I know that Audi TT is generally hated here, but what is Veeky Forums's opinion on the TTS?
- 265 hp, 258 lb-ft
- 0-60 in the low 5's
- Pretty good fuel economy for its performance
- 4-wheel traction for the Winter
- No manual for us Americans, though pretty much every review I've looked at says the automated dual-clutch w/ paddles is very slick.
>inb4 chick car
>inb4 Golf with a bodykit
Get a cayman instead.
I heard that the Quattro is pretty front-biased. Like 80-20 or something.
Superior driving dynamics, no question. But how much more expensive is it to maintain than the Audi? What about practicality as a daily?
Personally I like them, but
>turbo I-4
>could still look less like a chick car
The main knock is just that it's so expensive it competes with all kinds of cars - M2, Mustang GT, 370z NISMO are all similar if not cheaper depending on options
Very practical for a sports car, and I'd imagine it to be more practical than the TT since it has both a rear hatch and a frunk. You lose out on rear seats compared to the TT though, so I guess it depends on your needs.
Cargo capacity? Cayman probably wins.
Got more than 2 people in your car, ever? TT takes it, although there's also Mustangs, Camaros and [spoiler]a fucking Hyundai[/spoiler] that offer the same thing, but RWD instead of Haldex front-biased AWD.
If you can afford to maintain a tts you can afford to maintain a cayman. Besides, you should be doing some maintenance yourself.
Just as practical as a tt. But you're buying a sporty coupe, why are you worried about practicality?
>You lose out on rear seats compared to the TT
Eh, I'd probably just end up folding them down for a larger trunk anyways. They look pretty useless.
>Besides, you should be doing some maintenance yourself
But that would mean I have to actually do some research and stuff :-(
I've never even changed my own oil lol
>why are you worried about practicality?
Because I don't want two cars.
There's always time to start wrenching. You'll save a lot of money in the long run, as well as learn some useful skills.
How does one go about finding independent shops to do the work for cheaper? Don't wanna be raped by the stealership...
You should change your own oil. I'm sure there's a video on YouTube or a guide on a forum.
Just Google Porsche mechanics in your area. They'd be in a bigger city and/or the rich part of town.
The best part is Porsche actually keeps maintenance in mind when designing their cars, so they're not even insanely hard to work on.
For instance, you'd expect changing belts to be a hell of a job in a mid-engined car like a Cayman, but they have removeable engine compartment access panels behind the rear seats.
>- 265 hp, 258 lb-ft
>- 0-60 in the low 5's
is that seriously it? i know theyre chick cars but i figured they were at least somewhat fast. thats just embarrassing.
Golf R/Audi S3 with a bodykit.
At least the RS is pretty fast (and it sounds great, mu I5).
It's nothing crazy, but enough to have fun with. Really depends what you're used to.
Calling it embarrassing is a bit dramatic I think.
the i5 is nice. still transverse though. and in that awful car. i wonder if one of those could be mated to a tip- or s-tronic and mounted longitudinally in an a4 or something.
>0-60 in the low 5's
>not even somewhat fast
You sure have some pretty high standards user. Please share with us your sub-5 second car.
personally i think ts embarrassing namely because it's an S. if it were a normal TT then theres no expectation for it to be fast, so its not pretending to be something its not. its a girly car and youre a girly man. whatever. but an S model car that cant even break into the 4s 0-60 is just plain sad.
its not even about my car, its about the expectations of driving a 'performance' model. theres the base TT which is not fast, and not supposed to be, and then theres the S which is supposed to be, but isnt. if the car weighed 2 tons itd be one thing but its friggen tiny. how can you not get such a tiny little car into the 4s 0-60 in the 'performance' model?
>its a girly car and youre a girly man
Way to blow your cover. Can't even take the rest of your post seriously now.
i 'blew my cover'? lol. thats fine, im just offering my opinion. youre free to disregard it.
H A L D E X
O
M
O
S
E
X
My issue is that you think a low 5 second car isn't even "somewhat fast." That would imply that a somewhat fast car by your definition is in the 4's. AKA: a car that is almost fast.
What is fast then? 3's? Lol...
its all relative. if a new porsche cayman did 0-60 in 5s itd be embarrassing. if my mom's old minivan did it itd be impressive. pretty simple concept. again, just my personal opinion. a base TT doing 5s would be fine but if youre paying extra for performance and your car isnt performing then i find that to be silly.
>cant even break into the 4s 0-60
>pretending to be something its not
Not really. It's a TT with notably improved performance, hence the "S" label. That doesn't mean it has to match a Corvette in a drag race.
>its all relative
By your definition, a WRX is not even "somewhat fast." How does that make sense?
if a stock 2016 TT did 0-60 in 9 seconds and a 2016 TT-S 'performance' model did it in 8, would you find that to be acceptable? simply because it was improved? hell, V6 honda accords do 0-60 in the 5s.
look dude honestly youre getting sort of autistic about this and im not sure if i really care enough to get into a serious debate with you about this topic that i really dont care much about. personally yes i would not consider a wrx fast. but the wrx is essentially the base model, so a 5 second 0-60 in a base model is pretty much what i would expect. the sti (performance model) on the other hand is a 4s 0-60 car, so yea, makes sense to me.
youre not going to agree with me and youre not going to change my mind so i dont see what the point of arguing about this is. you think the TT-S is fast. cool. buy one. i dont care.
Not him, but here's how I see it:
The WRX is more like one step down from the top, the STI.
Kinda like how the TTS is one step down from the top, the TTRS.
>if a stock 2016 TT did 0-60 in 9 seconds and a 2016 TT-S 'performance' model did it in 8
This is downplaying how much the TTS is improved over base TT. Convenient for your argument.
>but the wrx is essentially the base model
The base model of a car which is inherently more performance-oriented than a base TT.
>you think the TT-S is fast
I never said this you dumb fuck. I've repeatedly said that my objection is to your claim that it's an embarrassment and not even somewhat fast. This is unreasonably high standards.
look if im destroying your world view then just disregard what im saying. im just some random asshole on the internet, who cares what i think. and if you still cant get over what im saying then just get a tune for it. if its running low 5s stock and has a turbo then it should easily be able to get into the 4s with a tune.