German Car Zone

Hockeheim lap times
Audi TT-RS Coupe 1:15.0
Porsche Cayman S 1:15.5
Porsche 997 Carrera (2008 facelift) 1:16.1
BMW Z4 sDrive35i 1:16.6
BMW Z4 M Coupe 1:17.2

Which A3 was that quick? The latest TT is built on a separate platform from the A3, unlike the previous version. The TT-RS may not have the ideal set up to please an engineer, motoring journalist or enthusiast but it's probably the car on that list that is easiest for the average driver to drive fast. You can say it could have been better but you can't act like it's not as fast as it's competitors (which I agree have theoretically superior racing pedigree).

The TT is what it is as some have said before. If the car had Quattro Torque Vectoring set up it would demolish all the above cars in every department. However Audi are not going to change and engineer a whole new set up for a low volume car and decrease profit margins when what they have produced is sufficient.

Also when the Audi TT debuted QTV was not ready so was never going to be an option.

I have read a few Swedish reviews of the TT-RS and the general conclusion seems to be that;

1. It is a car that people who like what Audi does, will love.

2. It is a car that is more efficient than fun on a track.

3. It should be driven i the rain to make the most of it.

I fail to see the purpose of QTV on a car where the front wheels get the vast majority of torque in optimal driving conditions. With just 2% reaching the rear wheels most of the time what's QTV really going to do?

Thats sorta the point imo, imagine the TT being able to do corners like a evo, but with the added benefit of its lighter weight, lower center of gravity and higher power. It would be a super weapon.

Poverty, I fail to see "the point".

Quattro Torque Vectoring or Sport differential is designed to apportion and even boost torque to the rear wheel that has the most grip. It therefore is far better suited to applications where the torque split is 40:60 as per the Audi S4 - cars with the longitudinally oriented drivetrain. The premise behind the system is that the rear diff is already getting X amount of torque split (i.e. 60% and upwards) and therefore will use this torque further to send it to the outer loaded wheel with more grip. This gives the car a more tail-led cornering balance.

The TT-RS is a FWD car with AWD capability when conditions call for it - a predominant characteristic of Haldex-equipped AWD cars. This is because the drivetrain solution involves sending nearly 100% of drive to the front axle and only a small percentage rearwards as part of a "pre-loading" function. With this comes the familiar nose-led handling traits so readily associated with cars like the TT and S3. So again, if you're sending such a little bit of the drive to the rear axle, only to employ QTV when it does eventually get some torque then really... I question the viability of the cost and effort involved.

Ok I understand what you mean now, we have mis understood each other.

What I originally meant was for the TT-RS to ditch haldex all together, and have a permanent 4wd system put in its place, with the torque vectoring technology or similiar, as fitted in the evos.

I understand that quattro cannot be utilised in transverse engine mounting, but if mitsubishi can come up with a system thats adequete then so can audi if they really so wish.

Ah, yes, thanks - same page now...