TTS test in German AMS

[KresoF1]

Audi TTS Coupe S Tronic

0-100km/h: 5.4s
0-160km/h:12.6s
0-200km/h:21.1s
Weight: 1422kg

Remarks: the best TT, really responsive small turbo engine with almost NO turbo lag, S Tronic very fast and smooth, excellent drive dynamics. Verdict-very, very good small sports GT.

[Leadfoot]

The figures are a little slower than what I was told to expect (5.1s, 12.2s and 20.6s).

But the remarks are pretty much as expected, great to hear they liked it. :thumb:

[Rage]

Audi TTS Coupe S Tronic

0-100km/h: 5.4s
0-160km/h:12.6s
0-200km/h:21.1s
Weight: 1422kg

Remarks: the best TT, really responsive small turbo engine with almost NO turbo lag, S Tronic very fast and smooth, excellent drive dynamics. Verdict-very, very good small sports GT.

Do you have the figures for the Z4M for comparison?

[HKS786]

The figures are a little slower than what I was told to expect (5.1s, 12.2s and 20.6s).

But the remarks are pretty much as expected, great to hear they liked it. :thumb:

Dont worry Leadie. Look at the not-so-good times they achieved for the DCT-M3:

BMW M3 Coupe M-DKG

0-100km/h: 4.6s(manual 4.8s)
0-200km/h:16.0s(manual16.3s)

[Leadfoot]

Dont worry Leadie. Look at the not-so-good times they achieved for the DCT-M3:

BMW M3 Coupe M-DKG

0-100km/h: 4.6s(manual 4.8s)
0-200km/h:16.0s(manual16.3s)

Was the M3 tested on the same day?

At least they found the TT/S to be a great little coupe with excellence dynamics. These are comments not usually given to a car equipped with a Haldex awd system, in fact I reckon this must be the first. :p

It looks to be living up to my original statement of best small coupe in it's class, though I still reckon the baby Cayman with have the better dynamics if not the quicker lap time.


Do you have the figures for the Z4M for comparison?

Can't give you SportAuto's figures for the Z4M but I think Autocar got 5.1s(100km/h) and 11.9s(160km/h), not that much better than the little Audi with it's 2.0L engine :hihi: .

[HKS786]

Not sure Leadie if it was the same day, but they def tested the M3 with DCT and the Ferrari F430 Scuderia...

F430 Scuderia

0-100km/h: 3.6s
0-160km/h: 7.5s
0-200km/h:11.2s
400m: 11.6s(203km/h)
Weight: 1415kg

Few remarks: not very best build quality, only two airbags, fantastic drive dynamics test results, amazing traction, probably currently the best true sportscar on the market. YES, Germans are crazy about Scud!

BMW M3 Coupe M-DKG

0-100km/h: 4.6s(manual 4.8s)
0-200km/h:16.0s(manual16.3s)

Remarks: M-DKG excellent gearbox, better suited to the chassis and engine then manual. Fuel consumption up to 1l lower despite extra 20kf of weight. M3? As M-DKG please!

[Ruergard]

Interesting times from all cars, a TT-S with a few mods should do the trick for me!

The Scuderia is damn quick, I don't like the line about the building quality though.. :/

[Leadfoot]

Interesting times from all cars, a TT-S with a few mods should do the trick for me!

The Scuderia is damn quick, I don't like the line about the building quality though.. :/

Man it's a Ferrari so think along the lines of a kit-car. :hihi:

OK, that's a bit harsh but once you have driven one you will know what I mean. Though there is no denying that it's F'ing quick with a capitol F.

[Clio16V]

Do you have the figures for the Z4M for comparison?

Z4M coupe does 0-200 in about 18s

Another test from the M3 manual vs DKG:

Manual

0-100kph: 4.8s
0-200kph: 16.3s
80-120(6th): 7.6s
fuel cons.: 13.8l
lap time: 1:35.41

M-DKG

0-100kph: 4.6s
0-200kph 15.2s
80-120(6th): 6.3s
fuel cons.: 13.0l
lap time: 1:35.11

[Leadfoot]

Z4M coupe does 0-200 in about 18s

Another test from the M3 manual vs DKG:

Manual

0-100kph: 4.8s
0-200kph: 16.3s
80-120(6th): 7.6s
fuel cons.: 13.8l
lap time: 1:35.41

M-DKG

0-100kph: 4.6s
0-200kph 15.2s
80-120(6th): 6.3s
fuel cons.: 13.0l
lap time: 1:35.11

That's another set of inconsistent times between SportAuto and others. So it looks like not only Audi don't achieve decent results in the hands of SportAuto but BMW also has the same problem.

The only consistency is the manual car times, identical in both. Is there a possibility that AMS got the launch control to work and Sport Auto didn't?

[KresoF1]

Leadie,
TTS was tested by AMS, NOT Sport Auto.

M3 comparison was done by AMS and Auto Bild(figures in Clio16V are from Auto Bild). Sport Auto did not test M3 with M-DKG yet(next issue)...

[artur777]

KresoF1,

to be unbiased what are your predictions on real MDKG times 0-200?

[Leadfoot]

Leadie,
TTS was tested by AMS, NOT Sport Auto.

M3 comparison was done by AMS and Auto Bild(figures in Clio16V are from Auto Bild). Sport Auto did not test M3 with M-DKG yet(next issue)...

Sorry mate,

Knowing that you supplied the original M-DKG figures I just assumed they were from SportAuto. Silly me. :blush:

Though it's still interesting that it's the manual and not the semi-auto which is providing the more consistent, a bit of a surprise don't you think as I know how difficult it is to get a high powered rwd off the line.

[KresoF1]

KresoF1,

to be unbiased what are your predictions on real MDKG times 0-200?

Lets say around 15.5s is pretty good since as Leadie said manual times are pretty consistent...

[KresoF1]

Sorry mate,

Knowing that you supplied the original M-DKG figures I just assumed they were from SportAuto. Silly me. :blush:

Though it's still interesting that it's the manual and not the semi-auto which is providing the more consistent, a bit of a surprise don't you think as I know how difficult it is to get a high powered rwd off the line.

No problem. I agree with you manual is more consistent.
I am very interesting to see numbers for forthcoming Sport Auto test...

[artur777]

Sport Auto Test will be of great interest indeed.
Will it be an ordinary one or a Supertest at the Ring?

[Leadfoot]

Sport Auto Test will be of great interest indeed.
Will it be an ordinary one or a Supertest at the Ring?

I'm hoping for the supertest as it will be interesting to see what M-DKG does to the lap time if anything. If the car can make up 0.75s to 200km/h then something along the lines of 4secs is possible on there alone, the fact that dual clutch transmission usually make better traction coming out of corners should make up another 2~3secs. So best guess from me is a time of 7:58~8:00 is definitely on the cards wouldn't you think.

Frankly I reckon anything less will place the car in the middle of the field when cars like the big Caddy and the RS4/5 arrive.

[Clio16V]

At my work just arrived an e92 M3 with M-DKG but i don't think they will let me do the 0-200 test ;)

[artur777]

Ask them kindly ;-)

[Clio16V]

Some pictures of the M3-DKG:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v445/ErikT595/hpim0768.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v445/ErikT595/HPIM0770.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v445/ErikT595/HPIM0778.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v445/ErikT595/HPIM0774.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v445/ErikT595/HPIM0776.jpg

[artur777]

Cool :-)

[Leadfoot]

At my work just arrived an e92 M3 with M-DKG but i don't think they will let me do the 0-200 test ;)

Well they do need their run-in period before any silly stuff is tried out. :hihi:

[Clio16V]

;)

A nice movie of the M3 cabrio: http://www.autoweek.nl/videodisp.php?id=886&cache=no

[Leadfoot]

This is a review from Chris Harris of (Autocar and Drivers-Republic)



Audi TTS

Author: Chris Harris
<!--
Image: Charlie Magee-->
Back in the day, Autocar used to run a back page column called 'Why I love the....', and everyone -me included - regularly guffed on about the cars they loved. I wrote about the impossibly horny Audi S8, and then one day I asked the editor if he might permit me to write a 'Why I hate the...'. This was directed at another Audi, the TT.

It was, on reflection, a slightly misguided rant because the intended sentiment was hampered by the title of the series - what I wanted to attack was the notion that Audi had made a proper sports car - because it most certainly hadn't. I never disliked the old TT as a car, I just found it immensely irritating within the framework of Audi's irksome insistence that it made, and makes, sports cars.

Audi has come a very long way since 2001. It has made arguably the best sports saloon ever, the RS4 -and that you have to pause for a deep breath before passing judgement on the relative superiority of the R8 or the 911 is endemic of how capable a car maker it has become.

There are good Audis and there are indifferent Audis - but there are no bad Audis. Normally, you can tell within ten miles which type you're dealing with, and the new £33,390 TTS - thank the lord - falls into the good category. As much as anything, it's a matter of control weights, steering accuracy and quality of damping. In each of these categories, there are strong elements of RS4 to be found in the TTS, and praise doesn't come much higher than that.

To be blunt, what we have here is a TT with 10mm lowered suspension, adjustable dampers and a slightly re-mapped version of an S3 motor.But when that specification can be summarised as a 272bhp coupe that weighs 1395kg and uses all four wheels to put its 258lb ft of torque onto the surface, it sounds rather enticing. In a world where a newM3 is knocking on for 1700kg, it's an impressively light machine. Amusingly, all TTs now have a more rear-biased four wheel drive system. If they made such a change each time they claimed it, every Audi would now be driven by two auxiliary wheels hung ten feet behind the rear axle line.

You have to manage your expectations with this car. It is never going to provide the same level of excitement as a rear driven BMW M car, or for that matter a new Evo X, but what matters is how much Audi has closed the gap. For starters, it is fast. Audi claims 5.4sec to 62mph for the manual car I drove and 5.2 sec for the S-Tronic (for that read DSG). Torque builds the moment the rev-counter-needle (now white for the TTS) twitches and by 3000rpm it pulls very well indeed.Interestingly though, it still likes to rev and even though peak power comes at 6000rpm, there's ample incentive to go 1000rpm beyond that point. The installation is better than the S3's too, mechanical refinement in the TTS is markedly better; the exhaust noise is borderline naughty too.

There's suppleness and sophistication in the chassis too. With the dampers set to soft, it rides well and never feels uncontrolled at speed. In fact I wouldn't bother with the sport function unless on a smooth racing circuit - or on a pitted British B-road with a passenger you wish to aggravate. The steering is some of the best we've seen from Audi, very well judged not only for weight, but also for speed.

Styling additions are limited to new front and rear bumper treatments, some lower skirts and the obligatory silver 'S' mirrors.Few people can deny that the TT is an attractive thing, although having seen this car parked next to a line of standard versions, I have to say that the simpler the shape, the better I think it looks.But then I think nothing of wearing tennis shoes with jeans. The cabin is pretty much faultless: you sit low, the clocks are beautiful, the trim and build quality is typically superb and the seats will contain most frames.

Perhaps the cleverest thing about this car is the price. At nearly £10k less than the, admittedly much more potent Z4M, it lurks far enough below the big boys to look conspicuously good value. Factor in claimed combined consumption of 29.4mpg and just 191 g/km of CO2 and it begins to look like a bit of a performance bargain.

As for the usual Audi understeer jibes, just ignore them. Because for every occasion that M3 man has to smoke his rear rubber on a roundabout, there will be three others when this car would leave anything two wheel drive for dead on a wet, twisty road. This is Audi doing what it does best, mixing competence with graceful styling, fabulous quality and just enough fizz to keep hoons like me interested. All said, a pretty handy mixture.


Sounds like the kind of praise I like to hear. :D

P.S.
If you think that sounds good, well just wait for when they get their hands on the TT/RS. :hihi:

[SigmaS6]

If you think that sounds good, well just wait for when they get their hands on the TT/RS. :hihi:
At this time it doesn't sound like we should hold our breath for that though. Wasn't the earliest estimate for the RS-release 1 year after the TTS? That means we have to be very lucky if we even get an official spec from Audi before the end of this year.

But apart from that little glitch in the matrix I share your pleasant anticipation of the RS :)

[Leadfoot]

At this time it doesn't sound like we should hold our breath for that though. Wasn't the earliest estimate for the RS-release 1 year after the TTS? That means we have to be very lucky if we even get an official spec from Audi before the end of this year.

But apart from that little glitch in the matrix I share your pleasant anticipation of the RS :)

I agree that the likelihood of any of the mags getting to test one this side of Summer'09 is very slim indeed, but that's not to said that you will not hear glowing reports coming from other sources. ;)

Remember I have told you that it will be the one to watch and unfortunately until the mags actually gets their hands on it you will have to truth me on this one.

[SigmaS6]

Remember I have told you that it will be the one to watch and unfortunately until the mags actually gets their hands on it you will have to truth me on this one.
I never doubted that, I just hope they'll offer it earlier than Q4/09, otherwise the summer will be over when it's delivered. At least for me that would be a let down, during the fall and winter RS qualities aren't really that important. Spring and summer is usually the time when you appreciate it the most to have put some extra money in those two letters :)