# Is the Mk 3 a sales success?



## Vegas-RoadsTTer (Mar 17, 2013)

US sales of the Mk 3 are trending to about 3,000 a year in CY2016. Sounds good when compared to most of the life of the Mk 2 which averaged about 2,000 per year. However, the first full CY of the Mk 2 (2008) had US sales of 4,400 (which was far short of most years of production of the Mk 1). According to cars.com and autotrader, there are about 825 TT and TTS cars on lots in the US, or over 3 months of sales inventory. If the Mk 3 follows the annual US Mk 2 sales trends, Mk 3 sales will fall to under 1,500 a year by CY2018.


----------



## anti suv (Sep 26, 2013)

Why would it matter? Im not quite sure what your post is getting at.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

TT sales 2015 in Europe was 22.417 and in 2016 up to end of August 14.910.
So based on that i would say, "NO".


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

btw, R8 is even worse, in 2015 a grand total of 1108, 2016 up to end of August, 1057.
But rumor has it, "There will not be a next one", apparently the R8 days are numbered.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

But there are more Audi's "NOT" doing well.
For example the A7/S7/RS7, A5/S5/RS5, A8/S8, Q7/SQ7, the A5/S5/RS5 is best of the worse.


----------



## Vegas-RoadsTTer (Mar 17, 2013)

*It predicts the future of the TT*



anti suv said:


> Why would it matter? Im not quite sure what your post is getting at.


The only Audi model that the TT outsells in the US is the R8 supercar. One could argue that R8 sales numbers are not a concern since it has the role of performance flagship for Audi. Yet RST mentions here that its days may be numbered.

Obviously Audi thinks enough of the TT to be a part of its stable even though US sales the past few years were dismal and likely did not recoup the required US testing cost and parts logistics cost to sell it in the US. That is, at 2000 cars a year they were probably losing money selling the TT in the US. One can only assume that selling the Mk 3 TT in the US was done with the hope that Audi would deliver a sports car hailed by the professional reviewers and thus revive the TT brand. This has not happened. Audi has already begun to cut its US certification cost by not selling the TTS roadster I the US. Other body styles may follow if sales trends prove true. There is some history backing this. In 2006, Audi did not think it was cost effective to get the TT roadster certified for sale in California so they sold no new MY 2006 TT roadsters in CA.

So for those of us who love the TT roadster, it may be the next car on the US chopping block so get it while you can. For the coupes, I'd be amazed if there was a Mk 4.


----------



## Balthazar B (Jan 20, 2014)

Heck, it's probably not completely outside the realm of possibility that VAG will just stop US shipments of Audis altogether, if not shut down the marque and rebadge the reasonably-selling models like the A4 as super-VWs. That would be too bad, because the TT series in particular has been an effective incubator of VAG innovation over the years.


----------



## anti suv (Sep 26, 2013)

I dont think audi ever expected lots of tt sales. The tt has always been a car for people who like tt's. Its also one of the best daily driver sports cars available (thats why i bought one). Its a neat car that is part of audi's history and i think its cool that there is a race serries (the tt cup) dedicated to it. It's a great car and it keeps the brand interesting.


----------



## caj1 (Feb 16, 1999)

Balthazar B said:


> Heck, it's probably not completely outside the realm of possibility that VAG will just stop US shipments of Audis altogether, if not shut down the marque and rebadge the reasonably-selling models like the A4 as super-VWs. That would be too bad, because the TT series in particular has been an effective incubator of VAG innovation over the years.


:screwy:

Audi has had 65+ months of consecutive record sales in the US... they aren't going anywhere.


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

With rumors of Audi ditching MLB and moving the next A4/A5 to an MQB derivative it really becomes questionable as to why they would have two MQB coupes in the lineup. Unless they turn the TT into an electric or plug-in hybrid halo product I expect it'll be on the chopping block.


----------



## Huey52 (Nov 10, 2010)

The Brit's have always bought more TT's than anyone and still do. It's not all about us (as in US).


----------



## GaBoYnFla (Oct 2, 2005)

With the base TT costing 50,000 now, there's more margin for lower volume so I think it is fine. I like not seeing 2 or 3 at every red light like some cars I see.


----------



## caj1 (Feb 16, 1999)

GaBoYnFla said:


> With the base TT costing 50,000 now, there's more margin for lower volume so I think it is fine. I like not seeing 2 or 3 at every red light like some cars I see.


:sly: A base TT is $43,500


----------



## Vegas-RoadsTTer (Mar 17, 2013)

*I agree about best daily driver sports car*



anti suv said:


> I dont think audi ever expected lots of tt sales. The tt has always been a car for people who like tt's. Its also one of the best daily driver sports cars available (thats why i bought one). Its a neat car that is part of audi's history and i think its cool that there is a race serries (the tt cup) dedicated to it. It's a great car and it keeps the brand interesting.


That's why I've owned 3. I believe the Mk 3 is the ONLY sports car with a spare tire which gives you daily driver peace of mind and allows you to use real performance tires instead of expensive run-flat crap. The roadster trunk is also the largest in its class - great for road trips like TT West. The high inventory levels sitting on dealer lots should mean that dealers are willing to discount. Historically, the best discounts are around 6% which is what you get if you are an ACNA member. I would think TT discounts will have to get to the 10% level to move TT inventory off the lot. In any event, now should be a good time to buy a Mk3 off the lot, particularly if you can wait for end of year sales.


----------



## Vegas-RoadsTTer (Mar 17, 2013)

*I assume that by "base TT' he meant a non-TTS*



caj1 said:


> :sly: A base TT is $43,500


Add a few options to the coupe base price and you are pushing $50K and you will have a hard time finding a roadster on a lot with an MSRP under $50K. I paid $31K for my first roadster in 2001. I think the present price has people considering other options. I can get a Car & Driver perennial 10 Best BMW 2 series nicely loaded for less than the TT, in part because BMW seems to give better discounts. Then there are the Porsche and Corvette with base price about $10K more.


----------



## TT412GO (May 14, 2009)

Vegas-RoadsTTer said:


> Add a few options to the coupe base price and you are pushing $50K and you will have a hard time finding a roadster on a lot with an MSRP under $50K. I paid $31K for my first roadster in 2001. I think the present price has people considering other options. I can get a Car & Driver perennial 10 Best BMW 2 series nicely loaded for less than the TT, in part because BMW seems to give better discounts. Then there are the Porsche and Corvette with base price about $10K more.


I'm not sure it's just price. My take is that the TT is literally unique with an intrinsically small market. It's a luxury hot-hatch in a country that wants SUVs and crossovers. It compares most closely with it's sibling Golf R (but with more style and charisma). I can't imagine cross-shopping the TT with true sports cars like the Vette and Cayman (with little luggage room or rear seats of any kind). The BMW series 2 maybe, but there the trade-off is less storage and marginally better rear seating in a slightly larger (and IMHO less attractive) vehicle. 

OTOH what makes the TT unique is what makes it perfect for me - compact, comfortable, practical, sporty enough (with fairly extensive modifications available), with enough luggage space to make it a true daily driver and budget GT.

I still love my Mk 2, but I am tempted by the new TTS (I'd put on a Stage 1 tune and call it a day).


----------



## GaBoYnFla (Oct 2, 2005)

caj1 said:


> :sly: A base TT is $43,500


3 coupes on my local dealer's site and lowest one is $50,775.:sly::sly::sly:


----------



## anti suv (Sep 26, 2013)

You could order it the way you like it. Thats what i did and saved quite a bit of money. I bought a tt with upgraded seats and stereo with a 6% discount for $43k. Im not much of an 'options' person myeslf. Car company must make tons of money on options. People should play with the porsche configurator a little and watch a cayman s become an $75k-80k car really quick.

I do feel like the tt is overpriced a little though.


----------



## anti suv (Sep 26, 2013)

Vegas-RoadsTTer said:


> I can get a Car & Driver perennial 10 Best BMW 2 series nicely loaded for less than the TT, in part because BMW seems to give better discounts. Then there are the Porsche and Corvette with base price about $10K more.


I could see cross shopping the tt with the bmw 2 serries but not a corvette. Completely different customers. I think there is a lot less porsche and tt cross shopping then reviews suggest. Different buyers again and the porsche's are going to be a lot more expensive than people think.


----------



## caj1 (Feb 16, 1999)

GaBoYnFla said:


> 3 coupes on my local dealer's site and lowest one is $50,775.:sly::sly::sly:


Then they aren't "base" TTs, and clearly optioned up..you can buy a $43K TT if you want one.


----------



## kpiskin (Apr 6, 2007)

I think the price is where the problem is. When youre paying $50k, and youre still getting the lesser TT, when you can pay $5-10k less for a M235i or at TTS pricing get a lightly optioned Stungray or a fully loaded Mustang GT or Camaro SS, it puts the buyer in a quandary. You have to really want a TT. The other problem is for that kind of money people still get hung up on it "only" having a 4cyl instead of a 6 or 8 which is typically what you see in a performance model.

I would say the base TT should have gotten the TTS motor and the TTS should have gotten the 3.0t (I think it would fit) still leaving room for the TTRS 5cyl.


----------



## kpiskin (Apr 6, 2007)

Let's not forget too that most VAG enthusiasts know the TTS shares much of the drivetrain with the S3 and Golf R. The price difference there too probably makes a lot of buyers look at the other Audi/VW options. What you have to buy into is the small and somewhat light concept, the killer interior and cockpit.


----------



## Balthazar B (Jan 20, 2014)

kpiskin said:


> I would say the base TT should have gotten the TTS motor and the TTS should have gotten the 3.0t (I think it would fit) still leaving room for the TTRS 5cyl.


I agree, and would also add that the entire TT lineup should get that new 7-speed DCT as well.

But it's unclear how much in the way of improvements we can expect to see any time soon. I'm afraid VAG's profitability is going to remain severely compressed for years as a result of the Dieselgate disaster, heavily impacting their ability to innovate and compete effectively against others...although I think their new emphasis on R&D for electrics is the right one, under the circumstances ("target where the market is going, not where it is").


----------



## caj1 (Feb 16, 1999)

kpiskin said:


> I would say the base TT should have gotten the TTS motor and the TTS should have gotten the 3.0t (I think it would fit) still leaving room for the TTRS 5cyl.


3.0T is a longitudinal motor and the TT is build on the MQB platform which only supports transverse engines.. not to mention it is far too heavy for a 3100 LB car and only nets you ~30 more HP


----------



## Vegas-RoadsTTer (Mar 17, 2013)

*True*



kpiskin said:


> Let's not forget too that most VAG enthusiasts know the TTS shares much of the drivetrain with the S3 and Golf R. The price difference there too probably makes a lot of buyers look at the other Audi/VW options. What you have to buy into is the small and somewhat light concept, the killer interior and cockpit.


Although Car & Driver's lightning Lap tests put the S3 and Golf R significantly slower than the TTS, most professional reviewers for magazines make the comment "Why buy a TT when you can get the same for much less in the Golf R". I think the answer for those of us who love the TT is the fact that the TT has better performance, styling, and (thanks to poor sales) it is distinctive since you seldom see another one on the road.

IMO the sales failure of the Mk 2 and Mk 3 is primarily styling. The Mk 1 styling was iconic and the Mk 2 ruined the look (although I think it is a great looking car on its own). The handling improvement from the Mk 1 to the Mk 2 is dramatic but that was countered by the anemic engine initially offered in the base Mk 2 TT. Audi thought most enthusiasts would buy the 3.2 engine, much like the Mk 1 owners preferred the 225 version. From various internal design cues, the Mk 2 was designed specifically for the 3.2 whereas the 3.2 in the Mk 1 was a shoehorn affair. For some reason the 3.2 was not the engine of choice by Mk 2 buyers. IMO the initial 2L matched with DSG lugged far too often as compared to the 180 HP Mk 1s I owned with either the manual of auto tranny. In the test drives I had in the early Mk 2, I had to stay in sport mode most of the time. Professional reviewers had the same opinion and panned the Mk 2 for the poor drivetrain and abandoning the classic style. Audi solved the 2L problem in 2011 but by then sales were crap and no one noticed the substantial improvement. (in fact the 2011+ engine was significantly under-speced by Audi according to APR's dyno tests, IMO to avoid stealing TTS sales.)

Audi needed a home run for the Mk 3 to revive the brand but apparently failed according to sales numbers. I've parked my Mk 2 roadster adjacent to a Mk 3 roadster and at all angles except when viewing the grill, only a TT enthusiast could tell the slight differences. Professional magazine reviewers praise the improved handling but universally state that the base TT engine is underpowered compared to the potential of the chassis. The engine really is not much different than the 2011+ Mk 2 engine.

While some folks say the Mk 3 styling is more like the Mk 1 than the Mk 2 was, it was not far enough to appease those who loved the Mk 1 classic design. IMO, a better option would have been to make it like a mini R8. It appears that the Audi designers bet the farm on improving the interior, particularly the virtual dash, hoping that today's young techies would be won over. But today's techies are not buying $50K cars but are standing in line for the much cheaper and much faster Focus RS.


----------



## kpiskin (Apr 6, 2007)

Or an M2...


----------

