TT (Mk1) Discussion Discussion forum for the Mk1 Audi TT Coupe & Roadster produced from 2000-2006

3.2 VR6 Owners

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-02-2007, 06:30 AM
  #1  
New Member
Thread Starter
 
A4Driver81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default 3.2 VR6 Owners

Does the 3.2 Motor ONLY come in DSG? I want a 6MT on a TT so lookin at my options. How do you 3.2 owners like your car? If you had a choice, would you go for a 225 1.8T now? Thanks.

--John
Old 03-02-2007, 06:33 AM
  #2  
AudiWorld Super User
 
Lowcountry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,702
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

225 is infinitely more modifiable. 3.2 only comes with DSG.
Old 03-02-2007, 06:45 AM
  #3  
AudiWorld Super User
 
nikhil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 8,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default disagree

there a lot of mods out for the R32/TT 3.2 from chips/flashes, to cams, to FI kits. how many BT kits are out there for the 225?

chipped + intake + flapper-modded R32/TT 3.2 is just as quick as a chipped + intake + exhaust 225 and sounds better doing it.

both cars are great and can be modified pretty easily. the choice depends on which powertrain you want.
Old 03-02-2007, 06:48 AM
  #4  
New Member
Thread Starter
 
A4Driver81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Is the 3.2

250 HP stock correct? WIth all the above listed mods where are you at power-wise? 270? oohh man if it only came with the 6MT! =(
Old 03-02-2007, 06:50 AM
  #5  
AudiWorld Super User
 
Lowcountry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,702
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Ok then, how about this...

It's much easier to get bang for your buck out of a 225 than a 3.2. I got mine up to the 300hp range fairly inexpensively. That's not nearly as easily done with a 3.2. Reflash on 3.2 gives what, 15-20 extra hp or so? Reflash on 225 gives 35 hp and 77lbft torque. I still think it's much easier (cheaper) to squeeze performance out of a 225.
Old 03-02-2007, 06:52 AM
  #6  
AudiWorld Super User
 
nikhil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 8,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default the simple bolt-ons make a significant difference on that car too

the 3.2 has more power/torque from the factory, so both motors seem to be about equal once chipped.
Old 03-02-2007, 06:54 AM
  #7  
AudiWorld Super User
 
nikhil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 8,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

3.2 was either 240 or 250 stock (i don't remember)...i'd guess that i'm around 270hp with mods
Old 03-02-2007, 07:05 AM
  #8  
AudiWorld Member
 
Drollomite Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Out of the box, the 3.2 is a superior engine . . .

And remains so if you're not into modding. It simply has more torque (with no lag), and torque is what you feel. I migrated from a 225 to the 3.2 and have no regrets, though I still like turbo motors. Having said that, no matter how trick the DSG is, I would still prefer a manual. If you want a six-speed manual with the 3.2, you'll have to wait for a Mk2, because Mk1 3.2s were only equipped with the DSG. I especially don't understand Audi's engine-transmission configurations with the Mk2, but that's another post. In sum, the 1.8 seems pretty responsive to modding if that's your thing, and your only choice if you really want a manual tranny in a Mk1.
Old 03-02-2007, 07:15 AM
  #9  
New Member
Thread Starter
 
A4Driver81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Would you say the 3.2 is more "reliable"

than a 1.8T? Compared to Coil-packs and other stuff
Old 03-02-2007, 07:59 AM
  #10  
AudiWorld Super User
 
JohnLZ7W's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 21,113
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Well it doesn't have the timing belt issues that the 1.8t has


Quick Reply: 3.2 VR6 Owners



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:44 AM.