Archive for The Motor Forum "We are mature men in the highest cadres of our careers"
 


       The Motor Forum Forum Index -> Read All About It
franki68

Audi TT rs

Evo article ..0-60 in 3.4 ,(official figure is 3.7),combined with its grip  must be the quickest real world B road car, something like a 991 turbo or gtr is too big.
PhilD

It's basically a group B rally car!

Looks good, amazing interior, 5 cylinder, practical...

Tempted?
franki68

I'm easily tempted these days , doesn't take much .
Nice Guy Eddie

Don't know if I'm becoming all too sensible but I'd take handling over power everytime and therefore all these RS models aren't interesting me. A slight lie because the RS6 does funny things to me but I think that more its arches then the fact it has 600hp. Id be just as happy if it had 400hp.

I guess its easier to get headlines with daft power figures than having a 300hp car that handles like an Elise.
PhilD

I agree NGE if it's a ground up design but if your starting point is a Golf then maybe POWERRRR is the only way to go!
Racing Teatray

Whereas I go for power and giggles over handling and queefery as a central London-ite.

Hence this appeals quite a lot.
Andy C

I love this bit

The claimed time for the sprint to 62mph (100km/h) is 3.7sec but using an app installed on the TT RS we recorded a 3.4sec sprint on Jarama’s main straight, quicker than the 3.5 seconds evo once recorded in an Enzo and near as dammit McLaren F1 quick in an Audi TT. Madness.
simonp

I think VAG are always a little coy with their claimed power figures. Apparently the 8V RS3 had around 385 ponies and dipped into the 3s to 60 as standard. That's why it is always faster than the Merc A45 in twin test drag races. This probably has more than 400 BHP...
Twelfth Monkey

simonp wrote:
I think VAG are always a little coy with their claimed CO2 figures.


FYP...
Frank Bullitt

The tiTTy aRSe is right up my street, 5-pots of warbling turbo-ness - lovely.
gooner

Twelfth Monkey wrote:
simonp wrote:
I think VAG are always a little coy with their claimed CO2 figures.


FYP...


The two could well go hand in hand!
Racing Teatray

simonp wrote:
I think VAG are always a little coy with their claimed power figures. Apparently the 8V RS3 had around 385 ponies and dipped into the 3s to 60 as standard. That's why it is always faster than the Merc A45 in twin test drag races. This probably has more than 400 BHP...


This does not surprise me. My abiding memory of the original RS3 is that it was savagely rapid - easily a match for the M5 I had at the time.

And having tried the current version recently, it was also comfortably quicker than the M135i and at the very least a match for the F-type S AWD I had tried earlier in the day.
simonp

I'm hoping there'll be a facelifted RS3, as the new lighter engine will help some with the understeeryness that the last two exhibited.
the other ct

Shame they won't put the 5 pot in the R8.
Stuntman

I so wish it could be had with a manual gearbox.
PhilD

the other ct wrote:
Shame they won't put the 5 pot in the R8.


5 pot and an electric motor.
Frank Bullitt

the other ct wrote:
Shame they won't put the 5 pot in the R8.


The V10 is surely enough of a treat?
him

As much as SCHMEE irritates me, this shows the car pretty well:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUzoj4l_LA4

Sounds and looks great...
Twelfth Monkey

Never heard of that person.  But surely they can't be more irritating than James Fucking Corden?
PhilD

Twelfth Monkey wrote:
Never heard of that person.  But surely they can't be more irritating than James Fucking Corden?


How have you missed the SCHMEEster?!
Twelfth Monkey

If I knew how to answer that question, we wouldn't be having this conversation!
PhilD

Enjoy catching up 12th  
franki68

He's well up there on the 'please punch me in the face ' list.
Tim

Twelfth Monkey wrote:
Never heard of that person.  But surely they can't be more irritating than James Fucking Corden?


+1 on both counts.
Twelfth Monkey

PhilD wrote:
Enjoy catching up 12th  


Not going to happen!  Now, where's that paintbrush?
simonp

Very desirable car. What's not so desirable is the thought of some twat kicking the front door in and "asking" for the keys one night...
Twelfth Monkey

I seem to be missing this month's evo.  Did they like it?
Giant

the other ct wrote:
Shame they won't put the 5 pot in the R8.


Sadly not:

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news...i-r8-gain-29-litre-v6-entry-model
Tim

Twelfth Monkey wrote:
I seem to be missing this month's evo.  Did they like it?


Which issue is that, I feel another one is about due through the door?
(I'm sure I've still got last month's but can't remember seeing a TT in it!)
gooner

Giant wrote:
the other ct wrote:
Shame they won't put the 5 pot in the R8.


Sadly not:

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news...i-r8-gain-29-litre-v6-entry-model


If they're looking to give the entry level R8 around 450bhp then the V6 twin turbo makes more sense. I also think that most of the R8s market wouldn't want a straight engine and only a V will do. Same for the RS4 and 5 which will also get the R8's V6.
Twelfth Monkey

Tim wrote:
Twelfth Monkey wrote:
I seem to be missing this month's evo.  Did they like it?


Which issue is that, I feel another one is about due through the door?
(I'm sure I've still got last month's but can't remember seeing a TT in it!)


It's not in November's, so I assume franki is referring to an issue I haven't received.
Tim

Twelfth Monkey wrote:
Tim wrote:
Twelfth Monkey wrote:
I seem to be missing this month's evo.  Did they like it?


Which issue is that, I feel another one is about due through the door?
(I'm sure I've still got last month's but can't remember seeing a TT in it!)


It's not in November's, so I assume franki is referring to an issue I haven't received.


The last one I got had a close-up of a carbon brake disc on the front cover.
I'll check the issue tonight
PhilD

Tim wrote:
Twelfth Monkey wrote:
Tim wrote:
Twelfth Monkey wrote:
I seem to be missing this month's evo.  Did they like it?


Which issue is that, I feel another one is about due through the door?
(I'm sure I've still got last month's but can't remember seeing a TT in it!)


It's not in November's, so I assume franki is referring to an issue I haven't received.


The last one I got had a close-up of a carbon brake disc on the front cover.
I'll check the issue tonight


Mine has a gear knob from original Skyline GT-R. Think disc was last month (and has TTRS)
Tim

PhilD wrote:

Mine has a gear knob from original Skyline GT-R. Think disc was last month (and has TTRS)


You're right Phil.
I think the latest one may be in the recycling lorry by now then.
PhilD

Tim wrote:
PhilD wrote:

Mine has a gear knob from original Skyline GT-R. Think disc was last month (and has TTRS)


You're right Phil.
I think the latest one may be in the recycling lorry by now then.


you throw them out!  
Twelfth Monkey

227 is knob, 226 was a train of cars shot, can't find 225 and 224 was brake disc.  Can't see TittyArse anywhere.

If they could make a well-balanced one with good steering, I might actually consider it.  The engine sounds great and I love the way the current model looks.
simonp

The Titty Arse tests are all online, I reckon. Will be in the monthlies in the next issues.
Tim

PhilD wrote:
Tim wrote:
PhilD wrote:

Mine has a gear knob from original Skyline GT-R. Think disc was last month (and has TTRS)


You're right Phil.
I think the latest one may be in the recycling lorry by now then.


you throw them out!  


Yup and I'm working my way through the Fast Lanes and CAR mags from the '80s and early '90s that have been at my parents for the last 20+ years.
PhilD

Tim wrote:
PhilD wrote:
Tim wrote:
PhilD wrote:

Mine has a gear knob from original Skyline GT-R. Think disc was last month (and has TTRS)


You're right Phil.
I think the latest one may be in the recycling lorry by now then.


you throw them out!  


Yup and I'm working my way through the Fast Lanes and CAR mags from the '80s and early '90s that have been at my parents for the last 20+ years.


To read or file under B?
simonp

I throw out magazines once I've read them...
Twelfth Monkey

Mine go to a friend.

TT-RS in Autocar this week.  Great engine, stonkingly fast, grippy, attractive, well-made etc etc.   But the usual 'but's still apply.   Oh well.

I find it frustrating, given that Quattro Gmbh has produced a few greats that it clearly chooses to stick with 'the template' for most of what it produces.  It sounds like reworked (ok, heavily reworked) steering and a more liberal hand in sending power rearwards is all it needs to be the complete article.
Martin

I pass my copies of Evo to my dad and he sends Autocar my way.  All get disposed of when read.

I've got several boxes of old mags and brochures in the garage which I got recently when my ex cleaned out the loft. Quite looking forward to going through them, but most will go for recycling.

I do like the new TT and the RS appeals even more since Porsche went down the 4 pot route.
Nice Guy Eddie

Its harder for Audi than Porsche I guess to make the TT-RS a drivers weapon

The TT has to exist at a lower price point and have a diesel engine and pliant ride for the normal punter and therefore turning the car into the RS your starting point is far from brilliant.

The Cayman on the flip side has no other role than as a sportscar to appeal to enthusiasts only. Reading the article the TT-RS didn't miss out by a huge margin over the Cayman therefore surely worth closer investigation.
Martin

If you're interested, it's definitely worth a closer look.  I certainly wouldn't dismiss anything because of a review, unless it was truly terrible.
Twelfth Monkey

I won't, but the steering is a big deal.  Even if you're just pootling to the shops, the sensation of knowing exactly what's going on at the front is worth a lot.  And there's a particular roundabout combo on the way back from swimming that I love - but as much as speed and grip, it's about knowing how much grip is left and feeling yourself lean on the car that makes it enjoyable and interactive.  Without that, it's just speed.  Jeez, I sound all Queefy...
Tim

According to the final paragraph (I can't be bothered reading the whole article) of the latest CAR mag test between the TT RS and the Cayman 4 pot what you need is something with a Porsche badge  
franki68

Twelfth Monkey wrote:
Tim wrote:
Twelfth Monkey wrote:
I seem to be missing this month's evo.  Did they like it?


Which issue is that, I feel another one is about due through the door?
(I'm sure I've still got last month's but can't remember seeing a TT in it!)


It's not in November's, so I assume franki is referring to an issue I haven't received.


Online , and check the youtubers.Very positive reviews especially regarding it on the road .The engine sounds fabulous too.
Tim

PhilD wrote:
Tim wrote:

Yup and I'm working my way through the Fast Lanes and CAR mags from the '80s and early '90s that have been at my parents for the last 20+ years.


To read or file under B?


File under B.
PhilD

Tim wrote:
PhilD wrote:
Tim wrote:

Yup and I'm working my way through the Fast Lanes and CAR mags from the '80s and early '90s that have been at my parents for the last 20+ years.


To read or file under B?


File under B.


bet you end up reading them  
simonp

Twelfth Monkey wrote:
Mine go to a friend.

TT-RS in Autocar this week.  Great engine, stonkingly fast, grippy, attractive, well-made etc etc.   But the usual 'but's still apply.   Oh well.

I find it frustrating, given that Quattro Gmbh has produced a few greats that it clearly chooses to stick with 'the template' for most of what it produces.  It sounds like reworked (ok, heavily reworked) steering and a more liberal hand in sending power rearwards is all it needs to be the complete article.


They'll never produce a great Haldex equipped car. They're still spouting that bullshit line about it being able to send "up to 100%" of the power to the rear wheels and the dumb journos seem to reel it out in every review, but it simply will never happen.
Martin

Twelfth Monkey wrote:
I won't, but the steering is a big deal.  Even if you're just pootling to the shops, the sensation of knowing exactly what's going on at the front is worth a lot.  And there's a particular roundabout combo on the way back from swimming that I love - but as much as speed and grip, it's about knowing how much grip is left and feeling yourself lean on the car that makes it enjoyable and interactive.  Without that, it's just speed.  Jeez, I sound all Queefy...


I know what you mean and agree, it's not really about being all Queefy, it's about having a car you can reall enjoy at sensible speeds.  Steering quality is key to that imo.
simonp

Canned?

...or just delayed?

If you look at the bottom of the TT-RS page at the Audi UK website it says that no orders are being taken.  
Martin

Have they been taking lessons from Porsche, come up with something that people really want to buy and then limit the numbers.

From the website

*Audi UK has been allocated an extremely limited number of cars. No factory orders available, Centre stock only. Correct at time of publication, November 2016
simonp

The audidotcom site states that the car is unavailable to order as it has not yet been type approved.
simonp

It turns out that Audi dropped the ball when it comes to new 2017 refrigerant rulings and fitted an A/C unit to the early cars that doesn't comply. That's why these cars need to be flogged off before the end of the year and then the redesigned ones will go on sale again some time in 2017. Apparently there are around 300 2016 ones kicking about in the UK until the order books reopen.
Twelfth Monkey

In this month's evo.  0-100 in 8.1, that's pretty fucking serious even if it is one-up and not carrying a full tank.

I get their 'just about' victory for the Cayman, but the engine would be an absolute deal-breaker for me.  But I'd happily have a TTRSe if compelled to change.  It sounds real-world fantastic (with the caveats about steering etc).
PhilD

Twelfth Monkey wrote:
In this month's evo.  0-100 in 8.1, that's pretty fucking serious even if it is one-up and not carrying a full tank.

I get their 'just about' victory for the Cayman, but the engine would be an absolute deal-breaker for me.  But I'd happily have a TTRSe if compelled to change.  It sounds real-world fantastic (with the caveats about steering etc).


Never mind the cars, how good is the photography in that piece!
franki68

Twelfth Monkey wrote:
In this month's evo.  0-100 in 8.1, that's pretty fucking serious even if it is one-up and not carrying a full tank.

I get their 'just about' victory for the Cayman, but the engine would be an absolute deal-breaker for me.  But I'd happily have a TTRSe if compelled to change.  It sounds real-world fantastic (with the caveats about steering etc).


virtually identical performance to a 997 turbo ,which is insane.
Thomas Magman

Autocar road test out today
60 in 3.6
100 in 8.4

in the damp

Insane for 50k new!  
PhilD

Twelfth Monkey wrote:
In this month's evo.  0-100 in 8.1, that's pretty fucking serious even if it is one-up and not carrying a full tank.

I get their 'just about' victory for the Cayman, but the engine would be an absolute deal-breaker for me.  But I'd happily have a TTRSe if compelled to change.  It sounds real-world fantastic (with the caveats about steering etc).


Following article on what £50k odd gets you in the used market. 25k R8 as an alternative to TTRS initially sounds amazing but then they say that the R8 is only about 20bhp more powerful and that the tarted up Golf is the quicker car!
Twelfth Monkey

But not the better one to drive, I suspect.  Not read it yet, though!
Chip Butty

Unbelievable performance for the quoted statistics (and the price).

DSG + 4wd must flatter the times somewhat (how would a 6 speed manual fair ?), but how does 394 bhp go so far ?. That's quicker than the latest RS6 isn't it ?.
Twelfth Monkey

Apparently the 4wd system pre-emptively sends a greater chunk to the back when you are going for it from a standstill, but that shouldn't make it much different from a permanent 4wd setup.

In comparison with Autocar's figures for the RS4 (which I will now have to refer as to being 'stock'...), the differences that stand out are:

0-30, 2/10ths.
30-40 1/10th (TT changes up at 38).
40-50 5/10ths (RS4 changes up as 42).
50-60 1/10th.
60-70 3/10ths. (TT changes up at 62).
70-80 4/10ths (RS4 changes up at 70).
80-90 3/10ths.
90-100 3/10ths. (TT changes up at 93).
100-110 5/10ths (RS4 changes up at 102).
110-120 5/10ths.
120-130 4/10ths. (TT changes up at 131, RS4 at 137)
130-140 8/10ths
140-150 1.3 seconds.

So to 150 it's over 5.5s faster, of which I reckon it's saved maybe half a second per gearchange.  If that's right, it' still 4s quicker, over half of which is made in the last 20 mph, where power tends to tell rather than torque or traction, and where neither car changes gear.  And opening up the gap, which is the reverse of what tends to be the case with turbo/DSG combinations.

Even with a manual, I think it'll crack 4s to 60 and 9 to 100.  Fast car.
JohnC

Maybe the turbo wick has been turned up a bit on these cars or the standard quoted figures are very conservative.
franki68

Chip Butty wrote:
Unbelievable performance for the quoted statistics (and the price).

DSG + 4wd must flatter the times somewhat (how would a 6 speed manual fair ?), but how does 394 bhp go so far ?. That's quicker than the latest RS6 isn't it ?.


No,the rs6 has regularly dipped below 8 secs to 100, and I think I saw the performance model dip below 7 to the ton.
Martin

It is very fast, more so than you'd expect, but isn't it 'only' 0.5 sec quicker to 100mph than an M4?  Maybe slightly less than that for the Competiton pack and once rolling wont they be broadlythe same?  

Similar price and the M4 gets proper rear seats.

They've both got more performance than you'll ever need (or be able to use very often) on the road so it doesnt make much difference.  I do really like the TTRS and would probably choose one over the M4 if i liked the way it drove.
Twelfth Monkey

franki68 wrote:
Chip Butty wrote:
Unbelievable performance for the quoted statistics (and the price).

DSG + 4wd must flatter the times somewhat (how would a 6 speed manual fair ?), but how does 394 bhp go so far ?. That's quicker than the latest RS6 isn't it ?.


No,the rs6 has regularly dipped below 8 secs to 100, and I think I saw the performance model dip below 7 to the ton.


Not in like for like.  Autocar's two-up/full tank figure for the standard RS6 was 8.7.
PhilD

Martin wrote:
It is very fast, more so than you'd expect, but isn't it 'only' 0.5 sec quicker to 100mph than an M4?  Maybe slightly less than that for the Competiton pack and once rolling wont they be broadlythe same?  

Similar price and the M4 gets proper rear seats.

They've both got more performance than you'll ever need (or be able to use very often) on the road so it doesnt make much difference.  I do really like the TTRS and would probably choose one over the M4 if i liked the way it drove.


And (depending on who you believe) as soon as you come to the first corner you would die.
PhilD

Twelfth Monkey wrote:
But not the better one to drive, I suspect.  Not read it yet, though!


Absolutely but, and accepting that the R8 was launched as a sports car and then morphed into a supercar, I'd still be annoyed if my supercar was not quicker than a shopping hatch.
franki68

Twelfth Monkey wrote:
franki68 wrote:
Chip Butty wrote:
Unbelievable performance for the quoted statistics (and the price).

DSG + 4wd must flatter the times somewhat (how would a 6 speed manual fair ?), but how does 394 bhp go so far ?. That's quicker than the latest RS6 isn't it ?.


No,the rs6 has regularly dipped below 8 secs to 100, and I think I saw the performance model dip below 7 to the ton.


Not in like for like.  Autocar's two-up/full tank figure for the standard RS6 was 8.7.


Same temperature  conditions ?
PhilD

Or Audi forgot to turn the wick up on Autocar's RS6?!
Twelfth Monkey

franki68 wrote:
Twelfth Monkey wrote:
franki68 wrote:
Chip Butty wrote:
Unbelievable performance for the quoted statistics (and the price).

DSG + 4wd must flatter the times somewhat (how would a 6 speed manual fair ?), but how does 394 bhp go so far ?. That's quicker than the latest RS6 isn't it ?.


No,the rs6 has regularly dipped below 8 secs to 100, and I think I saw the performance model dip below 7 to the ton.


Not in like for like.  Autocar's two-up/full tank figure for the standard RS6 was 8.7.


Same temperature  conditions ?


Clutching at straws again, I fear.
franki68

Twelfth Monkey wrote:
franki68 wrote:
Twelfth Monkey wrote:
franki68 wrote:
Chip Butty wrote:
Unbelievable performance for the quoted statistics (and the price).

DSG + 4wd must flatter the times somewhat (how would a 6 speed manual fair ?), but how does 394 bhp go so far ?. That's quicker than the latest RS6 isn't it ?.


No,the rs6 has regularly dipped below 8 secs to 100, and I think I saw the performance model dip below 7 to the ton.


Not in like for like.  Autocar's two-up/full tank figure for the standard RS6 was 8.7.


Same temperature  conditions ?


Clutching at straws again, I fear.


More experience of figures not always matching up to reality on countless occasions rather than clutching at straws.I like both cars ,not enough to buy either so I have no agenda .Autocars figures are within .5 seconds of everyone else with the time for the tt but nearly a second out on the rs6 in some cases.
The dbs was 8.4 seconds to 100 in autocar I think ,there is no way in a million years the rs6 isn't substantially quicker.
I was more surprised with the lap time being much quicker for the tt vs the Cayman ,that's impressive.
Dr. Hfuhruhurr

It's a shame Audi doesn't have an equivalent of Alpina, to do some nice chassis refinement on their sportier models.

       The Motor Forum Forum Index -> Read All About It
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum