# Todays UK Press Launch drives



## R6B TT (Feb 25, 2003)

Firstly, whatever model you have chosen, I don't think you'll be disappointed!

Some initial impressions:

I took a 3.2 Manual out first - no MR. The engine noise was great, performance very good and the handling was much better than the Mk 1. It felt very planted in corners, and almost willing you to give it some more. Rude not to - I had close to an hour on B roads, A Roads and the M1. Base torque was better than a chipped 225, but I was missing the push as the boost comes in higher up the rev range. I did notice a strange phenomenon on the M1 - as the rear spoiler rose as 74mph as I was passing a Datsun 350Z, I felt my middle finger rising as I passed him 

Then, a quick run in a LHD2.0T with MR. My first reaction was not that positive compared to the V6. However, as I drove it, the cars have very different characters - the 2.0T pulls better than the 225, and is a lot lighter to drive (and physically) than the 3.2 - it feels like it wants to play! The 3.2 is a Grand Tourer and the 2.0 is a hot hatch. The best example on this drive was when NaughTTy missed the junction, but chucked it in anyway - it turned in fabulously with only a little chirp from the front tyres.

Next, I took the 3.2 DSG (sorry, s-tronic) with MR out. The gearbox is very good, but - not my cup of tea. I could probably learn how to drive it, but as in a manual I want power down NOW, the delay can be frustrating. However, the MR - it definitely tightens the car up a bit in sport mode, but it is in the last 10%. It's a nice to have if moneys no object - you could easily live without it.

Finally, I took the 2.0T manual again for a longer run - and tried it with and without MR on. You do notice a difference with MR, but I was pressing on down a B road slightly in excess of the regulation pace and it was a lot more settled than the Mk1 with MR on and off. I think I will have to learn how to get the best from the 2.0T but it showed flashes of absolute brilliance. I can understand why the journos are raving about it, whilst both cars are much better handling and performance than the Mk1, the 2.0 feels much more flickable and is more the drivers car. I turned the ESP off and abused it for 10 miles without traction problems, but it was a warm dry day.

Braking - the 3.2 has the same setup as the mk1, but in a lighter car works well. It did squirm a bit though on heavy braking. The 2.0T has a smaller disc setup than the 3.2, but have much more bite than the Mk1. They should be fine for 90% of people.

Interior - my concerns over the quality of some of the interior from the London event have been fixed! Audi said the car there was pre- production and it was true, the production model is much better - vent surrounds and AC controls in particular. I tried the Bose equipped and Standard stereos - the standard is very good, Bose is a bit clearer when you ramp it right up but the standard 140w / 9 speaker / 5 channels setup is a big step forward. Bose isn't a must by any means, I'd stick it in the same bucket as the MR - if you have money to burn.

There was a Misano Red 2.0 S-line there - we unfortunately couldn't drive it due to it being pranged yesterday by the motoring columnist from one of the broadsheets. I have been told (and asked to share) that we will not get the S-line in the UK for probably 2 years, and then it may be as a model refresh. Audi UK think it is pretty poor value for the UK at the moment - you get - s-line badge on wing, sline logo on sill shields, minor bodykit , lowered suspension and the same seats trimmed with cloth centres instead of leather / alcantara. Oh and an S-line badge on the steering wheel for approx Â£2500. In Germany, where they don't get many of the nice bits we get as standard here, it may be a nice option, but not for the UK.

IIRC there were 16 3.2s and 3 2.0Ts there - the 2.0Ts were constantly out, but at the end of the session had half a tank of fuel left whereas several of the 3.2s were empty (and they were in less demand as there were more of them).

We asked about the 3.2 / 2.0 mix - apparently the initial UK view was the 2.0 T would not be very good so they didn't order any - then the first drive reports came in, and they have been desperately trying to get cars ever since, hence the 2.0s being lefties.

In the UK, 55% of the 2500 Mk2s sold are 2.0T, 45% 3.2. Of the total, 10% have been specced with MR.

A terrific day, thanks to the Audi UK team and the TTOC.


----------



## mark88 (May 7, 2006)

No S-Line :-(

BOOOOOO

That means IF I buy a TT I have to put up with those fog lights. Hmmm. I don't see why they couldn't offer it anyway? give people the choice. If it's bad value then people won't buy it, but what difference does it make?


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

> the 2.0T pulls better than the 225, and is a lot lighter to drive (and physically) than the 3.2 - it feels like it wants to play! The 3.2 is a Grand Tourer and the 2.0 is a hot hatch





> the 2.0 feels much more flickable and is more the drivers car.


Nice 8)


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

> apparently the initial UK view was the 2.0 T would not be very good so they didn't order any - then the first drive reports came in, and they have been desperately trying to get cars ever since


ROFL


----------



## ChinsVXR (Apr 14, 2006)

Nice write up. Makes me even happier with my choice 8)

I see that What Car now have the 2.0T as their Coupe of choice and give it 5 stars. The 3.2 with manual gets 4.


----------



## exodont (Sep 10, 2006)

Thanks Rob, first class report and _very_ informative. Was there any hint that the 2.0T engines may be delayed for currently confirmed builds?


----------



## Dotti (Mar 9, 2003)

Great write up  Glad to hear a positive view on the 2.0 also . To me that sounds more my type of car being fun and light  Would of love to have seen a mk2 also in misano


----------



## PATT (Apr 2, 2003)

Interesting post and a lot to take in - Positives for all camps from the sounds of it 8)


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

20T owners have to try to big themselves up by selectively representing info as they know the car is not as good in order to make themselves feel better for not getting a real one.

Whatcar rates both cars the same - do a compare :roll:

Note how the 20T is compare to a 225, where as the V6 is compared to a CHIPPED 225 - mmm, which is better

Feels like a hot hatch - not a sports car, TT is not a hot hatch so why is that a good thing, i'd would have thought its a bad thing.

Only 45% of cars ordered are the 20T even though its much cheaper.


----------



## ChinsVXR (Apr 14, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> 20T owners have to try to big themselves up by selectively representing info as they know the car is not as good in order to make themselves feel better for not getting a real one.
> 
> Whatcar rates both cars the same - do a compare :roll:
> 
> ...


Well Ive got the copy of the Latest What car with me. They give 4 stars to the 3.2 manual and 5 to the 3.2 S Tronic. The 2.0T is their recomended version. Go buy a copy if you dont believe me.

55% of TT sales are 2.0T's. Not just from this post but from Audi themselves.


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Yeah tosh go buy a magazine.

I'm a member of different forums in the netherlands , Belgium, and germany. and all forums they say all the same. The 2.0 is the best engine till so far, in the MK2.

Tosh stop drinking beer, and try to read the magazines :wink:


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Yeah tosh go buy a magazine.

I'm a member of different forums in the netherlands , Belgium, and germany. and all forums they say all the same. The 2.0 is the best engine till so far, in the MK2.

Tosh stop drinking beer, and try to read the magazines :wink:


----------



## R6B TT (Feb 25, 2003)

exodont said:


> Thanks Rob, first class report and _very_ informative. Was there any hint that the 2.0T engines may be delayed for currently confirmed builds?


Thanks, and no reports of delays


----------



## NaughTTy (Jul 9, 2003)

Toshiba said:


> Only 45% of cars ordered are the 20T even though its much cheaper.


Nope - 55% are 2.0T - 45% 3.2's :wink:


----------



## R6B TT (Feb 25, 2003)

exodont said:


> Thanks Rob, first class report and _very_ informative. Was there any hint that the 2.0T engines may be delayed for currently confirmed builds?


Thanks, and no reports of delays


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Rob i bet you are a good driver, and also got the driver's feeling.
You realy now what "driving-fun" is.

Good old Tosh is more the relaxed driver, with a hat...


----------



## R6B TT (Feb 25, 2003)

exodont said:


> Thanks Rob, first class report and _very_ informative. Was there any hint that the 2.0T engines may be delayed for currently confirmed builds?


Thanks - hope it helps. No, there were no reports of delays on the 2.0T.
The TTOC reps collectively did express our concern about the in and out dates on options and the effect on customer sat


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

This is the best drive-revieuw from a forum-member...

There were also some other's which were nice , but this man now's what he is talking abouth.

I thought that Tosh also would drive both car's, but instead the test drive we got some blur-pictures from a drunken fotographer  8) :wink:


----------



## Dotti (Mar 9, 2003)

Toshiba said:


> 20T owners have to try to big themselves up by selectively representing info as they know the car is not as good in order to make themselves feel better for not getting a real one.


Oh ffs! :roll:


----------



## R6B TT (Feb 25, 2003)

Toshiba said:


> 20T owners have to try to big themselves up by selectively representing info as they know the car is not as good in order to make themselves feel better for not getting a real one.
> 
> Whatcar rates both cars the same - do a compare :roll:
> 
> ...


Oh FFS - I did a compare from my own perception, re-read the post!

At least I have had the advantage of driving both cars.

The 3.2 is great - it feels heavier to drive than the 2.0T though - and as a result sometimes more planted - the 3.2 feels like it can always take more in the corners as you push it - the 2.0 is lighter and more flickable.

This wasn't a 2.0 vs 3.2 post ( which you seem to have a HUGE chip about), more intended to help and inform based on my personal experience. Read the first line of the post again.

I'm f*cking offended, took a days holiday from work and used a tank of petrol to do this - yes I enjoyed it but it was an opportunity to share some experiences with TTOCand TTF members. and hope an apology may be forthcoming.


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Tosh is getting a nervous brake-down, Rob
He has buyed the wrong car, be gentle with him....

Tosh dreams the last few weeks abouth 2.0 engines which passed him at both sides.

I think:...... Toshiba has outliked the tt really and feels negative about buying one but has continued his purchase...


----------



## R6B TT (Feb 25, 2003)

Dotti said:


> Great write up  Glad to hear a positive view on the 2.0 also . To me that sounds more my type of car being fun and light  Would of love to have seen a mk2 also in misano


You will - but an S-Line, NuTTs and I got a private audience and some pics - you'll have to wait a couple of days before we can get them sorted tho


----------



## BMW330Ci (Apr 7, 2006)

R6B TT said:


> This wasn't a 2.0 vs 3.2 post ( which you seem to have a HUGE chip about)


Here, here. Thanks for your in depth review - I'm sure we all can't wait to test drive them next week and move on.


----------



## Dotti (Mar 9, 2003)

R6B TT said:


> Dotti said:
> 
> 
> > Great write up  Glad to hear a positive view on the 2.0 also . To me that sounds more my type of car being fun and light  Would of love to have seen a mk2 also in misano
> ...


You tease  . Can't wait to see the piccies 8)


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Tosh is the only testdriver that tested the car without driving.
And after he did that, he knew the 3.2 was the better car to take.

hahahaha !

Rob, this is the best post from this week...you must get a job in Topgear.


----------



## LazyT (Apr 13, 2006)

Dotti said:


> Great write up  Glad to hear a positive view on the 2.0 also . To me that sounds more my type of car being fun and light  Would of love to have seen a mk2 also in misano


Can you get an extra tall Christmas Tree in it? :? That's the ultimate question. :lol:


----------



## LazyT (Apr 13, 2006)

Rebel said:


> Tosh is getting a nervous brake-down, Rob
> He has buyed the wrong car, be gentle with him....
> 
> Tosh dreams the last few weeks abouth 2.0 engines which passed him at both sides.
> ...


Clean up your diction man before it's too late. :wink: Time is also running out on your chance to purchase the 3.2 V6. :lol:


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

my car is already at the dealer , i will get him next week...

i'm so happy that i chose the 2.0 with s-tronic and audi magnetic ride..........

wooohoo !!!  8) :wink:


----------



## R6B TT (Feb 25, 2003)

LazyT said:


> Dotti said:
> 
> 
> > Great write up  Glad to hear a positive view on the 2.0 also . To me that sounds more my type of car being fun and light  Would of love to have seen a mk2 also in misano
> ...


In the back seat - only if it's under 150cm tall 

I was gobsmacked to read in the press tech stuff that the luggage capacity is 700l with the seats down!


----------



## NaughTTy (Jul 9, 2003)

Still undecided as to my preference of the day....

The S-tronic was 'fun' in the 3.2 but partly as I've not driven DSG before. S mode was extremely entertaining - red line city :roll:  Maybe I'm not used to 'auto' but it's not really my cup of tea - I still prefer to be in the gear I choose, not what the electronics decide.

2.0T was 'nippy' and really chuckable....Rob, I didn't miss the turning - just thought I would see how hard we could take it (I'm used to LHD remember) :wink: I'd agree with Rob though - superb cornering ability - a tad light on the steering but only compared with the MK1. Seemed to be able to chuck it into any bend at any speed and just know it was gonna come out the other side 8) Surprisingly throaty sounding for the size of the engine too.

3.2 manual I really liked - Not quite as nimble as the 2.0T but the sound of that rasping exhaust note as you hit the red line was just so addictive  8) The V6 did feel a tiny bit nose heavy, and there was a hint of understeer when pushing hard through tight bends, but you would expect that with the size of the lump up front.

All handled superbly - great poise on the road - firm but no crashiness. The mag ride I thought made a great difference when throwing the car around, but, only really noticeable then. Under 'normal' everyday driving I'm not sure it would show it's worth. Depends how hard you drive 'normally' I suppose :wink: Of the two, the 2.0T was more balanced but there really wasn't that much between them.

If I had to choose one, it would be a difficult task. Each had it's own merits and would fit into the particular driving mood I was in. 2.0T for nippy, chuckability; 3.2 manual for the pull in every gear, no matter what the revs, and the amazing sound; 3.2 S tronic for all the fun and the sound but less involvement except the decision of which type of gear changing you fancy - D, S or paddles - D was too hesitant for me, too much time waiting for it to decide the gear when you wanted quick power inputs. S was exciting but no there appeared to be no happy medium. All of them had one major plus point - the fun factor 

As for the car itself: I was undecided about the new shape until today. It really is a great looking car. It manages to look fast whilst sitting still, and has incredible presence when you see it on the road - especially when one comes up behind you - almost predatory. The interior is solid, cocooning, intuitive and nicely put together (apart from a couple of niggly rattles from the dash). Overall, it oozes quality. I initially thought the heating/CC controls were in a really awkward position but, once in transit, they are pretty easy to get to..and very solid-feeling too.

The main disappointment for me was that the centre console is not changed from the LHD so the armrest is on the left and, if you had bottles or cups in the holders, your elbow would almost certainly have trouble finding a resting place. I suppose too many parts would be involved as the handbrake routing, etc, would also have to be changed. Also thought that the sliding lever to release the front seat-backs and it's surround, could have been better designed - it felt like it could easily be pulled away from the seat. I can see too what others have said about the seat bolsters wearing. The very low mileage demos already had some creasing appearing.

Would I have one? In a heart beat.....If I could afford it 

The TT has grown up but it has also lost some of it's youthful charm....but.....Dear Santa....... :wink:

Thanks to Audi and the TTOC also. I was very lucky to have been invited along to this day and hope I'v given some useful input


----------



## exodont (Sep 10, 2006)

Thanks NaughTTy - another first-class review to pore over. A slightly different slant from Rob's makes both a mine of information, and the conflict between 2.0 versus 3.2 was handled very diplomatically. :wink:


----------



## Dotti (Mar 9, 2003)

Another fab write up 8). Great to hear your experiences, advise and thoughts from both of you


----------



## ezzie (Jul 2, 2004)

Great reviews, thank you all. Its good to finally hear TT drivers' experiences rather than journalists. Excellent write-ups, can't wait for mine to arrive.

Colours of tested cars not mentioned. What were they? and what are your thoughts on their respective merits?


----------



## R6B TT (Feb 25, 2003)

ezzie said:


> Great reviews, thank you all. Its good to finally hear TT drivers' experiences rather than journalists. Excellent write-ups, can't wait for mine to arrive.
> 
> Colours of tested cars not mentioned. What were they? and what are your thoughts on their respective merits?


Colour doesn't influence the performance 

There were Phantom Black, Brilliant Red, Silver, Condor - and a Misano Red S line - colour is so personal - Kate the lovely Audi PR lady has ordered Dakar Beige  , the TT Product Manager has ordered Garnet Red, PR Director Ibis White with Red leather


----------



## Dotti (Mar 9, 2003)

R6B TT said:


> PR Director Ibis White with Red leather


Ahhh now that is very interesting to know!  . My first choice would be white with red leather! Glad I'm not the only mad one around here with mad taste .


----------



## NaughTTy (Jul 9, 2003)

Some pics from today:

Hope you like 8) 


















































MKI v MKII


























S-Line


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Rebel said:


> Yeah tosh go buy a magazine.
> 
> I'm a member of different forums in the netherlands , Belgium, and germany. and all forums they say all the same. The 2.0 is the best engine till so far, in the MK2.
> 
> Tosh stop drinking beer, and try to read the magazines :wink:


rebel for the final time they are talking about value for money not the best car - if you dont know the difference im not going to explain it to you.

Aldi beans vs Heinz maybe you will understand that better? Aldi is better 'value' not the better product.

If you think you wind me up you are very much mistaken, i truly don't give a damn, i just feel sorry for you :lol:


----------



## tehdarkstar (Jul 24, 2006)

NaughTTy, Rob, thank you guys for the great info! I loved to read every line of it and I believe you gave everybody here reasons to be very happy with their choices! I also loved the pictures. These 10 spoke wheels look better and better in my opinion!

Great work guys, thanks again! [smiley=thumbsup.gif]


----------



## Dotti (Mar 9, 2003)

NaughTTy said:


> S-Line


That is shit HOT! I WANT IT RIGHT NOW! [smiley=smash.gif]


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

R6B TT said:


> Toshiba said:
> 
> 
> > 20T owners have to try to big themselves up by selectively representing info as they know the car is not as good in order to make themselves feel better for not getting a real one.
> ...


When did i have a go at your report or say it was right or wrong? if it offends you that i posted a reply to a silly post by rebel then maybe the forum is a sadder place then i thought it was :?

If you look at the posts made you will find it was indeed rebel who turned this from a report or opinion on YOUR views of the days events to a 'my cocks better than yours' and all the people who have purchased a 3.2 are daft or wrong. Maybe rebel should stop, SHUT-UP, engage tiny brain and think maybe, and that is a 'maybe', we (the people who have ordered a V6) didn't want the cheaper 20T or a car with FWD, but actually wanted something else.

Is it not out right to be able to make our own mind up about what we want, since we are the ones who will be both paying for it and driving it on a day to day basis?

Rebel, maybe you should have vet'd all orders we place with AUK to ensure that we get the correct options and version? Call me silly but fcuk that, i want what i want not what you want and i really dont care what you think - i know im right.


----------



## LazyT (Apr 13, 2006)

NaughTTy said:



> Some pics from today:
> 
> Hope you like 8)
> 
> S-Line


Thanks NaughTTy for all of that eye candy. 8)


----------



## Dotti (Mar 9, 2003)

Toshiba said:


> 20T owners have to try to big themselves up by selectively representing info as they know the car is not as good in order to make themselves feel better for not getting a real one.


Toshy you did make that sound a little bit like people who have ordered a 2.0 their money is not as good as yours sort of thing. 

The 2.0 is exactly the same car as what YOU ARE PURCHASING so how can you type 'the car is not as good in order to make themselves feel better for not getting a real one) - your's just has an extra pipe, a few more gizmos (at a price) and a bit more pep in the engine (to make it whizz) the way I see it! :-* .

Â£35k tops for all the bells and whistles, singing and dancing (well mine would be after I have added all this on fully loaded on my mk2 TT  ) for an Audi hmm you start to think after the extas on top of the 3.2 car alone is it worth the 7k more over a 2.0 for basically the same car!

Still gonna have the same shape and get you from A to B :wink:


----------



## mark88 (May 7, 2006)

Look how low the S-Line is, and are those 18's or 19's on it?

Either way it really shows up the other standard TT's IMO, and its a shame we're not getting it.


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

Tosh me old mucker, shhh, go sit in the corner, ure wrong u know. Do me a favour though while you're sat there. I sent over BMW, Caterham, Westfield, Mercedes, Porsche, Ferrari, Lamborghini, Mazza, Noble, TVR, Mitsubishi, Subaru, Lotus, Aston, the guys behind the Monaro, 350Z, RX8 and every other company that makes true sports cars to sit with you in shame. Would you tell them RWD and 4WD ISNT right, they are ALL wrong and need to fit FWD to them please?

Do us a favour too Tosh, get those F1 teams to convert to FWD as well and what the hell the rally teams think they are doing with 4WD I dont know :roll:

What they need is FWD you see. Now, if they say that it will spin like a [email protected], hop around when they pull out of T junctions, especially in the wet, and understeer like a tesco's trolley you give them the link to this thread and tell em not to be silly. If that doesnt work post them all the articles written by those motoring journalists. When they say 'Err you mean those motoring journalists who get flown about in manufacturers private charter planes, collected from airports in fancy cars, put up in flash hotels, fed and watered free of charge AND get to drive round in free cars given by manufacturers?' you say YES BUT THEY ARE IMPARTIAL. Feel confident saying this as journos are famed for their honesty and professionalism.

Of course, what do I know, I only spent thousands making a real TT (no I dont want a mk2, if I did I would buy one, in fact I made a point, before it was too late, of getting and modding what I think is the perfect Mk1 cos I like the mk1, I knew the mk2 was coming and wasnt interested) go round corners properly. Why I bothered Ill never know, I mean, whats the point of being able to boot my car mid corner in the wet and NOT have the nose slide off into oblivion.

Ok enough sarcasm, simple fact and arguing the point is rather silly bearing in mind Audi are the ONLY manufacturer to produce a FWD Â£30K ish Sports Coupe. FWD just isnt right on a car like this, even Audi's standard Quattro isnt right so how anyone can possibly defend FWD is beyond me.

Maybe im wrong and AUDI have a magic trick to defy the laws of physics, wonder why they persist with quattro, take it off that RS4 you fools. :roll:

Ask yourself this final question. Ure looking atthe Audi order form. 2 boxes to tick. 2.0T FWD and 2.0T Quattro. Forget the money, thats a different argument. U bought a FWD cos there wasnt a Quattro and you couldnt afford to buy/run the V6. Fair enough, just dont pretend u preferred FWD over quattro.


----------



## bec21tt (Feb 27, 2003)

One question that I haven't seen answered yet - Is there any way to tell the 2.0 & 3.2 apart easily? Or will it just be the Quattro badge on the back?

It was easy on the MkI - how many exhaust pipes!

Ta
Bec

Oh & thanks for the excellent reviews, that's made me even more undecided now!!! :lol: Think I'll try the 2.0 too now :wink:


----------



## Necroscope (Apr 9, 2006)

> Ask yourself this final question. Ure looking atthe Audi order form. 2 boxes to tick. 2.0T FWD and 2.0T Quattro. Forget the money, thats a different argument. U bought a FWD cos there wasnt a Quattro and you couldnt afford to buy/run the V6. Fair enough, just dont pretend u preferred FWD over quattro


Honestly i dont think one person on the forum would argue this point.

BUT what makes my blood boil is the way some of the comments come off like all 2.0T buyers are sub-standard wana-be's. :evil:

I looked at dropping all my options and getting a 3.2 V6 but decided against it.......... will i get a 2.0TQ when they come out..............damn straight.

Forums are fantastic places to voice opnions, i understand and welcome this, but please stop trying to spoil everyone elses choice! Stand by it and live with it, that goes for everyone! 

Fact is the cars may look the same, but they at least appear to be completely different beasts!

And one last point if people want a real drivers car........... go get a porsche.

Anyway, today is our day........................ Its like an early Christmas. Everyone have fun, and lets starts the fights later this afternoon :lol:


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Is Tosh still sitting in the corner? :?:

Tosh, do yourself a favour and please test both car's. Only than you can give a comment like yours.
The Press, the Dealers, and the guy's from this forum who drove the car, are all wrong.
Tosh and don't say that you are not angry, because you sound very angry 

But let's get serious, Why don't you take a testdrive in both car's?
Or do you admit that you don't like the sporty way of driving but you're more the grand tourer with the sunglasses and the hat?


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Dotti said:


> Toshiba said:
> 
> 
> > 20T owners have to try to big themselves up by selectively representing info as they know the car is not as good in order to make themselves feel better for not getting a real one.
> ...


Dammmn, why are woman alway's smarter than us.....
Dotti for President ! :-* 8) :wink:


----------



## senwar (Apr 21, 2003)

Great reviews and nice to read.

Shame there's still some ridiculous my car is better than yours on this forum (and I feel a lot of it DOES come from the 2.0 people). I encountered this myself when I bought my 150.

Grow up and enjoy whichever car you get.

And Rebel - a lot of your posts are the ones that dig at others and bleat on about how much better the 2.0 is. Give it a rest ffs.

Back to the topic - are the ones in the pics dolphin grey? If so, its just made my mind up.


----------



## NaughTTy (Jul 9, 2003)

senwar said:


> Back to the topic - are the ones in the pics dolphin grey? If so, its just made my mind up.


Nope - Condor. IMO I would stick with the Dolphin if I were you :wink:


----------



## senwar (Apr 21, 2003)

NaughTTy said:


> senwar said:
> 
> 
> > Back to the topic - are the ones in the pics dolphin grey? If so, its just made my mind up.
> ...


Really? Looks a lot darker on the pics (I saw condor last week). And I did quite like it

But Dolphins good for me!


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

senwar said:


> Great reviews and nice to read.
> 
> Shame there's still some ridiculous my car is better than yours on this forum (and I feel a lot of it DOES come from the 2.0 people). I encountered this myself when I bought my 150.
> 
> ...


I think that you are a selective reader also.
Why are you blind for what the press and the magazines write abouth the car's?
They are two different car's, just like the people above said.



> the 2.0T pulls better than the 225, and is a lot lighter to drive (and physically) than the 3.2 - it feels like it wants to play! The 3.2 is a Grand Tourer and the 2.0 is a hot hatch





> the 2.0 feels much more flickable and is more the drivers car.


I think that the 3.2 still be a TT, and therefor also a nice car to drive.
And all the crab abouth the cheaper 2.0 is B*llshit. 
My 2.0 isn't cheaper than a 3.2 . I could get easily a 3.2 for that price.
But i choosed for the "driving-fun"

In the UK only 10% choosed for the Audi Magnetic Ride.........But choosed Bose or Ipod or painted calibers, and other stuff like that...
Do i need to say more?

Is Tosh still in the corner? Tell him to come back, because i like his postings, and he's got a great sence of humor :wink:


----------



## jam225 (Jun 24, 2003)

Rebel said:


> senwar said:
> 
> 
> > Great reviews and nice to read.
> ...


Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz [smiley=sleeping.gif]


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Rebel have you not cotton'd on as yet - people think your a joke. Why dont you just shut up.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Dotti said:


> Toshiba said:
> 
> 
> > 20T owners have to try to big themselves up by selectively representing info as they know the car is not as good in order to make themselves feel better for not getting a real one.
> ...


Its called a retort - and i cant be bother to explain it to you if you cant understand it.


----------



## Iceman (Jul 3, 2004)

Dotti said:


> That is shit HOT!


Only 37/38 degree :wink: thats not hot that's warm. :lol:

Hans.


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Toshiba said:


> Rebel have you not cotton'd on as yet - people think your a joke. Why dont you just shut up.


Tosh therefor you did get a ban, in the past?
Please call a mod, so you can ban me :wink:

You are acting like a child with your "shut up"
Maybe you must play a less with your avatar's an read better...
Read your own postings, where you say that the 2.0 people can't afford a 3.2. B*llschit..... shortminded answere
I know people who drive a Golf and they laugh abouth you...

I'm glad your such a rich man...  
What car does your wife drive?
Show us a picture from you home/interior.....
You drove a TTQuotro sport with sport seat's and told me you never saw a track......
You even never drove on any track you told......
You buy car's to show off??
It's people like you who gave the TT-mk1 the image that the car has in europe, they called it in our country a "gay-car" or a car for haircutters.

The budget i spent on car's in private life is just a laugh.
I have a own company with 5 car's/van's and they are more important than to show off with a 3.2.

How old are you anyway, that you can't take critics?
What it's your job?

You only hide after your pc, and play the rich man..
I'm glad your a rich man toch , enjoy it as long as it takes....hahaha

Go and run, coward, or take some critics whith a blink :wink: 
Or call a modorator and let me ban from the forum.
We all talk abouth the same car, and my contribution is more than the critics, so don't act like i'm only pusshing you.
And my english is also not that good, and therefor i often maybe use 'strong" words because i ain't got the time to search every word in a dictonairy.

So back on topic,

i stay with my opinion that the test from both peoples show us, that a 2.0 isn't a bad choice.
the 3.2 will also be a nice car, and this i said 100 times. But there is one guy on the forum, who can't read well between the lines, therefor again:

The 3.2 is TT and therefor a nice car 8)


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

Rebel, I think you will find that some of us like a good banter instead of just answering 'Whats the best colour?' and 'How do I post this pic of my new bog standard silver 225?' threads and watch out for someone prepared to say anything controversial, like u, so take it for what it is, banter.

While im at the keyboard....

DSG/S Tronic is Automatic, no matter how fancy it is and what you call it

FWD is for going to the shops, RWD is for sports cars and Quattro is a comprimise, sports Haldex less so

The Mk2 front end is too busy and the car doesnt carry the corporate grill off well

The interior is too generically Audi

The original TT standard suspension looks like it was made by Massey Ferguson and handles like it too

There that should give someone something to do. :lol:

Now, im off to 'detail' (whatever that means) my car, or I may just clean the fkin thing. So, uve been warned, expect rain by noon.


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Leg some good points there..

I never tried dsg......i will tried it, and otherwise it will be the last time.

FWD is for 90% off the people here, good enough to drive the car to work and back, and some sightseeing in the country.

Tosh had a QS and never taked it to a track.......for example.
I had several years a lot off fun with my MK1 on the track.
And when i sold the car, it still was brandnew.
I like the design off the car. and that's the main reason.
It's like wearing clothes fromm buss, or buying a chair from "Le Corbusier" ... you must feel wll with it, it's a part of your life.

the company grill sucks, but what can we do abouth it?

The interior i still like, i find this one even better than the MK1 interior

I think this MK2 will not stay as long as the MK1.....
The car will be changed in 4-5 years 
Facelift within 2 years......just wait and see


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Leg said:


> So, uve been warned, expect rain by noon.


Not over here......it will stay sunny 8) 
I'm going to enjoy the sun, i'll read the rest in the evening

Saluti


----------



## nutts (May 8, 2002)

I started the day expecting to think the 3.2 would be ok and the 2.0T would be the dogs danglies... :roll:

So, kicked the day off with a 3.2 manual no MR. Took it for a longish blast, perhaps 45 mins... I agree with Rob's assessment, the handling of the MK2 3.2 knocks the pants off the MK1 and that's with out MR. It sounds fantastic and extremely planted in the corners, even if well above "normal" speeds. I tried stuff that you shouldn't nomally try to understand how forgiving it can be... braking at speed mid corner, moose avoidance, etc and I'm gobsmacked at how good this car is in non MR form! 

So next I chose the 2.0T fwd in manual form, no MR... I was expecting great things from this car  and by the end was pretty disappointed. It ain't nowhere as quick as my 225 and didn't feel as confident in the corners as mine. It may be totally different in quattro form, but there is no way I would have an unchipped, non quattro version. I was underwhelmed by the whole 2.0T experience :?

I then chose the 3.2 S Tronic with MR... I ran out of superlatives in my mind for this car. EVERYTHING I wanted from this car, it delivered. The throttle response was simple staggering. Instant power on in most gears. VERY strange. :? I can't get over how good this car was. Even now... I want to get back in the car and go for a drive... unfortunately, I had to leave it there :lol: :lol:

The interior has been very much sorted over the pre production models. Having seen a few in Berlin, London and HMC... I can say that the production cars quality is an order of magnitude above the launch event cars in Germany and London.

The best colour combo on the day (for me) was silver and Magma red 8) 8) I reckon the best combo available could be Dolphin and Magma red...

I might yet be tempted :wink: 8)


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Rebel - Have i ever said i want you ban'd?

But a personal attack is against the forum rules and i consider this a personal attack :?

Do i need to prove anything to you? No
Do i need to prove i earn more than you? No
The post you are hintiing at said 3.2 bods COULD have had a 20T if they wanted, but most people will buy a 20T because it cheaper and for no other reason - and i'm sorry, that's a fact.

The shut-up is because it winds you up, simple as that.

What my 'fat' (your words not mine) wife drives is nothing to do with you - again is this not a personal attack? However she had a qS before i did and than swap'd it due to the idiots trying to racer her all the time. The replacement car also goes in two weeks time for another new one but, why do you care - maybe the colour is important too?
What does my old qS and or a track have to do with anything, nor how i choose to use it while i own it?

My home is my home, and that's private - again not sure why you seem to want to know such personal info about me.

Maybe you think I'm gay based on your other comment - again, either way that's personal and why do you care?
My age again - whats your point.

Who's being childish? :roll:

If you want to talk about cars, fine - if you want to get personal, this can go two ways, take your pick.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Mark,

Any views on MR vs Non MR and with your money would you go for MR?
Any problems with the seats?
Did you not see the black with grey leather?


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Nice review Nutts, i'm glad to here you liked the S-tronic and MR. thx

@Tosh: "*Shut up*" :wink:

@Leg: my contribution to this forum, in the future will be pictures from my MK2 on the Nurburgring Nordschleife in Germany.
Just like all the pictures from my MK1 on my website abouth this circuit, there will be a lot of pictures from the MK2 and i will place them also here.
I hope my first visit will be begin october.

But again i also will be reading which ipod, or which carwax is the best in the future overhere. I don't know anyone from this forum except two people which i learned to know better on MSN.

But one of the important things will be , sharing info abouth the MK2, for those who have the car, and those wo will get the car.
Strange things, or things that could be better, or faillures, etc etc...
That's why this forum is abouth. To share the passion and share the information.

And sometimes it will get a bit "rough" but it's all with a blink.
Don't forget that a often must search words in a dictionary, to understand what some people say.

But i know now what " Shut up" means....

I t means...."Laugh ....and go on"

Off i go.....


----------



## R6B TT (Feb 25, 2003)

nutts said:


> I started the day expecting to think the 3.2 would be ok and the 2.0T would be the dogs danglies... :roll:
> 
> So next I chose the 2.0T fwd in manual form, no MR... I was expecting great things from this car  and by the end was pretty disappointed. It ain't nowhere as quick as my 225 and didn't feel as confident in the corners as mine. It may be totally different in quattro form, but there is no way I would have an unchipped, non quattro version. I was underwhelmed by the whole 2.0T experience :?


Did you take one out again after lunch Mark ?

It did feel very different from the 3.2, so I took one out again in the afternoon for a much longer run, with MR on and off. Compared to the 3.2 which feels very solid it felt much lighter to drive, a huge contrast and which will take a bit of getting used to - but when you gave it some stick it responded very well


----------



## R6B TT (Feb 25, 2003)

bec21tt said:


> One question that I haven't seen answered yet - Is there any way to tell the 2.0 & 3.2 apart easily? Or will it just be the Quattro badge on the back?
> 
> It was easy on the MkI - how many exhaust pipes!
> 
> ...


The 2.0 has twin exhaust pipes on the left hand side - the 3.2 has one on each side, like the 225.

I'm told Milltek will be making a one on each side pipe as a conversion, also when some of the tuners took a peek under the 3.2 at Gaydon they reckoned there was good scope for a few more BHP to be liberated with a better exhaust design.


----------



## Dotti (Mar 9, 2003)

Based on Nutts review of the 2.0 I think I might stick with my 225 for the moment then . Love the way you guys talk about the sound of the 3.2 though. Does it sound a bit like the current 3.2 or is it alot more throaty sort of thing


----------



## LazyT (Apr 13, 2006)

Lads, yes Tosh and Rebel, please give each other a big cyber-hug and make up!!! This bickering ad nauseam over which engine is better is weighing on everyone's nerves. :x

The bottom line is if one is happy with his engine choice, then all the power to you friend. :-*


----------



## Mysterio (Jan 20, 2006)

Thanks very much for the reviews guys...Sounds brilliant!

Especially the rasping 3.2 !

As for Rebel - I can't believe i've sat here for 15 minutes reading an argument! :lol:


----------



## nutts (May 8, 2002)

R6B TT said:


> nutts said:
> 
> 
> > I started the day expecting to think the 3.2 would be ok and the 2.0T would be the dogs danglies... :roll:
> ...


I felt no inclination to take another 2.0T out :?

People have different needs, desires and preferences... and my preference has changed (after driving the 3.2 S Tronic) from turbo'd 4 pot to a sexy V6 

Each to his own... just like now


----------



## nutts (May 8, 2002)

Toshiba said:


> Mark,
> 
> Any views on MR vs Non MR and with your money would you go for MR?
> Any problems with the seats?
> Did you not see the black with grey leather?


ummmm TOUGH question. You can definitely tell it was having an effect when Sports Mode was engaged... If money was no object then clearly it would be on the shopping list...

I know I haven't answered your question and that's because I haven't go a clue whether I would go for it or not... I haven't yet got to the stage where I've 100% decided to go for the current MK2 or wait for a hotter version to appear 

Is there a point in having MR without quattro?


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Indeed - but is there any point having MR with quattro?

Thanks - dont know if mine has MR or not anymore i have changed the spec that often :roll: . Im going to goto the dealer either this weekend or monday and find out either way - else i could leave it as a suprise.

Besides I cant change either way, as my car was a WK37 build so should (in theory) now already be built.

Did you get any news on the hotter models - if you cant say, Np i respect that?


----------



## TT Law (Sep 6, 2003)

Very good write ups. Thanks Guys!

I just wish we could progress from the 2.0t v 3.2 debate now, it is a little tiresome.

For the record I am quite happy with my choice of Tesco FWD shopping trolley. Just need to mod it to stop requirements for Â£1 coins every time I drive it!

Steve


----------



## ezzie (Jul 2, 2004)

Thanks for the write-up nutts.

Was the manual box on the 3.2 clunky?


----------



## ChinsVXR (Apr 14, 2006)

Get on a Transatlantic flight and get back home to see 6 pages added.

Rebel - I do enjoy your defense of the 2.0T - but you might want to slow down on the posts at Tosh.

Being a hot hatch fan, I am enthused by what Ive read about the 2.0T - especially once I remaped it.

But not everyone wants a hot hatch, so we seem to have the 3.2. So everyones happy 

If nothing else, these posts are making the wait unbearable 

Jonathan


----------



## Dotti (Mar 9, 2003)

Just got back from Southend Audi based at Wickford. I just went for a general nosey touchy feeley to be honest .

Sat in a black one with a light coloured trim which was a 3.2 dsg. Gorgeous gorgeous gorgeous 8) 8).

As I was also having a nosey around the service bay also they were prepping a silver one with red leather too. The man prepping it very kindly offered me to look around it  . How could I possibly say no  :wink: . So I made myself at home and sat in that one also .

Both cars felt solid, good quality and I liked very very much [smiley=thumbsup.gif]. Personally though, I didn't think there was that much more room in the rear compared to the current TT. The arse on it though appeared wider :wink:


----------



## NaughTTy (Jul 9, 2003)

nutts said:


> The best colour combo on the day (for me) was silver and Magma red 8) 8) I reckon the best combo available could be Dolphin and Magma red...
> 
> I might yet be tempted :wink: 8)


Must be my powers of suggestion  :wink:


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

What are the benefits of the quatro suspension that you don't need MR? :?


----------



## R6B TT (Feb 25, 2003)

ezzie said:


> Thanks for the write-up nutts.
> 
> Was the manual box on the 3.2 clunky?


I didn't find it clunky - in fact I preferred the manual over the DSG I think, but that may just be familiarity


----------



## R6B TT (Feb 25, 2003)

Also, the DIS has about 5 trillion more functions than the old one - a whole set of menus for Computer 1 and Computer 2, even down to getting it to display the Chassis number ( I guess in case the tech is too lazy to get out of the car and look )


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

I did also get info from my dealer abouth the sales in the netherlands..

There were worldwide 270.000 TT's sold
2400 in the netherlands

from these 2400 were just 320 V6 TT's

The reason is quite simple.
In our country there are emission-taxes, , BTW and BPM, (also taxes)
The gap between the 2.0 and the 3.2 is larger than in the UK.

But than again, like i said before, i must pay 63K euro's for my 2.0 with options. For 55 K you get a 3.2......for example.
It's just where you want tot spent your money at.

For one person the engine only counts, for another is the whole package.....or other options.
I choosed for s-tronic, MR, and some other options.
But i also could choosed for the bigger engine, and less options.
It al depends what you want to do with your car, or to use for.

My last point,

i saw today again a [email protected] in the showroom without the extra leather package, but i must say, the plastics use on the dashboard, and the center console where the handbreake is, looks not realy audi...
It looks like a cheap copy from carbon, made of soft rubber...

If you don't order the leather pack extra, than be sure you gave it a look at the dealer without this package....


----------



## DonaldC (May 7, 2002)

I agree. I saw the dash last night without the extended leather pack and although it felt well put together and had soft touch rubber - it looked a wee bit naff like a rubberised carbon trim? It was okay but extended looked and felt better in the other cars.

Will post pics soon.

Donald


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

I did find the plastic/rubber from the mk1 better.
The extra leather pack is a must... realy

Are there people who saw a MK2 with and without MR from the outside...
How many space did both car's had between the wheels and the steel from the car, for example?


----------



## nutts (May 8, 2002)

Extended leather looked excellent compared to non. 

And the 3.2 'box was very smooth... a huge & significant improvement over the MK1 225 'box 

And Paul, I took your Dolphin suggestion and looking at some of the pics... you were correct


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

Right ive been out in a 3.2 S Tronic today and given it some hammer. I then drove the same route in my car pretty much immediately afterwards

Now, bear in mind how ive modded my car when you read this so im comparing it to mine really and not a std mk1, and im Â£6500 out on mods. Just to put it into context. Also this is my personal opinion and I know I've been helpling entertain everyone a little with Tosh and Rebel but this is me just expressing genuine views.

Handling - better than a standard 3.2 Mk1 and, quite surprisingly to me, very, very similar to how mine handles. This is with MR. I guess as the objective was the same for me as Audi - better handling with more rear bias yet retaining reasonable comfort - then its hardly surprising. Obviously this means I liked the handling.

General driving feeling - felt like I was in an A4. Having owned an A4 cabrio for 2.5 years/53000 miles I had serious flashbacks. The car feels a lot bigger than an original TT and really did put me in mind of an A4. Didnt feel as err, whats the word, 'direct' or maybe 'raw' I suppose, as my TT. I prefer raw but others may not ( for example some may think mine rides hard whereas I think its fine)

Interior - Sorry, I still dont like it, some parts felt very cheap like the sides of the centre console thingy and its all a bit too 'Mr Soft' and cosy for a 'sports' car. Its all down to personal preference obviously but I prefer cars to be a little 'harder' and less cluttered inside. Its why I couldnt own a Saab for example, squishy, big seats and lots and lots of buttons never turned me on. Too much fake metal too, just use metal eh lads cmon. Again though, playing devils advocate, its an Audi so some of the materials are also very nice. Mixed bag.

Exterior - needs 19s, needs lowering, seems to be a TT theme eh. Very nice to look at, chunky and solid looking. If possible I would do what Jamie did with his RS4 and have all the front 'blacked' out or toned down or whatever it is. Shame about the fog lamps, makes it look a little cluttered. I bet there will be a mod to change that tho before long. Dont like the grill but thats old news, taking the chrome off would make it look much better.

ICE - didnt listen to it but I bet the BOSE is great. Due to it being one of the miriad of 'modern' integral systems Im betting switching to after market will be hard which is fine, but Audi really need to introduce an MP3/DVD option (unless they have already?) in that case.

Spoiler - only thing that made me grin, I think I would stick a 'FUCK OFF' sticker underneath it so I can pop it up when people get too close behind lol

Overall I thought it was a nice Audi, I had no strong feelings either way other than some observations above. Ive had courtesy cars from Audi and handed them back without actually noticing what I was driving (A4 or A6? Err, sorry didnt notice) and once I was inside this, the same thought occured to me. Obviously from the outside u know what it is but inside and driving, could be any of the Audi range frankly.

It will come as no surprise when I say I wouldnt want one TBH, its gone a bit soft for me all too comfy and cosy inside and too Audi range. Having said that, they will sell millions of the things as it does nothing special, but nothing majorly wrong either.

Of course, as John (sales) from Audi Huddersfield said. Im a perfect example of their hardest audience. An enthusiastic TT owner who treats his car as more than just transport and has spent thousands making his TT into his own idea of a perfect TT.

Hence as I said, im comparing it to my car, not the mark one generally.

Well there you go, my genuine, genuine feelings. Im very happy with my TT, good luck to new TT owners, including the 2.0T brigade, I wouldnt have one but hey, each to their own.


----------



## Necroscope (Apr 9, 2006)

Bloody hell Leg nice review, but couldnt help feeling that you now think you have to apologise for your opinion........

Big question are you going to try a 2.0T out? Forget the whole shopping trolley thing, i think it would make for a genuinely interesting read!


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

Necroscope said:


> Bloody hell Leg nice review, but couldnt help feeling that you now think you have to apologise for your opinion........
> 
> Big question are you going to try a 2.0T out? Forget the whole shopping trolley thing, i think it would make for a genuinely interesting read!


No, no apology. My posts before have been purely for entertainment m8. This time I've driven it and can form a genuine opinion rather than just 1. Going by what I 'think' I know and 2. Relieving the tedium of 'Whats best, Silver or Black?' threads ;-)

I will try a 2.0T and Ill pass opinion on it. I have to say though. All it has to do is do the jumpy, wheel spin thing that FWD cars do when turning right out of a T Junction into a gap which demands you floor it and Ill pull over and walk back to the dealers. That really, really annoys me in a car. I hated my A4 cab for it, damn thing. Again, a personal gripe based on general FWD experience, when I drive the 2,0T ill be amazed if it doesnt do it.

You have to bear in mind, as with many people on here, I havent made 2K plus posts and spent Â£6500 on mods because I havent got strong opinions and feelings about TTs and in particular what I want from a TT. So for Audi to make an all new car and have me rave about it was always gonna be hard.

The TT isnt my ideal car, trouble is Ive got kids so I dont have the luxury of getting my ideal car which would be RWD, no driving aids electronics etc, plenty of guts and 2 seats (in actual fact I would LOVE to go buy a TVR Sagaris but the wife would kill me). The TT I have is as close as I can get with 4 seats, the new TT is just moving further away from that IMO, too far for me. I guess I just miss my Westfield 

Hoping JamesLunn will come along and post as he test drove it after me.


----------



## Dotti (Mar 9, 2003)

Another great personal write up


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

> in actual fact I would LOVE to go buy a TVR Sagaris but the wife would kill me


LMAO, she just walked into my office and I showed her a picture of the Sagaris and she just said, with a sigh, 'Richard, its just a car'.

You see what I'm up against, :wink:


----------



## paulatt (Oct 28, 2002)

Went to local dealer today to see and drive the new TT. 
After all the hype and photos I was expecting something special but......
I must admit that I was disappointed  it is not a fun sports car any more.
Ok, it drives well but it could be an A4. It just looks and feels so much bigger and more important and executive somehow.

Its just too big and too much car for me. This car will never have the charisma of the mk1 TT.....


----------



## R6B TT (Feb 25, 2003)

If you do try the 2.0T, give it a good hour. It feels so different to the Mk1 and the 3.2 Mk2, if you're like me, after 2 minutes in the 2.0T I didn't like it.

After 10 mins in the car, I thought it had some good points.

After a 40 min drive, down a route I'd driven in 3.2 Mk2 manual, 3.2 Mk 2 DSG, and then in the 2.0T with MR on and off - I know it is going to be a LOT of fun. It's much more flickable than the 3.2, and a lot lighter on steering etc - the closest comparison from cars I've owned in the past is its like a 205 GTi, but with better handling and about double the power.

After driving a 3.2 and 2.0 back to back, it just takes a while to get the feel for it and appreciate its virtues. Both are excellent cars, but very different in feel.

I know I'm gonna have fun - and I can appreciate why the journos who drive cars for a living like the 2.0T. I'm not knocking the 3.2 in any way - it's great - but I could drive it and enjoy it without being really stirred, its an easy car. The 2.0 is a bit more like a lively puppy who wants to play.


----------



## ChinsVXR (Apr 14, 2006)

Leg said:


> I will try a 2.0T and Ill pass opinion on it. I have to say though. All it has to do is do the jumpy, wheel spin thing that FWD cars do when turning right out of a T Junction into a gap which demands you floor it and Ill pull over and walk back to the dealers. That really, really annoys me in a car. I hated my A4 cab for it, damn thing. Again, a personal gripe based on general FWD experience, when I drive the 2,0T ill be amazed if it doesnt do it.


I would tend to agree with you that if the 2.0T does this, it will annoy me. My companies A4 does it, the 1.8T Passat company car does it, but I didnt really have this issue with the MKV GTI and even less so with the 240bhp Astra VXR.

I do seriously thing that peoples bias against fwd is based on old cars such as the A4 and not where chassis dynamics, grip and ECU managment has progressed to.

The worst thing I actually think for T junction pull outs is EU4 emmisions and the ECU mapping required by it. This seems to lead to a poor initial throttle response on many cars, 4wd, fwd and quattro. You either scream off the line twice as fast as you want to, or bog down.

Jonathan


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

Spoiler - only thing that made me grin, I think I would stick a 'FUCK OFF' sticker underneath it so I can pop it up when people get too close behind lol

Especially this :lol: :lol:


----------



## Dr.Phibes (Mar 10, 2006)

nutts said:


> I then chose the 3.2 S Tronic with MR... I ran out of superlatives in my mind for this car. EVERYTHING I wanted from this car, it delivered. The throttle response was simple staggering. Instant power on in most gears. VERY strange. :? I can't get over how good this car was. Even now... I want to get back in the car and go for a drive... unfortunately, I had to leave it there :lol: :lol:


Music to my ears ! Cheers for the reviews guys. Makes the wait even more agonising.


----------



## nutts (May 8, 2002)

I do have to stress that the MK1 and the MK2 might as well be different cars. They share a similar shape and the 3.2 shares an engine and that's about it.

There will be people that didn't like the MK1 because whilst it was a good (special) looking car, it didn't deliver driving dynamics wise.

The MK2 comes closer to it's competition driving wise and in some cases would surpass it. Unfortunately, the MK2 will NEVER be a MK1 (the original) and for that reason some owners will never like it (or it might take a while anyway :wink: ).

The 2.0T is very much in the hot hatch band and as such some new and existing owners will love it for that. Don't get me wrong, the 2.0T is a great car and drive  I was expecting it to be like a 225 and it most definitely isn't! My 225 wth 310ft/lbs of torque is a very easy drive in most gears... I guess this (combined with the engine & exhaust note) is why I was happier driving the 3.2 

I have a DSG in my Touran TDI and it is a remarkable 'box... but I've always maintained that it suits the TDI engine more than the petrol. I don't know (but am guessing), but I suspect that the software has been updated for the MK2 and as a consequence I have now changed my opinion... the 3.2 S Tronic is the best driving TT that Audi have made to date (imho)  To some others, the 2.0T or the 3.2 manual will have the edge... it really is all down to personal opinion 

Oh and... the 2.0T hits 65mph in second gear... whilst the 3.2 hits 59 in second 

I'm guessing that 2nd gear has been lengthened on the 2.0T to get the 0-62 figure down, though why that is necessary when the 2.0T S Tronic takes 2/100 of a second to change from 2nd to 3rd, I'll never know!


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

ChinsVXR said:


> The worst thing I actually think for T junction pull outs is EU4 emmisions and the ECU mapping required by it. This seems to lead to a poor initial throttle response on many cars, 4wd, fwd and quattro. You either scream off the line twice as fast as you want to, or bog down.
> 
> Jonathan


Nope, never experienced any of this, 4wd and RWD dont have any issues with this, its purely a FWD issue. My TT, floor it and go, simple as that, my (ex)Westfield, floor it and go an try and hold it straight, neither had/has any lag, wheelspin (Westy rear wheel but thats completely different to FWD spin) or anything else and they scream off the line as quick as you want them to, just control your throttle. :?


----------



## ChinsVXR (Apr 14, 2006)

nutts said:


> The 2.0T is very much in the hot hatch band and as such some new and existing owners will love it for that. Don't get me wrong, the 2.0T is a great car and drive  I was expecting it to be like a 225 and it most definitely isn't! My 225 wth 310ft/lbs of torque is a very easy drive in most gears... I guess this (combined with the engine & exhaust note) is why I was happier driving the 3.2


Without going into another FWD vs Quattro debate. The hot hatch feel and ease of tuning is what appeals to me. As we have in this thread already, I dont think Ive seen a review from a 225 owner that hasnt modded it 



nutts said:


> Oh and... the 2.0T hits 65mph in second gear... whilst the 3.2 hits 59 in second
> 
> I'm guessing that 2nd gear has been lengthened on the 2.0T to get the 0-62 figure down, though why that is necessary when the 2.0T S Tronic takes 2/100 of a second to change from 2nd to 3rd, I'll never know!


Is that the same for both S Tronic and Manual. One of the graphs Ive seen shows the 2.0T manual only being capable of under 60mph in second.


----------



## Necroscope (Apr 9, 2006)

> Nope, never experienced any of this, 4wd and RWD dont have any issues with this, its purely a FWD issue. My TT, floor it and go, simple as that, my (ex)Westfield, floor it and go an try and hold it straight, neither had/has any lag, wheelspin (Westy rear wheel but thats completely different to FWD spin) or anything else and they scream off the line as quick as you want them to, just control your throttle.


No arguement that wheel spin around corners from a standing start "may" be a problem, but you hit the nail on the head when you said "just control the throttle"

Give the 2.0T a fair run leg and try and look past this problem, and tell us all what you think!

Cheers...........


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

In the magazine "Autoweek" there is a test from the 2.0. They wrote this : The TT has eliminated all the negative things that a frontwheel-car has against a rear wheel. It's Neutral all the way.

But than again, i drove for 3 years with my frontwheel MK1 on the limit of the car on the Nurburgring-nordschleife , a well know difficult track.
I even did a Scuderia-Hanseat Cursus http://www.scuderia-hanseat.de/

I personaly think that a lot off people never would feel the difference of a FWD or a RWD , at the way they drive a car normaly. If the engines were the same power, they wouldn't feel it at al.
The new FWD car's get better and better every year.
The new TT is a good example.

And for the ones who did buy the FWD 2.0 don't be sad, with a FWD you can have a lot of fun, as wel on the track as in daily traffic, just look here below ........ :wink:

The last picture is specialy for Tosh :wink:


----------



## ChinsVXR (Apr 14, 2006)

Do you have a copy of the report you can upload :?:


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

chins, i never used photobucket before....
yesterday with the seat-pictures i post was the first time.
i have almost 12 magazines with test from the last months.

i wil, share some of these test with you and will take pictures from it and post them today. i promise.

but they are in german and also in dutch. but i can translate the important things.
And no, they don't say the 3.2 is a bad car. They say at the end mostly that the best value for money is the 2.0, just like tosh said.

But there ara also some nice pictures from things that they likes and don't like at the car.

by the evening they will be online.


----------



## nutts (May 8, 2002)

ChinsVXR said:


> nutts said:
> 
> 
> > The 2.0T is very much in the hot hatch band and as such some new and existing owners will love it for that. Don't get me wrong, the 2.0T is a great car and drive  I was expecting it to be like a 225 and it most definitely isn't! My 225 wth 310ft/lbs of torque is a very easy drive in most gears... I guess this (combined with the engine & exhaust note) is why I was happier driving the 3.2
> ...


As I said above, the Hot Hatch feel to the 2.0T fwd will appeal to new and existing owners 

The 65mph I hit in second gear as in the 2.0T manual 

In the 3.2 manual, I tried and tried and tried and once out of 6 attempts I hit 59... the rest were limited to 58


----------



## bec21tt (Feb 27, 2003)

nutts said:


> As I said above, the Hot Hatch feel to the 2.0T fwd will appeal to new and existing owners
> 
> The 65mph I hit in second gear as in the 2.0T manual
> 
> In the 3.2 manual, I tried and tried and tried and once out of 6 attempts I hit 59... the rest were limited to 58


Are you sure you tried hard enough?! :wink: :lol:


----------



## ChinsVXR (Apr 14, 2006)

nutts said:


> The 65mph I hit in second gear as in the 2.0T manual
> 
> In the 3.2 manual, I tried and tried and tried and once out of 6 attempts I hit 59... the rest were limited to 58


But you have speedo accuracy to take into account. The technical data Ive seen says the 2.0T is 58mph max in 2nd, so infact it does need a 3rd gear change to hit 60 like the 3.2.


----------



## nutts (May 8, 2002)

I have a 6% speedo inaccuracy in my MK1, applying that logic to the one I drove... would make it 61mph in second


----------



## ChinsVXR (Apr 14, 2006)

nutts said:


> I have a 6% speedo inaccuracy in my MK1, applying that logic to the one I drove... would make it 61mph in second


But the technical info doesnt tally with your observations. Did you add in some paralax error into your equation 8)


----------



## Trax (Aug 11, 2006)

Rebel said:


> Are there people who saw a MK2 with and without MR from the outside...
> How many space did both car's had between the wheels and the steel from the car, for example?


On thursday, the dealer black car looked lower than the condor grey, so I did test it with my fingers. Got two above the wheel to the outer arch on the black, and three on the Condor. Black was definately standard, not sure if condor was MR, but the spec lists posted by nutts say condor is MR.


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

I ment to see this also, that the MR was a litle bit lower, but can confirm that. Tomorrow i will know more, because i see the two car's side by side.


----------

