# TTS vs Golf R



## Submerge (Sep 7, 2002)

Hi guys,

I'm currently thinking of picking up a TTS. I know its similar to the Golf R in terms of suspension, motor and etc. This isn't so much about is the TTS worth $20K more than a Golf R, but rather the reviews that come with the TTS. From all the reviews I've seen of the Golf R, EVERYONE seems to rave about how great it is. How fun the car is at the track and etc etc. They're saying its a special car, more fun than the 2 series BMW (Chris Harris LOVED it...I wonder if he would have given the TTS such praise), better than the Sti and etc. Yet, when I see reviews for the TTS, they're often luke warm about it. Not bad, but they're saying "its not really a sports car", steering could use some help, has understeer.

From everything I've read, it seems that the TTS is a much more nimble/dynamic version of the Golf R, yet the TTS didn't get as much "buzz" as the Golf R. Why is this? I haven't driven either, so I can't really give my opinion. Do they drive similarly?


----------



## anti suv (Sep 26, 2013)

I chose a non-s tt over a golf r (should be here in a month). Its a different driving experience so definitely test drive then both. I was dead set on a golf r (i'm a current mkv gti owner) but when i test drove it i realized that I wanted more of a sports car. I have always liked the TT so i went to check one out. Just sitting in it i was sold and the test drive felt more like a sports car than the golf r. Also i was able to get 6% off msrp of the tt where most of the golf r's had markups.

There is also a thread i started about golf r vs tt a couple months ago which may help.


----------



## Woj (Oct 23, 2000)

I went from a golf R (2013) to a TT-S and I am having some degree of buyer's remorse.
I' be too many GTIs before the R and wanted something different.

My main gripe is that I just can't stand the DSG transmission. Always had manual transmissions and it is turning out to be a deal breaker.
Handling is good and the fact that it weighs less than the R helps. Numb steering is part of the Audi feel. At least, the Quattro is setup to be 40/60 as the default, unlike the R, which is basically fwd until slippage is detected.
The car looks good and receives complements from a lot of people. It's small size is welcome as I found the R mk7 to be too big for my use as a DD.

All it needs is more power to differentiate it from the R and a manual transmission. The locked ECU is making it tough to have some more power extracted so that may be an issue for some.


----------



## Submerge (Sep 7, 2002)

Thanks for the input. Sorry about the buyer's remorse bit. That's exactly what I'm worried about too. But I've always wanted a TT from the 1st gen. The part about quatro vs Golf R's haldex AWD system, aren't the TT's AWD system the same as the Golf R (Latest gen Haldex)?


----------



## anti suv (Sep 26, 2013)

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?t=7430338

My golf r vs tt thread.

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?t=7594858

S3 vs tts tread. May be usefull too.


----------



## GaBoYnFla (Oct 2, 2005)

I went from the R32 to TTS and now on 2nd TTS....and don't regret it at all.....car is great, looks great, preforms great. Faster than the Golf Rs due to weight. Only thing I would consider is how you use your car. The back seat of the TTS is completely useless.....I call it a "very nice leather storage shelf." You can fold down the seats and there is decent room but nothing like the Golf R's room. 

Ironically, I may be going back to a Golf R next year due to the increasing cost of the TTS and I want to get a 2nd dog which I can't fit in the TTS. We'll see how that goes. 

I can tell you the TTS gets tons of attention from people which I like and I RARELY see another one which I also like. You may not see a R often but you will see GTI's, and regular Golfs all over the place. I like the uniqueness.


----------



## Vegas-RoadsTTer (Mar 17, 2013)

*The TTS is a significantly better performer that the Golf R*



Submerge said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> I'm currently thinking of picking up a TTS. I know its similar to the Golf R in terms of suspension, motor and etc. This isn't so much about is the TTS worth $20K more than a Golf R, but rather the reviews that come with the TTS. From all the reviews I've seen of the Golf R, EVERYONE seems to rave about how great it is. How fun the car is at the track and etc etc. They're saying its a special car, more fun than the 2 series BMW (Chris Harris LOVED it...I wonder if he would have given the TTS such praise), better than the Sti and etc. Yet, when I see reviews for the TTS, they're often luke warm about it. Not bad, but they're saying "its not really a sports car", steering could use some help, has understeer.
> 
> From everything I've read, it seems that the TTS is a much more nimble/dynamic version of the Golf R, yet the TTS didn't get as much "buzz" as the Golf R. Why is this? I haven't driven either, so I can't really give my opinion. Do they drive similarly?


I hear what you are saying about the reviews. Many are pointing out that that the Golf R is identical to a TTS with a different skin. However, this is absolutely untrue. There are some similarities, like the engine, but many more differences.

I view the Car and Driver Lightning Lap tests as the most objective measure of a car's overall perfromance. It is the only objective test that combines acceleration, handling, and braking as a non-modified car goes around a track driven by the same professional drivers. In the most recent, 2015, tests the S3 was faster than the Golf R and both were significantly slower than the old Mk 2 TTS. With the HP and handling improvements of the Mk 3 TTS over the Mk 2 TTS, the Mk 3 TTS will leave the Mk 2 TTS in the dust. I expect the Mk 3 TTS Lightning Lap, when tested in 2016, to be about the same as the Mk 2 TTRS (less HP but far improved handling). 

As proven by the track data, the Golf R and TTS are different animals with the TTS being vastly superior in overall performance. Is it worth $20K more? Only you can answer that. The Golf R might be good enough or if you have to have a manual tranny, then go with the Golf. But the C&D track data pitted a manual new Golf R versus a DSG Mk 2 TTS and the TTS won easily.

What really puzzles me is even the C&D review of the Mk 3 TTS made the same stupid statement about the Golf R being the same car. Seems like some writers don't do any research, even in their own magazine, and just print subjective trash. When it comes to performance comparisons, I prefer to use measureable data instead of someone's seat of the pants.


----------



## mremg (May 10, 2015)

Vegas-RoadsTTer said:


> What really puzzles me is even the C&D review of the Mk 3 TTS made the same stupid statement about the Golf R being the same car. Seems like some writers don't do any research, even in their own magazine, and just print subjective trash.


I'm often puzzled by how inaccuracies mentioned in one review almost end up in every other review. 

Back to the question - TT had never really been a 'review' favorite. If you go back in history and look at all the TT reviews almost everyone trashed it for not being so pure or fun or both. The new Golf R apparently has really short gearing which might be a bit more involving if you're into it. 

Try test driving both and decide for yourself. Don't put too much value in car reviews.


----------



## Submerge (Sep 7, 2002)

Yes!! This is what confuses me! Seems like EVERYONE that reviews the R LOVES it. The way it handles, the way it drives. But the same people, when reviewing the TTS, it doesn't get as high a praise. They still like it, but they aren't RAVING about it the way they raved about the R. It should technically be even BETTER than the R (driving wise), right? I'm baffled.


----------



## Submerge (Sep 7, 2002)

anti suv said:


> http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?t=7430338
> 
> My golf r vs tt thread.
> 
> ...



Anti Suv, thanks for the links! Extremely helpfull!:thumbup:


----------



## Ginovega (Jul 22, 2013)

It's all about the looks ! If you can afford it. .


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

Submerge said:


> Yes!! This is what confuses me! Seems like EVERYONE that reviews the R LOVES it. The way it handles, the way it drives. But the same people, when reviewing the TTS, it doesn't get as high a praise. They still like it, but they aren't RAVING about it the way they raved about the R. It should technically be even BETTER than the R (driving wise), right? I'm baffled.


I think some of this is down to the packaging and expectations that come from it. Look at what the Golf R is typically being compared against, STI, and other hot hatches. What's the favorite comparison for the TTS? A Cayman. 

That said, even on the same platform, with same engine and basic suspension setup there can be vast differences in how a car feels. That's why we mod cars. We haven't fundamentally changed the chassis but there's certainly a difference in feel and capability. Whatever VW has engineered into the Golf R in terms of spring/damper rates, bushings and alignment could go a long way in to how it drives compared to the TTS.

A further thought. Many of the reviews I've read of the mk3 TTS talk about just how much grip it has and how tied down it is. Perhaps the TTS chassis is quite a bit better than the Golf R but that presents itself as ultimate grip and higher limits effectively making the car too capable on the street. There's something to be said for trading grip for feel.


----------



## Huey52 (Nov 10, 2010)

That's why I went TTS over Cayman. The Cayman is an ultimate track tool but the TTS has a better everyday road feel. imho of course.

And the Golf R is an exceptional hot hatch, but not a sportscar. 




JohnLZ7W said:


> ....
> 
> A further thought. Many of the reviews I've read of the mk3 TTS talk about just how much grip it has and how tied down it is. Perhaps the TTS chassis is quite a bit better than the Golf R but that presents itself as ultimate grip and higher limits effectively making the car too capable on the street. There's something to be said for trading grip for feel.


----------



## madmac48 (Nov 27, 2014)

I went with TTRS over Cayman for 2 reasons, 1. occasional back seats.2. 4WD. Cayman is lovely,no doubt,especially the GT4,but not as practical due to the lack of small seats.So the real rival is a Carrera4,which is in a different league altogether,and lovely if you have the $.To get a faster Carrera than my Stage2 [435HP] [Kg/HP 3.33] it would have to be at least a 4S if not GTS,at a LOT more $.One of my sons has a Golf R and it is lovely,practical,nice to drive,but way behind in handling and performance to my TTRS+ Stage 2.He says "this is a beast" when he drives it,no comparison.I await the new TTRS with interest,and the new Golf R420 and RS3 Sedan.For the price of a reasonably optioned C4S I could buy BOTH:laugh: Its a "no brainer".The TTS and RS are grossly underestimated,and for a quality hot hatch ,to quote a British Car Mag comment "Its the only car you really need" In retirement ,for me ,that might just turn out to be true!
Mac


----------



## Woj (Oct 23, 2000)

Current TT-S is setup to have the 40/60 split and is AWD all of the time, unless you put it into some sort of ECO mode.

The looks are nice and as a daily driver it is okay. 
Cup holders are the wrong size. 
Tire hum is painful with either the OEM 20's or with the Pirelli winters 19's.
The HD part of the radio is crap compared to my MB GLK. The B&O option is over rated. Audio software is not Mac friendly in terms of iTunes files types.
Gas mileage is better than my previous ono-stock Golf R (mk6).
Brakes are OK but hardly impressive. Golf R had HPA BBK.
As with most Audi vehicles, rear wheel motion is fairly abrupt and it does not do well with soaking up the terrible roads in the Berkshires of MA.

Ultimately, it's a personal choice and a decision about the amount of money involved.
IF my car is ever able to get the APR software installed, then I may be less pessimistic. Local shop has tried twice without success.


----------



## p912guy (Apr 9, 2015)

Huey52 said:


> That's why I went TTS over Cayman. The Cayman is an ultimate track tool but the TTS has a better everyday road feel. imho of course.
> 
> And the Golf R is an exceptional hot hatch, but not a sportscar.


 While I don't have any direct info regarding Golf R vs TTS, I can share the thought process I am currently involved in regarding my next vehicle purchase. I am looking at replacing my 2011 MINI Cooper S in a few months and my primary requirements for a replacement, in order, are, convertible/roadster, daily driver, fun to drive, comfortable for both driver and passenger running around town and on 3-4 hour trips, small size / light weight easier parking. Also, while I enjoy a MT and more HP and torque as much as anyone, the thought of driving car with a really good dual-clutch AT and reasonable power is appealing especially in these days of heavy traffic that moves at a snails pace more often than not. I subscribe to the philosophy that within reason, it is more fun to drive a slow car fast than drive a fast car. 

Keeping all those considerations in mind, clearly the Golf R / GTI is eliminated. When I purchase my MINI I compromised and got the hardtop with it's large sunroof thinking it would make up for not getting a convertible, but it's my biggest car buying regret in my lifetime. Had I not compromised and purchased a MINI convertible, I wouldn't be thinking new car now. Therefore my short list is Miata MX5, Audi A3, BMW 2 Series, JCW MINI Cooper Convertible, CPO Porsche 981 Boxster and Audi TT. The MX5 is simply too small, especially for the passenger as the passenger side leg room is reduced compared to the driver due to the location of the transmission and it's too difficult to get in and out of and my wife simply wouldn't be happy. While the A3 and BMW 2 Series are both great rides, they would be a compromise. I am really looking for a more sporty car and I don't really need a back seat, even if it's not really big enough for adult passengers. In the whole time of driving my MINI I have never once had the need or urge to have a rear seat passenger. The JCW MINI is a thought, but I haven't been thrilled with the recent redesign and even though I really have like my MINI and it's been a great car with no issues, I think I am ready to move on to something different. Also, it FWD only and I'd rather have RWD or AWD. I am a HUGE Porsche fan and I have loved the Boxster since I saw the first one back in 1996 and in my mind the 981 is the best one ever, but the potential cost of Porsche maintenance, parts and repairs send chills down my spine. Even so, if I could find the perfectly optioned low mileage CPO 981 at the perfect price, I would be very interested. 

So, all that said, I am leaning more and more toward the Audi TT Roadster. While I think it's a bit pricey for what it is, I think it offers the perfect blend of ingredients, considering my list of priorities. Ideally I'd be most interested in a CPO TT that has served as a Executive / Program / Demonstrator vehicle, but I imagine those are like hen's teeth especially my preferred Vegas Yellow or Tango Red color. Currently I am thinking ordering what I want in a TT at the same time that we replace my wife's Mazda CX9 with a Q5 3.0 TFSI might work well. Also, I became a member of the Audi Club of America to at least get the 6% discount when the time comes.

Of course the perfect 981 might be in my future too - only time will tell.


----------



## Balthazar B (Jan 20, 2014)

p912guy said:


> So, all that said, I am leaning more and more toward the Audi TT Roadster. While I think it's a bit pricey for what it is, I think it offers the perfect blend of ingredients, considering my list of priorities. Ideally I'd be most interested in a CPO TT that has served as a Executive / Program / Demonstrator vehicle, but I imagine those are like hen's teeth especially my preferred Vegas Yellow or Tango Red color. Currently I am thinking ordering what I want in a TT at the same time that we replace my wife's Mazda CX9 with a Q5 3.0 TFSI might work well. Also, I became a member of the Audi Club of America to at least get the 6% discount when the time comes.


Sounds like you really want a TTS or TTRS roadster. Or maybe I'm just projecting, since so do I.


----------



## p912guy (Apr 9, 2015)

Balthazar B said:


> Sounds like you really want a TTS or TTRS roadster. Or maybe I'm just projecting, since so do I.


TTS Roadster would be very nice, but no such animal in the US, at least for now. Also, I'm not quite sure the price premium would be worth it vs the regular TT. I think I could easily live with the performance of the base TT (or base 981) while under warranty and then do a Stage 1, and also upgrade suspension and brakes if needed. The base TT would still be a big upgrade over my MINI as a DD and I really don't see myself tracking or AutoXing it.


----------



## Balthazar B (Jan 20, 2014)

p912guy said:


> TTS Roadster would be very nice, but no such animal in the US, at least for now.


I know, and that's why Audi won't get any of my money until they bring it over.


----------



## Woj (Oct 23, 2000)

The limited volume of roadsters sold annually will make that unlikely.
Heck, Ford apparently sold more Mustangs in Germany last month than Audi sold TTs or Porsche sold 911s.

Besides, you can tune a TT to make similar power to that of a TT-S.


----------



## Balthazar B (Jan 20, 2014)

Woj said:


> The limited volume of roadsters sold annually will make that unlikely.
> Heck, Ford apparently sold more Mustangs in Germany last month than Audi sold TTs or Porsche sold 911s.
> 
> Besides, you can tune a TT to make similar power to that of a TT-S.


It's possible Audi will decide to bring the TT RS over to the USA in 2018. That could be worth waiting for.

But I'm not optimistic. I was already scratching my head about some of Audi USA's decisions. Or maybe it was passive inaction rather than decision-making. But that plus the headwinds from dieselgate don't exactly fill me with hope about extraordinary Audis in the USA.


----------



## GaBoYnFla (Oct 2, 2005)

Woj said:


> The limited volume of roadsters sold annually will make that unlikely.
> Heck, Ford apparently sold more Mustangs in Germany last month than Audi sold TTs or Porsche sold 911s.
> 
> Besides, you can tune a TT to make similar power to that of a TT-S.




There is more to the TTS than just power.....brakes for one....well worth the money....Magride....other stuff.


----------



## Woj (Oct 23, 2000)

Personally, I find the magnetic shocks less than impressive and the brakes are adequate, not great.
I thought it would more of a difference, but alas, as there were none to be test driven, I drank the cool aid and .....


----------



## Huey52 (Nov 10, 2010)

How's that tune coming along? 



Woj said:


> The limited volume of roadsters sold annually will make that unlikely.
> Heck, Ford apparently sold more Mustangs in Germany last month than Audi sold TTs or Porsche sold 911s.
> 
> Besides, you can tune a TT to make similar power to that of a TT-S.


----------



## Vegas-RoadsTTer (Mar 17, 2013)

*According to the few threads down on this forum Audi says the TTRS will be sold in the US in 2017*



Balthazar B said:


> It's possible Audi will decide to bring the TT RS over to the USA in 2018. That could be worth waiting for.
> 
> But I'm not optimistic. I was already scratching my head about some of Audi USA's decisions. Or maybe it was passive inaction rather than decision-making. But that plus the headwinds from dieselgate don't exactly fill me with hope about extraordinary Audis in the USA.


The title of the thread has a small error. The schedule shows the sale date as April 2017.


----------



## Vegas-RoadsTTer (Mar 17, 2013)

*Regarding the mag ride, that was my impression on the Mk 2*



Woj said:


> Personally, I find the magnetic shocks less than impressive and the brakes are adequate, not great.
> I thought it would more of a difference, but alas, as there were none to be test driven, I drank the cool aid and .....


Although most who have it love it. There was a post some time ago on the Mk 2 forum from a mag ride designer that the mag ride shocks rode softer than the fixed shocks on the Mk 2 in normal highway driving and only firmed up when pressing performance. Personally, my ass could not tell the difference between mag ride and standard shocks on local roads. I have no doubt it makes a difference when really pressing the performance envelope. Interesting that it is no longer an option on the base TT for the Mk 3.


----------



## Vegas-RoadsTTer (Mar 17, 2013)

*Could not agree more*



Balthazar B said:


> But I'm not optimistic. I was already scratching my head about some of Audi USA's decisions.


Significant price increases, dearth of paint colors, not being able to order the admiral blue interior on a roadster with blue or black paint, killing the TTS roadster, etc, etc, etc. Seems like Audi is doing its best to keep the TT a low volume seller in the US.


----------



## Woj (Oct 23, 2000)

Huey52 said:


> How's that tune coming along?



Will try for the third time in the next week. Last two attempts were a bust due to the box code.

Or, maybe I will wait for REVO version.

:banghead:


----------



## Woj (Oct 23, 2000)

Vegas-RoadsTTer said:


> Although most who have it love it. There was a post some time ago on the Mk 2 forum from a mag ride designer that the mag ride shocks rode softer than the fixed shocks on the Mk 2 in normal highway driving and only firmed up when pressing performance. Personally, my ass could not tell the difference between mag ride and standard shocks on local roads. I have no doubt it makes a difference when really pressing the performance envelope. Interesting that it is no longer an option on the base TT for the Mk 3.


I remain underwhelmed with the presence of the mag shocks on my TT-S. I found the TT fixed shocks fine and it would have been so much easier to lower the car without the mag shocks.


----------



## caj1 (Feb 16, 1999)

Woj said:


> I remain underwhelmed with the presence of the mag shocks on my TT-S. I found the TT fixed shocks fine and it would have been so much easier to lower the car without the mag shocks.


I actually feel a pretty big difference between comfort and dynamic suspension settings in my TTS, much more so than in the M3 I had previously.


----------



## Submerge (Sep 7, 2002)

JohnLZ7W said:


> I think some of this is down to the packaging and expectations that come from it. Look at what the Golf R is typically being compared against, STI, and other hot hatches. What's the favorite comparison for the TTS? A Cayman.
> 
> That said, even on the same platform, with same engine and basic suspension setup there can be vast differences in how a car feels. That's why we mod cars. We haven't fundamentally changed the chassis but there's certainly a difference in feel and capability. Whatever VW has engineered into the Golf R in terms of spring/damper rates, bushings and alignment could go a long way in to how it drives compared to the TTS.
> 
> A further thought. Many of the reviews I've read of the mk3 TTS talk about just how much grip it has and how tied down it is. Perhaps the TTS chassis is quite a bit better than the Golf R but that presents itself as ultimate grip and higher limits effectively making the car too capable on the street. There's something to be said for trading grip for feel.


This seems like a very logical possibility. TT probably has higher performance, while Golf R is tuned for fun (Miata vs FRS).


----------



## Submerge (Sep 7, 2002)

Well speak of the devil..this video came out yesterday, and he compares it to the Golf R (driving dynamics, etc)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHmIW7uuxNo


----------



## BEM10001 (May 14, 2007)

Somewhere between TTS and TTRS you lose the ability to actually benefit from the "extra" at least on public roads in the Northeast. Track day is a different story, but TTS is about all I could use without killing someone where I am.


----------



## Derneck (Mar 11, 2015)

Is the TT-S, being a "true" sports car, any LOUDER than my pitifully quiet R?


----------



## anti suv (Sep 26, 2013)

I have a tt and think its pretty quiet. Newer cars just seem to be very quiet and refined these days. Overly so i think personally.


----------



## kpiskin (Apr 6, 2007)

Derneck said:


> Is the TT-S, being a "true" sports car, any LOUDER than my pitifully quiet R?


I think you should drive one, but I do think the TTS is somewhat louder in dynamic mode. Not sure if it's simply the design of the car, the soundaktor or what.


----------



## Huey52 (Nov 10, 2010)

The TTS is really a whole different [read better/sportier] car in Dynamic mode. Transmission in particular and much better sound, but latter interior largely thanks to the soundaktor.




kpiskin said:


> I think you should drive one, but I do think the TTS is somewhat louder in dynamic mode. Not sure if it's simply the design of the car, the soundaktor or what.


----------



## Derneck (Mar 11, 2015)

Thing is, with the Golf, its overall quietness suits me most of the time, when I think of it as a regular car, which it is, body style and all. When I approach it with "I am about to drive a sports car" mindset then it is somewhat too quiet on startup and whenever it isn't pushed. With the TTS, which decidedly does look like a sports car, that would be an issue. But I do hope it actually is louder by design than the R.


----------



## Huey52 (Nov 10, 2010)

The chief complaint of the new 718 Boxster/Cayman is the sound. Only so much you can do as turbo 4's are the new way of the world. The TT/TTS does a pretty fair job of making the most with what's available.



Derneck said:


> Thing is, with the Golf, its overall quietness suits me most of the time, when I think of it as a regular car, which it is, body style and all. When I approach it with "I am about to drive a sports car" mindset then it is somewhat too quiet on startup and whenever it isn't pushed. With the TTS, which decidedly does look like a sports car, that would be an issue. But I do hope it actually is louder by design than the R.


----------



## madmac48 (Nov 27, 2014)

Huey52 said:


> The chief complaint of the new 718 Boxster/Cayman is the sound. Only so much you can do as turbo 4's are the new way of the world. The TT/TTS does a pretty fair job of making the most with what's available.


Not quite! we have the amazing choice of the Turbo 5,in TTRS and RS3.It is WAAAY ahead of the others in sound, feel, torque ,performance.i current RS3 smoked a 380 HP A45 in recent drag test,and the new one will be even faster.TTRS with the flaps open burbles away and sounds fabulous,always turns heads,which my son's Golf R does not.
Sell the farm or whatever and move up to a TTRS or RS3 ,it is the ideal vehicle ,sports car or compact sedan IMHO:thumbup:
Mac


----------



## Huey52 (Nov 10, 2010)

The obvious reply is that we in the US don't have the new TTRS, nor RS3, until .....???? But yes, a turbo 5 cylinder is a wonderful thing. :thumbup:



madmac48 said:


> Not quite! we have the amazing choice of the Turbo 5,in TTRS and RS3.It is WAAAY ahead of the others in sound, feel, torque ,performance.i current RS3 smoked a 380 HP A45 in recent drag test,and the new one will be even faster.TTRS with the flaps open burbles away and sounds fabulous,always turns heads,which my son's Golf R does not.
> Sell the farm or whatever and move up to a TTRS or RS3 ,it is the ideal vehicle ,sports car or compact sedan IMHO:thumbup:
> Mac


----------



## madmac48 (Nov 27, 2014)

Huey52 said:


> The obvious reply is that we in the US don't have the new TTRS, nor RS3, until .....???? But yes, a turbo 5 cylinder is a wonderful thing. :thumbup:


Indeed so! but they are coming,and cannot come soon enough for me,as I may end up buying both The TTRS for Canada and a more practical RS3 Sedan for use at my "pied a terre" in Scotland.As I said, the ideal combination,or perhaps I can buy an RS3 in canada for my wife!!


----------



## MaysEffect (Aug 18, 2013)

Woj said:


> Handling is good and the fact that it weighs less than the R helps. Numb steering is part of the Audi feel. At least, the Quattro is setup to be 40/60 as the default, unlike the R, which is basically fwd until slippage is detected.


For future readers, please disregard what this user has said about the Quattro system. I don't understand how they got this information, but the TT shares the same exact Haldex type AWD system found on R's, A3/S3's and the other shared chassis types. There will never be more than a 50/50 split as the front wheels will always be driven no matter what Haldex settings or slip reading you can possibly change.

Now with that rant over, i was just hoping to see what people gathered about the TT(S/RS) over the Golf as i'm looking to replace my MKV chassis as its lived a long life. 
I was never a true VW fan but i immediately felt connected to the usability of the R32 when i was looking for a new cars years ago. Had i known about the TT's benefits (lighter, bigger tire selections) I would have would have seriously considered it over the R.

The Golf served its purpose well with allowing me to take full advantage of the hatchback space, but now that i don't need the extra space i'm really considering getting a more sports oriented car. Really stuck between a 135i, 370z and a TT. The one thing that is leaning me towards staying with the VW Audi group is that i already have so many parts i could easily swap over to the TT.


----------



## Huey52 (Nov 10, 2010)

Actually in the TTS the rear wheels can go to a 60% share in Dynamic mode. btw: Recently I unexpectedly spun same on a dry/clean road in launch mode.

I appreciate the sporty yet practical "hot hatch" nature of the Golf R, although the TT/TTS also shares some practicality and is the attribute that tipped the scales for me over the Cayman.




MaysEffect said:


> For future readers, please disregard what this user has said about the Quattro system. I don't understand how they got this information, but the TT shares the same exact Haldex type AWD system found on R's, A3/S3's and the other shared chassis types. There will never be more than a 50/50 split as the front wheels will always be driven no matter what Haldex settings or slip reading you can possibly change.
> 
> Now with that rant over, i was just hoping to see what people gathered about the TT(S/RS) over the Golf as i'm looking to replace my MKV chassis as its lived a long life.
> I was never a true VW fan but i immediately felt connected to the usability of the R32 when i was looking for a new cars years ago. Had i known about the TT's benefits (lighter, bigger tire selections) I would have would have seriously considered it over the R.
> ...


----------



## MaysEffect (Aug 18, 2013)

Huey52 said:


> Actually in the TTS the rear wheels can go to a 60% share in Dynamic mode. btw: Recently I unexpectedly spun same on a dry/clean road in launch mode.


I think you are confusing differential split with the haldex ability to lock under load. In dynamic mode the rear diff clutch system can lock up to 40-100 percent depending on torque load. The front wheels are still receiving 100 percent of the power from the engine, there is no way around this. In situations when the front wheels start to slip it will apply the brakes and cause the rear wheels to temporarily spin faster. Even the older generation cars can do the same. What you probably didn't realize as well is that one of your front wheels started to slip first and was undoubtedly the left side which is the differential direct output side.

I'm not trying to be rude about it, but unless we are talking about different dynamics it is surely impossible for the engine to split the power 40/60 F/R. There is no center diff nor is there a bypass shaft directly from the engine to the rear wheels. Nor is there independent clutchess on the front axles.


----------



## Huey52 (Nov 10, 2010)

I stand corrected and further educated. Thanks!



MaysEffect said:


> I think you are confusing differential split with the haldex ability to lock under load. In dynamic mode the rear diff clutch system can lock up to 40-100 percent depending on torque load. The front wheels are still receiving 100 percent of the power from the engine, there is no way around this. In situations when the front wheels start to slip it will apply the brakes and cause the rear wheels to temporarily spin faster. Even the older generation cars can do the same. What you probably didn't realize as well is that one of your front wheels started to slip first and was undoubtedly the left side which is the differential direct output side.
> 
> I'm not trying to be rude about it, but unless we are talking about different dynamics it is surely impossible for the engine to split the power 40/60 F/R. There is no center diff nor is there a bypass shaft directly from the engine to the rear wheels. Nor is there independent clutchess on the front axles.


----------

