# A stage 1 MK3 TT 2.0TFSI doing 0-60 in 3.9secs!



## wlondoner (Feb 10, 2013)

Has anyone seen this? It's a stage 1 remapped MK3 Audi TT 2.0TFSI doing 0-60 in 3.91 seconds!

Weird thing is that's in comfort mode and not dynamic as that was slower lol

I mean they could of cleaned the car and did some research on official 0-60 times before the video was shot but it's deffo one to watch. Sorry if it's been mentioned before.

Maps are £500 ish right? I am impressed with the 2.0 engine! That time is not far off an R8

Video below:


----------



## revulike (Jun 15, 2018)

Yes, great video!

I've just remapped mine, so I'm dying to try a 0-60, but need a decent meter.


----------



## migzy (Apr 17, 2007)

just got my TTS remapped 0-60 3.6 seconds 380bhp and 500nm torque, also got the DSG map at the same time which is definitely worth it



it's rapid


----------



## no name (Feb 16, 2014)

Not convinced on that one.
Especially two 'manz' up haha
Maybe a TTs


----------



## GoodThunder (Jul 19, 2016)

Not convinced it's something worth doing. Either buy a faster car or leave it stock. Everything else is a poor man's solution to a non-existent problem.


----------



## gAgNiCk (Dec 25, 2017)

olly2016 said:


> Not convinced it's something worth doing. Either buy a faster car or leave it stock. Everything else is a poor man's solution to a non-existent problem.


Some people like to to tinker, each to their own...


----------



## wlondoner (Feb 10, 2013)

gAgNiCk said:


> olly2016 said:
> 
> 
> > Not convinced it's something worth doing. Either buy a faster car or leave it stock. Everything else is a poor man's solution to a non-existent problem.
> ...


I agree. It's a great idea if you love your 2.0T but maybe want a bit more from it.


----------



## revulike (Jun 15, 2018)

olly2016 said:


> Not convinced it's something worth doing. Either buy a faster car or leave it stock. Everything else is a poor man's solution to a non-existent problem.


Ouch!

So there are people that actually use the phrase "poor man's".
Suppose it's nice to know I have such a humble set of wheels. :?


----------



## carlsicesilverTT (Jun 30, 2016)

olly2016 said:


> Not convinced it's something worth doing. Either buy a faster car or leave it stock. Everything else is a poor man's solution to a non-existent problem.


You have issues mate lol! Real men happy with their life don't come up with that type of comment, they respect other guys and don't bring them down or say things to make you feel better.

You really want to get a remap but you haven't got balls or money to do it more like :lol:


----------



## Power777 (May 30, 2020)

Is there anything I can do to mine thats on lease and not get done when I return the car at the end?


----------



## no name (Feb 16, 2014)

Agreed.
Something a snooty Porsche owner would say.
Before they disappear in the rear view mirror :-D


----------



## Mr GTS (Dec 17, 2019)

How many people are also upgrading their brakes when re-mapping? I know when I had the TTS, that the brakes were barely adequate and remember the TTS has uprated brakes. So a remapped TFSI on it's standard brakes would be an accident waiting to happen right? Even the brakes on my RS could do with an improvement - if I remap my car then the brakes will get sorted before the power increase.


----------



## revulike (Jun 15, 2018)

If I were to track my remapped TT, then I would upgrade the brakes, but I find for normal road use they're perfectly adequate.

Even though the car's remapped, the speeds that I drive at haven't increased much at all, I just reach them in less time. 

I have noticed I'm braking more often, so I guess the brakes will wear quicker. I will need new rear discs next year, so may look at upgrading then.

Can I just put TTS brakes on a TT? Or perhaps for track work something more fancy.


----------



## Trikz (May 17, 2017)

olly2016 said:


> Not convinced it's something worth doing. Either buy a faster car or leave it stock. Everything else is a poor man's solution to a non-existent problem.


Why even say something like this? Such a stupid comment. This is why i love the Japanese car community everyone respects each other and the love for cars and tinkering with them.

Amazing though what a time, it's amazing how fast cars are getting these days, 3.91 out of a base TT haha brilliant!


----------



## griffster (Aug 4, 2015)

....soooo, any supporting evidence for this tuning claim? - The tuners website seems to make no mention of this tuning option

Love to think that over 350bhp is possible on a non TTS..but it doesnt seem likely - usually with no supporting hardware, 20-25% power hike would be limit?

Can anyone show 350+ on a stage 1?


----------



## AMT (Apr 8, 2019)

With regards to the brake comments, remember the cars the same weight, its designed to stop at speed with those brakes. Yes upgraded ones can work better but mapping the car to be faster doesn't necessarily mean your brakes won't be up to the job. There still designed to stop you from even its higher speeds.... the mapping just gets you there quicker... you won't be any heavier lol.


----------



## leopard (May 1, 2015)

AMT said:


> With regards to the brake comments, remember the cars the same weight, its designed to stop at speed with those brakes. Yes upgraded ones can work better but mapping the car to be faster doesn't necessarily mean your brakes won't be up to the job. There still designed to stop you from even its higher speeds.... the mapping just gets you there quicker... you won't be any heavier lol.


Force = Mass x Acceleration :roll:


----------



## revulike (Jun 15, 2018)

F=ma gives the deceleration for a given mass with a given brake force, which is dependent on tyre grip and pad friction, (ignoring drag and engine braking). Speed is not a factor.


----------



## MarksBlackTT (Nov 29, 2016)

revulike said:


> F=ma gives the deceleration for a given mass with a given brake force, which is dependent on tyre grip and pad friction, (ignoring drag and engine braking). Speed is not a factor.


 :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## leopard (May 1, 2015)

revulike said:


> F=ma gives the deceleration for a given mass with a given brake force, which is dependent on tyre grip and pad friction, (ignoring drag and engine braking). Speed is not a factor.


Cobblers :lol:

You can't argue with the law of physics and Newton never mentioned anything about tyre grip, pad friction or engine braking


----------



## ZephyR2 (Feb 20, 2013)

revulike said:


> F=ma gives the deceleration for a given mass with a given brake force, which is dependent on tyre grip and pad friction, (ignoring drag and engine braking). Speed is not a factor.


Well actually speed is a factor as acceleration is the measurement of the rate of change of speed (or velocity) - i.e. metres/sec/sec.


----------



## revulike (Jun 15, 2018)

I meant that 'speed' literally doesn't figure in that expression.

But yes, acceleration is rate of change of velocity, and in this case, it's how quickly the velocity can be changed (reduced).

Newton's original expression was "force is proportional to rate of change of momentum ".

Physics has hijacked the thread!


----------



## gAgNiCk (Dec 25, 2017)

griffster said:


> ....soooo, any supporting evidence for this tuning claim? - The tuners website seems to make no mention of this tuning option
> 
> Love to think that over 350bhp is possible on a non TTS..but it doesnt seem likely - usually with no supporting hardware, 20-25% power hike would be limit?
> 
> Can anyone show 350+ on a stage 1?


If you watch the video and pay attention you will note that stg1 311BHP is claimed, where did you get the 350+ figure from?


----------



## leopard (May 1, 2015)

revulike said:


> I meant that 'speed' literally doesn't figure in that expression.
> 
> But yes, acceleration is rate of change of velocity, and in this case, it's how quickly the velocity can be changed (reduced).
> 
> ...


The topic centred on increased acceleration therefore, F=ma. It was also stated that it might as well won't matter as although the car will get you there quicker it will still be the same weight. Quote.

Based on this you're still going to get upto speed quicker than the car was originally intended for and because of this, the manufacture will have designed the braking for that particular model within set parameters. It's highly doubtful that they will have been designed for the extra power and acceleration that "X" amount of power a 'stage whatever tune' attributes to. This is why you don't have a TTRS with the brakes off a 45...


----------



## gAgNiCk (Dec 25, 2017)

leopard said:


> revulike said:
> 
> 
> > I meant that 'speed' literally doesn't figure in that expression.
> ...


Not entirely sure of the point you were trying to make, I think you are saying that the brake configuration is largely determined by the price point within the model range. :lol:

Are stock brakes on a stg1 2.0 TT adequate for normal road use? Yes
Would bigger brakes be necessary for track use? Yes

I've seen folks putting cheapo tyres on their TTS, presumably grip isn't an issue for their driving style, as always it's each to their own...


----------



## Mr GTS (Dec 17, 2019)

All I know is I had mk3 TTS and the brakes struggled to slow the car when driven 'enthusiastically' and I now have a TTRS and the brakes are just about OK until again, I push it. In my view, having owned both these cars, the TTS needs the RS brakes and the RS, something better. Tuning a 2.0 tfsi to 300bhp or more without upgrading the brakes, good luck with that. In fact, why not upgrade the brakes and then tune it... I'll shut up now


----------



## leopard (May 1, 2015)

gAgNiCk said:


> leopard said:
> 
> 
> > revulike said:
> ...


Re-read the original comments, there is nothing to be unsure about. Stock brakes are only adequate if you don't use the extra performance that the map would give, ie if you didn't have the map in the first place, normal road use :lol:


----------



## leopard (May 1, 2015)

Mr GTS said:


> All I know is I had mk3 TTS and the brakes struggled to slow the car when driven 'enthusiastically' and I now have a TTRS and the brakes are just about OK until again, I push it. In my view, having owned both these cars, the TTS needs the RS brakes and the RS, something better. Tuning a 2.0 tfsi to 300bhp or more without upgrading the brakes, good luck with that. In fact, why not upgrade the brakes and then tune it... I'll shut up now


Exactly this..


----------



## revulike (Jun 15, 2018)

Depends a lot on how you drive.

Eg. Dual carriageway, stock reaches 70 from roundabout in, say, 5 secs, remapped in 4 secs. Both cars now have to decelerate for next roundabout from 70. No difference in braking between the two, assuming they both begin braking at the same time. Although the extra 70 hp has been 'enjoyed' it has made no difference whatsoever to the braking requirements.

Of course, with the extra 70 hp, the remapped car _could_ be going much faster come the next roundabout - depends on the driver.

I know the cornering capabilities of my car haven't improved, so I can't (and don't) corner any faster, remap or not.

I grant you, with RS brakes you could drive like a nutter more of the time.

Pads make a huge difference in braking performance, and I will likely put harder ones in, along with braided hoses, to give more initial bite.


----------



## gAgNiCk (Dec 25, 2017)

leopard said:


> Re-read the original comments, there is nothing to be unsure about. Stock brakes are only adequate if you don't use the extra performance that the map would give, ie if you didn't have the map in the first place, normal road use :lol:


The 2.0 TT stock brakes are meh with or without a stg 1 map, you get what you pay for...


----------



## dannyzucco (Aug 13, 2019)

damn like an r8 and a huracan wow


----------



## chillystuff (6 mo ago)

AMT said:


> With regards to the brake comments, remember the cars the same weight, its designed to stop at speed with those brakes. Yes upgraded ones can work better but mapping the car to be faster doesn't necessarily mean your brakes won't be up to the job. There still designed to stop you from even its higher speeds.... the mapping just gets you there quicker... you won't be any heavier lol.


On a bendy road you could gain a higher speed on each small straight so you have more energy to shake off before the corner


----------



## aeroflott (Feb 18, 2019)

revulike said:


> I grant you, with RS brakes you could drive like a nutter more of the time.


But this is it isn't it. 

One can quote science and technicalities all you like. But what it boils down to is if you don't drive like a dick you shouldn't need upgraded brakes. Remap or no remap.

I have a remap and it is fun and all that. But I don't drive like a loon and put myself in situations where I don't feel I can stop within the capabilities of the car/brakes etc.


----------



## kevin#34 (Jan 8, 2019)

truth is, TT std brakes are inadequate already with the stock map (at least til '19 YM)


----------



## Nobbyk (Jun 29, 2021)

Kevin#34, What pads do you reccomend for our TTS and would they also be suitable for BMW?


----------



## kevin#34 (Jan 8, 2019)

apart the OEM ones, I just tried the Brembo Xtra (P 85 124X for the TTS), and considering the price difference with the OME ones, they were not that bad (especially for what concerning initial bite and heat resistance)
www.bremboparts.com/europe/en/catalogue/audi-tt-fv3-fvp-2-0-tts-quattro/000108402-1








Set Pastiglie dei Freni Freno a disco per Audi TT FV3 FVP cntc chhc CUNA cjxg cjsb BREMBO | eBay


Le migliori offerte per Set Pastiglie dei Freni Freno a disco per Audi TT FV3 FVP cntc chhc CUNA cjxg cjsb BREMBO sono su eBay ✓ Confronta prezzi e caratteristiche di prodotti nuovi e usati ✓ Molti articoli con consegna gratis!



www.ebay.it





Concerning BWM application list, just check the Brembo parts site


----------



## Barmybob (Nov 4, 2015)

Funny how this thread ran into talking about brakes... what about the motor?

So many people seem to think that the 2.0 TFSI is a de-tuned TTS motor. Pop in a different map and get TTS performance - or more - on the cheap.

The thing is everyone seems to miss the fact that the TTS EA888 CJXG motor is quite different, in some rather crucial and possibly very important areas.

According to Audi the MK3 TTS has unique pistons, uprated con rods with different bearings. A reinforced crankcase at the main bearing seats and also the main bearing cover. The cylinder head is made of a different silica-aluminium alloy compound to provide higher strength and better temperature resistance. The valve springs and seat rings have been modified (Higher Nitride content in the valves) all to cope with more heat due to higher loads. Different piston cooling jets are used, different injectors even a different radiator, cooling seems to be behind most of the changes. It also seems turbo's are different, IHI IS20 on TT & IS38 on the TTS. Finally compression ratio of 9.6:1 on standard & 9.3:1 for TTS.

Pushing a standard EA888 engine so hard, especially without addressing the cooling, would concern me. If it were me I would go with a milder stage 1, and probably still seek to address the cooling. If TTS power was my goal then I would just go for a TTS.


----------



## kevin#34 (Jan 8, 2019)

I confirm the different parts as mentioned above, plus the camshaft profile


----------



## danielvolt (Jul 11, 2020)

Mr GTS said:


> How many people are also upgrading their brakes when re-mapping? I know when I had the TTS, that the brakes were barely adequate and remember the TTS has uprated brakes. So a remapped TFSI on it's standard brakes would be an accident waiting to happen right? Even the brakes on my RS could do with an improvement - if I remap my car then the brakes will get sorted before the power increase.


I have a CHHC (stock engine internals) IS38 upgraded hybrid turbo, running 30-31psi which is well above 2bar boost, and no, i don't have any problems braking on stock rotors and pads. Upgraded the pads to DS3000 and no issues what so ever, on a car that is running over 500bhp. 60% of this forum seems to hate tuning, for me its the only reason i'm still owning this car. TTS is fun, but the short gearing compared to the TT makes it less fun for me, and the i5 is just too much money if i tune and have to replace the motor. Pushing 620nm, and having lots of fun. Motor blows? 2.5k and i have a new engine in it, just get it tuned right and make sure fueling wise (injectors & fuel pump and lines) are in good condition and these engines hold lots of torque/hp. Do i need bigger brakes for 500+bhp? No, i don't track my car.


----------



## danielvolt (Jul 11, 2020)

Barmybob said:


> Funny how this thread ran into talking about brakes... what about the motor?
> 
> So many people seem to think that the 2.0 TFSI is a de-tuned TTS motor. Pop in a different map and get TTS performance - or more - on the cheap.
> 
> ...


I don't understand where this cooling problem comes from . You seem to mix up "tracking" and dailying a car... As i stated, 31psi on my engine and i have yet to see oil temps above 105 degrees, even in 38 degrees last week. I push my car so hard to its limits, where i blow intercooler hoses off and i still haven't seen "high" temps at all. TTS or TT, both handle boost nearly the same. the VVTI crossover the R's is just a tad bit different because of the compression and makes boosting it a tad bit easier. People push 500whp on ethanol on these things, knock matters.


----------



## kevin#34 (Jan 8, 2019)

forgive me, but to have oil temp at 105 while trashing a mapped TT with 38C of ambient temp seems very optimistic to me (and with what I experienced in 4 years of TT).
Don't forget that the oil temp (bar) reading in the TT is quite approximate, while TTS/RS show the exact number, then a more credible value..
With my stage 2 TTS I could see 105C only if driving very calm and without extreme ambient temperatures (let's say up to 24/25C)
in hot days ( >30C), having oil at 125C was ordinary, if driving hard... on track, after 5/6 laps I could reach even >130C... and I always use a 0/40 instead of the 0/30 Audi recommends...
same for the DSG oil, a couple of times I even had the warning on the VC and protection kicked-in...
current RS seems not moving away so much from these temps, even if still stock

problem is the absence of oil coolers for both oils (first mods track users do, together with big brakes kit), just exchangers with water





danielvolt said:


> I don't understand where this cooling problem comes from . You seem to mix up "tracking" and dailying a car... As i stated, 31psi on my engine and i *have yet to see oil temps above 105 degrees, even in 38 degrees last week. *I push my car so hard to its limits, where i blow intercooler hoses off and i still haven't seen "high" temps at all. TTS or TT, both handle boost nearly the same. the VVTI crossover the R's is just a tad bit different because of the compression and makes boosting it a tad bit easier. People push 500whp on ethanol on these things, knock matters.


----------



## Barmybob (Nov 4, 2015)

danielvolt said:


> I don't understand where this cooling problem comes from .


I would suggest it comes from AUDI themselves.
The evidence? Well that would be the FACT that the TTS motor is significantly modified!



danielvolt said:


> You seem to mix up "tracking" and dailying a car...


I am not mixing anything, just indicating that the motors are different.


----------



## MrOCD (Feb 9, 2021)

Barmybob said:


> I would suggest it comes from AUDI themselves.
> The evidence? Well that would be the FACT that the TTS motor is significantly modified!
> 
> 
> ...


Yes, they are different and I don’t think anybody has said otherwise.

However, well known tuners have done substantial R&D in tuning these cars for several years. It’s very well known the safe limits for a TT engine is around 460-470bhp. There are also lots of cars out there pushing 500bhp + … I’ve yet to come across any that have had failures due to cooling or otherwise.

Temps are really not an issue for a road car regardless of tuning state. You can never drive it hard enough to matter. Certainly in the UK. 

Track driving is another matter entirely and that applies to any TT, standard or not.

As Kev mentions on track oil temps are critical for any car hence why the first cooling mods are typically oil coolers and intercooler upgrades (to maintain power levels) …


----------



## Barmybob (Nov 4, 2015)

MrOCD said:


> Yes, they are different and I don’t think anybody has said otherwise.


Quite a few people do say exactly that unfortunately. You don't have to look too hard to find a prominent TT you tube vlogger suggesting it! Then there are tongue in cheek comments in this video asking "Is it even worth buying a TTS?"

Clearly the EA888 in the MK3 TT responds very well to stage 1 chip tuning, and will indeed surpass the standard MK3 TTS. Bang for buck it does seem to be a bargain.

However if you add a stage 1 (APR) tune to a MK3 TTS this would also respond very well, usually +80hp and close to +100 FT-LBS torque. Leading to it surpassing the standard TTRS. It could be argued that all the differences built into the TTS version of the EA888 motor could make it more robust. But if not then why did Audi spend money developing those elements? I don't believe the motor was homologated for motorsport?

Anyhow, the TTS Stage 1 has now made the TTRS irrelevant. But add a stage 1 (APR) tune to the TTRS and that would release +86hp and +108FT-LBS.

Audi clearly build in a huge safety margin, offering significant, and easy tuning potential for their standard motors. I am not sure where the sweet spot is for each motor, but diminishing returns (£ per HP & £ per torque) will take effect at some point.


----------



## kevin#34 (Jan 8, 2019)

Barmybob said:


> EDIT
> Audi clearly build in a huge safety margin, offering significant, and easy tuning potential for their standard motors.* I am not sure where the sweet spot is for each motor*, but diminishing returns (£ per HP & £ per torque) will take effect at some point.


I think that on pre-OPF models, stage 1 still offers the best _cost/performance/reliability_ compromise...
OPF is so much a blockage, that the EGT is already at the limit with the stock map... so stage 1 for OPF models are very soft and therefore no big margin of increase... paradoxically, is much safer to go with a stage 2, since OPF has gone


----------



## MrOCD (Feb 9, 2021)

Barmybob said:


> Quite a few people do say exactly that unfortunately. You don't have to look too hard to find a prominent TT you tube vlogger suggesting it! Then there are tongue in cheek comments in this video asking "Is it even worth buying a TTS?"
> 
> Clearly the EA888 in the MK3 TT responds very well to stage 1 chip tuning, and will indeed surpass the standard MK3 TTS. Bang for buck it does seem to be a bargain.
> 
> ...


Firstly 80bhp + from a stage one map on a TTS is a bit OTT. Realistically it is circa 60-70bhp increase iirc. APR figures are optimistic. A basic map on a TT is 70bhp / 70lbft increase in comparison. APR quote 87bhp and 114lbft increase for the TT which is nonsense.


Secondly you are quite right you can map the TTS / TTRS as well but the point people are making is that there is a considerable jump in price from TT to TTS circa £7k when I last looked although likely a bit lower now prices are coming down a bit to normal levels. Regardless, that’s a considerable saving to be had which is why value for money becomes a consideration given it’s the same platform.

Last, I agree with your points about the engine and also agree if budget allows get the TTRS / TTS but the simple fact is the majority of the public don’t really care for minor engine tweaks / changes and simply look at value for money, their budget and performance. Certainly when comparing TT and TTS given they are both 2.0 4 pot turbo engines, are both quick cars and other than the differences mentioned I can see why people out there think a mapped TT is more than sufficient and great value.

Value for money you cannot beat a TT S-line Quattro petrol with a remap. £ for performance very little comes close. IMHO.

We could also argue that Audi deliberately de-tuned the EA888.3 engine to not show up the TTRS … something to consider …


----------



## Barmybob (Nov 4, 2015)

The figures on the APR web shop are very optimistic. Awesome GTI do address that somewhat on their page. That said it does seem that all Audi performance data is based upon 95RON fuel. Most of the highest quotes are based upon running 98RON so I guess that's where the optimistic figures could have base.

Clearly the simplest, and cheapest tune any TT owner can do is stick in some premium 98RON and obtain a pump tune 



MrOCD said:


> ...the point people are making is that there is a considerable jump in price from TT to TTS circa £7k...


There is, but it's not like you aren't getting something for that extra money. The aforementioned mechanical engine upgrades, bigger brakes, mag ride, extra LED interior light pack, extended leather, Auto dimming mirror, light and rain pack, Audi sound system , heated super sport seats, active lane assist and an option on early TTS's was to have it in manual.

2017 List Prices.
SPORT 2.0 TFSI quattro 230PS 6-speed S tronic £33,600.00
S-LINE 2.0 TFSI quattro 230PS 6-speed S tronic £36,150.00
TTS quattro 310PS 6-speed manual £39,685.00
TTS quattro 310PS 6-speed S tronic £41,050.00

So yes from new the base TTS was £7450 more than a base specification SPORT but only £4900 more than the base S-line. Add the TTS options to the S-LINE spec and that would cost £4700 meaning the engine changes and bigger brakes on the TTS cost just £200. So, new, was the TTS the bargain?

If, as you are suggesting, the difference between getting a second hand, like for like, TT and a TTS is still about £7K then that would seem to suggest that the TTS has kept really strong residuals when compared to the TT!



MrOCD said:


> the simple fact is the majority of the public don’t really care for minor engine tweaks / changes and simply look at value for money, their budget and performance.


Engines are mechanical machines. Surely ANY mechanical and material upgrade and improvement is beneficial. Just because "the Majority of the public" don't understand it, doesn't mean it is any less significant! Indeed one could argue that the vast majority of the public couldn't care less about increasing the performance of their vehicles - full stop.

And if value for money was really the key, they wouldn't be buying an Audi, a perceived luxury product! I would suggest BADGE usually trumps value for money - ergo a TTS MUST be better than a TT? 



MrOCD said:


> We could also argue that Audi deliberately de-tuned the EA888.3 engine to not show up the TTRS … something to consider …


I Considered, for a moment, and no! To be honest I couldn't care less what 4 pot Golf, Seat, Skoda motored car burns me off from the lights, farting it's way into the distance. I have a car that reminds me of standing in a forest in the 1980's. All the cracks, bangs and that screaming 5 cylinder roar - it's another level and I'm so glad I didn't take the R8 route. That said the V10 could perhaps bring back some Le Mans memories.
Oh and if I really wanted to chase power I could hand over several thousand pounds and try for 700hp on stock internals


----------



## Barmybob (Nov 4, 2015)

All joking aside...

This thread has criticised someone for using the term "Poor Mans" but it then shot off into the opposite direction, almost suggesting that anyone that bought anything other than a 2.0 TFSI TT quattro is some sort of fiscally irresponsible fool!

We are all TT owners, and that's one thing that's supposed to unite us, on a TT forum!

The only person any of us need to justify our decision of what TT we choose, is ourselves, even down to the colour


----------



## dreich9999 (12 mo ago)

no name said:


> Not convinced on that one.
> Especially two 'manz' up haha
> Maybe a TTs


Not Sure Mate but I got 4.4 Secs with MK3 2.0 TT Stage 1 so maybe he has other mods contributing to the claimed 3.9 Secs!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------

