# Pros and Cons MK11 TT



## Scooby-Doo (Sep 29, 2006)

Bought TT190 2WD last year,planned to buy MK11 2007.

Pros: New model,styling smoother than the MK1

Cons: Same spec will cost Â£3500 more
Premature wear on seats.
Centre armrest on handbrake,looks terrible.
Drivers seat offset ???
Rear spoiler problems
Wear on side of handbrake
Audi Uk's limited and expensive options list especially compared to 
Germany.Britain is supposedly the biggest market for the TT but I get the impression that they think they have'nt got to try really hard to sell the car over here hence the limited options and high price.

Do I really want a MK11 ???????????????????????????


----------



## blagman (Sep 11, 2006)

Go on you know you do really


----------



## YELLOW_TT (Feb 25, 2004)

Stick with the mk1 guys original and best :wink: flame suit on


----------



## TTonyTT (Apr 24, 2006)

Since when did buying a car become a rational decision based on pros & cons?

You either want one, or you want one. Decision made. :wink:


----------



## Scooby-Doo (Sep 29, 2006)

I really wanted one a few weeks ago, only waiting for the rush to die down and for Audi to introduce the "S" line pack.I think I'm more wound up by Audi's marketing attitude to the UK,ie how much can we get away with this time.Shot themselves in the foot with MK1 "S" line when they had to refund buyers for the "S" line option.


----------



## vanos (Aug 25, 2006)

TTonyTT said:


> Since when did buying a car become a rational decision based on pros & cons?
> 
> You either want one, or you want one. Decision made. :wink:


I would say, you either have the money, or you don't...


----------



## TTonyTT (Apr 24, 2006)

vanos said:


> TTonyTT said:
> 
> 
> > Since when did buying a car become a rational decision based on pros & cons?
> ...


There you go, getting all practical and sensible again :wink:


----------



## Wolverine (Dec 22, 2002)

When the MK1 came out it was "must-have". For a long time there was _nothing _else at that price point to compare. There was nothing second-hand that could come close to it either.

Now however, if you want a stylish 2+2 coupe for a very reasonable price you can pick up a second hand MKI and still have a great car and be quids in pocket. Maybe the MKII is a better vehicle but it's all about how much you want to spend/can afford.


----------



## Scooby-Doo (Sep 29, 2006)

I don't think that the opposition has much to offer in comparison to the TT,as a car to live with on a day to day basis.The Nissan 350Z looks and goes well but after 10 minutes as a passenger in one a while back it didn't take long to decide that I couldn't go to work every day having my ears bombarded with the loud exhaust note and baked bean tin build quality.BMW Z4 Coupe, never been in one but it looks like a softop with a badly designed hard top fitted. Porsche Boxer,now you're talking,absolutely beautifull but can't afford it ( optional extras again,worse than Audi). What else can anybody suggest?


----------



## TTonyTT (Apr 24, 2006)

Scooby-Doo said:


> What else can anybody suggest?


There's quite a choice really.

Black Audi TT
Silver Audi TT
Blue Audi TT

:lol:

I think your analysis of the market was exactly right - it was the same as mine anyway. I was originally looking at the Cayman (when it was supposed to be a "cheap" Porsche), but at Â£50k spec-for-spec against the TT at cÂ£33k, it was just too much more expensive. I suppose it *is* cheap for a Porsche though.

2nd hand 996/997?

Brera?

And there's no way that I'd take an Alfa in preference to an Audi. I think that's probably it.


----------



## Speed Racer (May 21, 2006)

Scooby-Doo said:


> Pros: New model,styling smoother than the MK1
> quote]
> 
> Yeah...they took every perfect line and ruined it. The new TT, dare I say, has turned Japanese! The styling is now disposable, like everything Nippon. First Ducati ruin the classic modern 916 styling with the 999; and now, the (new) TT is forever generic. Put a Nissan badge on it and call it a day...or Hyundai.


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Only the ones who drove first a MK1 can tell how much better the new one drives. I get so many good comments on my MK2. They all say it looks more mature than the MK1.

The interior is bigger, the car looks much sharper, en the driving is 10 times betther. Car's will change during the year's and nothing last forever.
The MK1 was a great car, and a beautifull design, but they didn't sold many car's, last year's. So they designed a new one.
It's better and it's up to date to 2007.

I like the MK2.


----------



## moore11 (Oct 1, 2006)

Scooby-Doo said:


> Bought TT190 2WD last year,planned to buy MK11 2007.
> 
> Pros: New model,styling smoother than the MK1
> 
> ...


If you love the MKI, and you seem to, you will really love the MK II. The options on the MK II are comparable to any other 25-35K sports car. Audi haven't been complacent with the MK II, they've had over 6 yrs with the MK I and really knew where to make the improvements. The MK II is great value for money and seems much more expensive than its price tag. As for Speed racers comments (slagging off the MK II on the MKII forum, brilliant), park a MKI beside a MKII...you'll be suprised.


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

moore11 said:


> As for Speed racers comments (slagging off the MK II on the MKII forum, brilliant), park a MKI beside a MKII...you'll be suprised.


I would think hes allowed to as the thread is entitled 'Pros and Cons Mk11 TT'. Kind of asks for positive and negative views to be aired doesnt it! Or were you just hoping for more of 'The Emporers New Clothes'?

Anyone fancies parking their Mk2 next to my TT for a photoshoot I will be more than happy to oblige. Just PM me. I'm in Leeds. I parked it next to a couple at the dealers, and you are right, I was pleasantly surprised.


----------



## Speed Racer (May 21, 2006)

Rebel said:


> They all say it looks more mature than the MK1.


That's the problem. Who wants mature in a sport coupe? I recognize I don't represent the market, but I don't want an A6 in the shape of a TT. I want a car that performs its purpose, and doesn't distract from that same purpose. Many new cars are becoming too generic, and their real appeal is that they're under warranty. For the money of most new cars, you can source a used, new car killer. I'd much rather have whatever Porsche 9** I could buy for the price of the new TT. The only risk being the cost of repairs if completely out of pocket. Perhaps the pureness of purpose is what's most missing. The new TT (no such thing as a MkII, or MkI for that matter) is redesigned enough to make it "new", but function wise you may as well be driving a A* with a pop-up spoiler (when it works) and yesteryear's motors. Nice job! But it could have been so much more. Perhaps too rushed to market? Audi have proved so capable with the RS4. So what happened here? Truthfully I'm disappointed. It should be better: RWD or Quattro; complete ASF (not 25%); "Porsche" range brakes; BMW power ranges (250 bottom end - 300+ mid model range); etc. The stuff they got right matters so much less. Blah, blah, sorry...

To add: I'm very gald those who own the new TT like it. I would hope so. While I don't think it's revolutionary, it's for sure more modern (as it should be with the benefit of extra year's development). Some claim it's far more than it is. Fine...enthusiast's rights. I do have to laugh at how much Toshiba drools over it. Not that I want to, but I can only imagine he yells out "MKII" when he climaxes! That boy redefines blind loyalty! :wink:

Enjoy your experiences!


----------



## TTdriver (Sep 2, 2006)

Speed Racer i agree and have same views basically with everything you have posted on this thread, Its too jap looking for my liking and even the blokes up the pub last night reckon it looks like a nissan 350z, young lad at work 21 yrs old hates the MK2 and reckons it looks awful, he said he loved the mk1 when it came out but went off it when the VW beetle looked like a blown uo version of the tt but he hates the mk2.


----------



## TTonyTT (Apr 24, 2006)

TTdriver said:


> and even the blokes up the pub last night reckon


 :lol: :lol: :lol:

Well, that's it then. :lol: If the :lol: blokes :lol: up the pub :lol: :lol: reckon :lol: :lol: :lol:

Sorry about all the laughing ... you just reminded me of a comedy show

:wink:


----------



## TTdriver (Sep 2, 2006)

TTtonyTT thats Ok mate if the blokes up the pub dont like it and the young lad at work doesnt like it and i dont like it and i still have not seen one on the road yet means that most other people dont seem to like it then at long last you have a exclusive little TT club that hardly no one likes :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:  so unless the car grows on people like the ford Ka did your be driving a car that most people dont like, EXCLUSIVITY at last for the TT :lol: And roll on the MK3 in 4 years time, perhaps i might then change my MK1 for the upgrade


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

I know what Speed is saying, its perfectly ok, but, for example, there are things available on the S3 which would really have made a difference to the TT.

If there had been a 260 + bhp 2.0T Quattro at launch and the option of the S3 recaros, I must admit, I could probably have got past the bits I dislike about the mk2 and got one of those. In phantom black, red leather recaros (Audi Hudds tell me u can have em in red if u pay), dropped it, stuck some aftermarket BBS 19s on it and been quite happy once I had had that front grill surround black powder coated. Atke a sports haldex and uprated ARBs as a given too. Chip it up to 300 brake and stick a performance zorst on and ure getting into a proper TT then.

S3 Recaros










compared to

TT seats


----------



## Speed Racer (May 21, 2006)

moore11 said:


> As for Speed racers comments (slagging off the MK II on the MKII forum, brilliant)


Interesting. See the quote above my pic. The difference is, I'm just giving you a counterpoint opinion, as I'm not so enthusiastic with the offering. I'm certainly not being rude about it though.


----------



## TTdriver (Sep 2, 2006)

Leg how much better do the S3 Recaros look and they look quality and the present seats in the MK2 are one of the things that in my opinion look cheap looking


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

TTdriver said:


> Leg how much better do the S3 Recaros look and they look quality and the present seats in the MK2 are one of the things that in my opinion look cheap looking


I know, imagine them in red nappa, mmmmm. I assume they flip forward too as they are in the S3 which is a 2 dor 4 seater!


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Leg how can you say , that you would buy a MK2 when the car has recaro's like the picture?

I thought the driving fun starts with the car and not with the seats.
Where do you need those seat's with the "big ears" for anyway?? You don't track the car anyway?
If you only would get whole testday in a MK2 you wouldn;t say that.

I know you made a lot of mod's on your car, but i can asure you, that your car, can't compare to the Mk2.
Mk2 is new technology. New wheelbase, etc etc...


















http://www.fourtitude.com/news/publish/ ... tml?page=7

Do you realy think that an old car like the MK1 which was designed in 1998 can beat a car from 2006 ?
Let me guess, you don't have electricity at home, but you use candles?

Leg just get a test drive at your dealer, and sell your MK1 :wink:


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

Rebel said:


> Leg how can you say , that you would buy a MK2 when the car has recaro's like the picture?
> 
> I thought the driving fun starts with the car and not with the seats.
> Where do you need those seat's with the "big ears" for anyway?? You don't track the car anyway?
> ...


I love you being on the forums Webble, your innate ability to display a lack of intelligence continues to be a source of never ending amusement for me. As I posted that I thought, nay hoped, you would be along any moment. As usual, I was correct.

Lets address your points one by one, keep it simple for you.

1. You may note that the Recaros were one point amongst many. As usual in your petty efforts to try and be clever, an insurmountable mountain for you to climb by the looks of it, you decided to omit the other areas I mentioned. The other comments were centered around performance. However, as you yourself have commented many times on the looks of the car I felt it was only relevant to also comment on how those seats could improve the looks.

Lets face it Shlebble, no one on here bought their TT, whatever version, purely for performance, hence when commenting on a proper 2.0T they should have made (sorry if the fact you got a FWD one and i commented on a need for a quattro one offends you, it was a generalised comment) I mentioned many performance changes they should have done and a couple of aesthetic ones.

2. I do track. Just not in the TT. Told you that before Flebble.

3. I test drove a mk2 3.2 Quattro, you know, the proper one. Didnt like it myself. Oh its fine but well, at one point I forgot I was in a TT and thought I was in an A4.

As for the handling, it IS much improved over the mk1 in standard form but as someone so knowledgeable I am sure you arenâ€™t saying that the manufacturers of the modifications I have had professionally fitted and set up are using 7 or 8 year old design or technology are you? No of course not, not even you are that silly.

You see, I CAN drive a std mk2 and comment. You CANT drive my car and comment. Well not unless you want to pop over? Iâ€™m in Friday all day.

Doesnt it bother you that you bought essentially the same car as an S3, for similar or more money, yet got FWD instead of Quattro, boring seats instead of Recaros and 200 bhp instead of 260 plus? Hell, it would me!

Now, personally I dont want to get into a mk1 vs mk2 debate again, apart from the fact that you will try and make out I have a problem with the 2.0T when my comments have been about FWD, its been done to death.

The point is, they did a great job on the S3, why couldnt they do that on the TT? Why? Does anyone know? Is there a single reason why they couldnt have given your car quattro and 260 brake and made the seats an option? Ill tell you what, I cant think of one, can you? And if they felt the S3 needed all that, why did they think the TT didnt? Some may say its because the TT _S_ will have that but isnt the TT, by its very nature, already the sports model worthy of that spec?


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Scooby-Doo said:


> Bought TT190 2WD last year,planned to buy MK11 2007.
> 
> Pros: New model,styling smoother than the MK1
> 
> ...


Cars not going to drop like a stone in price like the MKI
I have no wear in the seat
Seats doesn't feel offset
I have had no spoiler problem
I have no handbrake wear
UK has bigger packs, so it appears more expensive. More Std kit too
They don't have to try, they are selling faster than ice cream on a hot day.

Cant answer the last one, only you can.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Leg said:


> The point is, they did a great job on the S3, why couldnt they do that on the TT?


Dont agree. The S3 is shocking. Looks 99% the same as a 1.6, dull inside and out and is way over priced. i would be given one (and when audi did 'try' to loan me an A3 20T i returned it within 10mins it was that poor).

I'd rather drive a golf and i hate golfs.


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> Leg said:
> 
> 
> > The point is, they did a great job on the S3, why couldnt they do that on the TT?
> ...


If you re insert that line back into my post and therefore back into context im blatantly referring to the points I made regarding specific things the S3 has. Quattro, 260bhp plus and the Recaros. Which, on the first 2 points, I'm pretty sure you agree should have been on the 2.0T TT based onyour previous posts.

Could anyone say 'Oh yeah I dont think my TT would benefit from Quattro over FWD and an additional 60 plus brake!'. If they do, they are kidding themselves.

As for dull on the inside, couldnt agree more, hardly different from the new TT is it. I mean look at the pics I posted on the previous page.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Mine was a general comment about the S3.
A FWD car with 260bhp is silly, it can only be quattro IMO.

if i close one eye and stand over near the door they look the same - i think, i cant see the screen! :roll:


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

LEG, you are not a real TT driver. I'm sorry to say so.
You bought one of the most beautiful designed coupe's and re-decorated it to a "fast and furious" mobile

If i read your post abouth the "wonderfull" S3, than i only can tell, you miss the TT-feeling.
A TT is like a coat you wear. Not just a 400+ quatro , with chaise longue, sofa seats, like you want it to be.

If i only see you your signature, that's say's everything.

the TT is car with a "less is more" design...
You better could buy a fat toyota celica, or whatso-ever with recaro's and lot's of spoilers and a big engine with a lot of "bling bling" and "tuut tuut" and "look-at-me" stuff

Or just buy a a S3, it suits you well.
The most TT drivers buy the car in the first place with there heart.
The lines, the standard equipment, the quality.....that will do the trick for them.

If i see you car, with all the mod's and extra tuning stuff, it look like a cartoon.
Sorry to say so, i know you don't like it.
But who are you to judge over the MK2??
A blind man can tell that you ain't got the real "tt-feeling"

I think the most beautifull tt's are the originals......like most people have ordered.

Sleep well , uncle Leg :wink:


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

Rebel said:


> LEG, you are not a real TT driver. I'm sorry to say so.
> You bought one of the most beautiful designed coupe's and re-decorated it to a "fast and furious" mobile
> 
> If i read your post abouth the "wonderfull" S3, than i only can tell, you miss the TT-feeling.
> ...


Your post in itself demonstrates how little you know. If we were in court I would rest my case. 8) 

I hope everyone on the forum reads that dribble, should give them a good laugh. It did me. I think the funniest bit is the fact that you dont even understand the mods ive done as most of them cant be seen and are there to improve handling, so funny. Not to mention the fact that you are flying in the face of popular opinion, lol! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

To top it all, I have to assume you are actually saying you prefer 200bhp and FWD to 260 bhp and Quattro given the choice seen as you obviously dont agree with me! Thats hilarious. :lol: :lol:


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Leg, everyone can see that you got a car where you proberly win a lot off prices on tuning-concour's.

But this is the MK2 forum, i'm sorry guy, and we aren;t impressed with that old MK1 with all the bling bling stuf
If it only was "natural" and original, maybe than i would believe that you liked your MK1 more than the MK2, but i realy think that the stuff on your car is more expensive than the car itself, so you can't sell him at this point.

Leg, if you want to impress people than maybe you are at the wrong forum? The MK1 forum is a betther place for you i think, because everytime i see your sig a have a big laugh :lol:

Leggie.....just od us a favour and take a decent test drive in a MK2..
Only than you can give a real good comment.

p.s. don't get to upset, it ain't worth it :-*


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Leg said:


> I think the funniest bit is the fact that you dont even understand the mods ive done as most of them cant be seen and are there to improve handling, so funny


I also think it's funny that you did all those mod's. You better could save the money and bought a MK2. Because that car's is already good. It doesn't need 26 mod's. :lol:

Leggie so you are saying that a standard MK1 was a shit car to drive? And therefor all the mod's done by you?
Why don;t you get a job at Audi AG. You would be the number one on the TT office.

Maybe you think your car is much better whith all the mod's, but just one question uncle Leggie...........only one question......

Show us some pictures from your wonder-car at the track or a circuit......

NO......

Show us only *one* picture from your car at full speed in a corner on a circuit or a track......

I shall give the answere for you............you ain't got a picture, because i asked it before and get the some answere's on and on....

You designed a sportscar not for the track but just for to go to your work and do some shoppings. And to win some prices at tuning-concour's.

now okay, i had a "poor" and "cheap" MK1....with FWD....
I did also shoppings and go to my work with the car.
But i also tracked it......

How money pictures do you want from my MK1 on the track?

1?
10? 100?
Just say it, mister LEG HILL..... :lol: 
Or shall i call you Damon?

Here Leg, just for you..... http://www.ringrebel.nl/dia/tt.htm
A "poor" and "cheap" MK1 in action, with no "bling bling" and No "look at me stuff"

Sleep well Leggie :wink:


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

Rebel said:


> Leg, everyone can see that you got a car where you proberly win a lot off prices on tuning-concour's.
> 
> But this is the MK2 forum, i'm sorry guy, and we aren;t impressed with that old MK1 with all the bling bling stuf
> If it only was "natural" and original, maybe than i would believe that you liked your MK1 more than the MK2, but i realy think that the stuff on your car is more expensive than the car itself, so you can't sell him at this point.
> ...


rofl, my posts werent about my car, u brought my car into it remember. I know its hard but at least understand your own posts eh, otherwise u just look daft m8ty.

My posts were about the fact that Audi could have put the 260 brake engine in the TT and also quattro and, as a nice touch, made the recaros an option.

But they didnt have to did they, they charged the same price for FWD and 200 brake and made more profit, LMAO! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Just read my last post and give for once and all a normal answere, with some pictures............than you are a man, and you get my respect.
And otherwise just go further with tuning your car, and shut up.
Because it's alway's the same. You alway's are over here on the MK2 forum to say how wonderfull your car is, and how ugly and bad the MK2 is.

From now on, i will call you "Bling-Bling-Leg"

:wink:


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

Rebel said:


> Leg said:
> 
> 
> > I think the funniest bit is the fact that you dont even understand the mods ive done as most of them cant be seen and are there to improve handling, so funny
> ...


LMAO u really ARE struggling arent u, now ure posting the same posts from months ago. Remember, I posted track pics of me in my westfield, u know, a proper track car, bare bones tracking.

Im afraid you just slated half the TTs on this forum with same and more mods than mine, TTej, Yellow etc etc. Dont look at the Ace Cafe meet thread for goodness sake, there are pictures in there of TTs that make mine look like I have only just started.

Come on Rebsy, if ure gonna try, at least make an effort, these posts are weak, weak, weak. I notice you are still trying to push the discussion onto my car when I didnt bring mine into it till you did. We were talking about the mk2 remember, and I said the S3 had 2-3 things the Mk2 2.0T should have had, re read the thread and once you have caught up post something relevant eh.

:lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

I just look at you movie that was in your sig......... ROFL !!!!!!!!! :lol: 

http://s35.photobucket.com/albums/d163/ ... 0_6712.flv

Ladies and gentleman .........."bling bling Leg" in action on the "track" ..... LOL  :lol:

Mennnnn, i almost pissed on my chair from laughing. That movie should be on a Seat-forum, posted by some 18 year old guy...... how old are you Leg? What the fuck is that movie all abouth????? ROFL !!!!!! :lol: :lol:


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

Rebel said:


> I just look at you movie that was in your sig......... ROFL !!!!!!!!! :lol:
> 
> http://s35.photobucket.com/albums/d163/ ... 0_6712.flv
> 
> ...


Posted for people who asked me what the blueflame sounded like on a V6...forgive me for being helpful, I drove up past Skipton for MikeyG to hear it as he was pondering buying one, the others were too far away though. Got sick of being PMd and having to send the link to people tbh.

Of course, you would criticise them all for modding their cars eh, rofl.

So, you wouldnt choose a 260 brake quattro 2.0T TT over a FWD 200 brake one then? That was the point I made that you seem to be trying to avoid by talking about my car? Wassup, make you feel uncomfortable does it? :lol: :lol:


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Okay "Bling bling Leggie"

On topic, like you said,

I not agree with your S3-versus TT-Mk2 story.....

Why? Because a TT is a TT and a S3 is a A3....simple as that.
A TT is car that you don't only buy for the perfomance....
I think most people buy a TT with there heart.
So i don't agree with the S3 story....

And if the S3 had 350hp and golden recaro's in it, i still don;t like the car.
Bling-bling-Leg, i told it before.......and i will tell it again, you don't got the "TT-feeling"


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

Rebel said:


> Okay "Bling bling Leggie"
> 
> On topic, like you said,
> 
> ...


OMG, new levels of stupidity. READ the posts for goodness sake Rebel. Ure just making yourself look really thick. I didnt compare the S3 to the TT, I said they put a 260 plus BHP engine, Quattro and an option of the Recaros on the S3, why couldnt they put them on the TT and if they had, it would have been a much more attractive proposition.

Regardless of language barriers its incredible how you continually fail to grasp simple concepts, it really is.

Jeez, what do you need, neon letters?

Heres my original post to make it easier for you..by the way, the car described below would have tempted me but I would still keep the one I have as well as I always loved the original TT and its paid for. TBh if I was getting a 3rd car I would get another Westfield (or similar) though.



Leg said:


> I know what Speed is saying, its perfectly ok, but, for example, there are things available on the S3 which would really have made a difference to the TT.
> 
> If there had been a 260 + bhp 2.0T Quattro at launch and the option of the S3 recaros, I must admit, I could probably have got past the bits I dislike about the mk2 and got one of those. In phantom black, red leather recaros (Audi Hudds tell me u can have em in red if u pay), dropped it, stuck some aftermarket BBS 19s on it and been quite happy once I had had that front grill surround black powder coated. Atke a sports haldex and uprated ARBs as a given too. Chip it up to 300 brake and stick a performance zorst on and ure getting into a proper TT then.
> 
> ...


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Leg if i had to choose between a 150HP MK2 or a 250 HP A3 , i would choose the MK2.

Is that answere fair enough for you? :wink: 
Why? Because the Mk2 is a beautifull car, even more beautifull than the Mk1, andddddddd.......because you also can have a lot off fun with a 150HP......if it's in correct hands.

Leg, if you track your windfield, why all the mod's on your TT?
That little trick that you do on your movie i also can do with my wife's A3.
I'm pretty sure if you only would buy a MK2, you proberly wouldn't put all that stuff on your car...........because that car, is standard already that good, it doesn't need all that stuff, to drive better.

But than again........i think if you gonna sell your car, you will loose a lot of money. And maybe therefor you don't like the MK2.
I know a lot off MK1 drivers who don't have the money for a MK2, but do have the courage to say that they like him above the Mk1.

They are at least honest.....


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Bling-bling-Leggie ... it's not only this post....
It's on every post where the Mk2 is on battle with the Mk1. 
Because only than you show up :wink:

It's quit simple "Bling bling leggie" if you don;t like the Mk2, or the engines or the seat's or the spoilers, or the "whatso-ever button's" than be happy with your car, and don;t give negative comment's abouth the mk2.

How would you feel, if i give comment in different MK1 threads, how wonderfull the Mk2 is, and how shitty the Mk1 was?
Where are the nice comment's or the comment's where you wish the gu'r good luck with there new Mk2?

You only have negative comment's over here and than leave to the Mk1 forum, were you are "Queen Sheeba" herself....

Bling-bling-leggie......i like your humor.....but just don't alway's be nagative abouth the Mk2, otherwise don't come over here. because, the other owner's won't bite..........but i do 8) 
So if you want to play, and still be negative abouth the Mk2, than i will come over to the Mk1 forum and chat a little abouth your "super-bling-bling" MK1.

And now i'm going to sleep, amigo :wink:


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

Rebel said:


> Leg if i had to choose between a 150HP MK2 or a 250 HP A3 , i would choose the MK2.
> 
> Is that answere fair enough for you? :wink:
> Why? Because the Mk2 is a beautifull car, even more beautifull than the Mk1, andddddddd.......because you also can have a lot off fun with a 150HP......if it's in correct hands.
> ...


Aaaargh. Rebel, you a re still on about A3 vs TT man, wake up, read the post! I cant make it clearer.

As I say m8ty, mines paid for, I could buy a mk2 tomorrow if I fancied it. I dont care a jot about money on cars, I buy em to please myself, I invest elsewhere.

Dont get into money and 'Ooh Leg you cant afford a mk2 so you have to stick with your mk1' cos ure barking up the wrong tree.

Anyway, unlike you I dont feel the need to post pictures of my houses and other assets and thats not the point. Point is, the TT would have a been a much nicer proposition if they had given it the S3 Engine set up and Quattro not to mention the Recaros. Agree or disagree, thats the only point ive made to everyone else and been attempting to make to you.

PS. I actually sold the Westfield this spring as I went tracking/Hill climbs etc on far too many weekends in 05 and 04 and frankly it was unfair on my wife and kids. A sacrifice I had to make im afraid, perils of a family life.


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

Rebel said:


> Bling-bling-Leggie ... it's not only this post....
> It's on every post where the Mk2 is on battle with the Mk1.
> Because only than you show up :wink:
> 
> ...


Pop over where you like. I couldnt care less. If you think my lightly modded TT is bling Im sure you can make some new friends elsewhere ont he forum. :lol:

It would be nice if you could grasp the meaning of my post though, if only to actually discuss a salient point regarding Audi's model configuration policy across their range.

Make an effort eh


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Leg, the TT is the TT like's it's availble now.
What's the point to critised every thing which it don't got?
I also would like a MK2 with the R8 engine in it.
And with seat's from carbon, and with ceramic brakes, etc etc....
But could we still afford it??

The Mk2 is the Mk2.....if you don;t like it, so be it.
If you think your car is better, so be it.
But if you only post on the Mk2 forum with negative comment, i will react. 
Sorry, that's me....Leg

So, till next time.... :wink:

P.s. i hope you will have some new good argument's next time, because everybody know's by now, that the engines are crap, and the seat's could be betther on the MK2 ....


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Leg , i have my friends in real life, so i'm not here to make friends.
And i want do like you do, and "come over" and give comment on the Mk1 forum, otherwise i would be the same as you.

You just play the Queen over there, and i play the donkey over here :lol:


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

Rebel said:


> Leg, the TT is the TT like's it's availble now.
> What's the point to critised every thing which it don't got?
> I also would like a MK2 with the R8 engine in it.
> And with steels from carbon, and with ceramic brakes, etc etc....
> ...


Err Rebel, have you forgotten the title of the thread? Pros and Cons of a mk2. I.e. the originator is asking us what we think is good, and bad, about the mk2.

So I said, its ok but could have been so much more, for example, why couldnt Audi put the quattro and 260 brake from the S3 in and while they were at it wheres the harm in offering the Recaros as an option. I.e. The pros are its ok (I think I said 'its perfectly fine') and the cons are 'they have these options on a similar platform, why not offer them?'

Pretty simple, then you come along and drag my car into it and start trying to flame and slate me, which is fine, as u tend to make a berk of yourself which is a shame as ure obviously passionate about your TT and would probably be able to make a constructive comment if you would just put your brain into gear for a moment. Hence why I keep asking you to try harder.

If u are in a face to face conversation do you half listen to the other person and decide what you want to hear and then respond to something totally different to what they said? Thats what you do on the forums. :?

You know, the funny thing is, I havent made any negative comments about the new TT in here. :? Just pointed out some things that would have been nice for it to have. U made up so much dribble there Rebel u nearly had me believing it.


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Leg, you only show up on the Mk2 forum when there are threads like this.
You only give negative comment's abouth the Mk2.

i think you just a jealous old man, which feels screwed by audi.
Because you turned your Mk1 in a little goldmine, and you know your money will go down the river in no time.

Leg the point's your are saying abouth the Mk2, are everytime the same......bad engines, bad seat's bad, this bad that, bad wheels, bad everything.

Leg, i don't like SEAT ......so i don't visit SEAT-forum's
You don't like the Mk2...............so what are you posting over here?
i have looked on the Mk1 forum, some time ago.......and every.........i repeat........in every thread i see your name.....LOL
I will tell you once again...........you ain't got the TT-feeling- .........you are a poser.....one look at your sig will say enough
Poser's don't drive TT's......TT's are driven by people with the "less is more" feeling..
Poser's drive "bling bling-tt's....

You are the bling-bling-pimp-poser nummero uno on this TT forum.

And now i'm goint to sleep, because i spend enough time too reach too your brains. But when i saw you standing on that picture that you took from your shiny front, standing on your driveway..... i better waked up and realized that it's a waste of time to get to your brain's.

So post what you like.....i'm going to sleep. I will read it tommorrow evening maybe 8)


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

Rebel said:


> Leg, you only show up on the Mk2 forum when there are threads like this.
> You only give negative comment's abouth the Mk2.
> 
> i think you just a jealous old man, which feels screwed by audi.
> ...


As I mentioned above, I havent made any negative comments about the new TT in here, merely suggested some things Audi should have included for the 2.0T model.

Well im 36, dunno if thats old, feels it sometimes. You do focus on money dont you Rebel, why is that? As I mentioned, mines paid for, including the mods, its just a little something to keep me entertained, thats all, its not about the money buddy.

I havent slated the engines though, seen as the V6 is the same as mine that would be a bit daft and I have never slated the 2.0T apart from when I said in here 'why didnt they put the 260 brake version in' which isnt exactly slating it now is it. You may be confusing the fact that I most definately did slate FWD and that just happens to be in the 2.0T. In fact if you recall I actually said given the choce of 2.0T quattro and 3.2 quattro I would have selected a 2.0T as its more tuneable. I chose the V6 in the original Tt as I never buy used and fancied a change from the 2 4 pots I had driven for the previous few years.

I post a fair bit, thats true, but every thread...nah. Just joining in. 

If im a poser why did I spend so much on handling mods, mods people cant see, cos, and you like to talk about money so here goes, 75% of the cost of my mods is on things you cant even see.

Everything you say is riddled with holes Pebble, but I love how you dig deeper and deeper, proper funny.

But, yet again, you have dragged me off topic and still not responded to the original point of either me or the thread originator. I wonder if you ever will, probably not.

See you tomorrow no doubt, try and make sense and address the actual discussion point though eh, we know you dont like my TT and that I think FWD is a joke already.

Here it is again...

*Do you think the new TT 2.0T would have benefited from the S3 engine config, quattro and the optional Recaros?*

and the thread originators...

*What are the Pros and Cons of the new TT?*

Nice and simple eh


----------



## Wolverine (Dec 22, 2002)

Very amusing, boys :lol: Perhaps the mods can set up a "Rebel vs Leg" subforum :wink:

Of course I agree that the TT should _never _have been produced in fwd; not the 150 MKI or the 2.0 MKII. So the biggest "con" is the 2.0 MKII; it's not a proper TT.


----------



## sandhua1978 (Sep 11, 2006)

Bloody hell... that was hard work!!

Leg got to say i commend you for staying with it... looks like it was a long night!!!

But I agree on what you were saying....Do i think the mark 2 would be better buy for me with a 260 bhp and quattro, plus recarros personally YES!!!


----------



## Scooby-Doo (Sep 29, 2006)

Right then,where were we ? I think it was TT MK11 or something else.
S3s excluded!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Wolverine (Dec 22, 2002)

Scooby-Doo said:


> Right then,where were we ? I think it was TT MK11 or something else.
> S3s excluded!!!!!!!!!


TT _MK1_ - 3.2 V6 DSG


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Wolverine said:


> TT _MK1_ - 3.2 V6 DSG


But with a MKII V6 this  grows to this

                     :                                                                                                                       

Earlier posted missed the 180FWD TTC too.


----------



## Wallsendmag (Feb 12, 2004)

Toshiba said:


> Wolverine said:
> 
> 
> > TT _MK1_ - 3.2 V6 DSG
> ...


 8)


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> Wolverine said:
> 
> 
> > TT _MK1_ - 3.2 V6 DSG
> ...


But if Audi had delivered whatthey *should * have then the Audi TT Mk2 2.0T Quattro 260bhp with Red Nappa Recaros plus an after market Haldex and Chip to 300 bhp would have given you this...










But they didnt so what the hey eh


----------



## TTonyTT (Apr 24, 2006)

Leg said:


>


Yeahbut, nobut, yeahbut, nobut ... well, see, the mark1 is still the best ... and Dutch drivers are way better in a Daf (remember those, I couldn't think of any other cars built in Dutchland) than any English drivers in any car. So there.

And I think Rubble is the best.

Not saying what at though. There are enough fights going on already.

:twisted:


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Just so I'm clear then:

Are we saying a car with less than 300bhp is not a good car?

I think the MKII is a great car and i dont want anymore power than i have, nor do i want an engine turbo'd to within an inch of its life. I enjoying driving the car, its quick, its safe/sure footed/good handling, its looks good, no it doesnt have recaros like the S3 but i didnt really like the recaros in the qS so thats another good thing for me, the cabin feels like a special place to be and everything works very well. The feed back from the car is good and you get a smile factor when driving and lots of heads turn.

I dont see the point in spending 1000s in mods to turn a ish car in to a better car.

Colour - people will never agree, hence why they give you more than one. Red leather just doesnt work for me.

But if Audi was doing it right it wouldn't have heldex at all, it would be a system like seen on the RS4 etc. :wink:


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> Just so I'm clear then:
> 
> Are we saying a car with less than 300bhp is not a good car?
> 
> ...





Toshiba said:


> 20T is like having a ticket to cheap seats at the Oscars - ok you can go, but nobody cares. If you're going to bother turning up, turn up in and sit at the front with a smile on your face know you are in the right place - the best seat in the house!


One of MANY quotes from you stating the 3.2 is the better car. We can only assume that, as the only difference between the two really is the power and quattro (lets face it styling is nigh on identical and the turbo charged engines from Audi are as smooth as an engine needs to be), then you must surely agree that if they had put the 260 BHP version of the 2.0T engine in the TT and added quattro it would be a better car, possibly the better of the 2 TTs available. As this is available in the S3 which is essentially the same platform, then my point is valid. Why didnt they deliver that from the off? They can do it, the S3 shows that, so they *chose *not to, its not missing because they couldnt deliver it!

Re the Recaros, exactly why I said 'make em an option'.

With regards to modding it, as a sports haldex and an extra 50bhp is so cheap at around a grand or so, why not, sounds like a bargain for what you get.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

I think it clear i dont like the 20T for all the reason previous said. I got a V6 for two reasons. I wanted a V6, and i wanted quattro.

So even if the S3 engine with quattro was on offer i wouldnt have ordered it.


----------



## moore11 (Oct 1, 2006)

I do love the new S3, it looks great. I haven't driven one but all the reviews I've read state that the new S3 is a let down and it hasn't recieved the reviews that the TT has. One reviewer felt that the 3.2V6 Quattro A3 and the R32 Golf were both much better drives than the new turbo charged S3, back to back....


----------



## Bryn (Feb 12, 2004)

Rebel said:


> You are the bling-bling-pimp-poser nummero uno on this TT forum.


Usually responsible for talking utter $hite but that my old china is an absolute classic :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## surftt (Oct 5, 2006)

Glad to see the MkI v MkII debate is still going strong :wink: 
I finally saw my first MkII today. I had to go to an Audi garage to do it but it was worth it. It looks so much better in the flesh. My only disappointment was the wing mirrors, the're huge! Otherwise I really liked it, even the corporate grill looks good. 8) 
Having been following this forum for a while it's a shame that Audi seem to be taking so long on delivery and charging the earth for all the accessories which were standard on the MkI. I also think they should do a quattro version of the 2.0T.
To cap it all, on the way home from the garage I saw my 2nd MkII actually on the road driving  :lol: 
I'll look forward to owning a MkII (when I can afford it) but in the mean time I am more than happy with my MkI.


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

surftt said:


> Glad to see the MkI v MkII debate is still going strong :wink:


Where?


----------



## surftt (Oct 5, 2006)

Leg said:


> surftt said:
> 
> 
> > Glad to see the MkI v MkII debate is still going strong :wink:
> ...


You're such a 'Leg' puller!


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

surftt said:


> Leg said:
> 
> 
> > surftt said:
> ...


No I meant it, where?


----------



## Dotti (Mar 9, 2003)

Oh FFS just buy a pushbike it's far cheaper  :wink: Rebel, you can 'BLING' it up if you like  :-*

Have to admit read first two pages and the last only so my comment is probably irrelevant  :wink:


----------



## TTdriver (Sep 2, 2006)

I read some where that regarding the wing mirrors Its a new EU ruling, so that all new cars will eventually come with great big wing mirrors


----------



## squiggel (May 16, 2006)

TTdriver said:


> I read some where that regarding the wing mirrors Its a new EU ruling, so that all new cars will eventually come with great big wing mirrors


Wonder if they'll all come with tiny little interior one's as well.....

Like the outside mirrors, they work well when driving, but that interior one... :?


----------

