Many iconic classics look great but are not the best to drive. Still nice to own.

Totally agree – E type classic example of this.

Anyway, TT mk1 is only a “poor” car to drive if you obsess about cornering ability at the edge of adhesion. There is so much more to owning/ driving than that.

Mk1 tt should have been marketed as an affordable pocket sized grand tourer.

Anyway, TT mk1 is only a “poor” car to drive if you obsess about cornering ability at the edge of adhesion. There is so much more to owning/ driving than that.

That’s where we have to disagree really, everyone drives for a different reason and has different weightings. How the car looks and whether it’s a design icon is just about rock bottom on my list. The fun, to me, of driving a car is about how it feels and how it reacts to what you do with it. All the rest is just tat and showmanship.

Obviously lets not forget when the TT came out in, what 1998 (?) 225hp was not to be sniffed at, and it was not that bad a drive.

The same power levels in a 4WD, lighter IIRC, car were available some 8 years earlier at a similar price?

LOL at hairdresser comments! Just driven my Dad’s “hairdresser” Mini Cooper S (the mk1) and regardless of image, it’s a HOOT to drive!

TTs are fairly decent. The 1.8T engine is a wee bit dull but pokey. 3.2 sounds much better but not a lot quicker (had the same engine in my Golf). Grip well, well made, fairly practical. Mk2 seems to have upped the game a fair bit.

But as for calling then “better” than a 350Z – ermmm one has nearly 300bhp (now over 300bhp), is RWD and sounds like a beast, the other is a nippy (not VERY fast unless TTS or TTRS) coupe based on a Golf. IMO a 350Z is much more fun – and yes I’ve tested one.

Driven both TT and 350Z, I found the 350Z much more fun to drive. Car was for wife and she ended up with a SLK350 instead but the 350Z was by far the most fun car to drive by a country mile. It in fact reminded me of a Japanese version of my old TVR Chimaera.

You probably found the 350z skitish because it was actually telling you what it was doing. Most cars these days totally insulate you from this.

New style TT looks very pretty though, IMHO the MK1 is looking its age.

Bazzer

You got the wrong end of my stick, although as I in the end bought a clio 197 I do have some sympathy with the cornering rules school of thought.

Forget the looks, A mk1 still feels a tight, cosy, luxury place to sit and the bigger engined version’s acceleration will press you back in your seat hard whilst the engine note will make your spine tingle. These are driver’s car characteristics and if the type of driving you do is mainly straighter lines and dual carriageways there is still a lot of pleasure to be had in the drivers seat. The mk1 3.2 v6 is still about 2/3rds of the way down the TG lap board. Once you get rid of the top third or more occupied by cars that cost most than most of our houses that puts it about half way down a bunch of cars selected for driver interest around a twisty track – not THAT bad…

All the rest is just tat and showmanship.

Some people just enjoy owning beautiful, iconic or well designed products.

Got any nice art?

The same power levels in a 4WD, lighter IIRC, car were available some 8 years earlier at a similar price?

Something gopping like a Scooby no doubt…

My missus had a Mk1 TT, and I never liked the thing, it was numb to drive and just like any other Audi inside. I got an RX8, and that was a breath of fresh air after the TT. My missus binned the TT soon after and I couldn’t get the keys for the Mazda off her. It used as much oil as petrol though.

Then came kids, and things like this had to go.

I like RX8s but the mpg and oil use is just insane.

I drive a Puma and never cared about the hairdresser thing – just seemed the best thing (fun/small) for me at the time I got it. Never liked the original TT though, thought it was pretentious maybe?, and also the S3 was a better car for less money anyway.

cynic-al, the BMW I almost didn’t buy because of the image was an X5 and driving them does have about the same image as being a “member of the third Reich”. I did buy it in the end though because it was so much better than my other options which were Toureg and Discovery.

As for your comment about owning beautiful, iconic or well designed products, for me, performance and “fit for purpose” are much more important than looks, but I accept that you and others have different values. Art doesn’t really come into it as it’s not a product, although some products are designed almost as works of art.

I had a 3.2l DSG V6 for 3 years. I used it for long distance drives to visits clients and everyday driving. Also used it for a road touring holiday with the missus from the south coast, through the Lakes and upto Scotland and had no issues with comfort.

Great fun to drive though. I second the comments about the turbo 1.8 versions about the lag. I test drove one of these and the V6 was far smoother (I also had an A3 1.8T Quattro for 3 years before which has the same engine).

With the mk1 version you do get alot of understeer when pushing it into corners (especially with the heavier V6 in the front) but the car is very comfortable for driving distances. So I would second the comments about the mk1 being a good tourer rather than an out and out sports car.

Art doesn’t really come into it as it’s not a product, although some products are designed almost as works of art.

Heopfully everyone has or knows of some art that they like/can appreciate.

Some like what they own to reflect an aesthetic too, that’s my point.

If it is a 2nd car for driving fun and no practical need then I would go for an MX5. fantastic fun, v reliable and pretty cheap to run too.

Most Audi’s just feel dull. I did the terrible thing and became a BMW driver after my wife bought a 3 series. Test drove an A4 and A6 but they both felt the same as my old Vectra whereas the BMW lets you feel what is happening with the steering wheel.

What about a 3 Series coupe or soft top. Father in law has a 325 soft top and the straight six is a lovely engine.

Agree with bruk. I have driven some fast Audi’s in my time and the only one that got me going was a Dialynx Sport Quattro Conversion and an old Audi 80 Sport with Quattro Turbo 10v running gear. What a Qcar that was. The handling is good but you don’t feel it in the same way as you do in a good rear wheel drive car, say a Mk1 M3. I’d go for a 3 series. Should be plenty good ones around now due to the weather! A lad at work has a 330 D fantastic car. Probably faster than the TT and certainly cheaper on fuel.

No idea about the old TT but the new one (2.0 petrol) comfortably does 38/42 mpg – I would guess that is comparable/better than a 330d and the fuel is cheaper.

Is that the manufacturers figure done in a controlled atmosphere in a lab or the real world on the road. I see some MPG figures bandied about that in my experience seem a tad high. The only way to accurately test the mpg on a car is over a year, logging every fill with the actual distance travelled not what the speedo says as they invariably read high. Driving normally, cold starts and a mixture of journey lengths. Not one person who I know who has tried this has got anywhere near the supposed MPG of their car. Maybe your just a really good driver 😉

My ex had a MK1. It was a nice place to be in terms of the cabin – very nicely finished.

But it was crap to drive. The engine (225bhp) was very ‘thrashy’ and not really satisfying. It just didn’t feel fast. And it wasn’t that nice handling either – a bit too neutral and unfeeling (a bit like the Ex really!).

They are quite girly cars as well.