an old V6 and a Golf GTi engine in will not do, especially the latter with no Quattro and the Golf/Seat have more power :!:

The TT is a premium product and is priced as such, it makes the A5 look cheap with the spec and options that's getting, come on Audi give us the TT we want.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

I'm holding out for LPG.


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

jbell said:


> ...come on Audi give us the TT we want...


Not that I agree with Audi at all, but whilst waiting lists are so long there isn't really a good reason for them to do this :?


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

it's all a matter of positioning. you'll always make more money with a cheaper car for the masses than with an extraordinary model.

obviously that's where we misunderstood audi in the first place when we saw the TT as something extraordinary due to its sporty looks. sadly that wasn't what audi had in mind. the TT is a fancy golf/A3 and that includes the lack of high performance models and the existence of diesel models.

i would have wished for a more exclusive or higher class line up, too, but once you accept audis view it all makes sense.


----------



## Karcsi (Mar 6, 2003)

der_horst said:


> Karcsi said:
> 
> 
> > Fuel prices will keep on rising, and "environmental" taxes will do likewise.
> ...


Diesel is as expensive as petrol in the UK. It would have to be very much more expensive for it to outweigh the better fuel economy of a diesel. Other than the lack of revs and 0-60 lefargy, a 2.0 diesel with 200+ hp will perform pretty similarly to the 3.2, but return almost twice the mpg, cost half as much in road tax, and depreciate far slower. To many people it will be a no-brainer - nasty cancenogenic particulates or not.


----------



## trentend (Apr 14, 2006)

Any dates?


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Im married and im only into women, try rebel. :wink:

No, no dates.


----------



## ezzie (Jul 2, 2004)

I see BMW have announced their new twin turbo diesel engine. 204hp, 400Nm torque, 54mpg and 138g co2.


----------



## TT4Tommy (May 26, 2007)

There are certain cars that would suit a diesel engine but I think the TT aint one of them. Its a iconic design sports car and whilst diesel engines are great for performance and mpg it just wont be the same car. The sweet sounding petrol engine is part of the package which creates the whole experience. Only concern for me is that the company car boys who will get one will help to hit residual values on the petrol versions because they will be more TT's on the road. Would Porsche stick a diesel in 911....no, would Lamborghini......no.....will bmw stick one in Z4...no .....mmmm may be I suppose but this list can go on. I would be happier driving my 3.2v6 on a green petrol replacement fuel all day but not a smokey rattly diesel. No no no ( and im not anti diesel, driving great BMW diesel for last 4 years)


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

I too think its a bad move - doesnt matter about our thoughts, its all about selling units.


----------



## ezzie (Jul 2, 2004)

Let's not kid ourselves, BMW are putting a diesel in the 3 and 6 series, mercedes does so with the clk and sc. If we think audi will not succumb to adding it to the TT, we are kidding ourselves. Porsche and Lamborghini are not natural competitors to the TT.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

The TT is not a competitor to the 3 or 6, do you see a diesel in the cayman, or in the 350z - no.

The A4, A5 and A6 are - they have diesel engines in these cars - leave the TT be. Its 100% sure if the TT does get a diesel engine fleets will buy them. If fleets buy them the TT will have mondeo level resale values.

Even though the damage has all ready been done with the current line up.


----------



## ezzie (Jul 2, 2004)

Diesel engines have not damaged 3 series coupe's residuals. A diesel TT would mostly likely cost more than the current 2.0 petrol. However, agree it will certainly make it more popular as cheaper to run therefore less of a barrier to purchase. But as Audi intends to crank up production, they need to increase demand further. When the mkI TT came out diesels accounted for a very small percentage of the overall market and the engines were much more agricultural. Today neither of these is the case. I'm not a fan of the idea, but commercial logic will be far too tempting for audi.

Agree with assertion not a direct 3 series c competitor, but I would also argue neither is it a direct cayman, 350z rival. It seems to be pitched between the more hardcore cayman and the softer 3 series, and seem to want to have its cake and eat it by appealing to both sets of potential buyers.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

ezzie said:


> Diesel engines have not damaged 3 series coupe's residuals.


I'd disagree. the 3 sells far more cars now, as a result the resale on all 3s are less due to this very fact. Its a rep car.


----------



## tehdarkstar (Jul 24, 2006)

The TT is a direct competitor for the Z4 and the SLK and none of them have diesel engines. You wouldn't expect to see a diesel in these cars.

I do think that diesel will hurt the TT image of "sports" car (that is not very strong already) and will devalue the brand.

If Audi does introduce a Diesel to the TT lineup mine will be up for sale immediately.


----------



## cheechy (Nov 8, 2006)

Yes but I do think you are being a little choosy around who you are comparing with.

A good example of a direct competitor to the TT (and is even in roughly the same price bracket) is the Brera. Now that has a mix of pertrol and diesel doesn't it?


----------



## tehdarkstar (Jul 24, 2006)

cheechy said:


> Yes but I do think you are being a little choosy around who you are comparing with.
> 
> A good example of a direct competitor to the TT (and is even in roughly the same price bracket) is the Brera. Now that has a mix of pertrol and diesel doesn't it?


When I was in the market for a car the ones that I have looked at were the Z4, TT, S2000, 350Z, SLK and Boxter. For me these are competing in the same niche (maybe the Boxter a little bit above the rest). I don't understand why the TT wouldn't be a direct competitor for these other cars.

I don't see the Brera as a sports car (even though I agree that it is a direct competitor to the TT)...


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

tehdarkstar said:


> If Audi does introduce a Diesel to the TT lineup mine will be up for sale immediately.


Mine will also be gone too.


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

probably mine wont even be there by then...


----------



## ezzie (Jul 2, 2004)

I would probably follow suit too.

However, there is a light at the end of the tunnel:

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/secret_new ... 821&page=1


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

it's a pretty long tunnel though. 2011 leaves enough room for porsche to cancel audis ambitions in case they could hurt the boxster/911 sales.


----------



## ezzie (Jul 2, 2004)

Indeed.


----------



## Wallsendmag (Feb 12, 2004)

Do you think its possible to swap enigines between my Aygo and TT ? I could drive the TT and get 60mpg and really p**s people off in the Aygo :wink:


----------



## NUM_TT (Apr 5, 2004)

wallsendmag said:


> Do you think its possible to swap enigines between my Aygo and TT ? I could drive the TT and get 60mpg and really p**s people off in the Aygo :wink:


Funny my buddy Dann in work has an Aygo and has already offered me that very same engine swap, I declined. lol :lol:


----------



## vagman (Sep 6, 2002)

Much as I like the TT, I'd trade mine in for a Z4 coupe, if, sorry when, Audi release a diesel version.


----------



## Molehall (Jan 8, 2003)

When the first computers came along, the abacus makers moaned like mad.

When the first horseless carriage hit the streets, the horse and cart brigade said things just weren't the same.

When CDs were invented, the cassette guys made a fuss (as did the CD guys when iPods were invented).

There were great debates how the telephone would never catch on, because it wasn't the same as talking face to face.

When Audi made a diesel TT............................................


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

...and just why do you folks think Audi are spending millions racing diesel cars? Just for fun? Where do you think that they think that the market is actually going?

Their intentions seem quite clear...

And also, just why have the 'BMW reps' coupes residuals outperformed the petrol variants consistently for the last few years?

Selling your petrol coupes on annoucement of a derv Audi coupe will merely confirm this and drive petrol residuals down even further and faster.

Admittedly the Audi 4 and six pot diesels are currently a bit dire, but others are raising their games, so Audi would be foolish not to follow.


----------



## FinFerNan (Feb 28, 2007)

Molehall said:


> When the first computers came along, the abacus makers moaned like mad.
> 
> When the first horseless carriage hit the streets, the horse and cart brigade said things just weren't the same.
> 
> ...


Was thinking along these lines myself.

Also,what about the diesel R8 being touted by Autocar this week?

My only reservation with this line of argument is that diesel is not "new" technology, whereas the examples given above were new at the time.

Also (for example) most audiophiles agree that analogue is still better than digital............... So I guess I'm still not sure then :?

In defence of the oil burners - I doubt many of you have not driven a modern diesel. But if you haven't please try one out before knocking (sic) them. I would suggest a new 280/320Cdi Merc to see what is actually possible.


----------



## DXN (May 18, 2002)

I must admit I was VERY against a diesel but my wife got a TDi seat leon and this 2.0 engine is amazing, the torque is great and acceleration in the power range nothing but impressive. If audi do it right, the only reason you will be selling your current TT is because there will be a better faster TT with good mpg

Tractor sound included is the only drawback as far as I can see, but get BOSE and crank it up.


----------



## ezzie (Jul 2, 2004)

Engine sound is part of the reason the v6 is so good. If they can make a diesel that sounds that good, one would be more inclined to be open minded about them.


----------



## FinFerNan (Feb 28, 2007)

DXN said:


> I must admit I was VERY against a diesel but my wife got a TDi seat leon and this 2.0 engine is amazing, the torque is great and acceleration in the power range nothing but impressive. If audi do it right, the only reason you will be selling your current TT is because there will be a better faster TT with good mpg
> 
> Tractor sound included is the only drawback as far as I can see, but get BOSE and crank it up.


Sadly the VAG PDI Engines, whilst quick and very torquey are amongst the most noisey also.

Take a E320CDi or even an Accord CDTI out for a Test Drive and imagine the TT with that kind of installation. Remember, these engines are VERY easily tuned to give way more than 300 Lbs/ft at 2000rpm or so. :wink:


----------



## Molehall (Jan 8, 2003)

Following on from FinFerNan comment on a diesel R8, I doubt whether the petrol R8 boys will be moaning about a diesel R8.

The only guys with a genuine reason to hate diesels are all the runners up in the Le Mans and other races where a lot of petrol guys ate dust.

For everyone else, surely it's freedom of choice?


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Choice yes, but its something i feel devalues the brand image of a TT, i have personally spent Â£150k on Audi cars in 3 years, Â£120k on TTs in the last two - if a diesel one comes out i wont be buying another - its that's simple for me.

Not one single reason to release an oil burning TT unless you want to sell to even more to the sales rep market


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

DXN said:


> ...If audi do it right, the only reason you will be selling your current TT is because there will be a better faster TT with good mpg...


The diesel would need over 200bhp to be faster than the 2.0T and decidedly more than that to be faster than the 3.2, although some of the "headline" in-gear figures would be better.

The major problem I personally have with diesel cars is that people quote the huge peak torque figures and make statements like "...my car has more torque than a Boxster..." or whatever, but without realising that this torque is i) only produced between 2000 and 2050 rpm, and ii) that diesel cars run such tall gearing (35-40 mph/1000rpm in top) that the actual torque at the wheels is no better than a grunty petrol car.

Large capacity petrol cars (>2.5) have the best of both worlds - the low-down grunt of a diesel but the ability to hold the power at higher revs too.


----------



## sico (Feb 6, 2003)

Molehall said:


> When the first computers came along, the abacus makers moaned like mad.
> 
> When the first horseless carriage hit the streets, the horse and cart brigade said things just weren't the same.
> 
> ...


Are you seriously saying that Diesel is a step foward in technology?


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Diesel is hardly new know it is, and i agree its not a step forward in terms of technology.


----------



## Molehall (Jan 8, 2003)

sico said:


> Molehall said:
> 
> 
> > When the first computers came along, the abacus makers moaned like mad.
> ...


Around 50% of Audi customers go for diesel. Surely they're making some form of statement about what they think of diesel technology?

I'll bet good money that within 10 years at least one of the luxury car brands (Aston, Porsche, Bentley etal) has a diesel engined model.

In addition, although I'm probably being a bit boring repeating this, Audi diesels seem to be having a fun time trashing all the petrol snail cars at Le Mans and other races. Is Audi using the engine equivilent of an abacus?

Audi are giving the customer the option to choose whether diesel or petrol suits his/her personal needs. What's wrong with that?


----------



## sico (Feb 6, 2003)

Molehall said:


> sico said:
> 
> 
> > Molehall said:
> ...


Maybe your comparison/ analogy should be:

Betamax (Petrol) came a long and so did VHS (Diesel).

People chose VHS instead of Betamax?

This would be a better compare as Betamax was better than VHS.

Also lets not forget that although Diesel engines are more efficient and produce less Co2 they produce more particulates which are more harmful to people in the short term.

This can be proven however the effects of Co2 on the atmosphere have not actually been proven. As many scientists agree as disagree but only the scientists who agree are sponsored by the government.


----------



## tehdarkstar (Jul 24, 2006)

As Wondermikie said, it's not a question of what is the max-torque/bhp that the car delivers, but how it is delivered. Diesel cars tend to have their peak torque delivered in a very narrow rev range, while petrol cars can deliver high torque and peak power way up int the rev range.

And I am a driving enthusiast. I don't need no Bose unless I'm bored in an endless motorway cruise. When I am in a race track or a twisty road I want to hear my engine. If it soulds like a tractor, half of the experience is gone already.

I also think that people forget that the R10 is not winning races because it's the fastest car, but just because it is the most fuel efficient. The Peugeot 908 HDi for example had more power and was faster, but consumed more fuel and therefore ended second.


----------



## Molehall (Jan 8, 2003)

sico said:


> Molehall said:
> 
> 
> > sico said:
> ...


You correctly say that Diesel engines are more efficient and produce more particulates.

The former is due to various scientific priciples, which I don't pretend to fully understand. When the first diesel engines came out, the many diesel disadvantages were greater than the advantages. Diesel engines were confined to watercraft, lorries and tractors. The odd car manufacturer that built a diesel car soon realised the error of his ways. Gradually the disadvantages started to be addressed and by 2007 every mainsteam car manufacturer is producing large quantities of diesel cars. Why?

Regarding particulates this problem is being addressed partly by diesel particulate filters and partly by (soon to be introduced in USA) Bluetec systems. If Bluetec isn't introduced in Europe that's due to a combination of cost and legislation rather than bad diesel technology.

I don't pretend that diesel is either perfect or superior to petrol (nor is petrol perfect or superior to diesel), but I am glad that the car manufacturers are giving the customer the choice. Why do the anti-diesel brigade object to consumer choice?


----------



## Karcsi (Mar 6, 2003)

Molehall said:


> Why do the anti-diesel brigade object to consumer choice?


Because it will be more popular than the petrol version and hit their (my!) resale values. Modern diesels are quiet and clean (albeit all but the VW group ones, it seems  ). So they don't rev as much, or have as pleasant a sound as a V6. But I am sure it will be just as pleasant to drive, because it is a TT still.

I'm not sure about this narrow power band thing. My A3 had a decent power band once chipped. No, it will of course not rev the same as a 4-pot petrol or V6. But it does have to get you to a similar top speed in the same number of gears, so the time spent in each gear should be about the same.

I might be tempted into a 2.0 Bluetec, if it arrives. But only if the engine refinement rivals the likes of Honda, Ford and BMW, and it is quattro.


----------



## cheechy (Nov 8, 2006)

Essentially a large part of the TT's appeal is the image it gives off.

Diesel's current image is not compatible with this and many see this as being therefore incompatible.

Also the idea around an increased numbers of cars on the road is another complaint. However I've yet to hear reports that they will up the number of cars produced due to diesel - will they not just replace the petrol variants?

To be fair I've not heard anything official about diesel engine either so I suppose nothing is official yet :lol:

editing to say that I agree with Karsci - I would also consider a 2.0 TDI if the common rail technology that VAG have adopted instead of PD produces something quiet and smooth.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

But you are talking about 24hour endurance - diesel gets more mpg, doesn't mean its a better sports car. All it means is it had to stop less and as its revving lower id guess less chances of the engine breaking are less too.

Diesel sucks - get the A5 is you want a diesel Audi coupe or a Alfa and leave the TT with the rest of the sportier cars.

I will never accept a diesel sports car. I hated filling up when i had one. The wax crap all over the pumps, the smell, the black smog when you press the go button (mainly vw engines) the rattle - they are shocking and dont marry with the image of a sports car.

If you can't afford the petrol for a TT then you're a tight arse is my view. What next an LPG TT, or maybe electric, hell why not the 1.4 engine from the golf GT? :?


----------



## Shakal (Jul 14, 2006)

Maybe Audi wants with TT diesel make TT avarage everydays car with coupe looks and make a space for Audi R4 :?


----------



## FinFerNan (Feb 28, 2007)

Toshiba said:


> But you are talking about 24hour endurance - diesel gets more mpg, doesn't mean its a better sports car. All it means is it had to stop less and as its revving lower id guess less chances of the engine breaking are less too.
> 
> Diesel sucks - get the A5 is you want a diesel Audi coupe or a Alfa and leave the TT with the rest of the sportier cars.
> 
> ...


Then don't buy the diesel version then :?


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Buying it is not the point! It devalues the range and impacts the rest of cars in the range.


----------



## TTRTWO (Dec 9, 2006)

I don't want a diesel TT personally - hell, I've got a 3.2 at Â£400 car tax from next spring - but I accept that it is coming. If you don't like it, ignore it.

Just remember, a diesel 3 series doesn't detract from the 335i and forthcoming M3. Lets move on.


----------



## ADB (May 7, 2002)

TTRTWO said:


> I don't want a diesel TT personally - hell, I've got a 3.2 at Â£400 car tax from next spring - but I accept that it is coming. If you don't like it, ignore it.
> 
> Just remember, a diesel 3 series doesn't detract from the 335i and forthcoming M3. Lets move on.


No, but imagine a diesel Z4


----------



## TTRTWO (Dec 9, 2006)

I can't imagine the appeal of a diesel TTR but a TTC will sell loads.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

TTRTWO said:


> I can't imagine the appeal of a diesel TTR but a TTC will sell loads.


TTRs dont have appeal is what you mean :wink:


----------



## TTRTWO (Dec 9, 2006)

Mine has loads!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

TTRTWO said:


> I can't imagine the appeal of a diesel TTR but a TTC will sell loads.


Love it or hate it, you hit the nail on the head - Audi won't be able to make them quickly enough. I predict that once the diesel comes, it will take 70% of TTC sales.


----------



## FinFerNan (Feb 28, 2007)

Toshiba said:


> Buying it is not the point! It devalues the range and impacts the rest of cars in the range.


How does it?

Would you say the Merc S class is devalued by the diesels in the range or is your view because it's a sporty car?


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

Wondermikie said:


> I predict that once the diesel comes, it will take 70% of TTC sales.


they could easily introduce an diesel that wouldn't do that if they'd introduce one that is not made for saving money. but with the current lineup you don't have to be a prophet to guess if it will be closer to the golf eco or the R10...


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

BECAUSE ITS SUPOSED TO BE A SPORTY CAR,

Do lambo's do diesel? Do Ferrari? Can you get a diesel DB9 or veyron? 
Shall i get nearer the TTs class? Z4? Lotus Elise?

Why? because diesel means you are tight and dont want to pay for fuel. You buy diesel when you are company car driver, you buy diesel to tow your caravan, you buy diesel to plough fields, you buy diesel for taxis.

A 2 seat sports car - which is what the TT is (the back seats are pointless) with a diesel is a sin. I called the pope and he checked with the man himself.

The 3 series, Coupe A5, A4 cab, these car are family cars.


----------



## Shakal (Jul 14, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> BECAUSE ITS SUPOSED TO BE A SPORTY CAR,
> 
> Do lambo's do diesel? Do Ferrari? Can you get a diesel DB9 or veyron?
> Shall i get nearer the TTs class? Z4? Lotus Elise?
> ...


100% agree .

My company car is diesel and next one will be diesel too, because with doing many km is defenetly diesel right choice, and bigger V6 and V8 diesels are great. But diesel doesnt belong to TT, because TT isnt car for doing 100.000 km per year, and 2.0 TDI engine has sound like tractor. Also diesel engine is havier and weight ratio will be hurt.


----------



## TTQS2005 (Mar 22, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> I called the pope and he checked with the man himself.


It is actually the 11th Vatican Commandment. Thy shall not buy a diesel car.


----------



## Molehall (Jan 8, 2003)

Toshiba said:


> BECAUSE ITS SUPOSED TO BE A SPORTY CAR,
> 
> Do lambo's do diesel? Do Ferrari? Can you get a diesel DB9 or veyron?
> Shall i get nearer the TTs class? Z4? Lotus Elise?
> ...


There's a strong rumour that Audi will be making a diesel R8. Does this mean that the R8 isn't a sporty car?

As for calling the pope, open up your history books to see what the Germans (Martin Luther, in particular) thought of the pope's advice. Audi's a German company. QED.


----------



## sico (Feb 6, 2003)

Molehall said:


> Toshiba said:
> 
> 
> > BECAUSE ITS SUPOSED TO BE A SPORTY CAR,
> ...


No it means thats a rumour :roll:


----------



## loic (Nov 14, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> BECAUSE ITS SUPOSED TO BE A SPORTY CAR,
> 
> A 2 seat sports car - which is what the TT is (the back seats are pointless) with a diesel is a sin. I called the pope and he checked with the man himself.


Picture the scene......

You glance admiringly in your rear view mirror as a beautiful new Audi TT pulls up beside you at the traffic lights, only to have your senses assaulted by what sounds like a bag of spanners in a cement mixer when it's idling, before it leaves you in a cloud of black soot as it clatters off toward the horizon......

Does that sound RIGHT to you??


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

I think you too understand.

As for the rumor did that come from the same place as the RS TT or the 3.6 V6 ? :roll:


----------



## drjam (Apr 7, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> BECAUSE ITS SUPOSED TO BE A SPORTY CAR,
> Do lambo's do diesel? Do Ferrari? Can you get a diesel DB9 or veyron?
> Shall i get nearer the TTs class? Z4? Lotus Elise?


But go to any lambo, ferrari, AM, BM or Lotus forum (doubt there is a veyron one yet...) and they'll probably tell you a TT isnt sporty to start with, because it drives the wrong wheels, engine is in wrong place or whatever, before even getting to the subject of fuel. 
I'm not saying they're right, just that "sporty" can/is defined in plenty of different ways by different people. 
For my 2p, personally I'd say it's just down to performance and handling - if one day a diesel could do this as well as a petrol, why shouldn't it be "sporty"?

So the issue is: do they do this yet? No idea, never owned one :roll:. 
Having been a passenger in a recent BM, straight line speed seems okay, but a heavier lump up front in what's a basically FWD TT surely wouldn't help the handling?

Anyway, I wouldn't buy one, I still prefer revvy petrol


----------



## ezzie (Jul 2, 2004)

I suppose the main issue with diesels devaluing the range, is more significantly economic. Price is currently a barrier to purchase in terms of outright purchase price and running costs. If you halve the running costs, more people will buy TTs. Manufacturers get their money from the purchase price, so has no negative effect on their balance sheet in terms of selling price and if they sell more, they profit more and the dealers are happy as they get commission on more cars sold and serviced. The silver lining with all this is perhaps it would mean Audi can make more sporty and niche cars such as the R4.


----------



## FinFerNan (Feb 28, 2007)

Toshiba said:


> BECAUSE ITS SUPOSED TO BE A SPORTY CAR,


Agreed. It is "supposed" to be a sporty car. But it ain't no Lambo/AM et al. It's not as focused (sporty) as an Elise nor is it a one trick pony like the 350Z. This leaves the Z4 for which frankly a diesel model would be neither here not there IMO 

Have we established that your objection is based on the "perceived brand value" or the car's image rather than an economic value? If so, in that regard alone, I agree with what you are saying.

btw THERE'S NO NEED TO SHOUT! I am not deaf :wink:


----------



## Molehall (Jan 8, 2003)

ezzie said:


> I suppose the main issue with diesels devaluing the range, is more significantly economic. Price is currently a barrier to purchase in terms of outright purchase price and running costs. If you halve the running costs, more people will buy TTs. Manufacturers get their money from the purchase price, so has no negative effect on their balance sheet in terms of selling price and if they sell more, they profit more and the dealers are happy as they get commission on more cars sold and serviced. The silver lining with all this is perhaps it would mean Audi can make more sporty and niche cars such as the R4.


Some years ago it was generally accepted by car manufacturers and the car buying public that you couldn't put a diesel engine in a cabriolet/convertible. This was regarded as an absolute truth and anyone who disagreed was obviously a fool.

Then Audi stuck a 2.5tdi engine into the A4 cabriolet. The motoring press guffawed and generally gave this "new" diesel convertible a hard time. Words like tractor and taxi littered the motoring columns when commenting on this "new" car.

It's strange how Saab and BMW now have diesel convertibles and Audi give a choice of two diesel engines in the current A4 cabriolet. I wonder why.

I think we're just seeing history being replayed over the proposed diesel TT.

PS And if anyone says that the TT's different, re-read the first paragraph of this post.


----------



## cheechy (Nov 8, 2006)

Incidentally I wouldnt have thought a 2.0TDI would be much heavier than a 3.2 V6 :lol:


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Hopefully it will sound better and have more bhp than the 20t :lol:

Whats 10kgs. I've expelled heavier turds than that.


----------



## FinFerNan (Feb 28, 2007)

Toshiba said:


> Hopefully it will sound better and have more bhp than the 20t :lol:


 [smiley=stop.gif]

Back away from that subject............Back away from that subject.........Back away from that subject.........


----------



## cheechy (Nov 8, 2006)

:lol:

Ok Ok I started it!

Mind you I was comparing a diesel engine to a 3.2 VAG V6 not the 2.0TFSI.

Methinks Tosh is a little engine sensitive


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

I just turn everything round. Always another view.


----------



## Wallsendmag (Feb 12, 2004)

Does anyone know if the dealers are taking deposits on the TDis yet?


----------



## sico (Feb 6, 2003)

Toshiba said:


> Whats 10kgs. I've expelled heavier turds than that.


I think you should book an appointment with your GP.


----------



## drjam (Apr 7, 2006)

If Audi want to experiment with different fuels while still looking sporty (in fact sportier) and innovative, plus do lots of "ooh look aren't we green" marketing etc.., then instead of diesel, maybe they could go down this route...

http://www.pistonheads.com/Lotus/default.asp?storyId=14861
&
http://www.saabbiopower.co.uk/saabBiopower/

[smiley=end.gif] 
Of course there'd be nowhere to actually fill up for a year or two...

[& hears worm-filled can-opening noises, talk of rainforests chopped down, world corn prices etc.. etc.., gets coat... sticks to petrol still]


----------



## cheechy (Nov 8, 2006)

sico said:


> Toshiba said:
> 
> 
> > Whats 10kgs. I've expelled heavier turds than that.
> ...


As a mere matter of interest and not related at all with the post quoted above - did you know the human brain weighs approximately 10kgs? :lol:


----------



## Wallsendmag (Feb 12, 2004)

cheechy said:


> sico said:
> 
> 
> > Toshiba said:
> ...


 :wink: :lol:


----------



## Molehall (Jan 8, 2003)

cheechy said:


> sico said:
> 
> 
> > Toshiba said:
> ...


Do I detect a touch of facetiousness when you say that the two posts are not related?


----------



## FinFerNan (Feb 28, 2007)

Molehall said:


> cheechy said:
> 
> 
> > sico said:
> ...


Well if you don't I do


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

less weight is better you guys keep telling me.


----------

