Paint protection & vehicle theft protection ?
#1
Audiworld Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paint protection & vehicle theft protection ?
I'm about to buy new TTS 2016, but my dealer said paint protection and vehicle theft protection should be included and no negotiation with them. They are 995 each, so in total about 2000 bucks.
Is there anyone who are pushed by a deal to pay them which look like scam? I want to check if it is truly included in the car.
Update!
I take vehicle theft protection off, but for the paint protection, the dealer said that the coating is already covered to the vehicle so he cannot take it off even though he did his best.
However, I can't trust him fully since he already tried to put those BS. Is there anyone who was in similar situation?
Is there anyone who are pushed by a deal to pay them which look like scam? I want to check if it is truly included in the car.
Update!
I take vehicle theft protection off, but for the paint protection, the dealer said that the coating is already covered to the vehicle so he cannot take it off even though he did his best.
However, I can't trust him fully since he already tried to put those BS. Is there anyone who was in similar situation?
Last edited by purple; 02-10-2016 at 01:59 PM.
#2
AudiWorld Senior Member
This is BS! Paint protection and vehicle theft protection are extras. You can choose not to get it. If they refuse, I suggest that you take your business elsewhere.
Last edited by plat27265; 02-09-2016 at 05:17 AM.
#3
Audiworld Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#4
AudiWorld Super User
Agree. There are plenty of TTs for sale in the US. Go elsewhere
If vehicle theft is LOJACK, that is not a bad price but I would never buy it. Paint protection is worthless unless it is a clearbra over most of the front.
#5
AudiWorld Super User
'tis not the season for TT sales in this snowy period across much of the US & Canada, despite the goodness of Quattro. I would expect sales to pick up when Spring arrives.
The dealership "teflon" paint protection is not worth it imho. I can do a better job and at far less expense. Same for interior coating.
The dealership "teflon" paint protection is not worth it imho. I can do a better job and at far less expense. Same for interior coating.
#6
Interesting. What data do you have to back up that statement other than a cars.com search? That sounds more like of a guess to me.
#7
AudiWorld Super User
Regarding your Update, perhaps the dealership had already applied the "teflon" coating to the paint, in which case that would be somewhat true (could always be removed with say a Dawn detergent wash, but why would they?). Unusual to pre-apply a local cost bearing option, but dealerships do all sorts of unusual things. Just conjecture on my part however.
I'm about to buy new TTS 2016, but my dealer said paint protection and vehicle theft protection should be included and no negotiation with them. They are 995 each, so in total about 2000 bucks.
Is there anyone who are pushed by a deal to pay them which look like scam? I want to check if it is truly included in the car.
Update!
I take vehicle theft protection off, but for the paint protection, the dealer said that the coating is already covered to the vehicle so he cannot take it off even though he did his best.
However, I can't trust him fully since he already tried to put those BS. Is there anyone who was in similar situation?
Is there anyone who are pushed by a deal to pay them which look like scam? I want to check if it is truly included in the car.
Update!
I take vehicle theft protection off, but for the paint protection, the dealer said that the coating is already covered to the vehicle so he cannot take it off even though he did his best.
However, I can't trust him fully since he already tried to put those BS. Is there anyone who was in similar situation?
Trending Topics
#8
AudiWorld Super User
US Mk 3 TT sales are a dud
Even more bad news when analyzing US TT sales data. Typically, the first year of a major makeover of a car has sales significantly higher than following years. The Mk 2 TT was by any objective measure a sales failure and the first year's sales in the US were about half that of the successful Mk 1. Mk 3 sales are much worse, being only about half of the first year of the poor selling Mk 2! I think the major contributing factors to the poor sales are that (except for the grill), the Mk 3 looks virtually identical on the outside compared to the Mk 2, the base TT has essentially the same engine perfromance as the 2011+ Mk 2 TT (many professional reviewers state that the base TT engine lacks the power to take full advantage of the dramatic Mk 3 handling improvements), and the base TT's price has swelled about $5K compared to the Mk 2 of a few years ago.
The increase in price has placed the TT in a poor cost position compared to the BMW 2 series. Virtually all professional reviewers rate the BMW 2 series as a better performing car than the base TT. The MSRP of the 228 is less than the base TT and BMW dealers are offering much bigger discounts than the, at best, 6% you will get on the TT. In fact, for about the same price as a base TT (after dealer discounts), you can get everyone's "car of the year" the M235. You can still buy a 2 series with the manual tranny most enthusiasts want. Also, the BMW price includes free maintenance for the first few years.
IMO the only cost/performance standout of the Mk 3 is the TTS. I am certain the TTS will leave the M235 in the dust as far as performance, with Car and Driver Lightning Lap times will be about the same as the Mk 2 TTRS. If they made a TTS roadster, I'd own one by now. However, many folks are looking at the price increase and thinking for a few $k more than the TTS they can get a corvette or a Porsche.
I'm not saying base TT is a bad car. The handling compared to the Mk 2 is a dramatic and very noticeable improvement and the interior is an industry game changer (although I still pine for the original Mk 1 baseball seats). It is just that Audi has significant competition at its present price point.
Last edited by Vegas-roadster; 02-15-2016 at 05:51 AM.
#9
AudiWorld Super User
Good points, however more than a few bucks between the TTS and a base Cayman for instance. Quite a few more! Plus the TTS is more everyday practical to me than the Cayman. Yes, I did consider ...
And I'm not a 'Vette guy, even if it can finally get around a corner in decent fashion, albeit while losing lower quality interior pieces.
And I'm not a 'Vette guy, even if it can finally get around a corner in decent fashion, albeit while losing lower quality interior pieces.
Audi USA reported just over 300 TTs sold in the USA in August, a number inflated by pre-sales. The last 4 months of 2015, Audi USA averaged about 200 TT sales a month (base and TTS), which is up about 20% at an annualized rate as compared to the prior full production years of Mk 2 TT sales. The TT is still the poorest selling Audi car in the US if you exclude the exotic R8, and about 1/3 of the sales volume of the more expensive boxster/cayman. Meanwhile, TT inventory on US lots continues to climb. Cars.com a few weeks ago showed over 250 TTs for sale in the US, which is a conservative number since all Audi dealerships do not use cars.com. There are also about 100 TTS for sale. The total represents almost a 2 month sales backlog, a number that has almost doubled in a just a few months when I last checked US inventory. Bottom line, there should be bargains if you shop beyond your local dealer.
Even more bad news when analyzing US TT sales data. Typically, the first year of a major makeover of a car has sales significantly higher than following years. The Mk 2 TT was by any objective measure a sales failure and the first year's sales in the US were about half that of the successful Mk 1. Mk 3 sales are much worse, being only about half of the first year of the poor selling Mk 2! I think the major contributing factors to the poor sales are that (except for the grill), the Mk 3 looks virtually identical on the outside compared to the Mk 2, the base TT has essentially the same engine perfromance as the 2011+ Mk 2 TT (many professional reviewers state that the base TT engine lacks the power to take full advantage of the dramatic Mk 3 handling improvements), and the base TT's price has swelled about $5K compared to the Mk 2 of a few years ago.
The increase in price has placed the TT in a poor cost position compared to the BMW 2 series. Virtually all professional reviewers rate the BMW 2 series as a better performing car than the base TT. The MSRP of the 228 is less than the base TT and BMW dealers are offering much bigger discounts than the, at best, 6% you will get on the TT. In fact, for about the same price as a base TT (after dealer discounts), you can get everyone's "car of the year" the M235. You can still buy a 2 series with the manual tranny most enthusiasts want. Also, the BMW price includes free maintenance for the first few years.
IMO the only cost/performance standout of the Mk 3 is the TTS. I am certain the TTS will leave the M235 in the dust as far as performance, with Car and Driver Lightning Lap times will be about the same as the Mk 2 TTRS. If they made a TTS roadster, I'd own one by now. However, many folks are looking at the price increase and thinking for a few $k more than the TTS they can get a corvette or a Porsche.
I'm not saying base TT is a bad car. The handling compared to the Mk 2 is a dramatic and very noticeable improvement and the interior is an industry game changer (although I still pine for the original Mk 1 baseball seats). It is just that Audi has significant competition at its present price point.
Even more bad news when analyzing US TT sales data. Typically, the first year of a major makeover of a car has sales significantly higher than following years. The Mk 2 TT was by any objective measure a sales failure and the first year's sales in the US were about half that of the successful Mk 1. Mk 3 sales are much worse, being only about half of the first year of the poor selling Mk 2! I think the major contributing factors to the poor sales are that (except for the grill), the Mk 3 looks virtually identical on the outside compared to the Mk 2, the base TT has essentially the same engine perfromance as the 2011+ Mk 2 TT (many professional reviewers state that the base TT engine lacks the power to take full advantage of the dramatic Mk 3 handling improvements), and the base TT's price has swelled about $5K compared to the Mk 2 of a few years ago.
The increase in price has placed the TT in a poor cost position compared to the BMW 2 series. Virtually all professional reviewers rate the BMW 2 series as a better performing car than the base TT. The MSRP of the 228 is less than the base TT and BMW dealers are offering much bigger discounts than the, at best, 6% you will get on the TT. In fact, for about the same price as a base TT (after dealer discounts), you can get everyone's "car of the year" the M235. You can still buy a 2 series with the manual tranny most enthusiasts want. Also, the BMW price includes free maintenance for the first few years.
IMO the only cost/performance standout of the Mk 3 is the TTS. I am certain the TTS will leave the M235 in the dust as far as performance, with Car and Driver Lightning Lap times will be about the same as the Mk 2 TTRS. If they made a TTS roadster, I'd own one by now. However, many folks are looking at the price increase and thinking for a few $k more than the TTS they can get a corvette or a Porsche.
I'm not saying base TT is a bad car. The handling compared to the Mk 2 is a dramatic and very noticeable improvement and the interior is an industry game changer (although I still pine for the original Mk 1 baseball seats). It is just that Audi has significant competition at its present price point.
#10
Using your numbers, assuming your calculation is correct based on TT/TTS mix, you have a 60 day supply of cars on hand (which is what you want). So now that the production can match demand, that in turn is poor sales? Not at all.
Look at the segment as a whole, the small premium sports car segment is always low. This isn't 2000 when these were moving at 10k units per year. 2-3k a year is the norm.
And while base price between a boxster/cayman may be "only" a few thousand $ more, you have to look at comparably equipped and then there is a drastic gap in price.
Look at the segment as a whole, the small premium sports car segment is always low. This isn't 2000 when these were moving at 10k units per year. 2-3k a year is the norm.
And while base price between a boxster/cayman may be "only" a few thousand $ more, you have to look at comparably equipped and then there is a drastic gap in price.