TT-S Revealed - Official Thread

[Leadfoot]

Do you like the way the speedo goes up to 300km/h. I wonder does this mean that the performance-pack is coming (it was hinted to me a while ago that this would be a possibility) and that it may include a raised topspeed.

[KresoF1]

Do you like the way the speedo goes up to 300km/h. I wonder does this mean that the performance-pack is coming (it was hinted to me a while ago that this would be a possibility) and that it may include a raised topspeed.

BTW, check out specs here:
http://www.audi.de/audi/de/de2/neuwa...tts/motor.html

[itisme]

BTW, check out specs here:
http://www.audi.de/audi/de/de2/neuwa...tts/motor.html

specs from Audi.de in short: (no german required )

2.0 TFSI
200 kW (272 PS)
350 Nm 2.500 - 5.000 U/min
(S tronic) TTS Coupé 0-100km/h 5.2sec
(S tronic) TTS Roadster 0-100km/h 5.4sec
V-Max 250km/h

Audi TTS Coupé 2.0 TFSI
consume 8,0 l/100 km; CO2-emission 191 g/km
Audi TTS Coupé 2.0 TFSI S trronic
consume 7,9 l/100 km; CO2-emission 188 g/km
Audi TTS Roadster 2.0 TFSI
consume 8,2 l/100 km; CO2-emission 194 g/km
Audi TTS Roadster 2.0 TFSI S tronic
consume 8,0 l/100 km; CO2-emission 190 g/km

[SigmaS6]

Do you like the way the speedo goes up to 300km/h. I wonder does this mean that the performance-pack is coming (it was hinted to me a while ago that this would be a possibility) and that it may include a raised topspeed.

Now I'm really wondering why you are so exited about the TTS. I mean I still dislike it wholeheartedly (the looks are ok though) and think it's a pretty sassy approach to let people wait two years just to put the ECU of the S3 in the TT and sell it as S model with 8% more power than the standard and 25kg less weight, but reading all the excitement posts I realize many of them are coming from you.

So why should an S5 owner envy a 4pot 2l TT? I just don't get it. I mean if you had a GTI it would be the next stage and I could clearly understand your motives, but it sounds as if you're on the verge of downgrading with pride. You'd lose half your engine block, the power and the sound, don't do it!

Oh, and am I the only one in here who thinks that 4 tail pipes for a 2l engine is totally laughable?

And no, it wont make 300. I'm sure it will show you 300 though, but don't forget that the 2.0l already shows ~280 when it reaches its vmax of 245. The Audi speedometer precision is just terrible, but people seem to like it this way.

[Leadfoot]

SigmaS6,

I love the looks of the TT, always have and knowing how good the fwd TT drives with it's lighter engine I just know that adding more power and awd will improve things even more so.

I prefer cars which handle well and on this front I feel the lighter TT will give more of a buzz than what the S5 could muster but in any case that was not what the S5 was design for, it's role is to be a classy Grand Tourer not a pocket rocket.

Am I down grading, no because I already have my name on an M3 but if I didn't then I would very much like the try out this as a future replacement.

If capacity is what rocks you boat well and good but not everyone needs or wants to go that route.

P.S.

If you think an Audi speedo is bad try a BMW.

[Rage]

Now I'm really wondering why you are so exited about the TTS. I mean I still dislike it wholeheartedly (the looks are ok though) and think it's a pretty sassy approach to let people wait two years just to put the ECU of the S3 in the TT and sell it as S model with 8% more power than the standard and 25kg less weight, but reading all the excitement posts I realize many of them are coming from you.

So why should an S5 owner envy a 4pot 2l TT? I just don't get it. I mean if you had a GTI it would be the next stage and I could clearly understand your motives, but it sounds as if you're on the verge of downgrading with pride. You'd lose half your engine block, the power and the sound, don't do it!

Oh, and am I the only one in here who thinks that 4 tail pipes for a 2l engine is totally laughable?

And no, it wont make 300. I'm sure it will show you 300 though, but don't forget that the 2.0l already shows ~280 when it reaches its vmax of 245. The Audi speedometer precision is just terrible, but people seem to like it this way.

In short...couldnt agree more.

[Leadfoot]

So why should an S5 owner envy a 4pot 2l TT? I just don't get it. I mean if you had a GTI it would be the next stage and I could clearly understand your motives, but it sounds as if you're on the verge of downgrading with pride. You'd lose half your engine block, the power and the sound, don't do it!

A question for you, if you happen to be driving an M6v10 and the new M3 had just been announced, would it be classed as down-grading just because you preferred to change to something which had better handling but was ultimately slower in a straight line.

You see the stupidity of your statement.

Oh, and am I the only one in here who thinks that 4 tail pipes for a 2l engine is totally laughable?

The only reason for the quad pipes is that this is the new trade mark for S models, chances are when the S3 gets it's face-lift it too will received the same treatment in much the same way as the B6-B7 S4 did.

P.S.

SigmaS6 & Rage,

Not everyone will want a big V8 or even a V6 engined car and just because Audi see fit to choice this engine over the 3.2v6 they clearly had their reasons even if you don't understand them or agree with them.

I also think that you two are in a minority by not getting excited about these two little coupes.

[SigmaS6]

would it be classed as down-grading just because you preferred to change to something which had better handling but was ultimately slower in a straight line.

There's more than just one world between a 4.2l V8 and a 2l I4. In your example you change your style but keep the level, but here you're close to loosing everything. You're getting back from the premium segment to a standard engine that's with slight modifications also beating in e.g. a seat leon or the rabbit. I'd see this as equal to dropping the excitement and exclusiveness factor all together and getting back on a chipped GTI stage.

I never said a chipped GTI isn't fun to drive, but I'm sure we can agree that it's playing in a different league than the S5.

The only reason for the quad pipes is that this is the new trade mark for S models

Imo it's made for people who like to impress those that don't know the technical details of this car and assume a powerful engine in an quad-piped S-model.

I also think that you two are in a minority by not getting excited about these two little coupes.

Maybe those who don't like it don't even register in forums like this just to rant about it. In the german forums it seems to be more balanced though, I didn't see unanimous excitement there. So maybe it's once more a matter of road types and general speed limits, that lead to totally different perceptions of the same concept.

But I agree that it will sell well, the 2l engine keeps it cheap for an S-model, so it should be an instant success. Even though that wasn't the initial idea behind S-models in the past...

[The Pretender]

I don't like the front bumper and the side skirt at all.
I like the rear valance but on a 3.2 quattro.
The question is will the TTS grill fit into the S-Line front bumper and the exhaust valance in the rear S-Line bumper.
In that case you can put on the TTS a normal S-Line carbon bodykit and put in the "S" grill.
And you can put the TTS rear valance on a 3.2 Quattro S-line bumper.

Jarod.

[Leadfoot]

There's more than just one world between a 4.2l V8 and a 2l I4. In your example you change your style but keep the level, but here you're close to loosing everything. You're getting back from the premium segment to a standard engine that's with slight modifications also beating in e.g. a seat leon or the rabbit. I'd see this as equal to dropping the excitement and exclusiveness factor all together and getting back on a chipped GTI stage.

I have never classed the achievements of any car solely on what engine it happens to use, but you are correct in saying that perception from others may view the size of an engine to the ability of the car as the norm is bigger is better. Porsche has had to fight this for years with it's inferior 6cylinder small capacity engines against the like of Ferrari, Lamborghini and others with their 12cylinder large capacity engines.

But which one is profitable and which have been bought over time and again. I personally put this down to Porsche producing the results in term of performance while offering a well balanced package with regards to handling, braking and economy.

I believe the same will apply to the TT/S. Ignore the engine note and this car will deliver on every other fronts and deliver in buckets, to disregard this car because of it's engine you will have to do the same when the TT/RS arrives because it too will have a smaller engine than the rest of the competition.

Imo it's made for people who like to impress those that don't know the technical details of this car and assume a powerful engine in an quad-piped S-model.

Wrong, this car is made for people who aren't concerned with engine size but by the abilities of the machine, the people that will consider this are the type that buy the Cayman instead of a 997 regardless of cost because it is the better balanced car in term of overall performance. The number of exhaust mean precious little.

Maybe those who don't like it don't even register in forums like this just to rant about it. In the german forums it seems to be more balanced though, I didn't see unanimous excitement there. So maybe it's once more a matter of road types and general speed limits, that lead to totally different perceptions of the same concept.

This is something I do agree with, no small capacity engine will run with the big boys for long when it comes to topspeed, but then again this is a TT after all and that is hardly it's point.

But I agree that it will sell well, the 2l engine keeps it cheap for an S-model, so it should be an instant success. Even though that wasn't the initial idea behind S-models in the past...

You can't be stuck in the past, the breed has had to change and this is because BMW has moved it's M models into direct competition with the RS. I reckon in the future a return to smaller forced induction-ed engines will be the way forward for the S models at least.

[SigmaS6]

Porsche has had to fight this for years with it's inferior 6cylinder small capacity engines against the like of Ferrari, Lamborghini and others with their 12cylinder large capacity engines.

They use a 3.4l in the Cayman S, so it seems they are not downsizing in any way close to Audi. And why Audi believes that the performance models should be the first to be downsized is absolutely beyond me.

Imo it's a nice effort if VW does that with the 1.4l TFSI rabbit, but why should Audi chose the TTS for such an experiment? Are there really the environmentally aware customers?

Also I'm not sure if we can really call it downsizing in the TTS, imo Audi was just too cheap to develop an engine for the TTS, so they put in what they still had lying around.

to disregard this car because of it's engine you will have to do the same when the TT/RS arrives because it too will have a smaller engine than the rest of the competition.

If it has the 2.5l I5 it will have an exclusive and powerful engine of just the right size. An engine no rabbit will have and with a sound that is RS worthy.

the people that will consider this are the type that buy the Cayman instead of a 997 regardless of cost because it is the better balanced car in term of overall performance.

Wasn't the 911 turbo made for those who strive for better balance and performance than the std 911?

You can't be stuck in the past, the breed has had to change and this is because BMW has moved it's M models into direct competition with the RS.

BMW offers a 3l engine with 306hp in the 135i, their engine lineup seems perfectly ok to me, totally free of downsizing experiments. The same goes for the M models.

[Mockenrue]

imo Audi was just too cheap to develop an engine for the TTS, so they put in what they still had lying around.

From Fourtitude:

Compared to the engine it was derived from, the two-liter power unit has undergone extensive reengineering and strengthening to ready it for operation in the TTS – overhauled areas include the engine block, the cylinder head, the pistons, the connecting rods and the turbocharger, which can build up as much as 1.2 bar of relative air pressure. The intake and exhaust systems have undergone elaborate honing to allow the refined four-cylinder engine to both breathe freely and generate a powerful, resonant soundtrack. An optimized and highly efficient intercooler lowers the temperature of the compressed air, producing a crucial increase in the quantity of air supplied for combustion.

[RacerBice]

Now I'm really wondering why you are so exited about the TTS. I mean I still dislike it wholeheartedly (the looks are ok though) and think it's a pretty sassy approach to let people wait two years just to put the ECU of the S3 in the TT and sell it as S model with 8% more power than the standard and 25kg less weight, but reading all the excitement posts I realize many of them are coming from you.

So why should an S5 owner envy a 4pot 2l TT? I just don't get it. I mean if you had a GTI it would be the next stage and I could clearly understand your motives, but it sounds as if you're on the verge of downgrading with pride. You'd lose half your engine block, the power and the sound, don't do it!

Oh, and am I the only one in here who thinks that 4 tail pipes for a 2l engine is totally laughable?

And no, it wont make 300. I'm sure it will show you 300 though, but don't forget that the 2.0l already shows ~280 when it reaches its vmax of 245. The Audi speedometer precision is just terrible, but people seem to like it this way.

Already the stock TT 2,0T matches S5 and even TT 3,2 around a track. With Quattro and 72 BHP more, those too will be hopelessly lost. The S5 is entirely different kind of car, though, and desiarable on its own grounds.

As for number of cylinders, it's the size of the engine which enables this car to go as fast as it does. Döööh. I have an S3 and compared it in on numerous occasions with A3 3,2's (only 15 BHP less). There's no way I'd wanna switch to the 6 cylinder.

I agree with the exhaust pipe remark, though. But more on a general note. I think people (including yourself, it seems) are ridiculously hung up on this. For me, the ideal would be if pipes were entirely hidden, like on some diesels.

RB

[itisme]

Detroit pictures:

http://www.worldcarfans.com/9080114....led-at-detroit