# 350 2.5T for MKII TT........



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

The 353 is coupe, 354 is a roadster and 355 is Sportback. Sportback is still questionable for ANY location - signoff on the Sportback is a couple months away. I've bolded what appears to be a turbo 2.5 inline 5 cylinder with ties to the existing 2.5 block in the MKV cars, the S8's cylinder head design and some items for the Gallardo.........
... possible bodystyle and engine combinations as currently planned for the US:
353 - 200 2.0 FT, 230 2.0 Q, 250 3.2 Q, 302 Q, *350 2.5 Q* 
354 - 200 2.0 FT, 230 2.0 Q, 250 3.2 Q, 302 Q
355 - 200 2.0 FT, 230 2.0 Q, 250 3.2 Q, 302 Q
Remember this is a lifecycle plan, so not all of the combos will necessarily be offered at the same time.



_Modified by [email protected] at 6:34 AM 7-18-2006_


----------



## ZroDfx (Jul 15, 2005)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ ([email protected])*

Great info, Joe. Is there any indication which versions would be available at launch next spring and which would follow?


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (ZroDfx)*

Only the 2.0T and 3.2 250hp variants at launchas 2008 models. After CY 2007 - meaning most likely 2008.5 model year will see the 230hp 2.0T and the higher output 302hp VR6.


----------



## D Clymer (Feb 18, 1999)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ ([email protected])*

Thanks, Joe. Very interesting to hear that there are more plans for the inline 5 than just as a torque optimized Golf/Jetta motor for the US market. Do you have any idea as to whether the 302 hp VR6 would be a 3.2 or the new 3.6? Also, I'm assuming the 170+ is the 2.0 TDI...


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (D Clymer)*


_Quote, originally posted by *D Clymer* »_Thanks, Joe. Very interesting to hear that there are more plans for the inline 5 than just as a torque optimized Golf/Jetta motor for the US market. Do you have any idea as to whether the 302 hp VR6 would be a 3.2 or the new 3.6? Also, I'm assuming the 170+ is the 2.0 TDI...

Not sure on the VR6 but i'll thinking it's more likely the 3.6. As for the 170hp - i'm thinking it's a diesel as well - but not really sure either. More than likely though it won't come to the US - I left it on the list by mistake and just edited it out.


_Modified by [email protected] at 6:34 AM 7-18-2006_


----------



## Professor Gascan (Sep 11, 2002)

So far info on the 2.5FSI Turbo is pretty sparse. According to 2953 over at AW, the engine was only greenlighted in May, and it about 24 months away. Price will be north of $50K US, and it will probably be a 2009 car. It will be offered as a manual only, and will compete with the Z4 M and Cayman S. 
As for the 302 V6 Q, there hasn't been confirmation yet as to whether it is a 3.2 or a 3.6VR6. It would be considerably easier to extract that kind of power from the 3.6, but space may be an issue. Of course, the MKII TT may have been designed from the beginning to accept the 3.6VR6, unlike the MKV Golf. Everyone in the know has been decidedly coy about whether the 302 TT has the 3.2 or 3.6.
Lastly, here's what 2953 had to say about the 302 TT, which he has driven. 

_Quote, originally posted by *2953* »_With an extra 52HP more than the hottest ever to leave the factory, magnetic ride and a lightened (i.e. decontented) interior, the 302 is more fun to drive than an M4 coupe. Far more mechanical feeling than the Bimmer, too. That last point was a BIG surprise.


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: (Professor Gascan)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Professor Gascan* »_
As for the 302 V6 Q, there hasn't been confirmation yet as to whether it is a 3.2 or a 3.6VR6. It would be considerably easier to extract that kind of power from the 3.6, but space may be an issue. Of course, the MKII TT may have been designed from the beginning to accept the 3.6VR6, unlike the MKV Golf. Everyone in the know has been decidedly coy about whether the 302 TT has the 3.2 or 3.6.

I remember talking to Frank Metzger, the designer of the VR and W engines for VW back pre 3.2 VR6 and he mentioned that they were having trouble getting big hp out of the engine. I don't remember what it was but it had to do with limitations of the head design, new valvetrain design and of course - cost. This was also pre FSI as well. So I would venture to guess that it will be the 3.6 but we'll just have to wait and see. Also - the increased torque from the 3.6 is also a big bonus as well - as it doesn't have to work as hard to make those HP figures.


----------



## Professor Gascan (Sep 11, 2002)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_I remember talking to Frank Metzger, the designer of the VR and W engines for VW back pre 3.2 VR6 and he mentioned that they were having trouble getting big hp out of the engine. I don't remember what it was but it had to do with limitations of the head design, new valvetrain design and of course - cost. This was also pre FSI as well. So I would venture to guess that it will be the 3.6 but we'll just have to wait and see. Also - the increased torque from the 3.6 is also a big bonus as well - as it doesn't have to work as hard to make those HP figures.

I remember reading a post about that some time ago, probably about the time the Golf R36 rumors were starting. As you mentioned, this was well before FSI started showing up, not to mention Audi's new ValveLift technology. However, even with a more optimized cylinder head, FSI, and Valvelift, I have serious doubts that the 3.2 can make 302hp without dramatically raising the redline and cost. As you've said, the 3.6 is far more likely for cost and ease of power production reasons.


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: (Professor Gascan)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Professor Gascan* »_
I remember reading a post about that some time ago, probably about the time the Golf R36 rumors were starting. As you mentioned, this was well before FSI started showing up, not to mention Audi's new ValveLift technology. However, even with a more optimized cylinder head, FSI, and Valvelift, I have serious doubts that the 3.2 can make 302hp without dramatically raising the redline and cost. As you've said, the 3.6 is far more likely for cost and ease of power production reasons. 

What is the ValveLift technology you are talking about? Would it even apply to the VR6 engines? Curious - I haven't heard about this.


----------



## Professor Gascan (Sep 11, 2002)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_What is the ValveLift technology you are talking about? Would it even apply to the VR6 engines? Curious - I haven't heard about this.

At the moment I'm having trouble finding much technical data about the ValveLift technology. From what I've been able to gather, the ValveLift is similar to VTEC or VarioCam Plus, where the camshaft has two profiles for each valve. The 3.2FSI V6 in the Roadjet Concept had ValveLift, which enabled it to have a 7400rpm redline and 300hp. Apparently, Audi is going to debut a new 2.8FSI V6 with ValveLift at a Engineering conference in October. Here's the Eurocarblog report Click


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: (Professor Gascan)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Professor Gascan* »_
At the moment I'm having trouble finding much technical data about the ValveLift technology. From what I've been able to gather, the ValveLift is similar to VTEC or VarioCam Plus, where the camshaft has two profiles for each valve. The 3.2FSI V6 in the Roadjet Concept had ValveLift, which enabled it to have a 7400rpm redline and 300hp. Apparently, Audi is going to debut a new 2.8FSI V6 with ValveLift at a Engineering conference in October. Here's the Eurocarblog report Click


Interesting - I didn't remember that from the Roadjet concept story. I think due to the layout of the valvetrain of the VR6 it might be impossible to do this, but who knows.


----------



## Razor Back (Jun 2, 2006)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ ([email protected])*

So the three models mean what? Different body styles? I'm guessing, "normal" TT, TT S-Line, and TT-RS. Or do these three things corespond to something else entirely?
BTW looking forward to the 300hp TT. Are we thinking 0-60in aprox 5sec? That would be quite awesome


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (Razor Back)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Razor Back* »_So the three models mean what? Different body styles? I'm guessing, "normal" TT, TT S-Line, and TT-RS. Or do these three things corespond to something else entirely?


Coupe, Roadster, Sportback (like the concept).


----------



## D Clymer (Feb 18, 1999)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
Interesting - I didn't remember that from the Roadjet concept story. I think due to the layout of the valvetrain of the VR6 it might be impossible to do this, but who knows. 

I think the main concern with the VR6 valvetrain is the limited size of the asymetric ports. In terms of actual component layout it is similar to the inline engines - dedicated intake and exhaust cams actuating offset valves through unequal length roller rockers. I would think the Audi Valve Control system would work on the VR. 
It's been a while since I read the Roadjet press release. Did it give details on the function of the system. If it is indeed similar to V-tech that would be nice.


----------



## Razor Back (Jun 2, 2006)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_Coupe, Roadster, Sportback (like the concept).

That’s right, had a brain fart. Most everything from Audi comes in THE three styles. Convertible/Cabrio, Normal, and Avant/Hatch. The engine choices are probably where the S-Line, TTS, and TTR naming would come in.


----------



## chewym (Jun 21, 2006)

Will the 2.5 I5 engine have an aluminum block (I guess with a turbo it is unlikely) also, where did you get this "inside" information. If that happens that would be awesome.


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: (chewym)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chewym* »_Will the 2.5 I5 engine have an aluminum block (I guess with a turbo it is unlikely) also, where did you get this "inside" information. If that happens that would be awesome.

I don't know - but I doubt it. This information comes from an incredibly reliable source who works within the automotive industry.


----------



## der_horst (Jul 22, 2006)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_Only the 2.0T and 3.2 250hp variants at launchas 2008 models. After CY 2007 - meaning most likely 2008.5 model year will see the 230hp 2.0T and the higher output 302hp VR6. 

where did the 260+ hp 2.0 model go? it was in the lifecycle plan posted at audiforums. that's imo the most interesting competitor to the 302 3.6l(?) as it should be remarkably lighter.


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (der_horst)*


_Quote, originally posted by *der_horst* »_where did the 260+ hp 2.0 model go? it was in the lifecycle plan posted at audiforums. that's imo the most interesting competitor to the 302 3.6l(?) as it should be remarkably lighter.

Nowhere - just not very likely for the US due to it's need for a minimum 93 octane to produce 260hp and meet emissions etc. Its not out of the picture completely - but AT THIS TIME - unlikely we'll see that engine due to the 91 octane gas in major US markets.


----------



## LazyT (Jul 23, 2006)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (D Clymer)*


_Quote, originally posted by *D Clymer* »_Do you have any idea as to whether the 302 hp VR6 would be a 3.2 or the new 3.6? Also, I'm assuming the 170+ is the 2.0 TDI...

The MK2 will receive the the same 302 hp VR6 3.6L engine that the A5 will have as an option.


----------



## sp_wh (Dec 2, 2005)

Rumors about new Audi engines:
Apparently Audi is going to launch two new powerful engines this October.
A new 1.8 TFSI 4 cylinder engine with 240HP
And apparently a high revving 2.8 FSI V6 which produces 270HP and 300NM with a new valve-train system called Valvelift designed by Audi.
And the 3.2 V6 will get it's power upped to 300hp and 330 NM
source: http://www.autoblog.it/post/44...t-fsi
And the 2.0 TFSI with 260HP (Audi S3) (http://www.worldcarfans.com/sp...vered)


----------



## der_horst (Jul 22, 2006)

*Re: (sp_wh)*

iirc the 2.8l is for longitudinal mounting, i.e. wont fit in the TT


----------



## A4Jetta (Feb 16, 1999)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ ([email protected])*

Will 2.5T going into B8's bonnet? With 350hp, its enough to challenge BMW's 3.5L Biturbo in 335i Coupe.


----------



## Giancarlo (Aug 10, 2000)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (A4Jetta)*

I wonder if they will use the 240hp version in the TT, like the Seat Leon is using and if this engine has the same reinforcements and bigger turbo that the S3 has, or is it a "normal" 2.0T with more boost.
Any chance Audi using a version of the turbo-supercharger 1.4 engine that VW is using, this engine seems perfect for Europe in the TT as a lower priced, lower fuel consumption, and lower tax sports car, and diesel would make the volume raise too, so with all the volume then we can get special treats like the 350-400hp version.
Are Audi and VW coming out with too many engines? I don't know why have the 3.2 V6 from audi and the 3.2 VR6 AND the 3.6 VR6 and now even a 2.8V6.
What is audi doing as far as hybrid technology? I would imagine a TDi engine used as a generator to an electric car setup would be a LOT more efficient than the current gas-electric. I still think diesel is better, specially for the US where freeway driving is a big % of all driving.
What ever happened to the Turbo version of the VR6? this was expensive but has VW-Audi dropped it?
sorry for the long post, just exited with all the inside input.


----------



## der_horst (Jul 22, 2006)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (Giancarlo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Giancarlo* »_Are Audi and VW coming out with too many engines? I don't know why have the 3.2 V6 from audi and the 3.2 VR6 AND the 3.6 VR6 and now even a 2.8V6.

the 3.6l shouldn't fit into the tt as well as the 2.8l. new enignes in the company don't mean they can be ordered for the TT.
same thing with the 240hp leon cupra, unless they upgrade the 230hp for the entry level quattro to it. but if they don't there's not much need for a 3rd engine within 30 hp.
i doubt there's more to come than those from the first post. and while the 265hp version has manifested in the S3, the 302hp is still covered in mystery (type/release date/etc).


----------



## Giancarlo (Aug 10, 2000)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (der_horst)*

I meant too many engine in general, not only for the TT.
I know that the normal V6 don't fit in the A3, TT, MKV chassis, but they could fit the VR6 into the A4 and A6, even the A8 like the do with the VR6 in the touareg, Q7 and Cayenne.
I don't know if a stratergy like nissan with it's 3.5 V6 that they put in everything with a little variation is not a better stratergy to lower cost when you are producing many of one engine instead of a few of many engines. cost wise.
With the 240 hp in the cupra, it's basically the same engine, so I would expect the 230hp and 240hp 2.0T to be the same except for diferente boost. But are they going to let the seat havea higher hp than the TT??


----------



## trx0x (Apr 15, 2006)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (Giancarlo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Giancarlo* »_
Any chance Audi using a version of the turbo-supercharger 1.4 engine that VW is using, this engine seems perfect for Europe in the TT as a lower priced, lower fuel consumption, and lower tax sports car, and diesel would make the volume raise too, so with all the volume then we can get special treats like the 350-400hp version.


i remember reading that the twin-charger engines were going to be VW exclusive, and that Audi had no plans for using the twin-charger technology on any of their engines.


----------



## der_horst (Jul 22, 2006)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (Giancarlo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Giancarlo* »_With the 240 hp in the cupra, it's basically the same engine, so I would expect the 230hp and 240hp 2.0T to be the same except for diferente boost. But are they going to let the seat havea higher hp than the TT??

that model maybe. they can't beat the cheaper brands in every model variation. the TT still has the (inefficient imo) 250hp 3.2l and the 265hp S3 engine to choose from. 
what puzzles me more is that the TTS will have the same engine as the S3 even though the TT is positioned above the A3 for every other model. ok, that it will have only 25 more hp than a seat is also not the best that could happen to this car








that's why i'm so eager to get more info about the 302hp engine


----------



## Giancarlo (Aug 10, 2000)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (der_horst)*


_Quote, originally posted by *der_horst* »_
that model maybe. they can't beat the cheaper brands in every model variation. the TT still has the (inefficient imo) 250hp 3.2l and the 265hp S3 engine to choose from. 
what puzzles me more is that the TTS will have the same engine as the S3 even though the TT is positioned above the A3 for every other model. ok, that it will have only 25 more hp than a seat is also not the best that could happen to this car








that's why i'm so eager to get more info about the 302hp engine









The 250hp VR6 is not an Audi exclusive, VW is using it in the R32 and the V6 passat in europe, where they don't get the 3.6 VR6.
I think that the 2.0T in the Audi range should always have more hp than the VW range, just because Audi is more expensive, but hey, what do I know.


----------



## der_horst (Jul 22, 2006)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (Giancarlo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Giancarlo* »_
The 250hp VR6 is not an Audi exclusive, VW is using it in the R32 and the V6 passat in europe, where they don't get the 3.6 VR6.

the 250hp 3.2 is an engine that i disregarded from the TT-release on. it's the same old engine we had (in another forum) problems finding other brands in the same engine class that produce less hp per liter. 
probably not really the kind of competition audi wanted to win when they saw that their new engines wouldnt be ready at the TT-release









_Quote, originally posted by *Giancarlo* »_
I think that the 2.0T in the Audi range should always have more hp than the VW range


same here, but i also see differences between the audi models. maybe it's just me but i always saw the TT as something of higher class than the A3, therefore my comment about the unmodified reuse of that engine for the upcoming TTS.
but with a design limit of 272 hp for the 2.0 they probably had the same problem they had upon release: what other engine should they use? they couldn't give the S3 less hp as the seat cupra already has 240 and they couldn't raise it for the TT.
imo the right engine would have been something ~2.5-2.8l with 300hp and a turbo for the TTS, but there's nothing that could be the base for this that would fit into the TT atm


----------



## PhReE (Sep 16, 2004)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (der_horst)*

Meh I just want a
3.6L 300HP N/A VR6 with AWD and to be honest I would take it as a stick OR DSG. Preferably in a dark blue. Too bad they dont have sunroofs. Too bad the A3 wont be getting the 3.6L... otherwise I would want a 4dr A3 with the 3.6L, AWD, 300 hp, sun sky moon roof whatever thing, etc...


----------



## Giancarlo (Aug 10, 2000)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (der_horst)*

Why is the design limit of the 2.0T 272hp? What is the limiting factor?


----------



## der_horst (Jul 22, 2006)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (Giancarlo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Giancarlo* »_Why is the design limit of the 2.0T 272hp? What is the limiting factor?

dunno, you'll have to ask the people who engineered this engine for audi if you want to know the details


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (Giancarlo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Giancarlo* »_Why is the design limit of the 2.0T 272hp? What is the limiting factor?


280hp VR6








Seriously though - I doubt there is a "design" limit - but probably more a realistic limit in terms of how much power they would want to get out of the engine.


----------



## Giancarlo (Aug 10, 2000)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
280hp VR6








Seriously though - I doubt there is a "design" limit - but probably more a realistic limit in terms of how much power they would want to get out of the engine. 

True, I guess Audi doesn't want to offer a turbo that is too peaky, or has big turbo lag. But hey, if they get 300hp out of the VR6, then it will be fine for the TT.
Althought I can't imagine what a factory turbo VR6 could do, specially if it's the 3.6, why turbo the 2.5 if they could just turbo the 3.2 or the 3.6 VR6??
i'm all for the 2.5 Turbo, but I think a blown 3.6 could make the TT perform to caymas S or Cayman turbo (if they ever come out) levels.


_Modified by Giancarlo at 3:22 PM 8-8-2006_


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (Giancarlo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Giancarlo* »_
True, I guess Audi doesn't want to offer a turbo that is too peaky, or has big turbo lag. But hey, if they get 300hp out of the VR6, then it will be fine for the TT.
Althought I can't imagine what a factory turbo VR6 could do, specially if it's the 3.6, why turbo the 2.5 if they could just turbo the 3.2 or the 3.6 VR6??
i'm all for the 2.5 Turbo, but I think a blown 3.6 could make the TT perform to caymas S or Cayman turbo (if they ever come out) levels.

_Modified by Giancarlo at 3:22 PM 8-8-2006_

It's been confirmed that it is in fact a 3.6L FSI VR6 with 302hp and not a pumped up 3.2L.
As for the blown VR6 - i'll take the turbo 2.5 thank you very much. Lighter and capable of huge HP numbers. Look at how much they got out of the old 2.2L inline 5.  
If the MKII TT which gets the higher HP numbers is anything like i'm hearing it's going to be - more raw - it's gonna be a pretty sweet car.


----------



## PhReE (Sep 16, 2004)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ ([email protected])*

Any speculations/guesses/ideas on what the 302 HP version will cost?
I assume it will be the TT S and the 2.5L (Twin) Turbo will be the TT RS version.


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (PhReE)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PhReE* »_Any speculations/guesses/ideas on what the 302 HP version will cost?
I assume it will be the TT S and the 2.5L (Twin) Turbo will be the TT RS version.

That's the intent - although whether it will be call an RS is still to be determined. I would say the S will be in the $48k+ range and the RS in the $55k+ range.


----------



## der_horst (Jul 22, 2006)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
It's been confirmed that it is in fact a 3.6L FSI VR6 with 302hp and not a pumped up 3.2L.

who confirmed that? till now i've only heard that the engineers had problems getting the 3.6l engine in the TT-bay.


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (der_horst)*


_Quote, originally posted by *der_horst* »_
who confirmed that? till now i've only heard that the engineers had problems getting the 3.6l engine in the TT-bay.


My sources remain anynomous. Another source has driven the car in question. That source is never wrong


----------



## PhReE (Sep 16, 2004)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (der_horst)*


_Quote, originally posted by *der_horst* »_
who confirmed that? till now i've only heard that the engineers had problems getting the 3.6l engine in the TT-bay.


No they had problems getting the 3.6L engine in the MkV chassis (a la R36 and A3) but this car was designed from the get go to allow the larger tranny required for the 3.6L engine. --Its actually the tranny that didnt fit, not the engine. (The current trannys are only rated to 350Nm -- there is a 500Nm version but it is physically bigger.)


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (PhReE)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PhReE* »_
No they had problems getting the 3.6L engine in the MkV chassis (a la R36 and A3) but this car was designed from the get go to allow the larger tranny required for the 3.6L engine. --Its actually the tranny that didnt fit, not the engine. (The current trannys are only rated to 350Nm -- there is a 500Nm version but it is physically bigger.)

To clarify - it was the core support that was the problem - the engine couldn't be placed far enough forward in the Golf and Jetta. Apprently Winterkorn is driving a 3.6 A3 around. I don't know if it's modified to allow the fitment of that engine or if it fits in the current production A3. As you mentioned - it was my understanding that the TT was designed from the start to fit this engine/tranny combo.


----------



## Giancarlo (Aug 10, 2000)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ ([email protected])*

So they couldn't fit the 3.6 in the A3/golf, or was the modifying to much to make it to production?
I can imagine that the 2.5 turbo will be a monster, will it be single turbo? But can't help in lusting over the potential of a blown 3.6 (450-500hp???) 
Better start saving up.
Have the sources mentioned anything about taking the Cayman head on with a model, or will they kind of do their own thing? I'm asking this because this could be the difference between it being a costly limited edition or lower priced to get higher volume and compete with the Cayman, BMW?
Please educate the ignorant, what is the Core Support? Was this the reason for not making the R36?


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (Giancarlo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Giancarlo* »_So they couldn't fit the 3.6 in the A3/golf, or was the modifying to much to make it to production?

Didn't want to spend the money to do it on the MKV since the MKVI is right around the corner. It definitely fits in those









_Quote »_I can imagine that the 2.5 turbo will be a monster, will it be single turbo? But can't help in lusting over the potential of a blown 3.6 (450-500hp???) 
Better start saving up.
Have the sources mentioned anything about taking the Cayman head on with a model, or will they kind of do their own thing? I'm asking this because this could be the difference between it being a costly limited edition or lower priced to get higher volume and compete with the Cayman, BMW?
Please educate the ignorant, what is the Core Support? Was this the reason for not making the R36?


Core support is the radiator core support - the front of the engine compartment. 
As for the 300+hp TT it's the one that is supposed to take on the Cayman and M Coupe. No info on the Turbo model yet.


----------



## PhReE (Sep 16, 2004)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ ([email protected])*

Actually I remeber seeing a post from [email protected] saying VW decided NOT to redo the core support for the MkVI. For the life of me I can't find it though... Maybe (hopefully) I am mistaken.


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (PhReE)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PhReE* »_Actually I remeber seeing a post from [email protected] saying VW decided NOT to redo the core support for the MkVI. For the life of me I can't find it though... Maybe (hopefully) I am mistaken.

Nope he stated they wouldn't redo the MKV.


----------



## der_horst (Jul 22, 2006)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
As for the 300+hp TT it's the one that is supposed to take on the Cayman and M Coupe. No info on the Turbo model yet.

do you know anything about the relation between this one and the TTS? like when the 3.6l is expected to get publicly presented (the TTS should already be out by then) and how they'd name/position such a car that's between the TTS and TTRS?


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (der_horst)*


_Quote, originally posted by *der_horst* »_do you know anything about the relation between this one and the TTS? like when the 3.6l is expected to get publicly presented (the TTS should already be out by then) and how they'd name/position such a car that's between the TTS and TTRS?

Nope - just the engine combos right now and a few tidbits of info. It's at least a year away from what i'm hearing.


----------



## der_horst (Jul 22, 2006)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_As for the blown VR6 - i'll take the turbo 2.5 thank you very much. Lighter and capable of huge HP numbers.

but that one's reserved for the RS and even further down the roadmap, right?


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (der_horst)*


_Quote, originally posted by *der_horst* »_
but that one's reserved for the RS and even further down the roadmap, right?










Yeah - 09 or so from what we are hearing. Not sure if it will be called an RS or not.


----------



## gizmopop (Feb 6, 2000)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
Interesting - I didn't remember that from the Roadjet concept story. I think due to the layout of the valvetrain of the VR6 it might be impossible to do this, but who knows. 

all 24V VR6s shouldn't have a problem doing Variable valve timing, each camshaft is now responsible for all valves (intake and exhaust) for all cylinders..


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: (gizmopop)*


_Quote, originally posted by *gizmopop* »_
all 24V VR6s shouldn't have a problem doing Variable valve timing, each camshaft is now responsible for all valves (intake and exhaust) for all cylinders..

I think this is different than VVT - it's more like VTEC with variable cam lobes or something like that.


----------



## PhReE (Sep 16, 2004)

*Re: ([email protected])*

Yeah -- we currently only have variable cam phasing really-- the cam still has the same duration but the phase vs the piston can be changed. They are talking about adding real VVT -- with variable duration and/or lift. Good stuff


----------



## Professor Gascan (Sep 11, 2002)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (der_horst)*


_Quote, originally posted by *der_horst* »_
do you know anything about the relation between this one and the TTS? like when the 3.6l is expected to get publicly presented (the TTS should already be out by then) and how they'd name/position such a car that's between the TTS and TTRS?


I'll add a little more to the discussion with info probably stemming from the same place as Joe's.








From what I've read, the TT-S will be the 265hp 2.0T model. That engine will more than likely not come here. The TT-R as it is currently known, is the 302 3.6 VR6 model. As of present, it is more than a year away. Figure to see it on the road late, late in 2007 or sometime in the first half of 2008. As for the 350hp 2.5T car, there is still no word on naming convention as the engine was just approved for development in May. There have been warnings to keep in mind that not all engines will be offered at the same time. Whether that means that the 3.6 will disapprear when the 2.5T arrives is unknown. Clearly, the next 3 years are very, very exciting ones for the Audi lovers.


----------



## der_horst (Jul 22, 2006)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (Professor Gascan)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Professor Gascan* »_
From what I've read, the TT-S will be the 265hp 2.0T model. That engine will more than likely not come here.

i've read that several times as well, but recently i started to wonder, because i heard that the design limit of 272hp was for the K03, not the K04 engine, which makes me wonder if the TTS might get the bigger brother of the S3 (as it behoves







) and they were holding something back in the S3.
btw, i just read that audi gave the A4 a bhp-upgrade, 2.0l engine is now 220 instead of 200 hp. i hope that wave continues thoughout the entire 2.0l model range


----------



## D Clymer (Feb 18, 1999)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (Professor Gascan)*

I don't think the 265hp S3 engine will be the S-TT engine. If you look historically at the S3/TT relationship (previous generation) the TT 225 quattro and the S3 mk1 shared the same engine. However the performance of the TT 225 was not deemed worthy of the S badge, but it did elevate the ordinary A3 to S car status. 
It's true that 265hp is significantly more than 225, and the new TT is lighter than the S3 thanks the it's mostly ASF construction, but I think it's more likely that the 302 hp VR6 will be the S and the 350 hp turbo 2.5 will be the RS.


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (D Clymer)*


_Quote, originally posted by *D Clymer* »_I don't think the 265hp S3 engine will be the S-TT engine. If you look historically at the S3/TT relationship (previous generation) the TT 225 quattro and the S3 mk1 shared the same engine. However the performance of the TT 225 was not deemed worthy of the S badge, but it did elevate the ordinary A3 to S car status. 
It's true that 265hp is significantly more than 225, and the new TT is lighter than the S3 thanks the it's mostly ASF construction, but I think it's more likely that the 302 hp VR6 will be the S and the 350 hp turbo 2.5 will be the RS.

What I think will happen is that the 265hp version will simply be an upgrade in power to the standard 230hp 2.0T quattro over time. If you look at the S4 as an example - it's 344hp vs 250hp over the normal A4 V6. I doubt Audi would put an S badge on a car with only 35hp over the standard car. VR6 makes more sense.


----------



## Giancarlo (Aug 10, 2000)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (der_horst)*


_Quote, originally posted by *der_horst* »_
i've read that several times as well, but recently i started to wonder, because i heard that the design limit of 272hp was for the K03, not the K04 engine, which makes me wonder if the TTS might get the bigger brother of the S3 (as it behoves







) and they were holding something back in the S3.
btw, i just read that audi gave the A4 a bhp-upgrade, 2.0l engine is now 220 instead of 200 hp. i hope that wave continues thoughout the entire 2.0l model range









Isn't the 265hp version already using the K04? It mentions on the write up that it has a bigger turbo.
I'm really glad that they upgraded the HP on the A4 to 220hp, hopefully this is a real upgrade and not only stating what a lot of people think the 200HP version ALREADY made.


----------



## der_horst (Jul 22, 2006)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (Giancarlo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Giancarlo* »_
Isn't the 265hp version already using the K04?


yes, but it doesn't have to be maxed out at 265hp


----------



## MacMike (May 23, 2006)

Any chance that VW's ground-breaking 210-hp TSI gas engine which has both a turbocharger and supercharger will be in the TT or other Audis?


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: (MacMike)*


_Quote, originally posted by *MacMike* »_Any chance that VW's ground-breaking 210-hp TSI gas engine which has both a turbocharger and supercharger will be in the TT or other Audis?

It's always a possibility - but very unlikely.


----------



## TORSEN TRACTION (Mar 27, 2002)

Sweet! Im excited to see what happens.
cant wait for the Turbo Inline 5, bringing back the glory days!!
I wish the TT/R32 and passat werent transverse. I want a real quattro in there!!


----------



## Black20th (Jul 3, 2002)

*Re: 350 2.5T for MKII TT........ (D Clymer)*

good stuff ... can't wait to see it @ the dealers.


----------



## rastta (Feb 22, 1999)

*Re: (TORSEN TRACTION)*


_Quote, originally posted by *TORSEN TRACTION* »_
I wish the TT/R32 and passat werent transverse. I want a real quattro in there!!

Hmm - REAL quattro (ie. urQuattro) wasn't Torsen


----------

