# The new TT Mk3 will be a total failure IMHO.



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

I don't like what i have seen so far, it lacks TT-ness big times.
This car will be liked by all the people that did not like the first two TT's.
It will be just a ordinairy Audi coupe without any WOW factor.
Audi has completely lost it design wise.


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

Lots of similar comments on the forums this week. I'm curious though, what makes a TT a TT to you?


----------



## Macdoc (Aug 30, 2007)

R5T said:


> I don't like what i have seen so far, it lacks TT-ness big times.
> This car will be liked by all the people that did not like the first two TT's.
> It will be just a ordinairy Audi coupe without any WOW factor.
> Audi has completely lost it design wise.


I agree 100%. My first TT in 1999 (2000) was a great car, Cool design inside and out. I bought my 08 TT 3.2 6 speed S-Line, as soon as they were taking orders, the handling is better then the MK1, out side the car is better looking then MK1, but the interior is bland. Both cars did and do turned heads. I was really hoping for a Home Run this time for the TT, Going back to a rad design, lighter, more Horse Power with a 6 speed across the line, and put a sun roof in the dam thing Please??. Disappointed so far, even the interior is a let down, those air vents are hideous. I'll wait until it comes out for final judgment, but something tells me, I may have bought my last TT.


----------



## AU-297 (Apr 6, 2004)

*I disagree*

I've been around Allroad Shooting Brake concept now for two days in a row, it is very much a TT!


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

The concept looks already dated from a design point of view IMHO.
There is not much new, design wise and still looks like every other boring Audi.


----------



## 0101.adm (Dec 14, 2011)

the sight of the shooting brake is ruining the mk3 for me.

i hope that a coupe back, lowered suspension, and whatever exterior changes separately defines the new TT as its own.

otherwise, im buying a used TTS or even a Porsche.


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

0101.adm said:


> the sight of the shooting brake is ruining the mk3 for me.
> 
> i hope that a coupe back, lowered suspension, and whatever exterior changes separately defines the new TT as its own.
> 
> otherwise, im buying a used TTS or even a Porsche.


How can the concept ruin the TT? It's a design preview, it's not like they're going to throw a TT badge on the allroad and start shipping them as the new TT.


----------



## 0101.adm (Dec 14, 2011)

JohnLZ7W said:


> How can the concept ruin the TT? It's a design preview, it's not like they're going to throw a TT badge on the allroad and start shipping them as the new TT.


everyone and their dog is saying the concept is basically the TT. i must be feeding into the hype. 

where are these people getting this info from?


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

0101.adm said:


> everyone and their dog is saying the concept is basically the TT. i must be feeding into the hype.
> 
> where are these people getting this info from?


Everyone is saying the concept is a preview of the TT _styling_. There have been mules running around for a few months now that have the typical sports car profile but the actual detailing of the body and lights has been hidden. The allroad concept gives a clear view of what we can expect once the camouflage comes off.

It's basically the same routine Audi used with the mk2...
http://forums.quattroworld.com/tt2/msgs/33101.phtml


----------



## 0101.adm (Dec 14, 2011)

JohnLZ7W said:


> Everyone is saying the concept is a preview of the TT _styling_. There have been mules running around for a few months now that have the typical sports car profile but the actual detailing of the body and lights has been hidden. The allroad concept gives a clear view of what we can expect once the camouflage comes off.
> 
> It's basically the same routine Audi used with the mk2...
> http://forums.quattroworld.com/tt2/msgs/33101.phtml


at your link, the comparison is almost line for line.

i dont like the new concept look. i hope its not too 'line for line'.


----------



## cyberpmg (Nov 27, 2001)

Don't forget that Audi has used a Shooting Brake concept to reveal the design of a new TT before. Take the current concept. Lower it. Change the back end, and you'll have what will be very close to the Mk 3.


----------



## Vegas-RoadsTTer (Mar 17, 2013)

*The Mk 2 was a USA sales failure and the Mk 3 will likely fail also*

With fewer than about 2000 cars sold in the US per year for the past several years, the Mk 2 is a sales failure. Even worldwide sales are dismal being much less than the boxster/cayman and the BMW Z. The Mk 2 is, by far, the poorest selling car worldwide in the Audi inventory (excluding the RS8).

Only a styling and performance home run will rescue the Mk 3. Most posts I've seen on this and other forums seem to like the interior previewed at CES. However, I am worried that this new dash technology will generate the dreaded Mk 1 "cluster failures" on early Mk 3 models.

The base Mk 3 TT engine will definitely not be a home run. Assuming the reported 220 HP version is in the base US model, it is merely the Mk 2 2011+ engine that has been properly speced. (APR's testing shows that the 2011+ Mk 2 engine is grosly underspeced and already produces 220 HP). The TTS with a 35 HP boost to 300 HP sounds like a winner. However, the base TT needs to sell well for the Mk 3 to have sales that justify the product's investment.

I expect as much improvement in the Mk 2 to Mk 3 handling as I saw in the Mk 1 to Mk 2, which was substantial. However, exterior styling is the key to regenerate sales interest and the mule photos indicate to me that changes will be evolutionary rather than revolutionary. Few foks will argue that the Mk 1 styling was revolutionary and iconic. It was a sales success despite its handling shortcomings which labeled it by many as a "girl's car" because of it's perfromance limitations. However, the girl's car image helpe sell the Mk 1 due to the appeal to both genders.

Add to that the rumor that Audi is plannig a substantial price increase, and the Mk 3 will be the last TT built


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

Vegas-RoadsTTer said:


> The base Mk 3 TT engine will definitely not be a home run. Assuming the reported 220 HP version is in the base US model, it is merely the Mk 2 2011+ engine that has been properly speced. (APR's testing shows that the 2011+ Mk 2 engine is grosly underspeced and already produces 220 HP). The TTS with a 35 HP boost to 300 HP sounds like a winner.
> 
> I expect as much improvement in the Mk 2 to Mk 3 handling as I saw in the Mk 1 to Mk 2, which was substantial.


The 4-cylinder engines for the mk3 are brand new with carried over displacements. Most importantly they will be derived from the newest 4-cylinder units that are both port and direct injected. While Audi claims this is for fuel economy and maximizing torque it has the additional benefit of resolving carbon build-up issues.

I think you're off on handling improvements tho. The wheelbase, track width and rear suspension setup were all fundamentally different than the mk1. The mk3 is within millimeters of the footprint of the mk2 and from what I've seen of other MQB cars the rear suspension is very similar to the mk5 based cars. I'm sure it will be better, and if they pick up gen3 Magride that will also have benefits, but I don't expect it to be as much of a jump as the mk1 to mk2 was.

I think the big draw for the mk3 is going to be technology and the fancy interior might just be enough to offset the evolutionary exterior styling.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

JohnLZ7W said:


> Lots of similar comments on the forums this week. I'm curious though, what makes a TT a TT to you?


Unique Design like the first one had.
The new TT could easaly badge "A3 Coupe" with the design it gets.


----------



## Jet jockey (Sep 20, 2011)

I would think that if the mk1 & 2 was a flop in the USA then there must be a problem with the styling and it should change it some what. So they can sell some more then the BMW Z4 and Porsche


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

I don't expect that the Mk3 TT will sell any better then the 2 previus generations.
And the evolutionary facelift style redesign is not helping either IMHO.
I also have big doubts about that new display dashboard, aspecially at night, i think it will be a irritating factor.


----------



## Vegas-RoadsTTer (Mar 17, 2013)

*Mk 1 was a sales success*



Jet jockey said:


> I would think that if the mk1 & 2 was a flop in the USA then there must be a problem with the styling and it should change it some what. So they can sell some more then the BMW Z4 and Porsche


Most years the Mk 1 outsold the boxster/cayman and the BMW Z. It's unique design was immediately copied by the Nissan Z and Lexus. IT was fresh and iconic. For example, the 2002 TT had 9000+ sales in the US in 2002 and prior years were even better. The Mk 2 has sold about 2000 per year or less in the US since 2009. Pretty bad since 2008 was the first MY in the US for the Mk 2. Most folks blame styling. IMO another major factor was that the base TT drive train was not as responsive as my Mk 1 180HP, a problem rectified in the 2011 model. I know the HP and torque specs do not justify that opinion but it obviously is not the enthusiast's car the Mk 1 is. The enthusiast had to buy the 3.2 to get performance but that added 250 pounds on the nose.

Also, the Mk 1 brought a lot of customers into the showroom who eventually bought other Audi models. The R8 now has that role.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

*So many failures.*

*2015 Audi TT spied with minimal camouflage.*










http://www.worldcarfans.com/114020669828/2015-audi-tt-spied-with-minimal-camouflage


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

http://www.autoevolution.com/news/spyshots-2015-audi-tt-almost-undisguised-76319.html


----------



## yip (Jul 14, 2003)

Vegas-RoadsTTer said:


> Most years the Mk 1 outsold the boxster/cayman and the BMW Z. It's unique design was immediately copied by the Nissan Z and Lexus. IT was fresh and iconic. For example, the 2002 TT had 9000+ sales in the US in 2002 and prior years were even better. The Mk 2 has sold about 2000 per year or less in the US since 2009. Pretty bad since 2008 was the first MY in the US for the Mk 2. Most folks blame styling. IMO another major factor was that the base TT drive train was not as responsive as my Mk 1 180HP, a problem rectified in the 2011 model. I know the HP and torque specs do not justify that opinion but it obviously is not the enthusiast's car the Mk 1 is. The enthusiast had to buy the 3.2 to get performance but that added 250 pounds on the nose.
> 
> Also, the Mk 1 brought a lot of customers into the showroom who eventually bought other Audi models. The R8 now has that role.


I like both the MK1 and MK2 but the MK2 is a much better performer comparing all similar trims and packages. FWD MK1 did not outperform a FWD MK2, the AWD 3.2 MK1 did not outperform the 3.2 MK2 etc...... Contrary to you stating that you had to buy the 3.2 to get performance quite a few journalist stated that they would pick the 2.0T FWD over the AWD 3.2 given that the performance #'s were so close. 

The MK1 is a much more polarizing design and I think it will always stand out the most but there is no denying that the MK2 is a step up in performance on every level even if you factor in the issues with the early FSI motors. 

I understand that a lot of people will bash the new incoming model but regardless of how it looks I'm just happy that they are moving forward and continuing to offer a model in this segment.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

It looks like the Audi rings will move to the bonnet, based on these pics.


----------



## BMWDAD (May 13, 2012)

R5T said:


> http://www.autoevolution.com/news/spyshots-2015-audi-tt-almost-undisguised-76319.html


thanks, an evolution, not a revolution


----------



## pal (Aug 16, 2000)

I actually don't mind an evolutionary design for the exterior of the MK3 TT. The rear hatch flattens a bit sooner compared to the MK2 giving hints to the MK1; not a clear design choice but an attempt. The interior, while a nice place to be, was a let down (from a TT Mk1 view) and the MK3 does not look any more promising.

That being said, I think the Mk2 sales were poor in the US because a lot of us were hoping for a 6MT/Quattro/2.0T combo offering that never happened. And it looks like it won't again with the Mk3 from what the buzz seems to indicate.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 12, 2001)

pal said:


> The interior, while a nice place to be, was a let down (from a TT Mk1 view) and the MK3 does not look any more promising.


The MK3 TT interior is _fantastic_ it seriously issues in an entirely new era of Audi interior design. It's really, really nice, and advanced from both a design and technology standpoint. I haven't been in a production one yet, but we all know they'll nail the materials and fit and finish as well.

-Tim


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

Apparently it's already clear that the all digital dash cluster will be a extra option, the basic dash will be, conventional dials like in the A3, thank God for that.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

Sketches always looks much better then the actual model will be.

Based on this rearview skets it looks promissing.










The front view sketches are not that promissing, what happend with the fraise "the next TT will have the new Audi front design"  It's as boring like the rest of the Audi's.
The only good thing about it is that the Audi rings move to the bonnet.
Lets hope that the S-Line TT-S front will be any better.


----------



## MoreGooderTT (Aug 20, 2011)

So now that you've seen it for real, RST, what's your opinion? 

By the way, I hope we don't have many threads with loads of negative comments about the MK3. Why? Because without enthusiasm for the new MK3 Audi may just decide to avoid selling the TT in the US, period.

Audi indicated during the debut that they regard the TT shape to be iconic in the same vein as the shape of the 911 and the VW Bug; Immediately recognized, and classic in form. And I agree with them 100% I think they did a wonderful job of giving the MK2 an external facelift. The interior is breathtaking. I saw a video of the design process, and there was a moment when the interior was lit up as you would see it at night. I can't wait to see it in person.l 

Sure, there may be current MK1 TT drivers that pine for the days when their car was the new model. I feel a bit of that now too, even though my MK2 is only 2 years old. Nevertheless, I channel my energies into looking ahead. The MK3 is in my future if Audi is willing to sell me one. If not, I'll drive my MK2 until it falls apart.


----------



## dbturbo2 (Oct 22, 2008)

MoreGooderTT said:


> So now that you've seen it for real, RST, what's your opinion?
> 
> By the way, I hope we don't have many threads with loads of negative comments about the MK3. Why? Because without enthusiasm for the new MK3 Audi may just decide to avoid selling the TT in the US, period.
> 
> ...


:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

Couldn't agree more, the TT is Audi's 911 thus the changes should be evolutionary not revolutionary. Audi spent their money where it matters most with significant enhancements to handling/dynamics/performance and the interior. Hopefully Audi will price this car competitively and do some advertising so it will enjoy the retail success it deserves and live on for future generations.


----------



## outshined (Jul 30, 2011)

I love TT design, but the price is a bit of a head scratcher. It's closest competitor, the 2 Series starts at $33k. The TT starts at $40k. Wtf. Base TT should start at ~$35k.


----------



## MoreGooderTT (Aug 20, 2011)

outshined said:


> I love TT design, but the price is a bit of a head scratcher. It's closest competitor, the 2 Series starts at $33k. The TT starts at $40k. Wtf. Base TT should start at ~$35k.


Well, I'll add my take on that. 

How do you see the 2 series as the closest competitor to the TT? I'm baffled. The 2 series is a small 4 door sedan with 2 doors removed. There are loads of those out there. I would put the Audi A5 in even the S5 in the same boat. Removing 2 doors from a sedan does not a sport car make. Granted they removed some inches to the overall length of the 2 series so it departs from the sedan a bit further, but I still see a sedan with 2 doors. I haven't driven a 2 series, nor have a driven the MK3 TT yet, but I can't help but think that the TT will be a more engaging experience given that it's purpose built as a sport car as opposed to a rear passenger inconveniencing sedan.

Regardless, the TT is likely not going to be a high volume car. Low demand often dictates a higher price. Lower demand also means more exclusivity and higher resale values. (Disclaimer: Buying new cars as an investment is not smart financial planning)

Style does play into the price of a car. For instance you can find cars with similar HP to weight as a 911, but just because it can get to 60mph just as fast doesn't mean it automatically drives the price of the 911 down.

Sorry to sound harsh. I hope I don't come across as combative, but I'm honestly puzzled with your comparison with the 2 series.


----------



## outshined (Jul 30, 2011)

MoreGooderTT said:


> Well, I'll add my take on that.
> 
> How do you see the 2 series as the closest competitor to the TT? I'm baffled. The 2 series is a small 4 door sedan with 2 doors removed. There are loads of those out there. I would put the Audi A5 in even the S5 in the same boat. Removing 2 doors from a sedan does not a sport car make. Granted they removed some inches to the overall length of the 2 series so it departs from the sedan a bit further, but I still see a sedan with 2 doors. I haven't driven a 2 series, nor have a driven the MK3 TT yet, but I can't help but think that the TT will be a more engaging experience given that it's purpose built as a sport car as opposed to a rear passenger inconveniencing sedan.
> 
> ...


Some people view the TT as a Golf with two doors removed. I have a hard time believing a TT handles significantly better than a 2 Series. Most of Audi's vehicles are direct competitors with BMW and MB. I don't know why you find it so baffling. I do prefer TT styling over a 2 Series, but I don't prefer it for $7k more.


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

outshined said:


> Some people view the TT as a Golf with two doors removed. I have a hard time believing a TT handles significantly better than a 2 Series. Most of Audi's vehicles are direct competitors with BMW and MB. I don't know why you find it so baffling. I do prefer TT styling over a 2 Series, but I don't prefer it for $7k more.


Wouldn't the Z4 be a better comparison point for the TT?


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

MoreGooderTT said:


> So now that you've seen it for real, RST, what's your opinion?


My point of view have not changed. :thumbdown:


----------



## outshined (Jul 30, 2011)

JohnLZ7W said:


> Wouldn't the Z4 be a better comparison point for the TT?


The Z4 isn't much more than a 2 Series roadster. The actual 2 Series shares 2+2 seating with the TT though. Only major difference I see between the 2 Series and TT other than styling is awd, which is supposedly coming to the 2 Series at the end of the year/early next year.


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

outshined said:


> The Z4 isn't much more than a 2 Series roadster. The actual 2 Series shares 2+2 seating with the TT though. Only major difference I see between the 2 Series and TT other than styling is awd, which is supposedly coming to the 2 Series at the end of the year/early next year.


And yet there's a price premium for the Z4 over the 2-series. Auto manufacturers charge a premium for sporty lifestyle cars over more sedate sedans and coupe versions of sedans. Hell, even the 2-door versions on the same platform are typically more expensive than the 4-door. The A5 base price is 5k higher than an A4. I believe you'll find similar differences between 1/2 and 3/4 from BMW.


----------



## outshined (Jul 30, 2011)

JohnLZ7W said:


> And yet there's a price premium for the Z4 over the 2-series. Auto manufacturers charge a premium for sporty lifestyle cars over more sedate sedans and coupe versions of sedans. Hell, even the 2-door versions on the same platform are typically more expensive than the 4-door. The A5 base price is 5k higher than an A4. I believe you'll find similar differences between 1/2 and 3/4 from BMW.


Yeah, I forgot to mention that I think the Z4 is a bit overpriced as well, though it is a convertible. The 228i is cheaper than the 328i (2-door v 4-door) by about $5k. If Audi wants to stick with higher margins and less sales, that's their choice. Though I don't see how that helps VAG's overall sales goals. I think they could get more sales with a $34k-$35k starting point on the TT.


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

outshined said:


> The 228i is cheaper than the 328i (2-door v 4-door) by about $5k. If Audi wants to stick with higher margins and less sales, that's their choice. Though I don't see how that helps VAG's overall sales goals. I think they could get more sales with a $34k-$35k starting point on the TT.


This is absolutely the wrong comparison. The 2-series is paired with the 1-series. Of course the 2 is cheaper than the 3, it's a smaller car! You need to compare the 3 and 4 and you'll see at least $3k difference between those two.

Of course they could get more sales with a cheaper car but that totally ignores profit margins. It's not just a matter of higher margins but profitability, period. The TT is an expensive car to build. The hardpoints are the same as any other MQB-platform car but the aluminum intensive unibody is completely unique to the TT.


----------



## outshined (Jul 30, 2011)

Size-wise the TT is more comparable to the 2 Series than the 4. Obviously margins need to have room for profits, but sales goals achieve profits too. I don't see why Audi can't offer a cheaper fwd or de-contented version of the TT. Currently, they don't have a competitive coupe answer to the 2.


----------



## HalvieCuw (Mar 20, 2003)

outshined said:


> I love TT design, but the price is a bit of a head scratcher. It's closest competitor, the 2 Series starts at $33k. *The TT starts at $40k.* Wtf. Base TT should start at ~$35k.


Is this true...? Unbelievable. What a value for your money.:facepalm:


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

A full options M235i will cost you round about 70K.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 12, 2001)

R5T said:


> A full options M235i will cost you round about 70K.


In what country?

If you run through the builder at bmwusa.com, with every package and interior option it's somewhere around $53,000 for one.

-Tim


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

[email protected] said:


> In what country?
> 
> If you run through the builder at bmwusa.com, with every package and interior option it's somewhere around $53,000 for one.
> 
> -Tim


In The Netherlands. 

a full options TT RS+ is close to 100K. (Euro)


----------



## tdi-bart (Feb 10, 2011)

what are you guys smoking over there


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 12, 2001)

The cost of living in general is higher in the Netherlands than it is here, and car prices are also higher. In addition to that, the purchase taxes on a car in the Netherlands can run up to 45% of the purchase price of the car, depending on what you're buying. Because of all of that, the price of a TT or an M235i in the Netherlands has about as much to do with the price of those things here as the price of an orange in Mumbai compared to one in Salt Lake City.



-Tim


----------



## URHank (Mar 19, 2009)

It is pretty hard to compare the sales of the MK1 to the sales of mk2s. The world economy in 2008-2012 was far different from the economy in 2000-2007. I think the mk2 would have sold a lot better if it would have been released even a year earlier. Look at the sport cars that were released in that same era that had a hard time taking off. The one that comes to mind for me is the Genesis Coupe 2.0T. What a fantastic car that was just not bought due to the economy. 

I think the mk3 will do just fine, especially if they can get the car to keep losing weight. The TT isn't going anywhere mostly because the other cars built on the same platform aren't going anywhere.

Hank


----------



## JoeC1982 (Aug 4, 2006)

[email protected] said:


> In what country?
> 
> If you run through the builder at bmwusa.com, with every package and interior option it's somewhere around $53,000 for one.
> 
> -Tim


I'm looking at the 228i M Sport at $39k equipped how i'd want it which is fairly stripped honestly. I'm between that and the new TT with S Line package which i hope is within $3k but i doubt. The S3 starts just under $42k i believe. I like the low weight of the TT along with the utility of being a hatch with fold down rear seats. The BMW is rwd and still fairly light but i prefer the interior of the Audi so its going to come down to how they drive and the price.

Maybe i should just get the Golf R, don't think it will be offered as a 2 door though.


----------

