Out of curiosity (at this point in time!!!)In your opinion....how does Our(If mine EVER comes!!!!)C230 sports coupe compare with Audi TT Performance(speed/handling),build quality,reliability,styling,Value(TT fully speced is a couple of grand cheaper than my coupe)scope for tuning so on and so forth?
May be that I will get a 2003 coupe....and I will have the chance to pull out........sensible viewpoints appreciated

 

TT is a few grand more expensive than the C

I would say the C Coupe has slight edge towards the front drive 180hp but TT 225hp quattro is just one level up from the C Coupe in performance.

If I hadnt got the CC I'll be seriously thinking the TT

 

i think TT in the U.S. are well into the high $30k and low $40k range.

C-coupe is only in the high $20k range. besides two car are completely different. C-coupe is a 4 seater and TT really is only meant for 2. TT is in the market of sports car and C-coupe is not. TT definitely has better quality over C-coupe.

with that said my verdict is:

TT = small interior & luggage space + high $$ + better performance + great build & ride quality = A

C-coupe = bigger interior & luggage space + low $$ + average performance + okay build & ride quality = B+

 

The TT is not really in the same class as the c-Coupe, especially if you compare the 225 Quatttro roadster agains the coupe. The roudster is more the equal of the Porsche Boxter and IMHO is in many ways superior to that car. The TT is without doubt the top value sports car available to americans for the past 3 years. The only current rival for fun driving by the seat of you pants would be the Roadster M costing 70% more.

 

That's not a typo - the TT is a caricature of a car with truly goofy styling. To show just how absurd the styling is, the first year of TTs made had a huge positive Cz value on the rear axle due to the car's drooping bum, which caused them to trip and fall over at high speeds. Many people were badly injured and dozens of cars written off because of this, so Audi later put the little bum spoiler on, which apparently keeps the lift problem under control, more or less.

What does this show?
1. the car is all about form over function (I don't like the car's looks anyway, but most teenage girls do, apparently);
2. Audi is not infallible (those of us who drove in the 1970s and early 1980s already knew that);
3. the car wears a very ugly band-aid on its butt cheeks to remind everyone how wrong they got the aerodynamics in the first go-round.

The others are right too - the car is a cramped, claustrophobic 2 seater with zero headroom for tall people like me. So it's highly impractical for most situations unless it is a second car for you.

The C Coupé may not be perfect, but with its high rear end and Kamm tail at least we're assured that the Cz value is negative and the car will not do doggy tricks like "roll over" at high speeds. It may not have that "cuteness" that so appeals to pubescent girls, but who cares. You can seat 4 in it (5 in a pinch) and it does have a polyvalent nature that many "coupés" do not, due to the hatch and reasonably-sized luggage area.

 

Passionate viewpoints indeed...Perhaps it is not widely known,but,in the U.K. a TT is actually cheaper than a fully loaded C230k sports coupe(taking AMG body styling into account)as an aside.....if my coupe comes as a 2.3,what combination of modifications would be neccesary to outperform a TT (0-60mph)?

 

As an owner of both a $40K 2001 225HP TT Coupe and a $27K 2002 C230 I thought I would toss out an opinion.

The TT is a 2+2 sports car styled after the 911s, its faster, it corners like a go-cart, and it out brakes the MB. I know because my wife and I have raced on numerous occasions, with the TT winning every time independent of who is driving. It’s a great car to toss around on a race track or on a good winding country road. Its build quality is exceptional, and its interior materials and use of aluminum are a class up from the C230. We also love its stereo, Electronic Climate Control and Xenon lights. However it is considerable smaller inside, a true 2+2 for 2 adults at most, and has a much harder and noisier ride.


The MB is a 4 passenger 2 door that has much softer ride and handling, a quieter ride and engine, and much larger cabin. A much easer and more relaxing car to drive and ride in. We love the Steering wheel controls, auto dimming mirrors, visibility, safety features and layout of the cabin.

The cars are really 2 different vehicles, the TT a $35K-$45K sports car, the C230 a comfortable $25K-$35K sporty version of a fine four passenger car.

We love them both equally, we usually fight over the MB for everyday driving to work and back and use the TT on the weekends for dates or drives around the lake.

PS: I should note that I am adding the Kleemann pulley to get the C230’s heavier weight to feel more like the TT from an acceleration point. Acceleration is the one item we both feel the C230 lacks and we are hopping the pulley improves that situation.

 

Nope. I'd take a Boxster over the TT anyday.

 

Boxster is almost as common as 3 series in the Bay Area.

TT is more rare probably because they dont have autos yet

 

OK...any ideas on how I can coax TT levels of acceleration out of a 2.3 coupe.....short of blowing HUGE money on a larger displacement engine.......without such a mod....can we even get it to low 6 secondz 0-60mph?(manual 6speed)

 

C230k is not likely to get low 6 second without some major modification.

 

1) Kleeman Pulley Kit. 599 USD
2) Upsolute Chip 500 USD
3) Change rear end like renncpe did (search for article) (~500 USD)
4) New Larger Intercooler (renntech ~ 4500 USD)
5) Stiffer coils (minimize weight transfer during acceleration) (~300 USD)

This should get you to the low six second mark. But the intercooler will be the most expensive and difficult part to obtain.

 

I am a VW and Audi fanatic.... I worked on both cars . the TT is a gloified beetle plain and simple... built on the same platform as the beetle and the mk4 golf.... I can take the all wheel drive out of a TT and direct bolt on to the beetle or golf... I looked at TTs for my wife before she bought her 230 coupe.. I drove 225 tts worked and stock.. the coupe far impressed me more... that hurts to say being a vw guy... It bothers me that a 35,000 car is built on the same chasis as a 20,000 car!!!! I raced 225 tt in my VR6 with chip and exhaust and air filter and beat them... The TTs weight a ton!!! because of the all wheel drive which slows it down!! I have a turbo vr6 now and its a total joke... I laugh at them... I laugh at alot of cars when you push 300hp to the wheels... I think the coupe is a way nicer car.. not because we own one.. because MB built a great car for the money!!! I could not find a 2001 or 2000 tt with low mile for under 30,000... I think after we do the pulley I think the couple would beat a 225 TT... but that my opinion. that is why there are 31 flavors at baskin and robins everyone likes something different..

 

I got confirmation yesterday...my C230 will be a true 2.3 l engine so I can take confidence that my son will have ample room in the back and not squish him up in the back...I have a friend who does that with his two little daughters in his TT.....all I need to do now....is.....drive it stock for a while...then perhaps look into some mods....Brabus U.K. is only down the road from me!!!!!......Expected delivery date 18th June(but subject to possible delivery delays....AAAARRRRGGGGHHHH!!!!

 

Hope you got a manny, enjoy, Brabus is more expensive than kleemann but about the cost of Renntech.

 

yeah..........
...........manual

 

<img src="https://mbworld.org/upload/2002/BeeTTle.jpg">

 

OK

I own a 2001 Audi 225 TT Coupe, 6 spd, fully loaded with Nav System, and I purchased it for $38.5K. I modded it with APR chip, APR exhaust and Bilsteins and thicker anti-sway bar in back - Cost for those mods, about $2.6k I now get about 260 hp. TT forum members get sub 6, 0-60 mph times with these mods. I think of the TT as more of a GT coupe than a sports car, but I guess it's a little bit of both, especially with the mods.

I own a 2002 MB C230K with C5 and C7, 6 spd and I purchased it for $28.5K

Performance: First, they are completely different cars. In terms of sports car performance, the MB is not a sports car.

As to styling, with the TT you either love it or hate it. I think it is great - a classic. And the interior is not too retro. And still, after a year with the TT, I get more looks and positive comments, and both men and women saying how much they love the style of the TT, than with any other car, including BMW, VW, Audi, I have ever owned.

Performance: With the TT, you get a bit of turbo lag in 1st gear, after that, it's hold on to your seat, because your butt is kicked to the rear - like a roller coaster ride. It is strongest from 2500-5800 rpms. The MB thrust is nice, no lag, but in stock form, I am looking for more and it won't give it to me. The accelerator also feels heavier. MB Steering is also heavier than the TT. Also, I would like the rev limiter at 6500 like the TT. Is the TT worth 10 -12k more than the MB? In terms of 0-60, yes. But I would like to compare a modded C230K against my TT and then decide.

The TT rides much lower than the MB, so it feels like a sports car and not like a sedan. The ride is much rougher as compared to the stock MB, but one doesn't catapault over bumps in the hiway as you do with the MB.

The MB ride height is sedan like, very high, but the ride is very comfortable, almost great, but I wish they had tightened up the dampening on the shox - a bit firmer would be better and then I wouldn't catapault going 90 mph on imperfect hiways. You also get more roll with the MB.

When you shift down to pass or change lanes, I have full confidence with the Audi - it will go where you point it! and quickly. Not as confident with the MB - it seems to hesitate a second - maybe it's the accelerator - feels heavy. The TT exhaust also sounds terrific but a lot of noise comes through as compared to the MB. The MB is wonderfully quiet. As for handling, there is no comparison. The TT is much more confident through the twisties at good speed. I can't take the MB anywhere near where I can go with the TT.

As to the front interior, the Coupe is not cramped at all. In fact, the front feels more spacious than the MB because there is no huge console or hump in the middle (and the ebrake is where it should be). In back, you can fit 2 kids under 12 years (but that's it). As a car for 2 persons, I fit 2 sets of golf clubs, 2 suitcases, and two coolers in the TT by folding down the back seat flat and using the entire hatch. The MB fits 2 adults in the back so it is like the A4 in that area - the TT does not compare with the MB in terms of the back seat or the double sunroof.

As to the shifter, I am still breaking in the C7 MB, but the MB seems more precise about where it needs to be where the TT stick has a little bit of play - a bit looser. Neither is like butter but when you rev out the MB, the C7 shifter almost wills itself to 3rd. I wouldn't call either vague or rubbery like most magazines (they all like the Getrag stick) but they aren't like a hot knife through butter either.

As for instrumentation, the TT Tach is larger and easier to see. The MB computer is more extensive and that is better. As to stereo, they are both Bose (need I say more), although the speed sensitive setting actually works in the MB. As for AC, I like the MB system slightly better.

As to lighting, the TT has low beam Xenons. As to weight, the Audi weighs in considerably at 3400 pounds with quattro while the MB I believe is about 3200-3300?

As for safety - the MB has more airbags and based on its reputation, I think the MB would be the safer car.

I think the MB with Mods would be very nice - better handling and with a pulley or chip, that would definitely add to the experience. But it is not a TT. And the TT will never be a C230.

Life is about choices. And the MB is an excellent choice. The MB is an excellent GT car for long trips, much better than the TT in terms of comfort. With mods, it would be better than the TT for those types of trips. Some would say the MB is better suited for long, comfortable drives, just not as much fun as the TT.

 

Duffer thanks for your input,Invaluable experience....It seems obvious you have passion for both cars......but in totally different respects(suppose as much should be expected)anyway thanks once more for the time you took to give me the information I needed

 

Harpax,

Maybe there is something to that TT/Beetle theory. I heard a designer sat on a beetle clay model and that is how the TT was conceived.

 

Actually, it was conceived on some paper napkins when Thomas (the designer) was doodling.

As to the sitting on head, it might be that you confused the TT's conception with an incident that happened to you as a child - evidently someone dropped something.

 

freind of mine has a tt special edition

got it for near 46 gz

 

The relationship of the TT to the New Beetle is more than just on the technical level; clearly they share many (retro) styling cues.

In fact, I think the TT should be badged a VW, because it's a sort of a sporty version of the Beetle, much as the Karmann-Ghia was the sporty model to the old Beetle. This is not to denigrate the car, but just to point out its ancestry and technical basis. VW needs a new Corrado anyway, right?

This type of issue occurred in 1969 at the introduction of the Porsche 914 ... only in North America did they just call it a Porsche - everywhere else it was called the VW-Porsche 914.

 

The car is small....and I mean SMALL

I test drove one....and while feeling rather claustrophobic, the salesman piped up with the following:

"Remebah da Karrman Ghia? Well, dis cah is to the new beetle what the Ghia was to da old bug"

I walked away knowing my decision to wait for my coupe was the correct one....

 

The "Quattro" version of the TT is actually equipped with the technically inferior VW "Synchro" 4WD system, another reason it should have been called a VW.