# You can shoot me down in flames but......



## neilc (Aug 8, 2011)

I can't say how disappointed I am in the styling of the new MK3 and Audi's approach in general to the new TT , I had hoped that Audi would at least try something new and try to re-energise the TT brand for a new generation but no what we have is essentially a facelifted MK2 and that really is very lazy indeed.

And yes I'm sure there are those of you that will say you haven't driven it yet or perhaps that I haven't even seen it yet and that would be true but Audi had a real opportunity here to create what they did back in 1998 with the MK1 and sweep the buying public off there feet. And that most certainly has not happened reading Audi UK's official TT release comments is intriguing to say the least with a large proportion of comments negative. Now that can't have been the desired effect surely ?

Now I'm sure the MK3 will drive very nicely indeed and that the new interior will have so many gadgets it will keep you amused for many many seconds and that the performance , MPG and CO2 figures will all be class leading but isn't that missing the point ?

The MK1 was lusted after at launch and for many years after too and still is today , it's timeless design and perfect proportions were not replicated by the MK2 either but at least the Mk2 looked different to the Mk1 it replaced.

The MK2 did many things better than the MK1 , it is quicker , handles better, stops better , rides better but and it's a big but and I don't mean to offend any MK2 drivers ( I have owned one after all ) it is rather characterless in comparison with the drive and overall appearance being similar to many other Audi's I could mention.

Now some might say that the list of MK2 improvements make it a better car but again that's missing the point. Where is the personality , the lust ??

And that's excactly how I feel about the MK3 , a total lack of desire for it and that hurts to say as a multiple former owner of TT's I can see my current TT being my last TT. And that's a shame. 

Neil


----------



## ROBH49 (Jun 13, 2013)

neilc said:


> I can't say how disappointed I am in the styling of the new MK3 and Audi's approach in general to the new TT , I had hoped that Audi would at least try something new and try to re-energise the TT brand for a new generation but no what we have is essentially a facelifted MK2 and that really is very lazy indeed.
> 
> And yes I'm sure there are those of you that will say you haven't driven it yet or perhaps that I haven't even seen it yet and that would be true but Audi had a real opportunity here to create what they did back in 1998 with the MK1 and sweep the buying public off there feet. And that most certainly has not happened reading Audi UK's official TT release comments is intriguing to say the least with a large proportion of comments negative. Now that can't have been the desired effect surely ?
> 
> ...


Great post Neil.

I can totally get where your coming from i think Audi may have missed the boat with this one.
I can honestly say that i only really like the Sports Concept and hope and pray that the TTRS looks something similar. [smiley=bigcry.gif]


----------



## wja96 (Mar 4, 2010)

I think yours is a very well argued point. Audi aren't necessarily the same company they were 15 years ago. And the TT is a brand now as opposed to a bit of a gamble.

I think you might be surprised how different it looks in the metal though.


----------



## McKenzie (Dec 25, 2008)

Have to agree also. It seems they spent more time on the interior and the general tech and gadgets with the car that they forgot about the exterior and the styling element. I'm sure the car will drive even better and the cabin will be a nice place to be in but the exterior has really let it down. I'm glad I made the decision to move away from the TT for a few years now, perhaps when they bring out a hardcore RS version that will get the look that we expect.

Or are we all comparing a standard MK3 TT to the MK2 TTRS which in it's own right looks sensational, and with other amplified edition TT's they have that RS look and edge to them? Food for thought.


----------



## Gone (May 5, 2009)

Funny comment for an Audi single-type forum, but my opinion of Audi styling and brand these days is very much "Meh". I love my TT but I can't see me buying anything else from them, except perhaps a runaround A2.


----------



## TT Law (Sep 6, 2003)

Neil,

It's interesting that I have just popped into Audi City to have a look at the new car and think the same as you.

I too have had previous Tt's in both mk1 and 2 and this one doesn't light my fire.

Don't get me wrong it's a nice car and the interior is nice but the outside isn't special. The tech apart from the dash clocks is not new so doesn't make me go wow. I have the current A3 and a lot of the interior style is carried over just refined in the new TT.

I asked about the seats one of the nice bits of the car and surprise surprise they are not standard fit. I thought they may not be as virtually the same seats can be had in the A3 and A1 for a cost option.

Overall it's a nice car but not much of a step change from the Mk2 apart from the interior tech which is dated in the Mk2 anyway now.

Would I buy one? Yes as I still have a passions for the TT but if I were in a Mk2 at the moment it would not be a rush.

One of my main concerns is the new dash clocks. Just think of the expense if the LCD goes! To be honest I like manual dials with metal trim I don't really think the LCD will be as nice.

Just my thoughts but good luck to those who rush out and buy.

Steve


----------



## Alexjh (Oct 10, 2012)

great post but.........

The mk2 is way prettier than mk1. no offence to MK1 owners but when i see a MK1.......

i think of this:

A VW beetle with slightly less OTT arches and a lower roof.










With a lower roof










:lol: :lol:


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

I also agree, Audi have gone too corporate in their styling. They produce nice cars, but generally these cars are bland, they don not stand out. The mk1 still looks good 8 years after going out of production, I wonder if in 8 years time the same will be said about the mk2?

Having recently bought another car, I looked at Q3/5 which are without a doubt good cars but styling is just boring. So I have taken a chance with (Jaguar) Land Rover. JLR are taking their products seriously, they have people monitoring public forums who are openly Customer Service. They resolve people's problems, they give advise and recently intervened in one guy's accident damaged car which had a 6 week delay for a part by getting the part sent to the bodyshop within 5 days. I have a minor but annoying problem with my Evoque, my local dealer have been great, but more surprisingly when I asked a question on the forums I got a proactive PM from the CS guy saying if I was unhappy with the repair, to contact him direct with details and he would liaise with the dealer to get a fix.

Would Audi intervene if it was a Q3/5 - you can put money on that being a big fat no!


----------



## TT Law (Sep 6, 2003)

Alexjh said:


> great post but.........
> 
> The mk2 is way prettier than mk1. no offence to MK1 owners but when i see a MK1.......
> 
> ...


Alex

You could look at it that way but those of us who had a MK 1 early on know how special it was. Nothing like it at the time and was rarer than MK 2 as hand built in lower volumes. It really turned heads and felt very special.

The MK 2 never felt the same to me but that's not to say it isn't a great car but rare and special?

Steve


----------



## Alexjh (Oct 10, 2012)

I liked them when they came out, think i was about 14 or 15,

But as for rare : 1210 TTRS Roadsters in existance world wide (according to Audi)

pretty rare "model" i have 

Don't get me wrong.. the MK1 was nice in its time, mk2 prettier still and improved, and the MK3 .. a bit of a "update".

which is the point of the 1st post i guess.


----------



## senwar (Apr 21, 2003)

On first view I actually like it when I expected to not be too keen.

However, its not a Mk3 in my opinion, more like a Mk2.5. In fact, it could easily be seen as just a facelift refresh of the current Mk2.

Having had a Mk1 TTR as soon as the MK2 came out I ordered one (having been away from Audi for a while). However, I cancelled within a week as thought the Mk2 was a bit bland after thinking about it. As with all models/new cars, the following couple of years seem to bring out the better editions IMO and I eventually got myself in a Mk2 coupe Black edition 2yrs ago after being impressed with the TTS and Sline's. I'll be interested to see this evolve in the next 18 months or so. I've just bought a new car so my Mk2 goes on Monday (and I'm genuinely sad about this) but will keep a keen eye on the development of the 'Mk3' in readiness for changing again in 2yrs.

I also think Audi have missed a trick here as the change isn't as good as it should have been. As for the comment re: the Mk1 - as Steve says above, the Mk1 was special and in theory still is. It was a completely fresh idea when it came out and is still the only (non super) car that has genuinely turned my head when I first saw it - as in 'what the hell was that beaut'. Neither the Mk2 or the Mk3 has done or ever will do. Am sure the new model will be a great car though.


----------



## neilc (Aug 8, 2011)

It's certainly an interesting debate , what makes a car special ? It's something you can't touch but as mentioned the MK1 has it in spades and to me anyway the MK3 is just another generic Audi. A real shame but I'm afraid this is not Audi's finest hour.


----------



## Nyxx (May 1, 2012)

With all do resect I have to disagree.
I don't want to get into the MKI is better than the MkII, or The MKII is better than the MKI, that's just peoples personally opinions on looks more than anything else.

Audi gave us the TT, it was something totally new the likes of in a car we see....well very rarely. Porsche gave us the 911 a classic.
What other Porsche has stood the test of time like the 911,none.

Why do people think Audi can reinvent the TT again, look at the first 911 and look at the 2014 911, see where am coming from?

The MkI was designed to not have the stuck on spoiler all MKI have. The MKII got round that problem and gave us the clean look the MKI was going to have.
Im trying really hard to not get into a MKI v MKII think. Think of the iPad, I had a iPad 1, the iPad 2 was a big step up from the 1, why? because the iPad 1 was totally new and anything totally new can always give new direction, the iPad 2 was lighter, faster. Has the iPad changed? not realy the biggest change was from 1 to 2, Untill the air came out and even the air does not look that diffrent, it really has not changed much, why? because it's yet another classic design.

So I don't understand why people expect Audi to reinvent the TT. The 911 is not reinvented every time is it. 
IMO the TT is a classic, be it a MKI or MKII.

The MKIII is the next step in the evolvement of the TT. Audi cannot be excepted to reinvent the wheel again no more than Porsche giving the world another iconic car that lasts for years and people point at it and say it's a "911".

Look at that car it's a "TT". I think we all should be happy with that. If you prefer the MKI fine if like me you prefer the MKII fine. A lot of people cannot even tell the difference between the two. 
Which even one you like the best so be it, in my eyes its an iconic design what ever flavour you personally like the most.


----------



## neilc (Aug 8, 2011)

In some respects I don't disagree with you , and the 911 is a case in point been living off an old idea for to long and become IMO long in the tooth also with the latest generation 998 seriously struggling for sales against better and cheaper alternatives , a base Carrera now £77500 without options but I digress sorry.

I would be happy with the " All for for one for all suggestion " if the MK3 didn't look so damned dull and with the greatest respect and again without wanting to get into a design argument of MK1 vs MK2 , the MK2 was designed as a safe evolution of the new brand that the MK1 had created so is the MK3 now going for a extra dose of safeness on top of the already safe design ? Where is the excitement ?


----------



## davelincs (Jan 1, 2010)

I have to agree with you 100% Neil, although i have not seen a mk3 in the flesh so to speak, the photographs on here and elsewhere are rather, well let me say nothing special.


----------



## TT Owners Club (Mar 5, 2006)

Having spoken to one of the designers last night Audi see the TT design as evolution rather than revolution, the 911 and Beetle were held as comparisons in the way they look much the same throughout the years. There are some very nice touches and it is as different from the MkII as that was from the MkI


----------



## neilc (Aug 8, 2011)

TT Owners Club said:


> Having spoken to one of the designers last night Audi see the TT design as evolution rather than revolution, the 911 and Beetle were held as comparisons in the way they look much the same throughout the years. There are some very nice touches and it is as different from the MkII as that was from the MkI


Much as we should all be celebrating this launch I cannot agree with " it's as different as MK2 to a MK1 " the MK2 and 3 side profile is almost exactly the same not something that could be said of the MK1 vs MK2. Sorry but for me it's a let down and I feel frustrated by that.


----------



## TT Law (Sep 6, 2003)

neilc said:


> TT Owners Club said:
> 
> 
> > Having spoken to one of the designers last night Audi see the TT design as evolution rather than revolution, the 911 and Beetle were held as comparisons in the way they look much the same throughout the years. There are some very nice touches and it is as different from the MkII as that was from the MkI
> ...


I don't agree that it is as different as the Mk2 was from the Mk1. That was a major styling and drivetrain change.

The outside of the car is very similar to the mk2 and the rear lights shape really do make it look like a facelift.

Some nice touches are included but it is certainly not radical. Maybe we are expecting too much?

Steve


----------



## Nyxx (May 1, 2012)

TT Owners Club said:


> Having spoken to one of the designers last night Audi see the TT design as evolution rather than revolution, the 911 and Beetle were held as comparisons in the way they look much the same throughout the years. There are some very nice touches and it is as different from the MkII as that was from the MkI


I was not even there so funny to hear those thoughts after what I said.

Personally I look forward to seeing it in the flesh next week, then and only then can anyone get a full picture of the MKIII, pardon the pun. 



TT Law said:


> Maybe we are expecting too much?
> 
> Steve


I think people do expect to much Steve. You just cannot expect like the 911/Beatle for it to be reinvented. It's TT and should always look like a TT.


----------



## CWM3 (Mar 4, 2012)

wja96 said:


> I think yours is a very well argued point. Audi aren't necessarily the same company they were 15 years ago. And the TT is a brand now as opposed to a bit of a gamble.
> 
> I think you might be surprised how different it looks in the metal though.


Neil has raised some excellent points in the OP, but I am leaning towards the thoughts above.

Audi is a global mass producer of cars under the VAG umbrella, the brand stands for a certain level of recognisable style, image and quality. 
That's the publics perception and that's what they buy into, and that's the skill of the marketing gurus who create this aura. Only individuals can determine if that has a value to then or not, but look no further than this forum, to see constant comments about keeping it 'in the VAG family', its as if other marques do not exist to many owners.

Audi is not exclusive due to the mass production, the only model line that can stand out in terms of exclusivity is the R8. For the rest VAG use Audi as a vehicle to compete head on with BM/MB and now Jag, who have/are throwing themselves towards mass blandness.

As these brands mature they take less risk, they rarely need too, the loyal following keeps coming back for more and the aspirational types jump on the ladder, just search on the stats to realise that 75% of BM 1 series owners have no idea what end of the car is the driven end, they are buying the badge and the image, and don't give a toss if the Ultimate Driving Machine is a myth or reality.

Jag is pushing some boundaries but that will in time level off.

Back to the TT, it was a near cert, that it would be recognisable to the MK2, they were never going to risk a radical change to what is a fairly niche model, that all ended with the demise of the MK1, and as correctly stated by WJA, was a very different company then, the TT appeals to a small percentage of the buying public, its mostly a vanity car, whereas many owners need practicality and load lugging capability, either in luggage or human cargo or both, the major changes are under the skin, that should improve the never ending quest for more performance matched with lower emissions and greater economy, and for the manufacturer a cheaper build cost per unit, hence the move to the MQB platform.

Will it sell, yep of course it will, Audi know that, but it probably just will not appeal to the purists I guess.


----------



## Martin L (Jan 19, 2008)

What I'm finding funny is that there's quite a lot of people not happy with the Mk3 however NOBODY has slated the TT sport concept. Is it because the TTRS isn't the looker of the Mk2 range so anything is an improvement :lol:


----------



## .nayef (Nov 1, 2013)

Personally I like the evolution. (Pictures are not to scale)


----------



## neilc (Aug 8, 2011)

There are some good points made in this thread and key amongst them is that Audi are a very different company to pre-1998 and if we are all honest very different to 5 or 6 years ago even. It has grown into a huge money making prestige car maker that has almost as many models as BMW's minefield of a model list.

And that's great for them but I can't help but think the heyday for Audi was the launch of the TT Mk1 closely followed by the two best cars Audi has ever made the B7 RS4 and the original R8. These three cars brought Audi back from the brink to be considered a real player with keen drivers but alas the legacy they have left seems to be the Q3 , Q5 , Q7 , A7 etc etc etc An endless line of luxo cars which all look and feel very similar. It saddens me.

I wait with baited breath for the new R4 , this looks promising I have to say.


----------



## MINI-TTGuy (Sep 29, 2008)

The Mk3 TT is undoubtedly an evolutionary design, and it is obvious that Audi have gone down this road for two reasons:

1.	They see the TT as their Porsche 911, and taking guidance from their counterparts,have adopted an evolutionary approach regarding styling. They have also chosen the Porsche approach of using some of the original car's styling features, although I think that harking back to the MkI is a little premature so early in the TT's life - the 911 is 50 years old remember!;

2.	The MkII is so perfect that it is very hard to improve it without taking a large risk by redesigning key features of the car. The MkIII was never going to represent the quantum leap over the MkII that the MkII did over the MkI. Remember that the MkII, in the 8th year of its life cycle is still a highly competitive alternative to its rivals, many of which have been revised within that period - the TT won What Car?'s Coupe of the year award consecutively for about 7 years until 2013 I believe. Even in a recent evo, the TTS was praised for its interior, design and quality - described as leagues ahead of its rivals. Audi have been cautious enough not to mess to much with a winning design.

However, I still believe that Audi could have done more regarding the MkIII's exterior, and any changes they have made appear to be for the worse - take the spoiler for example - it's now a big slab with an angle in it whereas the MkII's was the perfect size and shape. The same applies to the unnecessary quarter-light window kink, the lack of shape to the doors, the far too sharply styled nose, the fussy fuel filler cap, the rear flanks with the MkI crease etc.

It is a difficult balance to strike though - if it was radically different we'd all be complaining that they've ruined an iconic design. That's their job though - to get these things right, and this time round, with the exterior at least, they could have done much better!


----------



## hugy (Dec 4, 2007)

The bottom line (for Audi) at least is sales.
Looking at the Mk3 I doubt many Mk2 owners will buy one as visually its just not different enough to the Mk2.
And what about that grill!
I have not seen one in the flesh but looking at the pics,its way too big(corporate my ass) :?


----------



## RAY-533 (Nov 6, 2013)

Agreed - very disappointing and a lost opportunity. Interesting editorial in this weeks Autocar - "In search of Audi's creative mojo" - which sums it up pretty succinctly. The grill alone is enough to put off any discerning car buyer!


----------



## Spaceman10 (Nov 15, 2011)

Hi guy,

Just want to say I went to see the car on Thursday in London and it dose look really nice.
Inside is a great place to be, both sets of lights look really good.
It 50kgs lighter and it up on the power, exhaust in the centre are old school mk1 (they look great)
I sure when it,it's the roads it will be a winner and audi will sell loads, just like the mk1 and mk2 did.

I just glad that they did another tt and kept the brand alive.

Phil


----------



## lude219 (Feb 13, 2013)

It's all about profit margin for audi now. A singular design language across the board equates to minimal R&D effort and the ease of model expansion. Sooner or later, they'll pull a BMW and come out with every model of the alphabet, each differs from the last by a few millimeters.


----------



## ZephyR2 (Feb 20, 2013)

Well complain all you like but the world's most profitable car manufacturer in 2013 was ...... VAG. So they must be getting something right and it would appear that they know what they're doing.
Merc were 3rd BMW were 5th - both of whom adhere to the policy of subtle evolution rather than revolution and clearly it works for them too. 
I would like to bet that many of those who are currently decrying the new TT actually end up buying one themselves - if only because they can't find anything better out there at the same price.
If you want "radical" have a look at some of those quirky Japanese / Far eastern models. I know which I prefer.


----------



## Patrizio72 (Mar 22, 2011)

I'm in agreement there isn't that much different visually, my gripe is how different just the front looks but the rest is pretty much the same and this gives a sense of disparity in the style, curves mixed with sharp edges. At least the previous designs were true to the style and lines throughout the car, that's why I loved the mk2. The mk2 will be my first and last TT for sure


----------



## Marco34 (Apr 5, 2009)

neilc said:


> It's certainly an interesting debate , what makes a car special ? It's something you can't touch but as mentioned the MK1 has it in spades and to me anyway the MK3 is just another generic Audi. A real shame but I'm afraid this is not Audi's finest hour.


One of the best debates in a while. I read your first post and agreed 100%. I wouldn't buy another TT after the Mk1, to me it is generic. It will handle better than the Mk1 and have, as you say, toys to keep the less enthusiastic driver entertained for a brief moment. The Mk2 is nice but you need to feel chemistry with a car. Even with all it's quirks and known faults, it has a sense of passion. The TT is a second car for me and I feel happy it sitting in the garage for nice days and weekends.

Should I get rid of the TT I won't be going in the direction of a MK2 or Mk3. But that's me, many may disagree but having owned Audis for 17 years, the MK1 TT was not like any other Audi.


----------



## Patrizio72 (Mar 22, 2011)

Everyone has their opinion, my TT MKII was the first performance car and convertible I have had and still love it to bits, personally I get bored of things quite quickly and if I still go down the two seater convertible route it will have to be something completely different but the MKII has certainly kept my boredom away so far


----------



## RockKramer (Feb 15, 2012)

Audi have played it way to safe with with the MK3... Predictable and safe. Clinical. It's a very cold and unemotional look IMO.
Some are saying it still had to look like a TT but I think most of the gripes from owners of previous gens are saying they expected a radical departure, a total reinvention that doesn't represent what we recognise as a TT. 
I think most would agree they expected a little more. A little edge to it, subtle aggression. I don't care people think it's a hairdressers car, driven by estate agents etc. I can see the diffences clearly but when even I think it looks basically the same as what I already have, there is little incentive for me to upgrade. 
Perversely I love the look of my TTS, just wish it had more soul, involvement. Driving pleasure.
If the MK3 has those missing ingredients I'll likely not want it anyway. 
Finally judgement will be seeing in the metal and test drive. I popped across to my local Porsche dealer this afternoon. The force is strong for the Cayman.


----------



## MINI-TTGuy (Sep 29, 2008)

RockKramer said:


> The force is strong for the Cayman.


Very true!


----------



## RockKramer (Feb 15, 2012)

MINI-TTGuy said:


> RockKramer said:
> 
> 
> > The force is strong for the Cayman.
> ...


Ahh, you been casting knowing glances in the Cayman direction too?
Some will say oh but the TTS/RS is faster, I get that side of car enthusiasm but the 0-60 times and straight line speeds has never been my bag.


----------



## phope (Mar 26, 2006)

I mostly like what I see and read, but I'll wait till I can see it and drive it before making up my mind...after all, driving it is surely the most important thing, no?

The Mk1, let's face it, was good looking but was/ pretty dull to drive straight of the box. Uninvolving steering feel and less than great handling made me sell my first Mk1 225 after less than one year. The two Mk2s we've had, a 3.2 V6 and the TTRS roadster have both been great to drive in their different ways, well ahead of the Mk1

Other MQB based sporty cars like the new Golf GTI, Golf R, SEAT Leon Cupra, etc are getting some great overall reviews, so perhaps that bodes well for the Mk3 TT

However, due to ongoing various health issues that are stopping me from driving until next January, and could possibly crop up again & again to stop me driving full stop  , I'm a little reluctant to commit to buy another expensive car, no matter how nice, if it's going to sit on the drive and not turn a wheel

Must admit, I don't really like the demo cars as shown in the red colour as it seems to hide most detail in the design, however this grey/silver is very nice - I think the 1st pic below shows off the lines better


----------



## mwad (Oct 11, 2013)

I agree with you Neil


----------



## ZephyR2 (Feb 20, 2013)

Just imagine if Audi had been bold and had come up with something adventurous and a big change in design. Everyone would then be moaning that they've lost the essence of the TT, the unique shape and it's style. 
You can't please everyone all if the time but I'm sure the proof of the pudding will be in the eating - i.e. How many Mk3s they sell.
I get the impression that too many Mk1 owners are stuck in the past and can't see beyond their own TT. The world has moved since 1998 and technology has advanced. Come on, wake up and embrace something new. 
Me, I'm not too bothered. I'm not a badge junkie and I go where the mood takes me so I feel fairly neutral about the whole thing.


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

phope said:


> Must admit, I don't really like the demo cars as shown in the red colour as it seems to hide most detail in the design, however this grey/silver is very nice - I think the 1st pic below shows off the lines better


Pete, You are right, in silver/grey you can see so much more of the detail and I could warm to it in that colour. One feature I do like is the return of a "boot" like the mk1 unlike the "sweeping hatchback" of the mk2. I can not get my head around the gaping mouth and the (small) 4 rings on the bonnet.


----------



## MINI-TTGuy (Sep 29, 2008)

RockKramer said:


> MINI-TTGuy said:
> 
> 
> > RockKramer said:
> ...


Yep - but the difference is that I wouldn't be able to get a brand new Cayman - have to wait 2 yrs until the current model is 2/3 years old and get one then! Would tie in nicely as I'll be nearly 30 in two years and you have to get a Porsche when you're 30 right?! Anyway we'll see - the Mk3 might grow on me, or I might properly fulfil my dream and get the car I really want - a 991 911 Carrera S!


----------



## Vxross (Mar 8, 2014)

The mark 3 does nothing for me either, completely agree with the initial post. One of the pics i saw of tan coloured criss cross seats looked like something from 1970!

On the plus side at least now the mark 2 prices may start to drop a little further for when I purchase in a few months!


----------



## Jonny_C (Jul 24, 2013)

.....so it could be worse though.

Look at the ugly lumpen thing the 3rd gen BMW Mini has become. As a previous owner of the 1st gen BMW Mini, the latest version (also 3rd gen, same as TT) is a gormless character-less thing compared to 1st gen.

Whilst I don't necessarily agree with OP, I do get the argument and it is well-made, but Audi could have done a lot worse.

Difference between revolution and evolution is always going to tough, I suppose.


----------



## RockKramer (Feb 15, 2012)

MINI-TTGuy said:


> Yep - but the difference is that I wouldn't be able to get a brand new Cayman - have to wait 2 yrs until the current model is 2/3 years old and get one then! Would tie in nicely as I'll be nearly 30 in two years and you have to get a Porsche when you're 30 right?! Anyway we'll see - the Mk3 might grow on me, or I might properly fulfil my dream and get the car I really want - a 991 911 Carrera S!


Sadly me too. Unless a few things go my way, brand new, a Cayman is a car too far for me. Previously enjoyed will be the way to go. The price difference between a new MK3 TTS and 2/3 yr old Cayman may probably not be that different...?

Oooh,, Just checked, there will be a big difference for Cayman 3.4.


----------



## Patrizio72 (Mar 22, 2011)

The TT is losing it's soul, the essence of its original style is being diluted rather than evolved


----------



## TTRTWO (Dec 9, 2006)

I'm quite relaxed about it being an evolution as I won't be selling my mkII roadster as I just love the 3.2 engine in it. Also have an S3 SB and the engine has no character, in fact it sounds like a diesel at idle.

Anyway, the nose on the cheaper mkIII looks ok but what about the grill on the TTS? Big mess.


----------



## datamonkey (Jan 23, 2012)

RockKramer said:


> Clinical. It's a very cold and unemotional look IMO.


These are my exact thoughts.

To me the Mk 3 looks nice, but not beautiful like its predecessors...


----------



## datamonkey (Jan 23, 2012)

MINI-TTGuy said:


> RockKramer said:
> 
> 
> > The force is strong for the Cayman.
> ...


For me the force is strong in the F Type Coupe!

http://www.autospies.com/images/users/A ... e%2003.JPG


----------



## Patrizio72 (Mar 22, 2011)

^ yes, the lines are more sympathetically done and simple yet in the right proportions and in the right places, the MK3 seems like a hashed bolt on just to make it a bit different to the MK2 so they can get sales going again


----------



## datamonkey (Jan 23, 2012)

Patrizio72 said:


> ^ yes, the lines are more sympathetically done and simple yet in the right proportions and in the right places, the MK3 seems like a hashed bolt on just to make it a bit different to the MK2 so they can get sales going again


Yeah totally agree. It feels like Audi have disappointed more than they have impressed with the Mk3.

For me, I will wait until I see the new TT in the flesh and to see if it grows on me but having said that I'm taking the F Type out for a test drive in 2 weeks when my local garage gets delivery of their first Coupe. Now that's got me excited!


----------



## neilc (Aug 8, 2011)

If the leaked images of the new R4 are to believed then that's what I mean about a daring design that makes you want to run to the showroom..Imagine that with a 400BHP 2.5 CYL engine because that's in the pipeline..


----------



## Piker Mark (Nov 16, 2011)

.nayef said:


> Personally I like the evolution. (Pictures are not to scale)


Are you sure that's in the right order :lol:

Just showed the pic to a couple of work colleagues and asked them, which one is the mk 3 and they all said the middle one! I'd go with that, the mk2 looks the more up-to-date model!

Interesting though, everyone is banging on about looks and the interior (me included) and yet, how will it drive? My TTS is hardly the most exciting of cars and I'd hope the new version is a lot more feel some. I also hope mag ride is an option I deselect from a TTS! That and the seats are my two biggest gripes about the mk2. Note that the new looks to have better seats, so that's one thing off the list.


----------



## RockKramer (Feb 15, 2012)

Piker Mark said:


> .nayef said:
> 
> 
> > Personally I like the evolution. (Pictures are not to scale)
> ...


Ditto that... But I've moaned enough about the lack of soul, involvement....
Personally I feel the mk2 is a better, warmer, more harmonious design than the mk3. Last year Audi talked up their new design language, 3D grills, new lighting designs etc.. Well it looks forced on the new model. These new elements _WILL_ work on the TT. 
Re evolution not revolution from supporters of the '3.' I doubt the majority of detractors want a design so far removed from what anyone would recognise as a TT but... There was room for more evolution before it became revolution.


----------



## Patrizio72 (Mar 22, 2011)

neilc said:


> If the leaked images of the new R4 are to believed then that's what I mean about a daring design that makes you want to run to the showroom..Imagine that with a 400BHP 2.5 CYL engine because that's in the pipeline..


This is certainly more like what I would expect with some nice lines and curves on that, none of this 'sharp angles I want to look modern and cool' look which in my eyes is only done well by Lamborghini


----------



## RockKramer (Feb 15, 2012)

More like it as a TT Pat or the long rumoured R4?


----------



## Bucks85th (Apr 27, 2009)

Not having seen one in the flesh yet, I can really say for certain.

But pureply from the pictures, I agree it doesn't appear to be much of a departure from the Mk2. Seeing the earlier pictures in this thread I'm tempted to agree with those who have said the Mk2 actually looks like the newer, cleaner lined evolution.

I seem to be of the opposite opinion to many on the interior however. I think the Mk3 looks too busy/cluttered. I prefer the simpler, cleaner look of both the Mk1 & 2.

Maybe my opinions will change when I finally get to see one but these are my initial gut reactions.


----------



## Plake (Nov 23, 2012)

As a mkII owner I'm pleased the mkIII looks so close - it was always going to be that way, as said above the TT is Audi's 911 and they are going to try and preserve its look & character with the same care that Porsche do.

In terms of other cars, well if you can afford a Cayman or F-type coupe then great, but the TT is in essence a practical mass market coupe - the back seats, hatchback and economy mean it can be bought and enjoyed by a wider range of customers than a pure sports car.

The TT mkI was a design classic, but the mkII is also a near-classic IMHO. Normally coupe sales drop off a cliff once the car is a couple of years old, but the roads are full of 61-63 plate TTs even though the car came out years ago. So the customer is always right! The TT is outselling the much newer Peugeot RC and Toyota GT86 which are its only real competitors. Audi are NOT going to mess with a winning formula...


----------



## Patrizio72 (Mar 22, 2011)

RockKramer said:


> More like it as a TT Pat or the long rumoured R4?


The new R4 is the way to go and i wouldn't want to go from the MKII to MKIII, seems pointless to me from what ive seen so far


----------



## RockKramer (Feb 15, 2012)

Plake said:


> As a mkII owner I'm pleased the mkIII looks so close - it was always going to be that way, as said above the TT is Audi's 911 and they are going to try and preserve its look & character with the same care that Porsche do.
> 
> In terms of other cars, well if you can afford a Cayman or F-type coupe then great, but the TT is in essence a practical mass market coupe - the back seats, hatchback and economy mean it can be bought and enjoyed by a wider range of customers than a pure sports car.
> 
> The TT mkI was a design classic, but the mkII is also a near-classic IMHO. Normally coupe sales drop off a cliff once the car is a couple of years old, but the roads are full of 61-63 plate TTs even though the car came out years ago. So the customer is always right! The TT is outselling the much newer Peugeot RC and Toyota GT86 which are its only real competitors. Audi are NOT going to mess with a winning formula...


No way the GT86 is a TT competitor. Light weight, bespoke platform, skinny tires, normally aspirated, RWD. It's fun, drivers car. Anyone looking at one of those won't be looking at a TT. We're too pampered


----------



## RockKramer (Feb 15, 2012)

Patrizio72 said:


> RockKramer said:
> 
> 
> > More like it as a TT Pat or the long rumoured R4?
> ...


Second part of your sentence actually sums my thoughts at the mo.


----------



## TTsdsgomg (Mar 19, 2013)

have to agree with 'neilc', i'm not impressed and really dont like the dash. I love gadgets but putting everything behind the steering wheel is a mistake.

1/ its dangerous as you will be constantly glancing down to music tracks or sat nav
2/ nothing for passenger to look at .. apart from scenery hurtling past.
3/ passenger can't assist in map reading or calling out next turn etc. whilst negotiating the Stilvio Pass.

on the plus side

1/ looks pretty awesome
2/ heating controls very nice design

ps i wonder if they have sorted the window regulator ? :x


----------



## tt3600 (Apr 8, 2006)

ZephyR2 said:


> Well complain all you like but the world's most profitable car manufacturer in 2013 was ...... VAG. So they must be getting something right and it would appear that they know what they're doing.
> Merc were 3rd BMW were 5th - both of whom adhere to the policy of subtle evolution rather than revolution and clearly it works for them too.
> I would like to bet that many of those who are currently decrying the new TT actually end up buying one themselves - if only because they can't find anything better out there at the same price.
> If you want "radical" have a look at some of those quirky Japanese / Far eastern models. I know which I prefer.


Pretty much this. It's not like BMW/Mercedes push the design envelope (well Bangle tried but he got tossed out). People didn't like the big change Bangle did and to be honest folks, smaller changes are better are they not? Don't want to shock the system


----------



## Plake (Nov 23, 2012)

RockKramer said:


> No way the GT86 is a TT competitor. Light weight, bespoke platform, skinny tires, normally aspirated, RWD. It's fun, drivers car. Anyone looking at one of those won't be looking at a TT


I don't agree. Sure the GT86 is RWD but the 1-series, A3 and Merc A-class are competitors without all being RWD...

The GT86 may be a bespoke platform but 99% of buyers won't know or care about that, and it's no lighter than the MkII TT. My dad has a GT86 and it's a lovely thing, with better steering feel and more sporty driving position than the TT, but let down by the engine which is both less powerful and economical than the TT 2.0 TFSI. But still, they are both basically £25k 2+2s so very much competitors.


----------



## sico (Feb 6, 2003)

I don't think its a competitor. If it is its a poor one, just compare interiors. If they are the same price then the GT is too expensive. Ones a Toyota and ones an Audi the reliability may be comparable but not the quality.


----------



## RockKramer (Feb 15, 2012)

Plake said:


> RockKramer said:
> 
> 
> > No way the GT86 is a TT competitor. Light weight, bespoke platform, skinny tires, normally aspirated, RWD. It's fun, drivers car. Anyone looking at one of those won't be looking at a TT
> ...


Hmmm, we'll to disagree on the competitor thing. 
1 series, A3 and A class are more practical 4 seaters... The 2 series, Z4, RCZ, Scirocco, 370z, Cayman are more likely.


----------



## Critter10 (Nov 4, 2010)

I remember many years ago, when I lived in Germany, talking to a Mercedes executive. He told me that their design concept was to try to ensure that, as new versions of models were introduced, owners of the prior version were not made to feel like they were driving an old car. It seems to me that Audi and BMW have adopted this same ethos. I think, from Audi's point of view, they view the TT as a mainstream car. The mk 2 has sold in hundreds of thousands and I've no doubt the mk3 will do the same. I know from an enthusiasts point of view that's small comfort, but Audi is a mass-market manufacturer and will always want to appeal to the widest possible audience.

The small comfort I take from this is that, as I intend to keep my car for a while, it'll feel less like I'm driving last years model. And as the Golf has proved, to some extent, iterative change has less negative impact on residual values for prior models. All in all I'm okay with this evolutionary approach, after all at the end of the day, for me at least, it will be as much about how it drives as how it looks - and the looks ain't bad.


----------



## Patrizio72 (Mar 22, 2011)

tt3600 said:


> ZephyR2 said:
> 
> 
> > Well complain all you like but the world's most profitable car manufacturer in 2013 was ...... VAG. So they must be getting something right and it would appear that they know what they're doing.
> ...


Yes smaller changes are better, but please do them sympathetically to the style of the cars shape!


----------



## CWM3 (Mar 4, 2012)

Went to Geneva today, great show.

Spent quite a while with a product demonstrator and in the TTS.

At present no UK TTS for a year. will be manual and DSG.

The words used in the discussion was that it will be driver selectable to adjust the power transfer to send more than 50% to the rear wheels in the sport mode.

For me, the interior is a step up from the Mk2, the driving position is going to familiar to all MK2 owners, the central tunnel seems higher and will give more leg support, but in the TTS the seats feel a major improvement, in side support and squab length.

The aircon dials in the air vents, look great and feel high quality, as does the general feel of the cabin materials.

Externally, i like the look of the car in the flesh, it is more aggressive than the MK2, looks fresh and The only thing I would like to see is less brightwork on the grill and rear splitter. I think it would look great in the dark met silver that the TT coupe was displayed in.

Major disappointment was M235 coupe, the interior is just so low rent and drab, and the seats are awful, so thats off the list.

Looks like a flip between the TTS and Cayman S.


----------



## Patrizio72 (Mar 22, 2011)

I think you will find the cayman s gets more browney points overall, no matter how good the mk3 drives or looks like inside for me it doesn't merit being my next upgrade from the mk2


----------



## CWM3 (Mar 4, 2012)

Well with a guesstimate of around a 5% increase on Mk2 prices, speccing a Cayman S to the same level is around 50% dearer, so its a big premium to pay for a better handling car, with less practicality....but whoever said buying cars was a sensible thing


----------



## Nyxx (May 1, 2012)

You RS boys should just wait for the MK3 RS.
It seem Audi are given you a big hint how it will look
http://www.ttforum.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=98&t=588305


----------



## TThriller (Feb 27, 2006)

neilc said:


> I can't say how disappointed I am in the styling of the new MK3 and Audi's approach in general to the new TT , I had hoped that Audi would at least try something new and try to re-energise the TT brand for a new generation but no what we have is essentially a facelifted MK2 and that really is very lazy indeed.........<snip>.......And that's excactly how I feel about the MK3 , a total lack of desire for it and that hurts to say as a multiple former owner of TT's I can see my current TT being my last TT. And that's a shame.
> 
> Neil


To anyone that knows me, it will come as no surprise that I fully echo your sentiments Neil. Well said.

Mk2 to Mk3 is nothing more than a spot-the-difference-competition that I wouldn't win.

With the Mk2, Audi missed the opportunity to put the engine in the right place and loose the silly rear seat to give us a proper small sports car: an R6 if you like. Then compounded the felony again with the Mk3...

Very, very disappointed.

Dave


----------



## Patrizio72 (Mar 22, 2011)

Disappointing, time to decide what alternative to get if I still have the luxury of having a 2 seater in a year or twos time


----------



## .nayef (Nov 1, 2013)

Patrizio72 said:


> Disappointing, time to decide what alternative to get if I still have the luxury of having a 2 seater in a year or twos time












:mrgreen:


----------



## Patrizio72 (Mar 22, 2011)

I must admit I'm a bit partial to the banana car, nice curves and lines to it


----------



## datamonkey (Jan 23, 2012)

Patrizio72 said:


> Disappointing, time to decide what alternative to get if I still have the luxury of having a 2 seater in a year or twos time












How about the beautiful F Type Coupe?!


----------



## Martin L (Jan 19, 2008)

datamonkey said:


> Patrizio72 said:
> 
> 
> > Disappointing, time to decide what alternative to get if I still have the luxury of having a 2 seater in a year or twos time
> ...


IMO this is not a beautiful car. The drop top is much nicer.
I followed one the other day and the tailgate just looks so wrong.
By trying to emulate the original e-type coupe in it's rear end look this f-type coupes rear end is just to high and squashed looking.

My over all impression of the f-type is while it looks good now it's going to date very quickly. No different to the XK


----------



## CWM3 (Mar 4, 2012)

What is the point of throwing up cars here that are in a totally different price bracket to a TTS?

The only one that comes close is the M235i, and as I said above, the interior is a cost saving exercise with bland and poor instrumentation, and very poor seating.


----------



## datamonkey (Jan 23, 2012)

Martin L said:


> datamonkey said:
> 
> 
> > Patrizio72 said:
> ...


Fair enough mate. It's all subjective. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that... :roll:


----------



## datamonkey (Jan 23, 2012)

CWM3 said:


> What is the point of throwing up cars here that are in a totally different price bracket to a TTS?
> 
> The only one that comes close is the M235i, and as I said above, the interior is a cost saving exercise with bland and poor instrumentation, and very poor seating.


Sorry, I must have missed the rules for this thread!

The dude talked about alternatives, so I gave him one...


----------



## CWM3 (Mar 4, 2012)

datamonkey said:


> CWM3 said:
> 
> 
> > What is the point of throwing up cars here that are in a totally different price bracket to a TTS?
> ...


PMSL, rules? Just reality bud, then again he might want to look at the Pagani Revolucion, as a 2 seater I liked that but they obviously guessed it was out of my price bracket and did not let me get on the stand.


----------



## datamonkey (Jan 23, 2012)

CWM3 said:


> datamonkey said:
> 
> 
> > CWM3 said:
> ...


Ok dude, I get your point but the Jag starts at £51k not £3m!


----------



## CWM3 (Mar 4, 2012)

datamonkey said:


> Ok dude, I get your point but the Jag starts at £51k not £3m!


  Fair point, although the 51K only gets you the poverty spec edition. Hard to believe they charge a £1750 uplift for 'High Performance Tyres' they then warn about using them in the wet!


----------



## datamonkey (Jan 23, 2012)

CWM3 said:


> datamonkey said:
> 
> 
> > Ok dude, I get your point but the Jag starts at £51k not £3m!
> ...


Poverty spec, lol!

That is an insane price for some bald tyres. Also like the £126 umbrella holder and £87 ash tray. :lol:


----------



## RockKramer (Feb 15, 2012)

datamonkey said:


> Patrizio72 said:
> 
> 
> > Disappointing, time to decide what alternative to get if I still have the luxury of having a 2 seater in a year or twos time
> ...


I love the F-Type Coupé except for the more US sounding exhaust but... It is a whole other world price wise. That's what platform share brings to VW, economies of scale (and well know compromises). Big savings channeled into R&D that brings expensive, techie interiors to VW/Audi products will keeping the price down.


----------



## Patrizio72 (Mar 22, 2011)

I'm talking a 2 seater roadster that's the equivalent of the price of a new MK3 TTRS


----------



## RockKramer (Feb 15, 2012)

Patrizio72 said:


> I'm talking a 2 seater roadster that's the equivalent of the price of a new MK3 TTRS


That puts right in Boxster territory... Then it'll come down to a choice of TT RS outright speed and oh it's got quattro or Boxster finesse and involvement.


----------



## Patrizio72 (Mar 22, 2011)

So really its the same old story, nothing new on the horizon worth considering?


----------



## RockKramer (Feb 15, 2012)

Patrizio72 said:


> So really its the same old story, nothing new on the horizon worth considering?


Well I depends what you're looking for from a car and what your ultimate budget is.
A Boxster S is £46/48k Man/PDK plus say 4k on options. The TT RS will no doubt be around the same price with more toys as standard and cheaper options. I personally see the Boxster & Cayman, a proper mid-engine sports car, as a step up from TT. I get the argument that the TT is the more practical car but then so it should be as the more compromised less focused one with cheaper running costs and almost 4 seats. That's why I have one. It's not a better car, it's different to the Porsche.
The only practicality I need is to get a few bags of shopping on the thing and bags for 2 for a weekend away. I see a Cayman in my future. I don't see anything else out there as an alternative to the TT. If you really need the practicality it's sticking with what you have or the MK3, which we agree could be more evolved and less face lift.
I know it's all new from the ground up and the interior is generally a thing of beauty but it's not offering me a compelling reason for me to install it as N°1 for Steve's next car.


----------



## Patrizio72 (Mar 22, 2011)

To be honest practicality and running costs of a 2 seater for me is not an issue as I would more than likely want a roadster again, its more the style and driving experience as I have another car which is the workhorse anyway.


----------



## datamonkey (Jan 23, 2012)

RockKramer said:


> datamonkey said:
> 
> 
> > Patrizio72 said:
> ...


Starts @ £51k. Not that far off a TTRS Mk3 I doubt....


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

A cayman 4 (as in wheel-drive) is what I would love to see...now that would be a worthy alternative to a TT, with the all-weather ability...


----------



## moro anis (May 27, 2010)

Re Boxster prices though, spec one up the same as a TTS and it's over £60k on the Porsche configurator.


----------



## RockKramer (Feb 15, 2012)

No doubt the Boxster is a premium over the TTS Roadster but it is a Porsche, flat 6 mid engine and a proper drivers car. 
Options are a personal thing and some are more necessary than others to the individual, though some options are essential to help maintain second hand value. 
The TT and the Boxster/Cayman aren't really apples with apples comparably but I wonder how many would opt for the Porsches if they had the necessary moolah. TT practicality plus points over the Porsche often get mentioned but I can't see the Roaster having a big advantage over the Boxster. The Cayman, that's down on rear seats but how practical are the Coupes rear seats really? if you have young kids they're only putting off the day when you need family wheels/second car. Obviously the Coupe scores big time with the added space when the seats are folded down which is a definite plus.
At the end of the day we have our own wants, needs and budgets and will chose accordingly.


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

I think they should have just re-launched the MK1, albeit with better handling, engines, pop-up spoiler, better seats, leather or alacantara dash options, rear-seat delete option on coupe, revised audio/sat-nav and LED lights front and rear. Job done! :wink:

...and no, that isn't a MK2! I prefer the styling and proportions of the MK1!


----------



## RockKramer (Feb 15, 2012)

RobLE said:


> I think they should have just re-launched the MK1, albeit with better handling, engines, pop-up spoiler, better seats, leather or alacantara dash options, rear-seat delete option on coupe, revised audio/sat-nav and LED lights front and rear. Job done! :wink:
> 
> ...and no, that isn't a MK2! I prefer the styling and proportions of the MK1!


I'd certainly go with keeping to the size of the MK1 and the rear seat delete option. Alas it isn't the case, it is what it is. Chose one or jump ship


----------



## MichaelAC (Sep 7, 2009)

I actually quite like it, it looks clean and they are taking the technology a step further as they did with the Mk2. I like the Mk2 as well. Both are lighter than their predecessor and quicker and most likely better handling. They need to sell cars by volume rather than satisfy purists such as myself and others on here. I love the Mk1 and decided to buy another instead of the Mk2 but that doesn't mean I didn't think long and hard first because I like the Mk2 and the better handling, lighter car appealed. However, the Mk1 can't really be replaced and is simply a different car than the Mk2 or Mk3.

I'd love a Caymen and almost bought one but then decided to be more sensible with my money. I'd not sell the Mk1, I'll just save up for a Caymen as well I think or just maybe a TT S or RS. Can't see myself without a Mk1 in the future so I know I'll need another car one day as right now I do almost 20,000 miles a year. As for the rear seats, well, in the TT they were just perfect for my Labrador that used to lie across the back seat and even driving enthusiastically he wouldn't move too much, just hit the rear seat a bit on hard braking


----------



## MichaelAC (Sep 7, 2009)

RobLE said:


> I think they should have just re-launched the MK1, albeit with better handling, engines, pop-up spoiler, better seats, leather or alacantara dash options, rear-seat delete option on coupe, revised audio/sat-nav and LED lights front and rear. Job done! :wink:
> 
> ...and no, that isn't a MK2! I prefer the styling and proportions of the MK1!


Hmmmm, nice idea.........but definitely not LED (Fairy) lights on a revised Mk1


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

In the right colour/model the MKI just doesn't look the age it is - it's such a pure design, inside and out, and the proportions are spot on. I saw a black MK2 coming towards me today and it just didn't look as special.

A 3.2 or QS MKI in the right colour, with the right leather and mileage if kept in good condition has future classic written all over it (well, not literally, of course).

If I had a MK2 ever, it would have to be an S or RS. Excluding the black special edition (and maybe a MKII 3.2) perhaps, none of the other models look right to me.

The dilemma comes as you say, when you do decide to change/update - do you keep the MK1 and get another expensive to run, impractical car!

I also love the Cayman (especially the new one) and have always, like many, wanted a Porsche at some point. I'm not so sure I would want a powerful rear-wheel drive car in the winter though, as my only vehicle.

..I guess a 911 Carerra 4 or 4S would fit the bill nicely!


----------



## TortToise (Aug 22, 2009)

IMO the Mk1 coupe just looks way too much like one of the original 'New Beatles' that's been stood on by a Monty Python-esque giant foot and squashed. The roadster looks a lot nicer.

Overall through, the Mk2 is a huge improvement in my eyes whilst retaining the general style and Mk3 struck me as a further improvement when I saw it.


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

TortToise said:


> IMO the Mk1 coupe just looks way too much like one of the original 'New Beatles' that's been stood on by a Monty Python-esque giant foot and squashed. The roadster looks a lot nicer.
> 
> Overall through, the Mk2 is a huge improvement in my eyes whilst retaining the general style and Mk3 struck me as a further improvement when I saw it.


The MK1 roadster only looks decent with the roof down though and loses the lines of the coupe, which make it such a coherent design in the first place.


----------



## neilc (Aug 8, 2011)

Well after a few months of seeing more images and digesting the tech spec , I'm prepared to eat a slice of humble pie and say that the MK3 has grown on me and actually I'm getting quite excited about seeing one in the flesh.

Perhaps my change of heart is down to owning a MK2 again ( TTS coupe ) and actually appreciating just what a cracking looking car this is especially in the right colour and wheel combo. And I'm looking forward to seeing the Mk3 in some better colours with different wheel options. I stand by what I said about the MK3 in red though , just looks all wrong in that colour. :?

And before you say it Nick , you were right :wink:


----------



## Patrizio72 (Mar 22, 2011)

neilc said:


> Well after a few months of seeing more images and digesting the tech spec , I'm prepared to eat a slice of humble pie and say that the MK3 has grown on me and actually I'm getting quite excited about seeing one in the flesh.
> 
> Perhaps my change of heart is down to owning a MK2 again ( TTS coupe ) and actually appreciating just what a cracking looking car this is especially in the right colour and wheel combo. And I'm looking forward to seeing the Mk3 in some better colours with different wheel options. I stand by what I said about the MK3 in red though , just looks all wrong in that colour. :?
> 
> And before you say it Nick , you were right :wink:


You're right, red only looks right on the MK2 :wink:


----------



## neilc (Aug 8, 2011)

:lol: :lol: Don't worry Patrick love Misano on the MK2 :wink:


----------



## squiggel (May 16, 2006)

Haven't looked in here in quite a while as I made the jump from Mk2 3.2 to a Cayman S quite a while ago after nearly going TTRS. Bit of curiosity about the Mk3 brought me back for a browse... 
Cant say that its making me feel any huge desire to jump back to the TT fold though. The Cayman has been costlier, but lots of lovely character, and so far no problems like a couple of maintenance issues with the TT that soured my feelings towards Audi.


----------



## martinbanshee (May 24, 2010)

I must admit I was disappointed when I first saw the pics of the Mk3......still feel the same.

I'm sure they'll still sell loads of them though.


----------



## Jonny_C (Jul 24, 2013)

As someone who previously owned a "Mk1" BMW Mini Cooper, we should all be grateful that Audi haven't turned it into ugly, gopping piece of shite like the "Mk3" Cooper:


----------



## glospete (Feb 1, 2013)

Jonny_C said:


> As someone who previously owned a "Mk1" BMW Mini Cooper, we should all be grateful that Audi haven't turned it into ugly, gopping piece of shite like the "Mk3" Cooper:


Yeah right!

Only joking!

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## neilc (Aug 8, 2011)

Will be getting my first view of the MK3 tomorrow at Goodwood , looking forward to seeing it in the flesh


----------



## DrFranknFurter (May 7, 2014)

glospete said:


> Jonny_C said:
> 
> 
> > As someone who previously owned a "Mk1" BMW Mini Cooper, we should all be grateful that Audi haven't turned it into ugly, gopping piece of shite like the "Mk3" Cooper:
> ...


lol these crossover things are just sooooo wrong imo :lol:


----------



## mwad (Oct 11, 2013)

DrFranknFurter said:


> glospete said:
> 
> 
> > Jonny_C said:
> ...


 I couldn't agree more, I just don't get it


----------



## Patrizio72 (Mar 22, 2011)

The reality is all the Audi range of cars will crossover at some point, at least looks wise anyway lol


----------



## neilc (Aug 8, 2011)

Well after a fantastic weekend at Goodwood and seeing some amazing cars I have to say I did misjudge the MK3 initially. In the flesh it really does look fantastic with a much more aggressive overall look especially at the front and rear end.

What you don't appreciate with just pictures are the sharp crease lines and squat appearance and a much less rounded look at the back.

The interior is just gorgeous with the look and feel sporting a more tailored look to it , the seats are very supportive and look great. And the tech is both intuitive and fantastic to look at too.

Will be great to see one in white , grey or black as still not convinced red is the best colour for it but it still looked superb.

My next car ? Do you know what I think a new TTS in a few years time would be a great choice.


----------



## Nem (Feb 14, 2005)

told you


----------



## Auditt1987 (Jun 30, 2014)

I just popped on to the Audi Website and had a quick look and other than the inside I can't see much difference in looks between the MK2 to the MK3, maybe its a little sharper, but but I'm a little unsure what I was expecting as the TT has got that "look". But it certainly wouldn't send me out rushing to buy one compared to a low mileage mk2.

Do you think the MK3 is going to be as successful as the MK2?


----------



## neilc (Aug 8, 2011)

Auditt1987 said:


> Do you think the MK3 is going to be as successful as the MK2?


In the flesh it does look far sharper and much more aggressive. As for doing as well as the MK2 , probably will in fairness because Audi are now a broader company with a simply huge customer base and a larger range too than back in 2006 when the MK2 was launched.

The success of the MK2 TT , R8 , A5 etc etc has given Audi the lead in the luxury coupe market place I believe.


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

Auditt1987 said:


> Do you think the MK3 is going to be as successful as the MK2?


I don't see how it can fail. Quite apart from the revised body shape and the radically new interior, there are significant weight savings over the outgoing model across the range which means more performance from an already hugely successful car in the sports car sector,

I've been on a fair few car boards over the years and I can't think of one where a new model has been universally accepted - usually quite the opposite, with people vowing they'll never buy one, only to end up doing just that. :wink:


----------



## Patrizio72 (Mar 22, 2011)

once my RS is gone I won't be returning to the TT fold, has to be something different without a doubt as I can never do the same thing twice no matter how much better it is, that's just me though


----------



## tt3600 (Apr 8, 2006)

Patrizio72 said:


> once my RS is gone I won't be returning to the TT fold, has to be something different without a doubt as I can never do the same thing twice no matter how much better it is, that's just me though


It's going to be a hard to replace it  You know you want a new TT!


----------



## Patrizio72 (Mar 22, 2011)

It will be a sad day for sure, don't even know if I will be getting a new toy to replace it or not when the time comes, moving home is killing my wallet


----------

