Autocar: New TT can rival the Cayman in driving dynamics.

[Poverty]

First Drive:

Audi TT Coupe 3.2 V6 Quattro S-tronic 2dr
Test Date 03/06/2006 12:00:00
Price when new £30,685

Audi TT (06-) 3.2 V6 Quattro S-tronic 2dr Coupe

What’s new?
Audi has gone all out to ensure that the second-generation TT can mount a credible attack on the prowess of the BMW Z4 Coupe, Mercedes-Benz SLK, Nissan 350Z and Porsche Cayman.

Audi’s primary target was reducing the TT’s weight, and at 1430kg, this new 3.2-litre V6-engined car is 60kg lighter than the car it replaces.

Under the clamshell bonnet of the initial range-topping version lurks Audi’s familiar 3.2-litre V6 engine, complete with direct injection and a high 11.3:1 compression ratio. Mounted transversely but slightly lower and further back in the engine bay than before – both in a bid to improve the overall centre of gravity and to ensure sufficient clearance from the bonnet, in line with the latest pedestrian safety regulations – the compact 24-valve unit kicks out 247bhp at 6300rpm, along with 235lb ft of torque between 2500 and 3000rpm.

The defining feature of the new TT’s driveline is Audi’s updated six-speed S-tronic gearbox (nee DSG). Available as a £1400 option above the standard six-speed manual, the double-clutch unit is perfectly suited to the 3.2-litre V6’s flexible nature. It even manages to improve on the previous DSG’s trick of providing that rare combination of smoothness and speed of gearchange.



What’s it like?
With less mass to haul and improved aerodynamic properties, the TT’s straight-line acceleration has improved. Ingolstadt claims 0-62mph in 5.7sec – a good half a second inside the old V6’s time. Top speed, as before, remains pegged at 155mph. The new TT’s pop-up rear spoiler deploys from the rear bodywork at 75mph. Which brings us neatly to probably the most important question about the car: has the new TT shaken off the dynamic foibles of the first TT? Is this new one as good to drive as they’ve promised?

The answer’s a profound yes. With tracks that are 44mm wider at the front and 53mm at the rear, stability has been improved out of sight. This car tracks much more faithfully at motorway speeds than the original TT, and when you come off the power there’s none of the old corkscrew antics.

On winding roads the new TT proves more fluid and willing to follow instruction than the Mk1 model, and it communicates much more insistently. A large part of this is down to the more sophisticated suspension and the fact that it’s been tuned with keen drivers in mind. Body control is excellent, with less pitch and roll over undulations and mid-corner irregularities.

The speed-sensitive power steering – an electro-hydraulic system based on that used in the A3 – is light at town speeds and offers accurate turn-in. That said, it could do with a touch more feedback when you’re pushing hard, when the TT’s natural tendency is to understeer. Still, if you’re prepared to keep your foot planted and rely on the ability of the four-wheel drive system to shift power from the front wheels towards the rear, it can be made to corner in a fantastically neutral manner. It’s a process that calls for delicate steering inputs, but it is hugely satisfying. And get this: it elevates the TT’s dynamic prowess to a level where it can genuinely be regarded as a rival to the Cayman S.


Should I buy one?
There’s no question about it: the new TT has taken a huge leap forward in the way it drives. Like the latest RS4, it proves that Ingolstadt’s attitude to dynamics has changed out of all recognition compared with the uninspiring Audis of the past decade or more. The company wants to sell 65,000 TTs a year; on this evidence, it may well shift a good deal more.

Was never really too fond of TT's but I have to say, after all the unexpected (even from me) glowing reviews Id gladly have one with the S-line kit.

 

[Midnight Runner]

That car may be fast but that interior....loooks like something I'd find in a old Opel....*goes to vommit*

 

[eiriksmil]

That car may be fast but that interior....loooks like something I'd find in a old Opel....*goes to vommit*

Seriously? I love it as much as I disliked the first generation TT.

 

[Leonidae]

and that long nose is quite similar to A4's.. could it be, that Audi is planning to put trustworthy 4.2 V8 in it? 330 bhp would be enough for a car that's light as this, and then it would challenge BMW's new M coupe.

 

[Poverty]

People say that the 4.2V8 wont fit but to expect a 3.6vr6 unit.

 

[Poverty]

That car may be fast but that interior....loooks like something I'd find in a old Opel....*goes to vommit*

lol ok any pictures to back this up? Because if you are right opel makes better interiors than any premium brand there is in the world, and beats most exoticas.

 

[Dave A]

The dials are nice but the center console is ugly, but it's likely made with decent materials because Audi have a lot riding on this car.

 

[JCE]

Wow, the new TT is looking very good. And I actually love that interior...I think it's fantastic. Although I dislike the pedals...

 

[Pupik]

Nice to hear of a car that's actually getting lighter in it's newest iteration.

Poverty, Can you plead to Jordan to give you your own Audi forum? You're...uh...flooding us...with Rings.

 

[Master_Yoda]

I like the new Audi... I've always liked Audi, they produce some very nice cars.

 

[Poverty]

Poverty, Can you plead to Jordan to give you your own Audi forum? You're...uh...flooding us...with Rings.

lol yeah I know, Im gonna balance things out, and post more about other manufacturers!

 

[Leonidae]

Nice to hear of a car that's actually getting lighter in it's newest iteration.

Poverty, Can you plead to Jordan to give you your own Audi forum? You're...uh...flooding us...with Rings.

that's because poverty is the Lord of the rings..

 

[Raghavan]

Interior is great, style is OK, but that front overhang looks like ass, and how will it rival the Cayman if that's more like a go cart, and this is an understeery POS?
Audi should learn to move the engines back behind the front axle, instead of sticking them in front of the headlights.

 

[YSSMAN]

...Mmmm, delicious TT...

I'll take mine in Silver or Grey with the 2.0T and the DSG transmission. Nothing fancy, just a good-looking, fun to drive car.

 

[Wolfe]

I call BS on the claim as noted in the title, but if it's getting people to say silly things like that, it's gotta be pretty darned good.

 

[harrytuttle]

Belive none of what you read, and half of what see.

Lame quotes notwithstanding, I never take any press release info at face value -- or any value -- except the numbers. And even then, it's usually a bit optimistic. I've felt that the TT design has always been great, even with the addition of the rear spoiler (although most people thought the name was literal, not technical). This TT is not an improvement on the original, but a really nice re-interpretation.

But it's still Golf-based, and while that makes for a great hatchback, can it really make for a great sports car? The Golf R32 v4 was awesome; best all-wheel-drive hatchback ever. Does that mean it can go up against the Boxster? Can giving the Golf R32 v5 a sleeker shape mean it's a rival for the Cayman? Can pigs fly any faster out of my buttocks? Rearward bias is not enough. Audi still has to improve on the substantial progress made on the 2006 RS4 to make itself known in the sports car segment.

By itself, though, it's another wonderful Audi. No doubt, it will sell in spades.

 

[Poverty]

lol I thought you guys might feel this way, I wasnt totally convinced till I read other reviews and what Jeremy Clarkson had to say about the car.

"I shall stop short of saying I loved the new TT. You can’t love something that looks so similar to something you loathed."

And Clarkson only drove the base model FWD TT

Interior is great, style is OK, but that front overhang looks like ass, and how will it rival the Cayman if that's more like a go cart, and this is an understeery POS?
Audi should learn to move the engines back behind the front axle, instead of sticking them in front of the headlights

The weight distribution of teh new TT is 58:42. The old TT was 62:38, and I dont think it has a rear bias as it uses a haldex setup I belive.

First mooted as long ago as 1995, the TT was nothing more than a four-wheel-drive Golf in a pair of sporty Lycra shorts. That’s like putting Terry Wogan in cycling clothes and expecting him to win the Tour de France. It’s not going to happen.

And it didn’t. I remember driving it on the press launch way back in 1999. Actually that’s not true. I remember getting very drunk on the press launch back in 1999. And then I don’t remember anything at all. (See how crazy I was.) But I do remember people at Audi being very upset when I said the handling felt numb and distant.

I was wrong actually. It turned out that the handling was in fact rather more than numb and distant. It was dangerous. And so, after some accidents and a spot of light death, the car was recalled, fixed and put back on sale. This should have been a kiss of death. But people, especially in Britain, just couldn’t get enough of those cycling shorts. We just didn’t care it had Wogan’s heart and as a result we became the biggest market in the world for what I called the Titty.

As the years strolled by, more and more versions were introduced. Some had front-wheel drive, some had 150bhp, some had soft tops and some had VW’s amazing DSG flappy-paddle gearbox. But that numbness never went away. I can put my hand on my heart and say that I’ve never enjoyed driving any TT.

It was an affront, really, that a car named in honour of the 1905 Isle of Man Tourist Trophy race and styled with a Bauhaus look should be as inert to drive as a bucket full of argon.

The new one didn’t fill me with much hope, either. Sure, it’s based on the current Golf, which is a far better platform than the oil rig they used back in the late 1990s. But there was too much piffle in the blurb about styling.

“Oh God,” I moaned as I ploughed through endless pages on the elongated, more aggressive bonnet and the lower, longer, more aggressive stance. “We can see all that. But what have you done to bring the damn thing alive?” Well I’ll tell you what. They’ve done something because, while the exterior looks similar to the last TT, it is a different animal to drive.


The steering has a crackle and a fizz, so you’re left in no doubt it is connected to the road. Likewise the engine makes a muted roar like it wants to be let off the leash and whipped a bit. And when you turn into a corner with your foot off the throttle, what’s this . . . ? Why, it’s the back end sliding round, ever so gracefully. It felt like I was driving Darcey Bussell.

This has been achieved with subtlety; a little spoiler that rises when you break the speed limit, a lower driving position for a better centre of gravity and, madly, a car made in two halves. The front is all aluminium, even the suspension, while the back is all steel.

It’s not easy,mating these two metals, as anyone who’s tried to wrench an alloy wheel off a steel brake disc will testify. But the effect is profound. Not only is the new car 9 stone lighter than the old one, but also the weight distribution is just about spot on. You can feel this when you’re at the limit, I swear it.

I don’t want you to think that I was hammering around in the V6 quattro version either. The car I’m talking about had the entry-level 2 litre turbo motor and front-wheel drive. It was the £26,000 bottom rung of the ladder.

 

[Onikaze]

Ok, so now it's a decent car...



For my girlfriend.


Gimme an M-Coupe and/or a Cayman RS, thanks.

 

[YSSMAN]

Cayman RS or an M-Coupe for the price of a TT? Please, not any time soon...

My biggest grippe with the TT is that I can get similar performance when the new Golf/Rabbit R32 comes to the US next year. Plus, I get a useable back seat and a functional hatch in the back.

...So why spend the extra money?

 

[Wolfe]

Cayman RS or an M-Coupe for the price of a TT? Please, not any time soon...

My biggest grippe with the TT is that I can get similar performance when the new Golf/Rabbit R32 comes to the US next year. Plus, I get a useable back seat and a functional hatch in the back.

...So why spend the extra money?

Let's put it this way:
The TT is a ditsy supermodel. The Rabbit R32 is a responsible, successful businesswoman. Both are equally good in bed.

Do you want the hot supermodel, or the not-so-hot businesswoman?

 

[xXSilencerXx]

This car looks pretty sweet to me. I thought the last one looked like crap.

 

[harrytuttle]

The weight distribution of teh new TT is 58:42. The old TT was 62:38, and I dont think it has a rear bias as it uses a haldex setup I belive.

For a long time, I've been thoroughly convinced that 4Motion & quattro both use Haldex systems, and are pretty much the same aside from a few subtle differences. Am I wrong on this, or has VAG developed two very different all-wheel-drive systems?

And can't any type of four-wheel-drive system be set to be either front- or rear-biased? Surely you can just adjust the center differential to lean one way or the other.

But it's good to see that the weight distribution is improved. Audi still needs to evolve their drivetrain if their to earn their sporty credentials. Perhaps Audi should consider that all their engines be longitudinal, not transverse. BMW seems to be able to fit an inline-6 with an all-wheel-drive system somewhere in that engine bay.

 

[Onikaze]

Audi is starting with W(rong)WD cars and adding AWD.

BMW is starting with R(ight)WD and adding AWD.

If Audi would stop making WWD base models, and switch to RWD base, AWD higher models, they would be respected as sporty.

It's hard as hell to make a WWD turned AWD car not piggish in the nose.

 

[Wolfe]

Audi is starting with W(rong)WD cars and adding AWD.

BMW is starting with R(ight)WD and adding AWD.

Maybe we should start referring to them as F(lawed)WD cars, instead of W(rong)WD.

 

[Raghavan]

For a long time, I've been thoroughly convinced that 4Motion & quattro both use Haldex systems, and are pretty much the same aside from a few subtle differences. Am I wrong on this, or has VAG developed two very different all-wheel-drive systems?

And can't any type of four-wheel-drive system be set to be either front- or rear-biased? Surely you can just adjust the center differential to lean one way or the other.

But it's good to see that the weight distribution is improved. Audi still needs to evolve their drivetrain if their to earn their sporty credentials. Perhaps Audi should consider that all their engines be longitudinal, not transverse. BMW seems to be able to fit an inline-6 with an all-wheel-drive system somewhere in that engine bay.

The TT and A3, along with the new Passat and Golf R32 use the Haldex differential, which is FWD until power is needed to the rear wheels. Sort of a 'band-aid' system as I call it. You're basically taking an FWD platform and adding a driveshaft and rear and center diff. And the Haldex center diff is only capable of giving 50% of the power to the rear, and only when it's needed, such as during hard launches, hard cornering, or in the wet.

The old Passat 4 Motion, the dead Phaeton, A4, A6 and A8 all use the Torsen differential. This has a rear bias or 50:50 power split at all times. Not FWD biased, although you can get all those cars in FWD (except FWD versions of the Phaeton, A8 and A6 are only available in Europe). This gives these cars better handling capabilities than the cars with the Haldex center differential.

And no, you can't set the power between the two axles yourself in AWD systems. Some, you can't really control. Others, like the Haldex, can only send 50% to the rears, and that's computer controlled. The thing is, the rear differential isn't strong enough to take the full engine power, so you'll end up damaging something in the long run. Subaru's AWD system can be controlled, at least in the STI, between 35:50 and 50:50. Others, like the Bugatti Veyron, can transfer power infinite ways, so it can be either FWD, AWD, or RWD.

And Onikaze, not all AWD cars that started as FWD cars are piggish. Case in point: Lancer Evolution. One of the best handling cars ever, and it started off as a lowly FWD Lancer. That AWD system is full time, meaning that power is always going to all 4 wheels, but the system can never send more than 50% of the power to the rear wheels, but it can operate as a full FWD car too.

That was a long post. Hope that helps.

 

[Wolfe]

...not all AWD cars that started as FWD cars are piggish. Case in point: Lancer Evolution. One of the best handling cars ever, and it started off as a lowly FWD Lancer. That AWD system is full time, meaning that power is always going to all 4 wheels, but the system can never send more than 50% of the power to the rear wheels, but it can operate as a full FWD car too...

The Evo handles well because it has an active rear differential, which is computer-controlled and sends power to the outside-rear wheel under cornering to help rotate the rear of the car and avoid understeer.

The first three Evos didn't have the active diff, and their handling wasn't nearly as good as the later ones.

 

[Poverty]

The A6, A8 and Q7 are the only non flawed audi's at the moment., The rest are because they originate from the VW platform sharing days.

Audi has done a great job though making those chassis do and handle what they were never designed for.

 

[Poverty]

The TT and A3, along with the new Passat and Golf R32 use the Haldex differential, which is FWD until power is needed to the rear wheels. Sort of a 'band-aid' system as I call it. You're basically taking an FWD platform and adding a driveshaft and rear and center diff. And the Haldex center diff is only capable of giving 50% of the power to the rear, and only when it's needed, such as during hard launches, hard cornering, or in the wet.

The old Passat 4 Motion, the dead Phaeton, A4, A6 and A8 all use the Torsen differential. This has a rear bias or 50:50 power split at all times. Not FWD biased, although you can get all those cars in FWD (except FWD versions of the Phaeton, A8 and A6 are only available in Europe). This gives these cars better handling capabilities than the cars with the Haldex center differential.

And no, you can't set the power between the two axles yourself in AWD systems. Some, you can't really control. Others, like the Haldex, can only send 50% to the rears, and that's computer controlled. The thing is, the rear differential isn't strong enough to take the full engine power, so you'll end up damaging something in the long run. Subaru's AWD system can be controlled, at least in the STI, between 35:50 and 50:50. Others, like the Bugatti Veyron, can transfer power infinite ways, so it can be either FWD, AWD, or RWD.

And Onikaze, not all AWD cars that started as FWD cars are piggish. Case in point: Lancer Evolution. One of the best handling cars ever, and it started off as a lowly FWD Lancer. That AWD system is full time, meaning that power is always going to all 4 wheels, but the system can never send more than 50% of the power to the rear wheels, but it can operate as a full FWD car too.

That was a long post. Hope that helps.

This is absolutely correct. I dont why audi choose to badge haldex cars quattro though. Its good marketing to the average buyer, but bad to those who know its a haldex setup.

 

[Raghavan]

The Evo handles well because it has an active rear differential, which is computer-controlled and sends power to the outside-rear wheel under cornering to help rotate the rear of the car and avoid understeer.

The first three Evos didn't have the active diff, and their handling wasn't nearly as good as the later ones.

Yes, but my point still holds. Onikaze said that all FWD based AWD systems tend to be piggish. Even though the Evo has an active center differential, it's still an FWD based system, and i'm just pointing out that it handles very well.

 

[Onikaze]

It's hard as hell to make a WWD turned AWD car not piggish in the nose.

Actually, I didn't say all FWD based AWD cars are piggish.

They are almost all piggish or ugly though, I.E. the Evo.