EVO tests the Audi TT-RS

[AMJ_77]

Are we comparing a car with no back seat (relatively speaking) to an M3? Interesting cross shop there

Let's compare the Hummer to it next...

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by footie

Now lets look at the in-gear times to see if the M3 is still pulling ahead.

In gear times are not very meaningful in the real world. This is the same type of data that big proponents of aftermarket diffs with higher FD ratios like to get confused about. Sometimes a diff helps with overall multi-gear acceleration but other times it can only help in gear numbers.

[Jonmartin]

Originally Posted by footie

Audi R84.2FSI vs M3 (M3 times are on the right )

Nordschleife 8:01.90 (FL) 8:05
Hockenheim Short 1:12.7 1:14.3
Vairano Handling Course 1:18.460 1:20.910
Bedford Autodrome West Circuit (2004 - 06/2008) 1:22.10 1:26.60
Oschersleben 1:47.57 1:47.20
Willow Springs 1:33.20 1:36.92
Laguna Seca 1:40.8 1:42.964
Virginia International Raceway 3:04.6 3:05.6
Zolder 1:45.88 1:49.31
Autozeitung test track 1:39.8 1:40.1
Balocco 2:52.78 2:56.51
Bedford Autodrome East Circuit 1:04.1 1:07.1
Contidrom 1:33.46 1:35.41
SportAuto wet handling test 1:29.0 1:32.4
Bedford aut.wet handling test 51.95 54.50
Nurburgring GP (3.7 km) 1:44.11 1:44.86
Rockingham 1:23.83 1:25.58
Serres Racing Circuit 1:30.95 1:33.05
Inta 1:11.08 1:12.36
Auto Club Speedway 54.34 56.39
Autocar Wet Handling Track 1:08.20 1:16.9
Willow Springs - Streets of Willow (1.7 miles) 1:10.66 1:12.70
El Toro 41.12 42.74
Camden Airport 1:11.87 (wet) 1:13.40
Circuit de Nevers Magny-Cours 1:24.22 1:27.40 (19"rims)
Kyalami 2:04.8 2:05.4

I highlighted all the ones where the R8 was quicker by more than one second, boy I nearly ran out of red ink.

Nice thanks for proving me right that R8 Barely hangs on by a thread.. And if that is Audis best/most expensive performance car on the market chances are the TT-RS is childs play again thanks I know you put alot of effort into it.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by Jonmartin

Nice thanks for proving me right that R8 Barely hangs on by a thread.

To be fair on some of the tracks the margin is quite significant, roughly 3 seconds per minute. If that kept up it would be the good part of 1/2 minute on the N'Ring. That being said, I don't really side with footie on the R8 vs. M3. The cars are close enough in drag type performance and on the track that it is pretty much a drivers race. And for the cost of the R8 that is not really acceptable.

[footie]

Originally Posted by swamp2

To be fair on some of the tracks the margin is quite significant, roughly 3 seconds per minute. If that kept up it would be the good part of 1/2 minute on the N'Ring. That being said, I don't really side with footie on the R8 vs. M3. The cars are close enough in drag type performance and on the track that it is pretty much a drivers race. And for the cost of the R8 that is not really acceptable.

That's my whole point about the TT-RS being a genuine rival to the M3, the two cars are close enough on the track and in performance to say that it's a driver's race.

There's no data as yet for the TT-RS on the ring but a pretty good guess will place it somewhere close to the M3 - RS4 time band, if it does worse than that then the track conditions on the day were less favourable and if it does better then the same could be true about the other two cars.

I happen to like the overall look and feel of the TT and the RS only heightens this even more, but for me I couldn't justify the lack of space, heaven knows I did try before I bought the Jag.

One thing I am sure of, if any of you get a chance to experience the TT-RS you will love the engine/exhaust note, especially if your old enough to remember the Quattro rally cars.

In gear times are not very meaningful in the real world. This is the same type of data that big proponents of aftermarket diffs with higher FD ratios like to get confused about. Sometimes a diff helps with overall multi-gear acceleration but other times it can only help in gear numbers.

Now that's the first time I have ever heard that being said that in-gear times are meaningless. The truth is they are much more meaningful than pure acceleration data, if you going to overtake you pick a gear and floor it, never will to pick the gear thar has less than 1000rpm left before shifting it always the gear up from that one so the best in-gear time possible reduces your time period where you are in danger. This example between the TT and M3 highlights the M3's lack of torque and if you disagree then you are only fooling yourself.

I promise you the next M3 will be incredible at this, and could drive me back into another M3.

[Garissimo]

Originally Posted by swamp2

To be fair on some of the tracks the margin is quite significant, roughly 3 seconds per minute. If that kept up it would be the good part of 1/2 minute on the N'Ring.

The fact that the 2 are so close on N'Ring leads me to believe that tires are a big part of the difference, because the M3 had upgraded rubber for its 8:05 run. Not taking anything away from the R8, but part of the reason it has the upper hand on all the tracks footie posted has to be rubber. The Hockenheim short track would be a case where it was still appreciably faster than the M3 on the cup tires.

[footie]

Originally Posted by Garissimo

The fact that the 2 are so close on N'Ring leads me to believe that tires are a big part of the difference, because the M3 had upgraded rubber for its 8:05 run. Not taking anything away from the R8, but part of the reason it has the upper hand on all the tracks footie posted has to be rubber. The Hockenheim short track would be a case where it was still appreciably faster than the M3 on the cup tires.

I would have to go away and check for you but I thought all the R8 times were conducted on stock rubber which is not of the standard of grip that the CUP+ give you.

[southlight]

Originally Posted by footie

I would have to go away and check for you but I thought all the R8 times were conducted on stock rubber which is not of the standard of grip that the CUP+ give you.

I can only speak about the Sportauto times and these were done on Pirelli UHP tires (most likely Corsa).


Best regards,
south

[graider]

Originally Posted by AMJ_77

Are we comparing a car with no back seat (relatively speaking) to an M3? Interesting cross shop there

Let's compare the Hummer to it next...

exactly. i would never cross shop a tt to an m3. two very different car. the tt is basically a 2 seaters since the back seats are useless with zero leg room.

a more suitable comparison is the new zxm (assume bmw make it) and the ttrs

[footie]

Originally Posted by southlight

I can only speak about the Sportauto times and these were done on Pirelli UHP tires (most likely Corsa).


Best regards,
south

I thought it was Pirelli P Zeros but you might be right.

[footie]

Originally Posted by graider

exactly. i would never cross shop a tt to an m3. two very different car. the tt is basically a 2 seaters since the back seats are useless with zero leg room.

a more suitable comparison is the new zxm (assume bmw make it) and the ttrs

Would you consider a 997?

[southlight]

Originally Posted by footie

I thought it was Pirelli P Zeros but you might be right.

I checked it up and it was P Zero Corsas (235/35 19 front, 295/30 19 rear).


Best regards,
south

[Jonmartin]

Originally Posted by footie

Would you consider a 997?

Who wouldnt? But no one would cross shop a 997 anything to a TT-RS either lol...

[footie]

Originally Posted by southlight

I checked it up and it was P Zero Corsas (235/35 19 front, 295/30 19 rear).


Best regards,
south

I'm sure there was two times that the R8 did around Hockenheim and at least one of them was done with the normal rubber. I think I recall it was roughly 1:13.4, can you confirm this?

Originally Posted by Jonmartin

Who wouldnt? But no one would cross shop a 997 anything to a TT-RS either lol...

I wouldn't expect someone who was considering a 997 to down grade to a TT-RS, but someone who would have been considering a TT-RS or Cayman S might consider an M3 and vice versa. I think the problem most of you guys in the US are having is in the respective prices of the M3 and 997 in your country compared to else where. The TT-RS cost £43K in basic form and £48K to a spec you would at least consider one, the M3 is £50~51K and £54K to the same spec as the TT, the 997 is roughly £62K starting. The man considering the 997 might down grade to an M3 but I somehow doubt at as it's an inferior product but the M3 man may well stretch his financials to an 997 in much the same way as the TT man might stretch to an M3.

If you think that people don't cross shop in a price bracket of 12~13% then you are seriously mistaken but I would agree that anything north of 20% is highly unlikely.

[chris719]

Honestly, I don't think more than a very low percentage of M3 buyers would consider the TT-RS.

M3 is cross shopped with: C63, IS-F, RS4, maybe CTS-V, and then on the lower performance end S4/S5 and 335.

TT-RS is cross shopped with: Boxster/Cayman, Z4, SLK, 370Z, Corvette

[graider]

Originally Posted by footie

Would you consider a 997?

not really as the back seat in the 997 does not fit adult comfortably and I need it on a daily basic. I would only go porsche if I don't need the back seat.

[southlight]

Originally Posted by footie

I'm sure there was two times that the R8 did around Hockenheim and at least one of them was done with the normal rubber. I think I recall it was roughly 1:13.4, can you confirm this?

You're right, an R8 S-Tronic was tested in Oct 08 and did a 1:13.4 on normal rubber.


Best regards,
south

[footie]

Originally Posted by chris719

Honestly, I don't think more than a very low percentage of M3 buyers would consider the TT-RS.

M3 is cross shopped with: C63, IS-F, RS4, maybe CTS-V, and then on the lower performance end S4/S5 and 335.

TT-RS is cross shopped with: Boxster/Cayman, Z4, SLK, 370Z, Corvette

I completely agree that the percentage would be low but does that not make to a rival none the less.

An example of how extreme these car affect the decision process I have a friend who has sold his E46 M3 and has looked at an Aston, an R8, an RS6 and a Carrera S.

How diverse can you get.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by footie

I happen to like the overall look and feel of the TT and the RS only heightens this even more, but for me I couldn't justify the lack of space, heaven knows I did try before I bought the Jag.

One thing I am sure of, if any of you get a chance to experience the TT-RS you will love the engine/exhaust note, especially if your old enough to remember the Quattro rally cars.

I love the look of this car, one of the best Audis in recent times. As always the fit finish and attention to detail is amazing.

Originally Posted by footie

Now that's the first time I have ever heard that being said that in-gear times are meaningless. The truth is they are much more meaningful than pure acceleration data, if you going to overtake you pick a gear and floor it, never will to pick the gear thar has less than 1000rpm left before shifting it always the gear up from that one so the best in-gear time possible reduces your time period where you are in danger. This example between the TT and M3 highlights the M3's lack of torque and if you disagree then you are only fooling yourself.

I promise you the next M3 will be incredible at this, and could drive me back into another M3.

In gear times are not irrelevant but way way less important than other metrics. Kind of like the hp vs. torque debate. What really matters is hp to the wheels/weight. hp more accurately reflects real world peformance for the reason that they can stay in gear longer getting the better acceleration from the lower gear longer. Of course high hp low torque vehicles will almost always have much large torque multiplication from higher gearing. IF and only if you plan on a race WITHOUT shifting (or are too lazy to shift) then this type of metric matters. If not, well then it simply doesn't. Also, to be clear I am talking about being fast, not the perception of fast (in one gear over a very limited time).

[footie]

Originally Posted by swamp2

In gear times are not irrelevant but way way less important than other metrics. Kind of like the hp vs. torque debate. What really matters is hp to the wheels/weight. hp more accurately reflects real world peformance for the reason that they can stay in gear longer getting the better acceleration from the lower gear longer. Of course high hp low torque vehicles will almost always have much large torque multiplication from higher gearing. IF and only if you plan on a race WITHOUT shifting (or are too lazy to shift) then this type of metric matters. If not, well then it simply doesn't. Also, to be clear I am talking about being fast, not the perception of fast (in one gear over a very limited time).

Are we talking about real life situations or just racing here?

If it's real life then sorry swamp but you are miles off, in-gear times are the only thing that counts, not true acceleration through the gears but what happens when you plant it in a given gear because that is how we all drive in the give and take of daily driving.

Either way the TT-RS stands up very well against the M3 given it's down 85hp.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by footie

Are we talking about real life situations or just racing here?

If it's real life then sorry swamp but you are miles off, in-gear times are the only thing that counts, not true acceleration through the gears but what happens when you plant it in a given gear because that is how we all drive in the give and take of daily driving.

Either way the TT-RS stands up very well against the M3 given it's down 85hp.

I'll be damned!

Foot, I'm reading the current Road & Track issue (lips moving, as usual), and when checking out the data panel re a comparison between the TT-S and 135i, I notice that the Audi runs the quarter mile in 13.2 seconds @ 105 mph (under the usual U.S. one-foot rollout "rules").

Well hell, adding 70 HP with maybe a two or three percent weight penalty gives me around 113 mph for a quarter mile trap speed, which is about what a healthy M3 does - with a given that the Audi will ET better with awd and turbo torque.

At a guess, the TT-S might fall behind a bit on the 'Ring's higher speed bits, but it'll surely give the M3 fits around any tighter courses.

In short, I think you're probably spot on. The TT-RS will be a fully competitive machine, performance-wise.

Y'know, back a few years when Piech said that Audi was going to chase BMW in the performance wars, I was a little skeptical about the outcome - but it sure looks as if Audi has caught up, with a good potential for pulling ahead.

Who woulda thunk it?

Bruce

PS - The Audi handily won the comparison.

[footie]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

I'll be damned!

Foot, I'm reading the current Road & Track issue (lips moving, as usual), and when checking out the data panel re a comparison between the TT-S and 135i, I notice that the Audi runs the quarter mile in 13.2 seconds @ 105 mph (under the usual U.S. one-foot rollout "rules").

Well hell, adding 70 HP with maybe a two or three percent weight penalty gives me around 113 mph for a quarter mile trap speed, which is about what a healthy M3 does - with a given that the Audi will ET better with awd and turbo torque.

At a guess, the TT-S might fall behind a bit on the 'Ring's higher speed bits, but it'll surely give the M3 fits around any tighter courses.

In short, I think you're probably spot on. The TT-RS will be a fully competitive machine, performance-wise.

Y'know, back a few years when Piech said that Audi was going to chase BMW in the performance wars, I was a little skeptical about the outcome - but it sure looks as if Audi has caught up, with a good potential for pulling ahead.

Who woulda thunk it?

Bruce

PS - The Audi handily won the comparison.

Well Piech still is in control of VAG no matter who is actually running each brand in the VAG group.

Interesting that the TT-S performed so well, much better than we achieve here in the UK, so maybe we aren't as skilled at launching car as you guys are.

P.S.
Not at all surprised that the TT-S won the test, it is a wonderful little coupe with mountains of grip and a punchy little engine.

What was the times and speed for the 135i?