Threxx 07-10-2006, 03:48 PM Man this thing sounds pretty cool!
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FirstDrives/articleId=116006#10
I'm especially interested since they make mention of what sounds like a pretty fun to drive DSG transmission - my wife is whining that our next 'fun' car be an automatic.:(
L.A. Z 07-10-2006, 04:33 PM I cant get excited over a 250hp bubble. If I want a lightweight two seater, a wicked interior, and a good handler, Id save myself 15 grand and get a Sky RL. Seriously, what about this car realy justifies its price? It might be fun to drive off a mountain....err...down a mountain, but 40 grand?:confused:
PacerX 07-10-2006, 05:02 PM I cant get excited over a 250hp bubble. If I want a lightweight two seater, a wicked interior, and a good handler, Id save myself 15 grand and get a Sky RL. Seriously, what about this car realy justifies its price? It might be fun to drive off a mountain....err...down a mountain, but 40 grand?:confused:
Which has always been the TT's problem...
For 40ish grand you get yerself a Corvette.
Hmmm...
TT or Vette? TT or Vette?
Wow...
I'm really gonna have to think on that one HARD.
Oh...
And one more thingy...
Am I wrong or does the big-gun Sky and Solstice motor make 10 more horsepower than the 3.2 liter in the TT?
Wow...
GM just won a hp/L argument...
Imagine that...
Mikes25thAnnTA 07-10-2006, 05:13 PM Well... at least it doesn't look quite as ghey as it used to.
Threxx 07-10-2006, 05:27 PM I cant get excited over a 250hp bubble. If I want a lightweight two seater, a wicked interior, and a good handler, Id save myself 15 grand and get a Sky RL. Seriously, what about this car realy justifies its price? It might be fun to drive off a mountain....err...down a mountain, but 40 grand?:confused:
Very likely the interior is much nicer, all wheel drive stability (very popular up north especially), higher feature content, and a chassis/steering setup that is almost unbeatable in the predictability and fun department.
Kinda the same reasons why people still buy a 3-series BMWs even though on paper it doesn't really seem all too impressive in any one area...
The 3.2L V6 will likely be seeing an upgrade after the first year.
And for 43 grand this thing should from what I've heard come loaded to the hilt including the DSG trans, magnetic ride control, navi, etc. That's not far from the Vette's price point but still almost 10 grand lower and with a driving experience that some people may prefer over the Vettes as I doubt they're very similar in the way they drive.
With that said I'd take the Vette hands-down if I were buying something... but Audi tends to have favorable lease rates. In fact I'd be surprised if leasing a 40k dollar Audi 07 TT would cost me anything past 500/month with zero down for 36 months. I've priced out lease rates on the Vette and it's retarded... like to the tune of 900-1000/month. I could get a almost 90k dollar E63 AMG Benz for a lease rate like that and it'd be nearly as quick!;)
Evilfrog 07-10-2006, 05:48 PM Does it come in a convertable? If not why would you compare it to the sky/solitce?
centric 07-10-2006, 05:59 PM Man this thing sounds pretty cool!
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FirstDrives/articleId=116006#10
Just make sure you have a chase car to pick up all the pieces that fall off of it.
Audi = looks good, doesn't last.
MagnaPilot 07-10-2006, 06:54 PM Just make sure you have a chase car to pick up all the pieces that fall off of it.
Audi = looks good, doesn't last.
Having seen and driven multiple VW/Audi's during my 3 year stint in germany... I will second that point. I don't ever want to work on a German car ever again.
cmutt 07-10-2006, 09:55 PM What am I missing here?
2.0L + turbocharged + direct injection = 200hp? Why such pathetic output? GM pushes 260hp out of their boosted, DI 2.0L motors.
PacerX 07-11-2006, 07:59 AM What am I missing here?
2.0L + turbocharged + direct injection = 200hp? Why such pathetic output? GM pushes 260hp out of their boosted, DI 2.0L motors.
This is a very strange position we're in here...
Not only is GM out-powering another manufacturer (which is normal), they're doing it on only 2.0 liters...
Will wonders never cease?
Threxx 07-11-2006, 12:24 PM See what doesn't make sense though is that 6 years ago the 2001 Audi TT was available with a 1.8L turbo 4 making 225 horsepower and 207 torque and that was WITHOUT direct injection, either!
The current direct injection 2.0T is only rated at 200hp/207 torque. Though there are several programs available from various third party companies that boost hp to around 260 and tq to around 290 on the Audi 2.0T running 93 octane, and supposedly say it won't impact reliability at all, though I'm not sure how true of a statement that really is... unless of course Audi just didn't want to compete with their own 3.2L? Maybe once the 3.2L V6 is revised to produce a more competetive power output they'll increase the boost?
muckz 07-11-2006, 04:27 PM What am I missing here?
2.0L + turbocharged + direct injection = 200hp? Why such pathetic output? GM pushes 260hp out of their boosted, DI 2.0L motors.
Well, the numbers do sound pathetic. Yet the performance derived from this engine is astounding to me.
Picture 3500 lbs all-wheel-drive Audi A4, with this 2.0L engine and 6-speed manual transmission. That engine propels the car through the 1/4 mi in 14.9 - 15.0 seconds at 94 mph.
muckz 07-11-2006, 04:29 PM I cant get excited over a 250hp bubble. If I want a lightweight two seater, a wicked interior, and a good handler, Id save myself 15 grand and get a Sky RL. Seriously, what about this car realy justifies its price? It might be fun to drive off a mountain....err...down a mountain, but 40 grand?:confused:
Well, there are many things available with this car that aren't available with Saturn/Pontiac.
DSG, for one thing.
All wheel drive, for another.
Advanced magnetic suspension.
A more wicked interior, fit and finish.
Does it all justify the 43K? Personally i would not buy that car. But I wouldn't buy BMW M3 either, or Lexus SC430.
Threxx 07-11-2006, 04:43 PM Well, the numbers do sound pathetic. Yet the performance derived from this engine is astounding to me.
Picture 3500 lbs all-wheel-drive Audi A4, with this 2.0L engine and 6-speed manual transmission. That engine propels the car through the 1/4 mi in 14.9 - 15.0 seconds at 94 mph.
My 100% stock FWD 2.0T A4 did 15.1 @ 93 on my first time to the track with it (best of three runs and I'm not a great stick driver, either).
L.A. Z 07-12-2006, 05:12 PM The current direct injection 2.0T is only rated at 200hp/207 torque. Though there are several programs available from various third party companies that boost hp to around 260 and tq to around 290 on the Audi 2.0T running 93 octane, and supposedly say it won't impact reliability at all, though I'm not sure how true of a statement that really is... unless of course Audi just didn't want to compete with their own 3.2L? Maybe once the 3.2L V6 is revised to produce a more competetive power output they'll increase the boost?
I happen to be driving a new 1.8T jetta everyday (no choice of my own) and it sucks! the car has been in for warranty work 6 times! in as many months. I cant stand it, The console broke today. The button to open it just broke right off. Its a total piece of crap. Every Audi I have been in uses many of the same parts inside and under the hood as my loaded Jetta, so....i would say that anyone that says they can increase power by 60hp without sacrificing reliability is in dreamland. Just starting the car or touching it sacrifices the reliablity. Didnt I see VW/ Audi near the bottom of a reliability test recently? Imma go look it up...
Threxx 07-12-2006, 05:33 PM I happen to be driving a new 1.8T jetta everyday (no choice of my own) and it sucks! the car has been in for warranty work 6 times! in as many months. I cant stand it, The console broke today. The button to open it just broke right off. Its a total piece of crap. Every Audi I have been in uses many of the same parts inside and under the hood as my loaded Jetta, so....i would say that anyone that says they can increase power by 60hp without sacrificing reliability is in dreamland. Just starting the car or touching it sacrifices the reliablity. Didnt I see VW/ Audi near the bottom of a reliability test recently? Imma go look it up...
Yep - VW is near the bottom in 90 day initial quality... Audi isn't too much further up either (still well below average). That's why I leased my Audi.
If your Jetta is a 1.8T, then it isn't new. The 1.8t was discontinued in the Jetta at the end of the previous generation design. The all new Jetta came out in 2005 with the 2.0T - much nicer car all around IMO (it SEEMS less cheap though I have no doubt it's still a POS underneath)... 20 more ponies... 34 more pounds of torque with a much flatter curve.
And FWIW I've driven an 06 Jetta 2.5 (n/a) as a loaner car twice - once when they were fixing my driver's seat which squeeked a lot, and once for the 5000 mile service interval. I hated it too. This A4 is WAY more pleasurable to drive and WAY nicer inside in terms of the whole tactile issue.
But I'll say it again - if Audi pulled 225 ponies out of the non direct injection OEM 1.8T in the 2001 Audi TT... then of course 260 ponies out of a 2.0T with direct injection shouldn't be that big of a deal unless there's some major change to the overall strength of the motor between the two that I'm missing?
MissedShift 07-12-2006, 06:14 PM Reliablility and Performance aside.
The damned thing looks like the bastard child of a Porshe and a VW beetle.
Gloveperson 07-12-2006, 07:12 PM I'm especially interested since they make mention of what sounds like a pretty fun to drive DSG transmission - my wife is whining that our next 'fun' car be an automatic.:(
I drove the VW GTI with a DSG transmission. It really is everything it is cracked up to be. It is so fast, so smooth and it really gave me the feel you get of being in control of the vehicle that a conventional manual does.
It engine brakes and there is no comparison to the placement of the paddle shifter as compared to stick on the console.
Being able to put it into automatic mode for traffic sure would be convenient.
cmutt 07-13-2006, 08:19 AM Sorry to hear about your car issues L.A. Z. My bro had a '01 Jetta (new) that gave him endless fits for 18 months. He had problems with just about everything. Just bizarre crap: the key-in-ignition warning chime going off repeatedly while driving down the freeway, windows not working, etc. He had a problem with a rough idle, stalling, just a whole host of crap. He *loved* the car when it ran straight - which was rare. When the check engine light came on after 18 months of b.s., he brought it into VW and told them to fix the check engine light so he could trade the P.O.S. away. Unfortunately, VW-horror stories like this (and yours) are far too easy to find on the net.
muckz 07-13-2006, 10:59 AM I happen to be driving a new 1.8T jetta everyday (no choice of my own) and it sucks! the car has been in for warranty work 6 times! in as many months. I cant stand it, The console broke today. The button to open it just broke right off. Its a total piece of crap. Every Audi I have been in uses many of the same parts inside and under the hood as my loaded Jetta, so....i would say that anyone that says they can increase power by 60hp without sacrificing reliability is in dreamland. Just starting the car or touching it sacrifices the reliablity. Didnt I see VW/ Audi near the bottom of a reliability test recently? Imma go look it up...
Relibility of components that you speak of do not have much to do with the engine. 1.8L engine is known to be very mod friendly and endures moderate amounts of boost increase very well. Of course reliability is sacrificed. How can it not be, when you are increasing stress on the engine? The question is, is reliability sacrifiec significantly? And the answer is not really.
One thing I learned from Audi ownership is that their engines are very long-lasting, as long as maintenance is performed (oil changes, timing belt changes, etc..). The same 1.8T engine is found in previous gen Audi A4.
Can't say anything about VW since I never owned one. But I have owned 2 Audis, and my current is 2001 A6... So far, the car is perfect (wheel bearing and contorl arm replacement aside, at 85K miles). No squeeks, no rattles. All electrical components work, all mechanical components work. It starts, drives and feels better than many new cars. Before I bought this car, I put money down on TSX (brand new). Backed out of it when found out insurance rate was quite high. Next on the list was Mazda 6. After I drove this Audi, there was no comparison to Mazda, though mine came with 75K miles and was 5 years old.
The car in question here is Audi, not VW. Say what you will about them sharing many parts, it has been my experience that they are quite different in reliability issues.
Threxx 07-13-2006, 11:16 AM my current is 2001 A6... So far, the car is perfect. No squeeks, no rattles.
:bs::p
If I was in there with ya I PROMISE I could point out at least a few to ya. I say this not simply because it's an Audi and my A4 already has 5 times the rattles, at 10k miles, that my GS400 did at 75k miles... but because I've never once ridden in a vehicle - even counting the many brand new luxury marque vehicles I've ridden in, that I didn't hear some sort of unintentional extraneous noise not caused by the occupants of the vehicle or third party items stored inside the vehicle.
All cars rattle - it's just a question of how many, how often, under what conditions (cold weather, warm weather, all the time, only over rough rodes, etc?), and how loud the noises are relative to the standard in-cabin road/wind/engine noise.
AAAAAAA 07-13-2006, 11:17 AM Yep - VW is near the bottom in 90 day initial quality... Audi isn't too much further up either (still well below average). That's why I leased my Audi.
Actually:
"The study, which measures problems experienced by original owners of 3-year-old (2002 model-year) "
Linky (http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=2005089)
http://www.jdpower.com/presspass/pr/images/2005089a.gif
IQS is 90days, the graph above is VDS.
muckz 07-13-2006, 03:28 PM :bs::p
If I was in there with ya I PROMISE I could point out at least a few to ya. I say this not simply because it's an Audi and my A4 already has 5 times the rattles, at 10k miles, that my GS400 did at 75k miles... but because I've never once ridden in a vehicle - even counting the many brand new luxury marque vehicles I've ridden in, that I didn't hear some sort of unintentional extraneous noise not caused by the occupants of the vehicle or third party items stored inside the vehicle.
All cars rattle - it's just a question of how many, how often, under what conditions (cold weather, warm weather, all the time, only over rough rodes, etc?), and how loud the noises are relative to the standard in-cabin road/wind/engine noise.
Maybe we could meet up! Too bad we're so far away :)
Seriously, I am very impressed. I bought the car in March and the weather was cold. Usually squeeks exhibit themselves in cold weather.
The only clunk I had was a control arm gone bad, replaced already.
P.S. I am VERY picky when it comes to rattles/squeeks. I took door panels in my Z off once every 2/3 months to adjust the window to remove window rattle.
Threxx 07-13-2006, 03:35 PM Actually:
"The study, which measures problems experienced by original owners of 3-year-old (2002 model-year) "
Linky (http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=2005089)
IQS is 90days, the graph above is VDS.
What do you mean "actually"? I never said mid-term or long-term quality surveys ranked them any better than initial quality.:shrug:
I'm well aware of that and the other JD Power surveys... I'd tend to guess I've posted their graphs as images more times than most of the rest of this board combined.:p
Here's 2006's IQS for ya. I even participated in it (I take around 20 JD Power surveys a year on average - I participate as a part of the 'power panel')
http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/charts/2006082a.gif
RussStang 07-13-2006, 10:41 PM :bs::p
If I was in there with ya I PROMISE I could point out at least a few to ya. I say this not simply because it's an Audi and my A4 already has 5 times the rattles, at 10k miles, that my GS400 did at 75k miles... but because I've never once ridden in a vehicle - even counting the many brand new luxury marque vehicles I've ridden in, that I didn't hear some sort of unintentional extraneous noise not caused by the occupants of the vehicle or third party items stored inside the vehicle.
All cars rattle - it's just a question of how many, how often, under what conditions (cold weather, warm weather, all the time, only over rough rodes, etc?), and how loud the noises are relative to the standard in-cabin road/wind/engine noise.
Is this really that big of an automotive psychosis to you? If you are really getting that irritated by the most mundane of noises in the car, I would utilizing your sound system as much as humanly possible.
Threxx 07-13-2006, 11:02 PM Is this really that big of an automotive psychosis to you? If you are really getting that irritated by the most mundane of noises in the car, I would utilizing your sound system as much as humanly possible.
It's really just a simple OCD. But not owning the car makes it go away almost completely. I think leasing may be a cure for my mental issues.:D
AAAAAAA 07-14-2006, 07:41 AM What do you mean "actually"? I never said mid-term or long-term quality surveys ranked them any better than initial quality.:shrug:
My apologies MR threxx.
|
|