I am a big fan of Audi cars and I love TTs but I don't understand the bias of the forum members regarding AWD system on TTs.<p>First, many A4.org members, who are also TT.org members, have tendency to treat all AWD system inferior that is not 50/50% torque distribution as in Torsen. Members goes in details how Subaru's AWD(automatic) is inferior, since it is 90% FWD and 10% RWD undtil slip occurs. We all know Haldex system that is used on TT is "FWD until slip occurs" (yes, Haldex locks up faster than VC but besides that). But suddenly, since this is on TT, it is the best system. Why the bias?<p>Second, many forum members have tendency to totally trash A4/A6 FWD, saying AWD(torsen) Audis are superior to FWD Audis. Plus anhything that is FWD got to be bad, look at all those Japanese FWD cars, right? Now suddenly, Haldex system is superior to Torsen, what gives? TT Quattro is not really a AWD (at least the way the A4.org forum made you belive),it is FWD after all.<p>I've been doing a lot of reading on Haldex system and I am not so sure if TT Quattro (180hp) is really better than TT FWD (180 hp). Plus, I rather have a RWD car than a FWD car, if I can't get an AWD car. I am sure many will agree.<br> <br>Now, why couldn't they have built this to be a RWD that is AWD like a Diablo or Skyline?<p>Any thoughts or comments? <br>

 

Yeah, yeah, we all know about reviews. I don't recall the affiliate of the reviewer, but they basically tested the TTs, FWD and Quattro, on a twisty road course, in the UK I think (it should be in the archives from the last few days). Well, they said the Quattro TT navigated the course at all speeds like it was on rails. On the other hand, they said the FWD version was a real handful and not particularly pleasant when put thru its paces. My opinion - Audis are great cars, even non-Quattro. Quattro just makes them even greater.

 

The statement that the TT's Haldex system is<br>"FWD until slip occurs" is incorrect.<p>The Motronic 7.5 computer will start sending torque to the rear wheels when it senses<br>acceleration to be proactive and this leads<br>to better traction when accelerating from a stop.<p>This I would think also helps do away with<br>the dread FWD torque steer that SOME have<br>complained about with the FWD TTs.<p>I have 180Q on the boat crossing the pond so I<br>may be a bit biased. <p><br>

 

Most of this is sentimental and slightly irrational, like choosing to be a fan of either Stallone or Schwartzenegger. We inherently need to decide on personal favourites, and then defend them valiantly, often disregarding unsuitable facts.<p>It seems FWD generally is the most sensible way to provide transportation. RWD seems to be the easiest way to provide a spectacle (aka fun). AWD is primarily a way to bring more product (be it safety, performance or product identity) to the market. We make our choices for widely differing reasons, all of them respectable and "real" to each of us.<p>The 50/50 "mantra" seems to be an excellent idea, until you look into vehicle dynamics and discover a): that it is an immensely complex field of science and hard to get even a superficial grasp on, and b): all of the critical situations call for some other ratio than 50/50, both between front and rear and usually between right and left. Any WW2-jeep could do 50/50! An Audi Quattro is so much more than that! <p>The torsen/Haldex issue is mostly sentimental. The best feature of torsen quattro is what it does outside of the 50/50 state, that is when traction fails on one or several wheels. This is mostly decided by the invariable, machined shape of the helical torsen gears, with the possible help of computer controlled braking of spinning wheels. The important thing to understand is that it is not 50/50 when it's doing its clever stuff, and it will benefit greatly from computer assistance, if provided.<p>The Haldex quattro system goes gradually and computer controlled from close-to-FWD operation in low-power situations where AWD isn't needed, to something we can think of as "wanted, biased distribution" when the going gets tough. 50/50 is never an object for this.<p>The "raison d'etre" of Haldex quattro was and is cost cutting. Fortunately we also have ample evidence that it already performs extremely well, probably as goos as torsen quattro for us mere mortals. The torsen quattro may actually be unable to perform as well as the Haldex with the very uneven, forward-biased weight distribution of the TT. <p>Being computer based, we may expect to see Haldex quattro being gradually developed over the years. Racing experience and success will contribute to this. Introduction of the system in the larger Audi models obviously will depend on both technical performance, production costs and emotional acceptance in the marketplace.<p>In the meantime, let us just enjoy what we get, FWD or Haldex, knowing that all TT models offer more than most other cars out there, and certainly more than most of us (including myself) will fully exploit. If you're still sceptical to the TT's performance, consider spending the first major upgrade money on a good driving school!

 

Fact is, driving school would be a lot less fun in a front drive car--unless it is a Mini. If you are looking for a "sensible" car, get a Camry.<br>Until the 225 TT comes out or people start chipping the 1.8 quattros, the TT is a cute underpowered car (this is a matter of opinion based on an informal poll by me. "Porsche on a crack" was the funniest comment I heard, whether you agree or not). I have to say that options like the "Nieman Marcus" and three pictures of a cupholder are indicative that the priorities of some TT drivers are different than those of the driver of an M Z3. A while ago on this board I posted a message that said lots of TT drivers will read GQ and wear all black. Obviously I wasn't far off the mark. But hey, I have no problem with Audi selling lots of cars.<p>The railings against the Z3 are amusing given the fact that the Z3 really started the roadster boom and the TT would most likely not exist if it weren't for the competition. Although the Z3 does not break new ground, it is a traditional looking roadster. The Boxster, despite its problems with reliability, has already created a huge new group of enthusiasts that have stiffened supsensions and taken their cars to the track. You have to like that. Ultimately, the competition will make each car better, as the S4 and M3 have done. Right now, none of the cars does everything well.<p>Flame away.<p>KJK 91 M5<br>BTW, I think the A4 is still the best looking Audi because it is a nice balance of elegance and understatement.

 

The Z3 started the roadster boom? I would put plenty of chips on the fact that Mazda started it with the Miata before BMW even dreamed of the Z3...

 

Z3 started the roadster boom??? You, my Z3 driving friend, are dreaming. I believe that Mazda revived the roadster boom ten years ago with the Miata. Give credit where credit is due.

 

I have driven a Z3 (over 1000 miles last summer) and if the TT is "an underpowered cute car" the Z3 is a "way underpowered cute car". Unless you go the the 2.8 or M (both alot more money)models you will chase the TT. Your profile of the average TT driver is way off the mark. The fact is you may know one or two, the rest is quess work with an edge. JIM

 

Just want to comment that the Z3 did not start the roadster revolution...just helped fan the flames. Most auto enthuisasts and writers give credit to Mazda's Miata for re-introducing the roadster. You're entitled to you're opinion, which is obviously slanted toward BMW (and that's OK). I do not own a Mazda, and probably never will, but do recognize their contribution. Do you really think BMW would have built the Z3 without the Miata?<p>Just my thoughts and comments...

 

I am not one of the GQ reading black wearing TT owners. I have been a horsepower man since the day I bought my first Mustang in 1985. I used to drag race my Mustang and I was ready to get a new Cobra until I drove the TT. I drove the TT and the Cobra ont he same day and got more of a thrill from the TT then I did the Cobra. I threw down my money that day and said I want one. The main reason I bought the TT was the styling and the feeling I get when I drive it. I like a car with a roof. As an engineer , automotive, I like the more rigid body. I also have a spot on the top of my head that the sun gets to but that is a matter of age. My friends can not believe that I am not buying a mustang and I admit so am I. The TT is a pure sports car even with 180 hp. I have to say that I will trade up to the 225 after a year or two but I still love the 180. <br>