# TT as weekend track toy



## aaron1085 (May 21, 2007)

so I'm in the market (and have approval from the fiance) to get a track car. I've done a few HPDE's with my 2007 A4 and using this car as my DD and track toy just doesnt seem smart when you start pushing the limits. That being said, I've been looking at different options for a good track car that will have creature comforts as I plan on driving to and from events, so it wont be a "true" track car.
I've kept circling back to picking up a TT and doing a few suspension, brake, rear seat delete mods, to make it a decent weekend toy. I'm turning you to you folks for input on this idea. I used to have a 2004 A4 with the 1.8T so I'm used to that motor. 
-Any weak spots in the motor,drivetrain, etc to the TT (probabaly 2000-2003 model years)
-Are there decent and affordable brake and suspension upgrades that will take this car from street to track able?
-pricing....basic price ranges and associated mileage / options....what would YOU folks pay?
-does the hatch weigh a TON? (I'm thinking thats a yes)

THANK YOU. I know I put a lot in there, just covering my bases with all the knowledge that is on this forum, I trust the responses to follow.


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

Here is a link to the back to back days I did with my TT. 50 miles to the track, spent a couple hours each day on the track and drove home with no problems. 

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5323733-Lime-Rock-Track-Days

Mods
Haldex Comp Controller
Adj Rear Control Arms
R32 Front Bushings
H&R Coil Overs
Brembo Drilled rotors with Hawk HPS pads (Super Blue Dot 4 Fluid)
Eurodyne Stage I Software
42 DD 3" Catless down pipe
42 DD Intake
Borla Cat Back
Verdict Motorsports Shifter Bushings
Verdict Motorsports Rear Arm Bushings
Verdict Motorsports Race Inserts for VF-Engineering Dog Bone
Verdict Motorsports Shifter Extension (Gets the shifter closer to the wheel to prevent missed shifts)
VF-Engineering Transmission and Engine Mount


New for this year will be remapped file for SEM Intake Manifold & Tyrolsport SMIC's. R32 Brake upgrade on the fronts and Verdict Motorsports Oil cooler setup. OZ's will be on with some Advan A048's (Less weight than the CH's and more grip)

Over all I had a blast and the car was tons of fun at the track. Brakes def need some work to inspire more confidence. The stock setup with better rotors and pads work well, but they are not as (Hand of God) stopping power as I like (I tend to dive really deep into corners)

The 225 is a good solid starting point for a nice base line to throw some mods at is and run, with the ability to be used as a 2nd or 3rd car if need be to break up the normal commutes. 

MadMax is another good source of info on tracking your TT, but has suffered the ban hammer over advertising bs. 

-Noah


----------



## aaron1085 (May 21, 2007)

Hey, great write up and link.

Have you had a chance to upgrade to R32 calipers and run it at the track? If so, how'd it fair?
all I really want is a solid car with great brakes, tight suspension and some creature comforts to allow me to drive to and from track days....the chipped 2.0T I have in my A4 is plenty of power for now, so I'm not worried about a 1.8T that doesnt have 400whp being a dissappointment.

I've considered some miata's, but I dont think I could deal with driving one for a long period of highway time and furthermore, though they do weight nothing and handle amazing, my ego kicks in a bit and makes me want just a BIT more.


----------



## TheDeckMan (Sep 26, 2004)

aaron1085 said:


> Hey, great write up and link.
> 
> Have you had a chance to upgrade to R32 calipers and run it at the track? If so, how'd it fair?
> all I really want is a solid car with great brakes, tight suspension and some creature comforts to allow me to drive to and from track days....the chipped 2.0T I have in my A4 is plenty of power for now, so I'm not worried about a 1.8T that doesnt have 400whp being a dissappointment.
> ...


The R32 brakes are sitting on my bench with a whole pile of other projects. Working on the suspension refresh for next season. I have tested the R32 brakes on a MK4 VR6 that I built a supercharger system for. They are very confidence inspiring, even in a car with 400hp they do the trick very well.


----------



## chrg-in (Jan 24, 2003)

My best friend and I have done many track days in our TT’s; we have done all the basic suspension mods including Coil Over’s. Running GIAC software and race gas the car were putting out just over 300HP on the Dyno. We were quite effective on the small tracks, but on the big HP big tracks the TT’s just don’t seem very impressive. One of the fastest cars one of the days was a mid 90’s POS brown mustang with no paint, Coil Over’s, Brakes, track tires and a Super Charger. It was Butt ugly.
The TT will work, but don’t expect too much. It always drove OK against the basic Evo’s and STI’s, but at Laguna or any uphill section I was regularly dropped. We’ve both gone to GT series turbo for more power but every new car seems to come with over 300HP so still not surprised to see people pull away on long straights and uphills.
The other side of the coin is that so many great cars now come with the interior of your most basic rental car. So the non track days you still have a car you can enjoy.


----------



## J Patterson (Apr 11, 2009)

*I've tracked mine for five years now. They work pretty well. -----*

You need to do some suspension and brake upgrades but it is possible to run competitively with some pretty fast machinery------


----------



## J Patterson (Apr 11, 2009)

Those are GREAT pics!


----------



## night_OWL (Nov 15, 2011)

^ was that a Boss 302? That thing was understeering like boat... braking pretty early too...


----------



## J Patterson (Apr 11, 2009)

night_OWL said:


> ^ was that a Boss 302? That thing was understeering like boat... braking pretty early too...


It was a Laguna Seca Edition Mustang. Yes he was braking early. I think it was his first time to track that car. He previously tracked a TTS.


----------



## night_OWL (Nov 15, 2011)

J Patterson said:


> It was a Laguna Seca Edition Mustang. Yes he was braking early. I think it was his first time to track that car. He previously tracked a TTS.


Ahh, gotcha! PS I HATE Mustangs... even though he let you pass, it still makes me smile


----------



## audiguy01 (Aug 12, 2008)

Suspension and brakes first, then chip or big turbo as desired. The AWD TT is a heavy car though the AWD system works pretty well if you upgrade the haldex system. On tighter tracks I can easily match lap times with C5 and C6 corvettes as well as cobra mustangs though if it is a really fast track such as BIR in the video even though I match these cars in HP they pull away on long straight aways due to large drag coefficient of the TT.

All and all I love my TT and have yet to have a A4 or even a S4 that can match beat my lap times on most tracks.

TT running down a Porsche at BIR


----------



## taverncustoms (Feb 18, 2011)

she is a heavy B


----------



## 01ttgt28 (Jun 23, 2009)

Has any one got the tt weight under 3,000


----------



## audiguy01 (Aug 12, 2008)

weighed mine (2001 AWD with roll bar and race seats) this summer at 3267 without me.


----------



## aaron1085 (May 21, 2007)

awesome video bro...it seems I wont get below 3000lbs, but it is what it is.. its a sacrifice. If i wanted/NEEDED 2500lbs, I'd get a miata.

so, probably going to try to take a look at this bad boy in the coming weeks. Anything in particular a "non-mechanic" like myself should be looking for? leaking gaskets, turbo parts, etc???

I may be able to do the deal for 11-12K

thanks


----------



## taverncustoms (Feb 18, 2011)

im betting if you removed everything not needed to race you could get it lighter. including fuel tank all interior except top half of dash/w cluster and seat. the hard part is sitting in the car and trying to talk your self into distroying all the interior cause its so nice its hard to part with.

i would like to get a second TT thats been Salvaged so i wouldent feel so bad about stripping it down.


----------



## Teeguzi (Jul 22, 2011)

I've got a 2000 180Q that is my "Drive to" track car and love every second of it. Not the highest horsepower car but once your comftorable with late braking and have your line down it's a fun ride.

I've done the following mods so far:

H&R Coil Overs
Camber Plates
Adjustable rear control arms
Injen Intake
Haldex Comp controller (a must in my book)
Slotted rotors F&R (Stoptech 355mm 4 piston on work bench awaiting install)
OZ Ultraleggeras w/Dunlop Direzza's.
REVO Stg 1
Rear seat delete
Radio gone






Sorry sounds sucks in video; GoPro has conqured the wind!

Cheers!


----------



## night_OWL (Nov 15, 2011)

Since this is a track based thread, I decided I would post my question here instead of making a new thread...

What is the best approach to countering understeer with a Q? Running a stiffer rear sway bar? Swapping the Haldex controller to a blue, orange, or HPA unit? Greater rear toe / camber / tire air pressure? Or just plain ol' technique? (later braking, more aggresive weight transitions, ect.)


----------



## The_RoadWarrior (Nov 21, 2011)

night_OWL said:


> Since this is a track based thread, I decided I would post my question here instead of making a new thread...
> 
> What is the best approach to countering understeer with a Q? Running a stiffer rear sway bar? Swapping the Haldex controller to a blue, orange, or HPA unit? Greater rear toe / camber / tire air pressure? Or just plain ol' technique? (later braking, more aggresive weight transitions, ect.)


Your handbook if your looking to make this car turn
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...suspension&highlight=let's+talk+TT+suspension


Your track related stuff
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?4915400-Building-a-Street-Prepared-Mk1-TT/page2

Start reading at post #27
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5504190-Rear-sway-bars....-Which-one-should-i-get


----------



## J Patterson (Apr 11, 2009)

Yes, More rear bar. I have Hotchkiss adjustables front and rear. Front on soft. rear on stiff. More front Camber. I run -2.5 degrees. Stiffer front control arm bushings. Defcon bushing sleeves or poly bushings. Set toe to zero front and rear. Stiffer springs will help a bunch too. I have H&R but Eibach seems really good on some friends cars. 

After all that, you still need to use trail braking to help rotate the car for slower (3rd gear) corners. I still like to lift and turn in and then plant the throttle on high speed corners to transfer the weight back and forth but there are those who say that the car is neutral enough at higher speeds with a steady throttle.


----------



## The_RoadWarrior (Nov 21, 2011)

J Patterson said:


> Yes, More rear bar. I have Hotchkiss adjustables front and rear. Front on soft. rear on stiff. More front Camber. I run -2.5 degrees. Stiffer front control arm bushings. Defcon bushing sleeves or poly bushings. Set toe to zero front and rear. Stiffer springs will help a bunch too. I have H&R but Eibach seems really good on some friends cars.


I agree with more rear wheel rate (overall rate of spring+bar taking into consideration the motion ratios) but disagree on the approach you suggested to get there John. More spring+less bar is always better than less spring+more bar in order to get the desired target wheel rate and natural frequencies. 

I would also suggest some rear toe-in to keep the car more planted at high speed, not that 0 rear toe is not driveable, but IMO it forces you have to respect the rear too much(especially in a short 95" wheel base). The extra driver confidence that minimal rear toe-in gives you, allow any driver to push a lot harder (think driving 9/10th vs 7/10th comfortably). 

For a mild setup (DD/occasional track car), 2.5 degrees of camber may cut it but a real track toy would need a lot more than that to get the car to turn without pushing on OEM caster(7 degrees). Even with 700/1300 lbs springs and an extra 3 degrees of caster, I still need at least -2.6 degrees of static camber to get an even temperature spread on the font tires and no understeer.


----------



## J Patterson (Apr 11, 2009)

*No argument from me *



The_RoadWarrior said:


> I agree with more rear wheel rate (overall rate of spring+bar taking into consideration the motion ratios) but disagree on the approach you suggested to get there John. More spring+less bar is always better than less spring+more bar in order to get the desired target wheel rate and natural frequencies.
> 
> I would also suggest some rear toe-in to keep the car more planted at high speed, not that 0 rear toe is not driveable, but IMO it forces you have to respect the rear too much(especially in a short 95" wheel base). The extra driver confidence that minimal rear toe-in gives you, allow any driver to push a lot harder (think driving 9/10th vs 7/10th comfortably).
> 
> For a mild setup (DD/occasional track car), 2.5 degrees of camber may cut it but a real track toy would need a lot more than that to get the car to turn without pushing on OEM caster(7 degrees). Even with 700/1300 lbs springs and an extra 3 degrees of caster, I still need at least -2.6 degrees of static camber to get an even temperature spread on the font tires and no understeer.


We are actually on the same page. Mine IS a weekend pleasure drive, occasional track day car. As time goes on I keep doing things that make it a bit better on the track and they almost ALWAYS make it less nice on the street. Life is a compromise. Next for me is Four piston brake calipers and a set of Schroth Harnesses. Maybe those won't have any effect on street comfort. Even though I run race pads, I'm getting too serious for the OEM brakes and harness. Safety is important too.
Thanks for your input!


----------



## night_OWL (Nov 15, 2011)

So how would the addition of a new Haldex controller change the charachteristics of the car during corner entry / exit in the Quattro?

My understanding is that the Blue/Orange units offer 50/50 torque transfer and faster front/rear torque transition (as opposed to 60/40 stock) and the HPA Performance contoller keeps the rear axle engaged during braking...

My theory: Blue/Orange units allow faster and more planted corner exit (esp with The_RoadWarrior's rear toe-in)

HPA: more aggressive and later braking; however less weight transition during braking

Thoughts?


----------



## Murderface (Nov 13, 2006)

Having owned (and tracked) a TT in the past, I recommend buying one of these for track duty instead:










It's ready for the track out of the box. Brembos, neutral handling, functional rollbar, 7k redline. Invest in some nice tires and brake pads and you're good to go.

You can find plenty in the $11-$12k price range too, just have to keep an eye out. Sellers loveee to mark up the prices on these cars because of the badge.


----------



## The_RoadWarrior (Nov 21, 2011)

Murderface said:


> Having owned (and tracked) a TT in the past, I recommend buying one of these for track duty instead:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If we're heading down that path, then a miata should be a more logical suggestion. Cheaper than the boxcrap, much better handling and more rewarding to drive. But that's not the point is it?


----------



## RabbitGTDguy (Jul 9, 2002)

night_OWL said:


> So how would the addition of a new Haldex controller change the charachteristics of the car during corner entry / exit in the Quattro?
> 
> My understanding is that the Blue/Orange units offer 50/50 torque transfer and faster front/rear torque transition (as opposed to 60/40 stock) and the HPA Performance contoller keeps the rear axle engaged during braking...
> 
> ...


My take on this...as I've experienced/had all three...

stock...well, just that. It works but really does make the car always quite feel front wheel drive biased and really doesn't use the haldex system for any sort of performance purposes. 

blue...blue is awesome, loved it. The instance feel/difference made the car feel much more planted through the corners, in acceleration, etc. The one drawback being dependent on your driving style that would release the rear end when the brakes were applied....which...

brings me to the orange. I just this fall swapped out my blue controller for the orange one and it has really made the car everything I really ever want it to be when if "AWD" and "performance" is what I had in mind. It has the same bias as the orange controller but caters much more to the driving style then lends to late braking. I am a late braker and like to keep the power on. Approaching corners, engine/gearing braking to level off speed, and then power on...that whole time the orange controller will keep the power locked in...apply the brake late into the corner and then power on through the apex, etc....orange controller will keep it locked in which makes the car seem to just STICK to the road and follow your line right through. With the blue controller releasing in these situations, it felt twitchy at times as the car moved back to that FWD bias. With the orange...for my driving style...it just simply makes the car that much better. 

There are lots of different opinions out ther on the haldex itself and really after experiencing all of them...I can instantly say that blue is LOADS change and better than the stock unit. The stock unit just doesn't simply use the tech that is at the rear end the way it could be utilized for performance purposes...rather...just simply for safety. Blue changes all that and Orange amplifies it. However, that choice between the two I really would factor down to your driving style and habits. It wasn't super apparent to me until trying both, but I was suprised how well one suited me vs. the other. 

Not to mention...pretty funny with the Orange to get the rear end to slide out, drift basically if you really wanted it to...

Joe


----------



## J Patterson (Apr 11, 2009)

Orange. I need to get one of those. A common misconception though is describing any Haldex drive as having a torque split like a center differential car. Haldex cars don't have a torque split Per se. All of the torque is always sent to the front axle. The Haldex clutches simply lock the rear axle to the front when slippage or high torque values occur. In actuality it is potiety a 100--100 split. The different controllers just decide how hard and how soon to lock the axles together . It is impossible for the rear axle to be driven faster than the front. It is a very different way of achieving a remarkably similar result.


----------



## RabbitGTDguy (Jul 9, 2002)

J Patterson said:


> Orange. I need to get one of those. A common misconception though is describing any Haldex drive as having a torque split like a center differential car. Haldex cars don't have a torque split Per se. All of the torque is always sent to the front axle. The Haldex clutches simply lock the rear axle to the front when slippage or high torque values occur. In actuality it is potiety a 100--100 split. The different controllers just decide how hard and how soon to lock the axles together . It is impossible for the rear axle to be driven faster than the front. It is a very different way of achieving a remarkably similar result.


And with the HPP or the orange...it's just that much better! Driving style does I feel influence your decision with which you go with!

Def can't compare the haldex to a Torsen setup, etc...but it does the job so nicely and more ...err ( prob going to suffer for this) ...more efficiently in ways. 

Joe


----------



## The_RoadWarrior (Nov 21, 2011)

RabbitGTDguy said:


> And with the HPP or the orange...it's just that much better! Driving style does I feel influence your decision with which you go with!
> 
> Def can't compare the haldex to a Torsen setup, etc...but it does the job so nicely and more ...err ( prob going to suffer for this) ...more efficiently in ways.
> 
> Joe


It is suppose to be a smarter, more modern setup - and only purists that would consider anything inferior to their loved Torsen, will give you heat. It's like the Evo guys that swear by the old, all mechanical AWD of the early cars, they can not wrap their head around the fact that active center differential and yaw control makes the newer cars basically drive themselves.

What I would like to know is how the controllers react with a front LSD when there is limited amount of slippage compared to the expected open differential?


----------



## RabbitGTDguy (Jul 9, 2002)

The_RoadWarrior said:


> It is suppose to be a smarter, more modern setup - and only purists that would consider anything inferior to their loved Torsen, will give you heat. It's like the Evo guys that swear by the old, all mechanical AWD of the early cars, they can not wrap their head around the fact that active center differential and yaw control makes the newer cars basically drive themselves.
> 
> What I would like to know is how the controllers react with a front LSD when there is limited amount of slippage compared to the expected open differential?


Agreed...its just that much better despite not being entirely true to those "true" Quattro roots. I see it as evolution of the Quattro system and I don't believe that Audi would have done it (and high ends likes that use haldex in supercars/exotics) if they didn't believe in it. Adding the performance modules just "enhances" the effect that much more and utilizes it's performance benefits...

I've wondering that same question of yours....due to the fact that in OEM conditions, the haldex is triggered by that slip...however, I believe it would still hook up very similarly though as its a very small amount of slip that initially triggers that coupling. 

That said though too...with the performance modules, the "slip" trigger isn't the only means of engagement. Haldex with the HPP modules etc...unless I totally mis understand things will engage on take off/acceleration and stay engaged (under a variety of these situations with differences above addressed between blue/orange) and is not just a "slip" measure. 

All this talk makes me miss the fact that mine is now sitting in the garage (after just having done Orange recently and swapping out Blue) and makes me want to drive. The discussion in the R forum is nice regarding the haldex, but I'm not sure elminating the coupling/haldex, solid driveshaft, etc. would be a good idea and would upset the balance of a very nicely tuned, intelligent system with say the "orange" or "blue" controller. Would be cool for those that are "blue" (as this is the reason I went from blue to orange) and if they are the type of driver that likes to late brake, keep the coupling engaged in cornering and under braking situations though if the suggested "single wire" running from the brake light switch to the haldex coupling could make up the difference between the HPP "Blue" and the HPA "Orange" unit itself... a "kill" for that condition would be interesting (not a kill for the drive all the time) if that was the case...(as described...the disengage/engage is the only difference between HPP Blue and HPA Orange units...with the orange staying locked in) and a easy mod for those with blue. 

Beyond that...I personally don't see a need to mod the coupling for more engagement...the Orange provides plenty, stays within the operating specs of the coupling itself and provides every bit of traction and grip one might need when needed...as much as I think about a LSD (front and rear) in the future...with the orange...I'm really not sure whether I require it. 

just my .02 

Joe


----------



## totem (May 15, 2010)

I was hesitating between an Haldex controller or a LSD. I bought the LSD figuring that it is probably useless to try to put power more through an open rear diff on a car that lift the inner rear wheel off the ground when cornering.

It works great. I no longer feel the need for a Haldex controller.

A rear Peloquin diff is really easy to install. No need to remove the diff from the car. You just have to remove the by the passenger side cover (The cover the half shaft goes in). You don't touch the gears so there is no shim adjustment required. A shop press is only special tool required.


----------



## nryan (Jun 24, 2009)

Have a look at a front wheel drive 2002 TT at Mosport. http://youtu.be/hgQVEIW9HlQ
FWD is the way to go.


----------



## The_RoadWarrior (Nov 21, 2011)

nryan said:


> Have a look at a front wheel drive 2002 TT at Mosport. http://youtu.be/hgQVEIW9HlQ
> FWD is the way to go.


Really? Wish I knew what you know that makes FWD the way to go. Maybe you can educated us a bit more instead of posting a track video that shows nothing.


----------



## nryan (Jun 24, 2009)

Nothing? Try these:

http://youtu.be/UJtwu6-zz8g
http://youtu.be/D6hXKbqkkXI

All I was trying to say was that you do not need the extra weight of the quattro and a fwd can be extremely fast. As for mods......it has them all. However I started with suspension, brakes and tires and the extra power did not actually reduce my lap times significantly.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

nryan said:


> Nothing?


Yeah, nothing. Unless there is a Mk1 TT with Quattro with the exact same flywheel HP and size and brand of tires that you were passing/lapping that I didn't see, your video proves nothing. Can a FWD TT be/look fast around the track? Sure. Do you know for sure if you're not comparing it to a Quattro TT? No. Anyone with motorsports experience would tell you that your thoughts on a solid rear axle being superior to a multilink setup is completely wrong, and that doesn't take into consideration the better F/R weight distribution of the Quattro vs FWD.


----------



## The_RoadWarrior (Nov 21, 2011)

20v master said:


> Yeah, nothing. Unless there is a Mk1 TT with Quattro with the exact same flywheel HP and size and brand of tires that you were passing/lapping that I didn't see, your video proves nothing. Can a FWD TT be/look fast around the track? Sure. Do you know for sure if you're not comparing it to a Quattro TT? No. Anyone with motorsports experience would tell you that your thoughts on a solid rear axle being superior to a multilink setup is completely wrong, and that doesn't take into consideration the better F/R weight distribution of the Quattro vs FWD.


Plus the fact that traction is * limited * at best when compared to the Quattro variant. Nobody is saying that the FWD can't be relatively fast for what they are but to say they are the way to go, is a real stretch.


----------



## night_OWL (Nov 15, 2011)

the_roadwarrior said:


> plus the fact that traction is * limited * at best when compared to the quattro variant. Nobody is saying that the fwd can't be relatively fast for what they are but to say they are the way to go, is a real stretch.


+1 

4wd > ff


----------



## Teeguzi (Jul 22, 2011)

OP: Ultimately your decision on a track car depends on where you plan to end up with it.

I run my TT in Group 3 with a number of associations now and will eventually move up to Group 4. But I have no plans on moving beyond Group 4 as I do this for fun.

If you do not plan to advance beyond HPDE; the TT is a lot of fun. If you plan to advance beyond HPDE the TT is not the best choice for a number of reasons. (4 given to me are)

1. You can't fit your head out the side window with a helmet on.
2. It takes a lot more $$$ to get reliable high HP out of this car.
3. Suspension geometry adjustments are limited without $$$.
4. It's heavy!

Cheers! :beer:


----------



## The_RoadWarrior (Nov 21, 2011)

Teeguzi said:


> OP: Ultimately your decision on a track car depends on where you plan to end up with it.
> 
> I run my TT in Group 3 with a number of associations now and will eventually move up to Group 4. But I have no plans on moving beyond Group 4 as I do this for fun.
> 
> ...


All the issues you mentioned above can be worked around very cheaply (I know because I've personally done it).


----------

