Forum menu
After a 2nd car at the moment and quite like the look of the Audi TT's.
You can pick them up 2nd hand with really low miles for under 10k.
Anyone on here own one? Have you had any issues?
Are you a hairdresser?
<googles for images of hairdressers with fake tans>
Latest style or original?
I have the latest one (2.0 FSi) and have no real issues - a really nice car to drive and VERY quick.
The only problem I have had in 2 years is the radio sometimes switches itself off when the cabin is hot (ie in the middle of summer).
Ohh, and the boot is actually quite a reasonable size and you can get two bikes in with the rear seats (which are pointless anyway) down.
It is technically a 4 seater but you will struggle to get an adult in the back.
No i have no hair!!
I know thats what people associate them with but from research I have done they look to be good cars. 225BHP and Quattro should mean its a fun drive.
They're ok - about as much as you can say about them to be honest. Had a Mk1 TT for about 6 months, didn't really do anything for me to be honest, found it rather bland to drive, but then there wasn't anything wrong with it either.
Driven a Mk2 TTRS a few times which is very nice and much better than the Mk1.
Depends what you are aftr, there are better sports cars out there - 350Z, S2000, even the new MX5 is more fun to drive.
225BHP and Quattro should mean its a fun drive.
You would think, but in reality - no.
Not me but work mate has a 59 plate and two friends own older models - no issues worth mentioning that would cause a concern. The older have all been reliable and still feel a solid drive and only had general servicing needs.
Only issue my work mate has is a lot of p***taking about being a hairdresser...
Depends what you are aftr, there are better sports cars out there - 350Z, S2000, even the new MX5 is more fun to drive.
The 350Z is awful, the S2000 is comparable, the MX5 is a nice car to drive but way down on power.
225BHP and Quattro should mean its a fun drive.
The 2.0FSi is universally regarded as the best of them - a more balanced ride. Although I could see why, on wet, wintry roads, the Quattro would be useful.
350Z awful? Under what context? It is a fantastic car to drive compared to the TT
The MX5 is down a bit on power but only a second slower to 60 than the 225bhp and faster than the 180bhp
Well I test drove both and didn't like it one bit - skittish and the interior was typical Japanese plastic.
And it looks like shit on the outside.
(IMO)
skittish
Yes, i suppose compared to the soft TT it would feel a little skitish. Its much stiffer, with more power and RWD.
And What Car agree...
[b]TT[/b]
**
For
The TT has stunning looks inside and out - it's a design icon now - [b]and a drive to match[/b]
Against
Reliability has been a real issue, and it's more of a tourer than a sports car
Verdict
The TT still looks as fresh as the day it first appeared, and it remains a real head-turner
[b]350Z[/b]
*
For It's got bucketloads of brute force and aggression, and stands out from the crowd
Against [b]Other cars in the class are better to drive, and the 350Z lacks a prestige badge[/b]
Verdict Good head-turner, but not as civilised as rivals
Yes, i suppose compared to the soft TT it would feel a little skitish. Its much stiffer, with more power and RWD.
Being stiffer (debatable) shouldn't make it skittish. More power (comparable models across the range at all power levels) wouldn't - just more unbalanced due to heavier blocks (such as the V6 TT which is too front-heavy) and RWD - well BWM manage to deal with RWD without being in the slightest bit skittish (at least the 330 Series I test drove).
Interesting, as What Car actually says:
For
The Audi TT still manages to looks chic and sophisticated after all these years
Against
It's uninvolving to drive, and the cabin is not as spacious as some rivals'
Think you are looking at the new TT!! - you need to compare that with the 370Z
Hairdresser comments are from Clarkson wannabes or sheep imo - take no notice. Original is a design icon, 2nd a great (better) car of the moment but won't go down in history as a "signpost" design like the mk1.
We seriously thought about one recently as our only car to go with a van - wife wanted something smallish and I wanted something fun.
I drove a few whilst thinking about it - mk1 3.2 V6 as we were after a DSG and then the later ones with the 2.0 turbo engine from the Golf gti and dsg. I liked them both. The older mk1 might not be all that in terms of handling but it depends how hard you plan on driving it. It was however a very nice place to be and would eat up motorways miles at silly speeds and comfort if you wanted it to. Mk2 good all around. Both surprisingly practical for 2 but forget about anyone ever in the back.
Bizarrely ended up with a much newer Clio Renaultsport which in many ways could not be more different to the Audi, esp mk1, but fulfilled our requirements just the same. This one is a hoot on B roads; much harder to drive fast in a good challenging way as rev management is so critical but much less relaxed for swift motorway/autobahn progress and build quality not quite as good. This car has got me thinking about how I drive more that any car I've driven before (and heel and toeing which I haven't done for years). Image is also very different. I'm just very glad I couldn't have afforded one in my yoof as I would probably have killed myself!
The latest generation TT is meant to be quite good according to all the road tests - not just for hairdressers any more.
You should also look at the the VW Scirocco which is fundamentally the same car, looks better (IMO), more fun to drive, is cheaper and build quality on a par
The MX5 is down a bit on power but only a second slower to 60 than the 225bhp and faster than the 180bhp
I guess you are talking about the Mk1 then? There isn't either a 180bhp or 225bhp MkII. And I have never driven a MkI to have an opinion of them.
Think you are looking at the new TT!! - you need to compare that with the 370Z
LOL yes I am!!!
I guess you are talking about the Mk1 then?
I don't think he will get a low mile Mk2 for under £10k!!!
I do love the Scirocco's but there above my price point at the moment!
The Nissans I really do not like. They look like some kind of boy racer car.
I just want something thats nice to drive and more fun than our Landrover. I hate using the Lnady for motorway milage hence looking now.
Yes sorry its the mk1 i was loking at.
Had the 3.2 V6 in 2005 for 6 months.
[url= http://farm1.static.flickr.com/9/13461290_f62a09bcd2.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/surfr/13461290/ ]IMG_2969.sized[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/surfr/ ]Surfrdan[/url], on Flickr
Lovely interior. Plenty of power and torque from the V6. Suited my engine preferences at the time. Got me into trouble with plod though so I chopped it in early for a Focus in an attempt to temper my right foot. Having since owned 2 MX5s and and RX8 I'd say that it drives well but not as well as the Mazdas. The R8 has a whole pile of other issues though and NONE of the above are practical, although I did squeeze a bike into the RX8 on many an occasion.
[url= http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3394/3648239824_117155d2ca.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/surfr/3648239824/ ]How to fit a bike in an RX8[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/surfr/ ]Surfrdan[/url], on Flickr
Buy a rack if you want to cart bikes around.
Now knocking around in a high milage 1.6 TDCi Focus with the seats down and a huge tarp in the back for throwing bikes inside. It's awesome and I love it to bits. No longer feel the need for speed and handling. Guess those 11 points on the license worked eventually (clean now).
If it is the MkI you are looking at I would have to agree the MX5 or the S2000 would be worthy considerations.
not just for hairdressers any more.
LOL at these comments - do folk really choose cars according to what Clarkson or even non-idiots say about them?
How about choosing it on factors such how it drives? TT - not the best, MX5 for the money, unbeatable (oldies at least).
Ditto re. BMWs - if you avoid buying a good car because of what folk will think, more fool you.
Is there a sports car that people, using their powers of original thought and inventive hilarity, won't call a hairdresser's car?
Is there a sports car that people, using their powers of original thought and inventive hilarity, won't call a hairdresser's car?
Of course - all the stuff they'll never afford.
How about choosing it on factors such how it drives?
Agreed.
I have had a Puma and a TT now (amongst some other quite camp cars) but I don't care what people say, enjoy the car for what it is, not what someone else suggests it might be.
You do realise that you have to have special advanced driving lessons before you are allowed on the motorway in a TT or A5.
They couldn't possibly all be a*ses for no reason.
[i]They couldn't possibly all be a*ses for no reason.[/i]
Yeah, cos all other drivers are wonderfully considerate 😕
I've owned both the Mark 1 TT 225 and V6. Not the greatest of out right driver's cars, but for most of us, that doesn't matter
Both were feel good cars, although the V6, if not quicker, ramped up the feel good factor x10 purely because of the engine and its noise. The downside is it was slighty more nose heavy. Both are quite practical as the rear seats fold competely flat if needs must.
The only donwn side of the 225 is the engine, depending on if you like the "whoosh" of the turbo. In terms of character and refinement it is well down on that found in the mark 5 Golf GTI, although still slightly quicker.
An option is to look for the limited edition TT which had the same 1.8 turbo engine but with increased power circa 240hp.
The Mark 2 TT is a very good car - basically a slightly quicker Golf GTI.
I had a Mk1 225bhp soft top when they were still quite new (X plate). Very nice but too fast for me - I had to be doing 100+ before it got fun. I'd pootle down the motorway and then floor it to go round corners and wrecked the corners of all 4 tyres in no time.
As for being fun to drive, I preferred my old MK2 Golf
The main issues I had with it were my ex-wifes inability to avoid speed cameras, kerbs and lorries
My wifes got a 150bhp, FWD convertable (which is up for sale due to recent arrival of daughter if you're interested) They are not sports cars in any guise, they simply don't handle in a way that you'd want to take it to a track day. However, she (and I) has never wanted to take it to a track day. She's wanted something thats reliable (it is), fast enough (it'll do 125mph easily enough, not that I'd know :oops:), cna put the roof down when it's sunny and that doesn't rape your wallet you each time it gets serviced or you fill up the tank. It's been great and she wouldn't change it now but for the need for more seats. Oh, and I quite like driving it as well, it does feel fun to drive, you're just not going to get the back end out (which I honestly don't think is a drawback....)
Get a Lotus Elise if its a second car.
Audi TT are for posers 😆
LOL at these comments - do folk really choose cars according to what Clarkson or even non-idiots say about them?How about choosing it on factors such how it drives? TT - not the best, MX5 for the money, unbeatable (oldies at least).
Yes of course they do for two reasons:
1) If you read the serious reviews, expert road testers will tell you exactly what they are like and how they compare. No different to buying anything else, assuming you read reviews before you buy stuff
2) For a lot of people image is a big thing, and works both ways. For instance I have in the past seriously considered not buying a BMW because of the negative image
And of course the reason the TT was considered a hairdressers car was because it looked great but was pretty rubbish to drive
Not driven either the Mk1 or Mk2 TT, but isnt it commonly known that the Mk1 is sh!t to drive and the Mk2 pretty good for a grown up sports car?
"Well I test drove both and didn't like it one bit - skittish"
Mk3 Mx5's are notorious for being very skittish. Some dimwit decided that the UK Mk3 should have 4x4 suspension on it. ie larger springs which upset the geometry.
With properly set up geometry the MX5 is incredibly stable and an absolute blast to drive.
how about best of both worlds - VAG 2.0T engine, cheaper and more practical than TT - Mk5 Golf GTi ???
For instance I have in the past seriously considered not buying a BMW because of the negative image
Your choice, I think it's daft though, it's not like you're joining the Third Reich.
What's wrong with pretty but average cars anyway? The TT was mold-breaking and IMO one of the few (if any) current cars likely to become a classic.
Many iconic classics look great but are not the best to drive. Still nice to own.
Obviously lets not forget when the TT came out in, what 1998 (?) 225hp was not to be sniffed at, and it was not [i]that[/i] bad a drive. Many a person whould have been spanked by a "hairdresser" at the TLGP. 😀
I genuinely dislike the look of the TT, it's just not pleasant in my view and I don't understand the "icon" status people are giving it. Hairdressers car - only in the terms of the people who drive them are generally those who want a "fast" car but don't know anything about them. Of course some people DO know about decent cars and still buy them - so they can't be all that bad.
Never driven a TT, but 4wd sports cars often put people off because they are remarkably different to drive than a fast RWD car. The characteristics of the car are totally different and can feel a lot more planted and solid, and therefore boring, if you are not using them at their limits. The thing is their limits are usually, in many respects, a lot further away than a fast RWD car, so most people don't dare go near them and get bored. In my 4wd sports car (more of a GT really) I am usually scared off LONG before the car is close to getting upset, and I like cornering and acceleration more than many. In a RWD car of similar power and speed I've been petrified going into, round and out of the same corners that I'd do quicker and at full throttle in my 4WD.
It's largely about personal taste. But for me the looks of the TT just don't cut it.
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...