Jump to content

Evolution of the Audi TT - design genius or the same old recycled tat?


Mook
 Share

Recommended Posts

I saw a Mk3 Audi TT this morning and it really stopped me in my tracks.  I've always been a fan of the TT since it was first launched and very nearly bought a TT 3.2 (despite it's hideously nose-heavy handling because of the weight of the VR6 lump in the front).

 

The Mk2 TT was a slight facelift in my eyes, even though they changed a load of the chassis as well as the engine options - Scumball 2006 was the first time I saw a Mk2 TT which was being showcased by Audi at a laucnh event in the Dorint at Nürburg.  Steve and I still have the number plates off it  :uhoh:

 

Forget about the engines and handling and alleged inferior AWD system, what about the design?  The 911 hasn't changed that much in the last 40 years, and from the 997 through to the (almost out) 991.2, the design changes have been minimal.

 

Is the TT in the same "timeless design" category as the 911?  Or are Audi just recycling design ideas?

 

tt3.png

post-8797-0-56066900-1422005747_thumb.pn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very good subject, Mr Mook.

 

I remember the original TT launch and thinking it would be a timeless classic, because it went against the grain of angry-faced aggressive sportscars, it was soft, rounded, unusual and kind of elegant. With each generation of TT it gets more and more 'generic Audi' to the point where when I looked at the pic above I thought it was just another A3/A4/A5/A6/Whatever, when it is actually a 2 door coupe. Audi need to be much braver.

 

The reason for the 911's longevity is that it was a unique piece of engineering when launched and Porsche haven't compromised it at any stage, sure, it's a bit of a flabby GT car now, but the engine in the back is still a cracker and the styling is a gentle evolution. There was never anything unique about the TT's engineering at launch, the styling was great, sure, but you need some substance beneath that to be a genuine long-term classic. Audi have taken the only thing the original TT had (it's looks) and watered it down over the years. I'm sure the fashion conscious will buy it, in white, with a diesel engine, but it will never be a classic like the 911.

 

Am I wrong?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty much as above, the original was a bold design, I never really liked it if I'm honest, but I admired Audi for having the balls to take what was really a concept car, and actually building it.

Unfortunately after the first one, it just became a boring generic Audi with none of the styling flair.

Sadly the TT hasn't (imo) stood the test of time, too many of the same faults that afflict most VAG products, meaning that longevity and reliability aren't strong points, coupled with what has now become a very dated looking design (despite being ground breaking at the time), means they are littering council house front gardens next to early BMW X5's on Chinese tyres.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I had my old MrkIII GTi (all of 105bhp!!) I was in the market to update my car and the TT came up. It was effectively a Golf but with a wonderful interior and very neat exterior design. It was different and stood out from anything else at that time. I loved the details in that car particularly inside it. 

 

I had it 3.5 years but which time it was rare or different. In fact they were everywhere and everyone had got used to the design. That in itself meant it wasn't that different or fresh anymore. I think it's really dated looking. I think since it was so different it wasn't going to be in vogue for too long.

 

I was disappointed with the MrkII TT. I guess the first was a concept car and hence grabbed attention whereas this was just a tweak and without being precious about the original it felt like they were undoing what had been achieved. In hindsight it was them making it more standard Audi.

 

The MrkIII does seem to have taken a bigger step than the MrkII and the interior is hard to fault aside from being quite familiar in many aspects although the new dash is quite a technical change. Exterior wise I prefer it to the MrkII but it does seem to be lost between the original and the mainstream features of any Audi. I think they're trying to make it look like a baby R8 - which admittedly some people have taken to extremes on MrkI and II's!!

 

I guess I bought the TT for it's design. I don't think anyone can have that as the reason for buying this one? I don't think that makes it bad/wrong etc but it's just not the same as buying something that's new and original. I guess from the perspective of a designer being told to refresh the TT, I think they've done an ok job. The have had to take the original shape and no doubt have to following the Audi family face so what really could anyone expect? If it's too different then it wouldn't be a TT.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could argue that Audi have taken the only thing the original TT had and carefully evolved it, ensuring it will still appeal to its market.

The problem was perhaps the subtlety of the Mk2 evolution. It was a much better car than the Mk1 dynamically but nobody noticed cos they thought it was just a facelift.

Edited by garcon magnifique
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem was perhaps the subtlety of the Mk2 evolution. It was a much better car than the Mk1 dynamically but nobody noticed cos they thought it was just a facelift.

 

Really?  I'm surprised at that.  I thought the MkI and MkII looked like chalk and cheese.

 

Loved the shape of the Mki.  Audi broke ground.  Loathed the Asian Pacific shape of the MkII.  Audi went backwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had an A4 Avant.  Hated it.  It was a second rate car compared to MrsMe's 320d SE at the time.

 

However, EldestMissMe's car was chosen (the A1) because we believed it to be the best in that class.  I don't have anything against the brand at all and if they made a better car than BMW (or anyone else I might buy from) in the same class then we'll buy it. 

 

Unfortunately (and it isn't good for an open market and competition) I just don't see it right now.  Mercedes-Benz upped their game massively from a 5-6 years ago and I'm just hoping the Audi range gets a bit of inspiration at some point - because right now I can't think of more bland and boring premium brand.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thinking of a similar car.  The Mercedes SLK.

From first to the second and now on the third? generation.  There was a massive change from the 1st to the 2nd gens.  The 2nd one made the 1st one look like shit.  Especially the interior

 

I don't think that happened with the TT.  The first gen is still quite stylish (IMHO).  The interior of the 1st gen still is pretty good with neat touches and stitching.  And with the 3.2 V6, makes a decent sound!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was in one yesterday.  I'm not a fan of the styling, I like the MK1 and haven't much liked either revision.  MK2 obviously drove better but that's it.

 

I do like the new dash though its quite cool, although I'm not sure how good it would be in long term use, also given Audis ability to deliver a reliable TT dashpod this is concerning!!!  The no screen in the dash does look nice and clean from an aesthetic perspective.  I wouldn't rush to buy one though, i'd rather a good MK1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had an A4 Avant.  Hated it. 

 

However, EldestMissMe's car was chosen (the A1) because we believed it to be the best in that class.  I don't have anything against the brand at all and if they made a better car than BMW (or anyone else I might buy from) in the same class then we'll buy it. 

 

 

 

Agreed A4 must be the blandest saloon ever made

 

In regards to the A1 sorry the only reason I can fathom that anyone would buy one over a Polo is for the badge, as I found it severely lacking against the Polo in every department save cabin finish, that includes looks, as I think the A1 is just wrong in that department, the asre end just ruins the thing

 

Same as you I looked into buying one for the daughter, and drove both cars for a weekend, even my mate in Audi said the Polo was much better all round car and I thoroughly agreed, and I subsequently bought one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In regards to the TT

 

Suggest reading Clarksons write up on the new model in yesterdays Sunday Times

 

It may surprise a lot of you on here

 

Mrs had one of the first MK2 TTS models and it had major steering issues from day one, the fix was a new rack, followed by a software update, we binned the car shortly after and she went back to an S3 a car she adores to this day as it does everything well as an overall package

 

TTS was a Brand new car with steering issues, where the ECU was not interfacing braking with the steering, downright feckin dangerous, and totally ridiculous

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I met up with the Stig (Perry McCarthy) years ago and was having a chat about Clarkson. It was according to him, he that showed Clarkson how to drive quattro based cars. He was employed as a racing driver by Audi at the time so it was there way in. He was kind of claiming credit for turning around Clarkson's views on them. Previously in all the videos of him driving quattro cars you could see him ploughing into beds too fast and then getting understeer etc. McCarthy managed to convince him how to adapt his driving (in the same way you do for RWD or FWD etc) to suit the car's setup. It was around this time that Clarkson started doing some more positive reviews e.g. B7 RS4 etc.

 

Maybe I'm not as shocked as others may be that he has Audi's in his house.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I struggle to choose between two cars when it comes to the level of grip they gave.

 

That might surprise you too when you find out what they are.

 

The first is the Porsche 911 Turbo I placed a deposit on and then cancelled.  The grip on that, with its AWD system, was incredible.  It was frighteningly quick and never seemed to want to show any signs of loss of grip.  A killer car in many respects and an engineering masterpiece.

 

The second will be the surprise - the Noble M400.  Not AWD but 400 bhp per ton.  Contract that to under 300 bhp per ton in the 911 and you start to realise how terrifyingly fast the M400 is.  So, to have that going through a single axle and with monster turbochargers - you'd think it would be lethal?  But no, it was surreal.  The grip the tyres and mid-engine give that car is nothing short of miraculous.  When you consider that it was once only bettered by the Ferrari Enzo and Carrera GT in the 0-120 mph stakes, you realise how well Noble managed to get the traction right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...