TT v Coupe

jezzer

Folks anyone know if an audi tt 1.8 petrol would be any harder on juice than a hyundai coupe 1.6 petrol?

colm_mcm

I'd say they're around the same.

jezzer

The coupe is an 02 1.6 and I am looking at a TT 03 to 05 1.8 petrol, the coupe is hard on juice but not ridiculous, I thought that maybe the step up to the 1.8 would be hard on juice

jezzer

OSI wrote: »

Nah, the 1.8T is reasonably good, you can get 30-35 taking it handy. Considering the performance difference it's considerably better on juice than the 1.6 coupe.

Really?? wow, i never would have thought that! thanks a million for the info!

silly question, but at a squeeze would you fit 2 grown ups in the back? or would it be smaller than the coupe?

Neilw

Which TT is it, the 180 or 225 bhp? 180 is a few mpg better than the 225, the 225 would be harder on fuel than the coupe.

jezzer

yes the 180 bhp

mickdw

I had a 180 bhp Quattro TT a few years back.
They are quite heavy on fuel. I'd be stunned if a 1.6 of any description was anywhere near as heavy.

Toyotafanboi

OSI wrote: »

The 1.6 in the Coupe is woefully bad. Much north of 30 was a struggle.

yeah, they are a bit of a donkey really. fairly reliable and robust, but rather thirsty.

tossy

Going from a coupe to a TT would be like going from a TT to a 911, never mind the MPG, just make sure it's 225 and quattro

KNS

Can only give advice on the TT. Had a mk1 225 (think all 225 are Quattro). To be honest city mpg was pretty poor. I was mainly doing short trips. Think I was averaging 26 - 29. Depends how heavy you foot is!! I was.

No comparison between the two. Go for the TT.

mickdw

KNS wrote: »

Can only give advice on the TT. Had a mk1 225 (think all 225 are Quattro). To be honest city mpg was pretty poor. I was mainly doing short trips. Think I was averaging 26 - 29. Depends how heavy you foot is!! I was.

No comparison between the two. Go for the TT.

The hyundai must be absolute junk to only be getting high 20s to 30 from a 1.6 with no great power.
The TT Quattro is a decent bit of kit. You will get smart comments - golf in a fancy dress etc but they are very good cars. Reliable and powerful while having fantastic grip.

colm_mcm

tossy wrote: »

Going from a coupe to a TT would be like going from a TT to a 911, never mind the MPG, just make sure it's 225 and quattro

Even a 180 Quattro can move.

Hachiko

the hyundai coupe is pure junk, even the bigger cc model is crap.

The TT would be about a billion times better than it.

colm_mcm

For what it is, there's nothing wrong with the coupe.

jezzer

Yes i must say the coupe is a very reliable car but it can be thirsty, i am used to what it takes to keep the tank full but if the TT was any worse i wouldnt get one, anyone know any reasonably priced diesel sports cars out there?

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Tea 1000

LIGHTNING wrote: »

Cool now I know your talking muck. Carry on folks we got a bar stool expert here.

The Mk1 TT uses the 1.8T engine which is used by a huge number of VW/Audi/Seat cars and is well known as being a strong engine. Its also used by a number of racing series. The TT version has stronger internals to deal with the higher boost. I have a TT myself and it hasn't let me down once, most of its components are tried and trusted VW components. Nothing too fancy to break.

They are prone to the oil sludge issue which as far as I can remember, can cause oil pump failure, and cooked engine.
Is there a prevention method for this?

tossy

Tea 1000 wrote: »

They are prone to the oil sludge issue which as far as I can remember, can cause oil pump failure, and cooked engine.
Is there a prevention method for this?

The are actually not prone to this at all, this is a problem more associated with the A4 where the engine is mounted longitudinally.

I'd love to know what problems Pat had with them, were the new cars or second hand cars.

Tea 1000

LIGHTNING wrote: »

General service as you would a normal car. So that puts it beyond most Irish people :pac:

I've heard a few stories on these engines, but only have experience with family members with 2 cars. Both were serviced according to recommendations.

tossy wrote: »

The are actually not prone to this at all, this is a problem more associated with the A4 where the engine is mounted longitudinally.

I'd love to know what problems Pat had with them, were the new cars or second hand cars.

Ah, that makes some sense, as of the two cars where family members had issues one was an A4, the other an A6. Both longitudinal layout. What's different on these that causes the issue?
Also, what's the story with quattro on the TT's? When did the Mk1 go to FWD options? Weren't all original ones quattro? In the Mk2, are the majority FWD?
(Sorry, turning this into a TT thread!)

NyOmnishambles

I am not sure why people think the Coupe is that hard on petrol, it is pretty average for any 1.6 I have had, I get mid 30's mpg in mine and I don't drive like a granny to achieve that, that is mixed use driving though, not all city driving

You might use more petrol in the TT but it would be a much nicer place to be, it is a more modern car than the Coupe with higher quality componets

I doubt you would regret going for the TT

Viper_JB

jezzer wrote: »

Yes i must say the coupe is a very reliable car but it can be thirsty, i am used to what it takes to keep the tank full but if the TT was any worse i wouldnt get one, anyone know any reasonably priced diesel sports cars out there?

I would say if your main concern is fuel efficiency then maybe a sports car is not for you? I've seen some TDI TT's about but mostly just amazed that anyone would want/buy one.
Don't get me wrong, nothing against diesels - I have one myself but it's just a saloon, personally I find something really silly/pointless about a diesel sports car, seems more about image then having a good or nice or fun car.

EazyD

Having driven a clean 225 a couple of months ago I have to agree it's a very good engine with good tuning capability. Didn't like the handling though, lack of feel through the steering was a bit disappointing but not a bad all rounder it has to be said.

evo2000

bit off topic but what are the coupes like? im thinking of getting one the 1.6 version at the moment ive a ford focus 01 1.6 ghia and tis grand just abit on the boring side!

Alanstrainor

evo2000 wrote: »

bit off topic but what are the coupes like? im thinking of getting one the 1.6 version at the moment ive a ford focus 01 1.6 ghia and tis grand just abit on the boring side!

They look nice, but I don't know if they're going to be much more exciting than your focus to be honest. The focus is a nice handling car already.

EazyD

evo2000 wrote: »

bit off topic but what are the coupes like? im thinking of getting one the 1.6 version at the moment ive a ford focus 01 1.6 ghia and tis grand just abit on the boring side!

I wouldn't rate them tbh. Nothing to do with reliability but there are much better options in that category (including the TT).

evo2000

Alanstrainor wrote: »

They look nice, but I don't know if they're going to be much more exciting than your focus to be honest. The focus is a nice handling car already.

Yeah ive nothing against the focus as such, just lookin for a change the looks and price are whats drawing me towards the coupe they sound nice aswell from what i can gather on you tube lol

The focus gear ratios are abit odd tho long or somethin and it seems flat enuff in 5th

evo2000

LIGHTNING wrote: »

Well a 1.6 coupé wouldn't pull the skin off soup in 5th gear.

hahaha

JPF82

evo2000 wrote: »

Yeah ive nothing against the focus as such, just lookin for a change the looks and price are whats drawing me towards the coupe they sound nice aswell from what i can gather on you tube lol

The focus gear ratios are abit odd tho long or somethin and it seems flat enuff in 5th

A 1.6 isn't a big engine so I'm not sure you would find any difference in the coupe. It could be flat enough in 5th too.

EazyD

JPF82 wrote: »

A 1.6 isn't a big engine so I'm not sure you would find any difference in the coupe. It could be flat enough in 5th too.

Well it's not so much to do with the lethargic engine but also the gearing. A high revving 1.6 with shorter gearing is a completely different thing to a 1.6 econobox.

NyOmnishambles

evo2000 wrote: »

Yeah ive nothing against the focus as such, just lookin for a change the looks and price are whats drawing me towards the coupe they sound nice aswell from what i can gather on you tube lol

The focus gear ratios are abit odd tho long or somethin and it seems flat enuff in 5th

I have a coupe that I will be selling at the end of the month but to be honest I don't think you would see much difference performance wise from your focus

I wouldn't be as blunt about it but the quoted comment below is true enough, the Coupe is a grand car and is a bit different looking and possibly more interesting than the focus and is grand for overtaking but it wouldn't call it swift in 5th, it looks a fair bit more sporty than it is

LIGHTNING wrote: »

Well a 1.6 coupé wouldn't pull the skin off soup in 5th gear.

evo2000

EazyD wrote: »

Well it's not so much to do with the lethargic engine but also the gearing. A high revving 1.6 with shorter gearing is a completely different thing to a 1.6 econobox.

Thats what i was thinking, id a old mazda 323 1.6 dohc and it pulled like a train in 5th compared to the focus which has alot longer gears, but isnt exactly slow either, i wouldnt be expecting a 2015 Ferrari type performance from the coupe but just a nice bit of acceleration

JPF82

EazyD wrote: »

Well it's not so much to do with the lethargic engine but also the gearing. A high revving 1.6 with shorter gearing is a completely different thing to a 1.6 econobox.

Gear ratios play a part but i got curious and checked parkers car review website.

The 1.6 coupe is slower to 60 mph and has the same top speed as the 1.6 focus. It looks kinda sporty but isn't.

Focus 0-60mph is 10.8 seconds. 115 mph top
2002 Coupe 0-60mph is 11.6 seconds. 115 top

EazyD

JPF82 wrote: »

Gear ratios play a part but i got curious and checked parkers car review website.

The 1.6 coupe is slower to 60 mph and has the same top speed as the 1.6 focus. It looks kinda sporty but isn't.

That was my point, the 1.6 in the coupe is gutless and the gearing really doesn't help that. For something that actually looks relatively sporty it couldn't be further from this.

evo2000

EazyD wrote: »

That was my point, the 1.6 in the coupe is gutless and the gearing really doesn't help that. For something that actually looks relatively sporty it couldn't be further from this.

is it really that bad? is it any fun at all to drive ? i was hoping it would be good

Alanstrainor

evo2000 wrote: »

is it really that bad? is it any fun at all to drive ? i was hoping it would be good

If you want fun, an MX5 is where it's at. Not practical at all however.

EazyD

Alanstrainor wrote: »

If you want fun, an MX5 is where it's at. Not practical at all however.

Yeah, my current mk2.5 is an absolute hoot. Lack of boot space can be a pain but then again if that's the main concern it's the completely wrong car to be looking at.

* I've managed to get 10 days worth of packing/shopping in last year for a trip to the west, wasn't easy though!!

galwaytt

mickdw wrote: »

I had a 180 bhp Quattro TT a few years back.
They are quite heavy on fuel. I'd be stunned if a 1.6 of any description was anywhere near as heavy.

Nope. On TT #3 and get 30+ from my 225bhp on runs. Less aground town.

Rear ok for short trips - like real short - for adults. My kids 14 and 11 just about these days. ....

landmarkjohn

Tea 1000 wrote: »

They are prone to the oil sludge issue which as far as I can remember, can cause oil pump failure, and cooked engine.
Is there a prevention method for this?

I think this is what killed my 1.8T 150 bhp Passat even though it did have main dealer service all the way to 100K miles (of course they could have skipped the oil at some stage, nothing would surprise me)

I think there was a fix of a revised oil pickup pipe in the sump or something, heard that from a Golf owner with same engine. I would say be religious about the oil change, maybe earlier than manufacturer recommendation with this engine.

Loved the engine, economical enough if driven with manners which was easy to do but a fast car when needed.

lomb

Sump takes around 2 hours to drop and refix if you have some ramps. The oil pressure light flickers in the TT prior to the engine failing or should do. Mine has a receipt with it from 50k miles ago of oil pressure light flickering and the pickup cleaned. 50k and 6 years later my engine runs perfectly and uses little oil. I dropped the sump around 10k miles ago to check and it was clear. So read into that what you will. Previous owner neglect? Im fitting an oil pressure gauge into the dash vent to keep an eye on it.
Cambelts have a history of breaking and the hydralic dampner on it needs to be changed too and often isnt.
They are getting on now and are becoming less reliable. However if you have VCDS software and a set of tools there is enough info out there on the TTforum that they are easily cheaply and quickly repaired. Parts are widely available too. Can any of that be said for Mazdas, Hondas and Hyundais? I doubt it and for that reason wouldnt buy one, Never mind that any of those are never going to have the heavy build quality of something like a tt. Even a Merc needs star software which is around 600 or 700 euros versus a copy of vcds for around 15 euros. So vag win the day on long term use of older cars for diy owners no doubt.
Mpg is around 30mpg mixed max.

Special Circumstances

lomb wrote: »

Sump takes around 2 hours to drop and refix if you have some ramps. The oil pressure light flickers in the TT prior to the engine failing or should do. Mine has a receipt with it from 50k miles ago of oil pressure light flickering and the pickup cleaned. 50k and 6 years later my engine runs perfectly and uses little oil. I dropped the sump around 10k miles ago to check and it was clear. So read into that what you will. Previous owner neglect? Im fitting an oil pressure gauge into the dash vent to keep an eye on it.
Cambelts have a history of breaking and the hydralic dampner on it needs to be changed too and often isnt.
They are getting on now and are becoming less reliable. However if you have VCDS software and a set of tools there is enough info out there on the TTforum that they are easily cheaply and quickly repaired. Parts are widely available too. Can any of that be said for Mazdas, Hondas and Hyundais? I doubt it and for that reason wouldnt buy one, Never mind that any of those are never going to have the heavy build quality of something like a tt. Even a Merc needs star software which is around 600 or 700 euros versus a copy of vcds for around 15 euros. So vag win the day on long term use of older cars for diy owners no doubt.
Mpg is around 30mpg mixed max.

I hear donedeal vag cables can also revive dead kittens when connected to a tt. And cure cancer. Not the diesel TT mind.

They are a nice car with power that puts them into a different segment to the hyundai, but I think you may oversold it slightly there toward the end ;-)

wendell borton

jezzer wrote: »

Really?? wow, i never would have thought that! thanks a million for the info!

silly question, but at a squeeze would you fit 2 grown ups in the back? or would it be smaller than the coupe?

Yes, if you chop their legs off.

lomb

Special Circumstances wrote: »

I hear donedeal vag cables can also revive dead kittens when connected to a tt. And cure cancer. Not the diesel TT mind.

They are a nice car with power that puts them into a different segment to the hyundai, but I think you may oversold it slightly there toward the end ;-)

They are nice but you'd expect them to be as they are still 50 grand cars although now 10-15 year old cars worth alot less. The Hyundai are 20 grand cars big difference there. The vcds is essential as these cars are now having problems.I'd expect to use vcds on it 3 to 4 times a year to sort things out. Mpg is crap but then again Ive lost very little on depreciation in 4 years so its irrelevant.

Special Circumstances

lomb wrote: »

They are nice but you'd expect them to be as they are still 50 grand cars although now 10-15 year old cars worth alot less. The Hyundai are 20 grand cars big difference there. The vcds is essential as these cars are now having problems.I'd expect to use vcds on it 3 to 4 times a year to sort things out. Mpg is crap but then again Ive lost very little on depreciation in 4 years so its irrelevant.

I'm no stranger to crap mpg. I was worried I wouldn't see 300km from the current tank in the subaru. Snow etc haha.

You're happy with a cheap vcds setup?some make they are dangerous, not great,or can only be installed on a laptop you never again connect to the Internet. Would like to help brother in law out with his passat but neither of us could justify the full cost setup unless pet reincarnation or cancer cures were guaranteed!

lomb

Special Circumstances wrote: »

I'm no stranger to crap mpg. I was worried I wouldn't see 300km from the current tank in the subaru. Snow etc haha.

You're happy with a cheap vcds setup?some make they are dangerous, not great,or can only be installed on a laptop you never again connect to the Internet. Would like to help brother in law out with his passat but neither of us could justify the full cost setup unless pet reincarnation or cancer cures were guaranteed!

Ive two vcds set up , the older one is 10.63 and newest is latest on ebay whatever that is. The newest doesn't work on the tt for some reason but the old one does. Ive both set up on oracle virtual box operating systems so that they run without infecting the main system or connecting to internet. A spare old copy of xp is ideal to set up or one can use a 30 day trial version of xp for free but need to keep putting date back to installation date say of 2013 or trial elapses. Its easy to install and run in any case. Any questions pm away if wanting to install.

Special Circumstances

lomb wrote: »

Ive two vcds set up , the older one is 10.63 and newest is latest on ebay whatever that is. The newest doesn't work on the tt for some reason but the old one does. Ive both set up on oracle virtual box operating systems so that they run without infecting the main system or connecting to internet. A spare old copy of xp is ideal to set up or one can use a 30 day trial version of xp for free but need to keep putting date back to installation date say of 2013 or trial elapses. Its easy to install and run in any case. Any questions pm away if wanting to install.

You da man. Use vbox at work never considered using it at home tbh.

ninty9er

LIGHTNING wrote: »

They can squeeze in the back, I wouldn't do a cross country drive but for short trips its OK.

You'd just about fit a child seat in the back. You could fit one adult at an angle. It's not at all a comfortable space.

My TT 225 may be for sale soon, depending on the doctor's prognosis on a lower back complaint.

I had to spend a bit to get the engine right when I bought it as the service history was patchy, but it runs perfectly now and is a smugness generator 100%. I love how planted it is as AWD.

Fuel economy isn't bad for what it is, better than my Mondeo SCi certainly, though I do miss cruise control.

evo2000

ninty9er wrote: »

You'd just about fit a child seat in the back. You could fit one adult at an angle. It's not at all a comfortable space.

My TT 225 may be for sale soon, depending on the doctor's prognosis on a lower back complaint.

I had to spend a bit to get the engine right when I bought it as the service history was patchy, but it runs perfectly now and is a smugness generator 100%. I love how planted it is as AWD.

Fuel economy isn't bad for what it is, better than my Mondeo SCi certainly, though I do miss cruise control.

Ill swap yeah a 2001 focus for it! ill even throw in a cushion for the back support!

mickdw

galwaytt wrote: »

Nope. On TT #3 and get 30+ from my 225bhp on runs. Less aground town.

Rear ok for short trips - like real short - for adults. My kids 14 and 11 just about these days. ....

So what you are saying is you get mid to high 20s on average for mixed driving.
This is reasonably heavy when spoken of in relation to a comparison with a 1.6 hyundai coupe which was the point.