TT Official: Audi TT-RS

[Tarek]

Impressive performance data ... but ... still TT is hairdresser's first choice.
Yet the TT RS is suitable for one very hectic raving hairdresser on speed.

So is Z4,SLK and Boxter,all that segment is suitable for hairdressers

 

[Amo]

 

[Tarek]

The spoiler looks weird on the convertible,coupe for me please

 

[VroomVroom]

WOOOOW!!!

 

[Sunny]

Yea, the wing looks downright ricey, especially on the roadster - much like this aftermarket version.

They should have just stuck with the moving wing they use on the TTS, so much better.

 

[LaArtist]

over 60K for this little thing with a 5 cylinder engine?

all i can say is Audi knows how to get paid

PS
Its hot though..

 

[Centurion]

I don't mind the spoiler on the coupe but it just doesn't work on the cabrio. It's a overkill for a small car that's shaped like a bar of soap. I can't even recall any other production car with such an aggressive spoiler.

 

[Zafiro]

Hopefully the spoiler is doing more good than harm, then its alright for me.

 

[Tumbo]

Hello to one of the most beutiful and killer fronts Audi has ever made!!!

 

[Tumbo]

Impressive performance data ... but ... still TT is hairdresser's first choice.
Yet the TT RS is suitable for one very hectic raving hairdresser on speed.

You and Klier never disapoint with your wonderful comments in any Audi thread...

 

[ACE]

I think most people will look at the purchase price for the sake of comparison as the figures prestented by What Car are not valid for my or 9 otu of 10 other board members markets.

For instance: Teknikens Värld made a comparison between the Audi TT 3.2, BMW Z4 3,0 Si and Alfa Romeo Brera.

Price in SEK:394,900, 421,000, 449,900
Cost in SEK per 10 km: 52.06, 50.94, 63.34

You missed the point of my post, i.e. purchase price vs cost of ownership. It's the concept, not the absolute cost of ownership in GBP that I was trying to point out. Of course, GBP prices aren't very relevant to people outside the UK. If "most people" look at the purchase price for the sake of comparison, as you say, then they are making the exact mistake that I was alluding to. If that's how you want to decide which car is more "expensive" then you just go right ahead and compare purchase prices, that's your (financially illiterate) right.

 

[Bartek S.]

2010 Audi TT RS Officially Unleashed with Well Over 300bhp

http://www.worldcarfans.com/9090223...rs-officially-unleashed-with-well-over-300bhp


Press Release

• This top model will debut at the Geneva Auto Show
• Direct gasoline injection and a turbocharger deliver far more than 300 bhp
• Top-notch chassis, big brakes, and quattro drivetrain

Audi is once again producing a five-cylinder powerhouse: the Audi TT RS will be unveiled to the world at the Geneva Auto Show. Its turbocharged 2.5-liter engine produces well above 300 bhp. It also delivers explosive acceleration, driving delight, and unrivalled sound.
A legend is reborn. After all, powerful five-cylinder gasoline engines have a long legacy at Audi. And the turbocharged direct-fuel-injection engine in the TT RS is the new torchbearer of this dynamic tradition. It enables the TT RS to perform extraordinary feats. For example, it needs nowhere near five seconds to reach 100 km/h (62.14 mph); overtaking is child’s play; and 250 km/h (155.34 mph) is the limited top speed only on paper.
The quattro permanent all-wheel drive system, a sophisticated chassis, and stupendous brakes keep a tight rein on the power. All in all, the compact TT RS – with its lightweight and largely aluminum body constructed as per the Audi Space Frame principle – is a driving machine to be reckoned with.
Additional information will be available during the Audi Press Conference at the Geneva Auto Show on March 3, 2009 (Hall 1, Booth 1060).

 

[Sunny]

Why the heck won't they reveal the actual power? Anyway In the end I think the power is limited by R8. They can't get too close to 400HP or the R8 will look like really bad value. And that sucks cause it is just a matter of time before there will be 420HP M coupe and probably a 455HP SLK63.

 

[Monster]

hummmm, if they say far more than 300hp, I guess it will be around 350 hp or a little bit higher.

 

[Mr Robert]

You missed the point of my post, i.e. purchase price vs cost of ownership. It's the concept, not the absolute cost of ownership in GBP that I was trying to point out. Of course, GBP prices aren't very relevant to people outside the UK. If "most people" look at the purchase price for the sake of comparison, as you say, then they are making the exact mistake that I was alluding to. If that's how you want to decide which car is more "expensive" then you just go right ahead and compare purchase prices, that's your (financially illiterate) right.

What I have presented is also the real cost per 10 km of owning the car the first 60,000 kms. It includes depreciation, insurance, fuel, service and such. Hence, the comparison made by Teknikens Värld also shows (in SEK) what car is most expensive of the three to own on the Swedish market.

So, no, I did not miss the point of your post, but UK prices for cars, insurance, service, fuel and market specific depreciation is not relevant other than in the UK.

This is the result, converted to the same format you used to present your figures:
(first figure = price in SEK, second figure = real cost of owning in SEK)
Alfa: 449,900 : 380,040
Audi: 394,900 : 312,360
BMW: 421,000 : 305,640

Edit: the calculation was based on 60,000 km (6,000 Swedish Mil) and 3 years ownership.

 

[Zafiro]

What I have presented is also the real cost per 10 km of owning the car the first 60,000 kms. It includes depreciation, insurance, fuel, service and such. Hence, the comparison made by Teknikens Värld also shows (in SEK) what car is most expensive of the three to own on the Swedish market.

So, no, I did not miss the point of your post, but UK prices for cars, insurance, service, fuel and market specific depreciation is not relevant other than in the UK.

This is the result, converted to the same format you used to present your figures:
(first figure = price in SEK, second figure = real cost of owning in SEK)
Alfa: 449,900 : 380,040
Audi: 394,900 : 312,360
BMW: 421,000 : 305,640

Edit: the calculation was based on 60,000 km (6,000 Swedish Mil) and 3 years ownership.

TeknikensVarld and I also think Automotorsport, in every comparison they also tell us which car is cheaper to own and maintain. In Sweden we dont only look at the purchase price, other costs are overlooked as well.
Two more examples:
M3 E90 vs C63 = M3 is cheaper to own the first 3 years.
BMW 120i vs Audi A3 1.8TFSI vs VW EOS = A3 is cheaper to own the first 3 years. But 120i is cheaper than a VW EOS to own.
BMW 325i vs Audi A4 2.0T Q = BMW cheaper than Audi to own the first 3 years

I see what ACE is reaching for and swedish carmags are doing the things ACE are asking for. I dont know how it is in UK but since I live in Sweden, this is the only market I care about.

 

[Zafiro]

Sportauto drove the TT-S in 8.29 min around Nordschleife. With R-tires perhaps the TT-RS can be around 15 seconds faster?

 

[Pekka]

Why the heck won't they reveal the actual power? Anyway In the end I think the power is limited by R8. They can't get too close to 400HP or the R8 will look like really bad value. And that sucks cause it is just a matter of time before there will be 420HP M coupe and probably a 455HP SLK63.

Right now we can only guess. IMO the power is also limited by technical barriers. My guess is something around 350 PS (HP).

Let's focus some VW / Audi power output per liter figures as samples:

VW 1.4 TSI

1390 ccm / 170 PS / 122,30 PS per liter

Audi TTS

1984 ccm / 272 PS / 137,1 PS per liter

Audi RS4 (B5) Bi-turbo

2671 ccm / 380 PS / 142,27 PS per liter


Showcases based on VW / Audis power output per liter figures:

Based on 122,30 PS per Liter (TSI) > 2,5 liter * 122,30 PS = 305,75 PS

Based on 137,1 PS per liter (TTS) > 2,5 liter * 137,1 PS = 342,75 PS

Based on 142,27 PS per Liter (RS4) > 2,5 liter * 142,27 PS = 355,68 PS


BTW - 400 PS require 160 PS per liter (*2,5)

 

[ACE]

Right now we can only guess. IMO the power is also limited by technical barriers. My guess is something around 350 PS (HP).

Showcases based on VW / Audis power output per liter figures:

Based on 122,30 PS per Liter (TSI) > 2,5 liter * 122,30 PS = 305,75 PS

Based on 137,1 PS per liter (TTS) > 2,5 liter * 137,1 PS = 342,75 PS

Based on 142,27 PS per Liter (RS4) > 2,5 liter * 142,27 PS = 355,68 PS


BTW - 400 PS require 160 PS per liter (*2,5)

Good analysis. I think that the TT-S PS/litre is most relevant, i.e. power must be > 342 PS. I agree with you, 350PS seems most likely.

 

[Mr Robert]

I agree, that engine seem like the most relevant to compare with considering age and characther.