Audi stupid to phase out 3.2L v6?
10-31-2009, 04:51 AM
#21
AudiWorld Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3.2 much slower?
Audi stated 3.2 stronic TT to 60mph in 5.3 sec vs. TTS 4.9 I don't consider that a significant difference. But, I'm sure the TTS feels faster because of the turbo boost kicking in.
10-31-2009, 05:06 AM
#22
AudiWorld Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Test drove another TTs yesterday. Don't see the 3.2L as significantly slower. More like with the TTs, one is stripping out some feel of a powerful car by the lack of engine timbre (ahhh, the sweet hum of a v6 or larger). Was again very impressed by how peppy the TTs is and that it does not sound strained at high sppeds (ferequent for a 4cyl. Had two reasonably pronounced episodes of lag during the test drive....and knowing you need to go or suffer potential harm (collision) is enough to concern me (once bitten by lag, twice shy). I'm going to purchase the 3.2L. I'll take a few mpg hit but anyone puppying up for one of these cars should not care about this issue IMHO (or at least have it as the deciding factor). An aside....the interior of the MK2 blows the MK1 outa the water, nice job Audi. I'd always thought the TT (MK1) once of the most comfortable sportscars out there for that price range. IMHO, the MK2 IS the most comfortable sportscar out there (have driven Boxsters, SLKs, BMW 135 in the past couple of weeks).
BosTTOn
BosTTOn
10-31-2009, 06:38 AM
#25
AudiWorld Member
In the real world though I haven't seen that # hit at least not in road tests. Most reviews have the TT-S in the 4.6 to 4.8 range to 60 while the best I saw for the 3.2 was 5.7 and as high as 6.1. There is nothing wrong with the 3.2 as I almost bought one but if you are truly looking for performance than the TT-S is the way to go. Bump the 3.2 to 300 HP and I'd switch in a second!
10-31-2009, 07:06 AM
#26
AudiWorld Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Road and Track Jan 07 3.2 0-60mph 5.1 sec
In the real world though I haven't seen that # hit at least not in road tests. Most reviews have the TT-S in the 4.6 to 4.8 range to 60 while the best I saw for the 3.2 was 5.7 and as high as 6.1. There is nothing wrong with the 3.2 as I almost bought one but if you are truly looking for performance than the TT-S is the way to go. Bump the 3.2 to 300 HP and I'd switch in a second!
11-03-2009, 12:58 PM
#27
AudiWorld Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Putting aside the question of how much faster/slower the 6cyl vs. 4cyl is (IMHO, both are quite nice), the bigger issue (and where I hoped this thread was going) was the general question of what the heck Audi is thinking by going with a sportscar with:
4cyl
turbo w/lag
no manual tranny
I appreciate that the TT has not been flying off the dealership lots for a few years. Sales have not been good (which is prolly a good thing as it makes people notice yer beautiful car more as it's a pretty rare sighting!). But those thinking sportscars and not the select few who will chip their vehicle, drive the DSG in manual or launch the car at every opportunity (reducing/elminiating lag and being overall nutjobs) will balk at the config of the 2010 TTS. Look at what Porsche and BMW have to offer....auto trannies?........auto trannies are pretty hard to get because people don't want them in their Porsche or BMW (or S2000). The MB SLK is mainly found config as an auto tranny but is thought of as mainly a chick car. People buy the MB SLK because of the hardtop or looks, not because of performance.
My take is that Audi has given up on trying to compete as a serious sportcars provider (at least with the TTS) and is targeting the people who would not normally gravitate to what many consider a serious sportscar. Now I know this will anger the TTS owners who are happy with their vehicles and think nothing of 4cyl, turbolag or no manual tranny....but the bottom line IMHO is that Audi has conceded the market to the other players.
BosTTon
4cyl
turbo w/lag
no manual tranny
I appreciate that the TT has not been flying off the dealership lots for a few years. Sales have not been good (which is prolly a good thing as it makes people notice yer beautiful car more as it's a pretty rare sighting!). But those thinking sportscars and not the select few who will chip their vehicle, drive the DSG in manual or launch the car at every opportunity (reducing/elminiating lag and being overall nutjobs) will balk at the config of the 2010 TTS. Look at what Porsche and BMW have to offer....auto trannies?........auto trannies are pretty hard to get because people don't want them in their Porsche or BMW (or S2000). The MB SLK is mainly found config as an auto tranny but is thought of as mainly a chick car. People buy the MB SLK because of the hardtop or looks, not because of performance.
My take is that Audi has given up on trying to compete as a serious sportcars provider (at least with the TTS) and is targeting the people who would not normally gravitate to what many consider a serious sportscar. Now I know this will anger the TTS owners who are happy with their vehicles and think nothing of 4cyl, turbolag or no manual tranny....but the bottom line IMHO is that Audi has conceded the market to the other players.
BosTTon
11-07-2009, 04:53 AM
#28
Audiworld Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: PA
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VF?
Has anyone every fitted the VF Engineering supercharger to the TT? I see it is available for the R32, why can't it be fitted to our 3.2TTs? The engine bay seems pretty tight, but I'm sure someone could come up with a place to put it.
I know it is expensive (about 4K) but you could potentially get 350 to 360HP.
I know it is expensive (about 4K) but you could potentially get 350 to 360HP.
11-08-2009, 01:07 PM
#30
AudiWorld Super User
Lets face it Audi USA have their head up their a$$
If you visit any US Mk 1 TT forum, 90% of the owners have 5/6 speed 180/225 Quattros.
The 3.2 and FWD hardly show up on the radar.
Audi USA decided to change the recipe for the Mk 2 and ,it is a technical success but a sales flop.
They have alienated the majority of the Mk1 owners.
I suspect unless I can afford an R8 (they hopefully will still have a manual), my next car will be something else.
The sad thing is, it was an easy fix, a four cylinder with around 265 hp , 6 speed and Quattro . The ingredients are still sitting on the shelf.
The 3.2 and FWD hardly show up on the radar.
Audi USA decided to change the recipe for the Mk 2 and ,it is a technical success but a sales flop.
They have alienated the majority of the Mk1 owners.
I suspect unless I can afford an R8 (they hopefully will still have a manual), my next car will be something else.
The sad thing is, it was an easy fix, a four cylinder with around 265 hp , 6 speed and Quattro . The ingredients are still sitting on the shelf.