Audi considering mid-engine layout for next-gen TT?
Not the next-gen model, but click above for Audi TT-S high-res gallery
Audi's next-gen TT may be getting a significant re-design, with a mid-engine placement if the swirling speculation around the interwebs is true. Now in its second-generation, the TT sits on Volkswagen's PQ35 platform (shared with the Volkswagen Eos and Tiguan) meaning customers are offered a front-engine chassis with a front- or all-wheel drive powertrain. When stacked against the front-engine BMW Z4 and mid-engine Porsche Boxster/Cayman, the current Audi TT holds its own... but that isn't keeping Ingolstadt engineers content. They realize that if they switch to a mid-engine design, like the one found on the amazing Audi R8, balance and handling will improve. Plus, Audi's quattro all-wheel drive system can be tailored with even more rearward torque bias. The third-gen TT, however, isn't set to debut until 2013. With Porsche moving closer to purchasing Volkswagen, a long lead may work to Audi's advantage as they'll have to convince the automaker from Stuttgart that a mid-engine TT won't chew into Boxster/Cayman sales.
Gallery: Audi TT-S
[Source: World Car Fans]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Red 12:42PM (7/25/2008)
This would make sense if the rumors are true about a possible Volkswagen competitor for the Lotus Elise that was reported just a few days ago. It would certainly help spread the cost of the chassis and allow Volkswagen to move into Porsche-like brand association, which would help, I think, distinguish Audi from BMW and Mercedes and possibly lift Audi into its rivals realm of desire.
That said, it's going to take more than a MR layout to make a genuine sports car. The TT, as is, particularly with the 3.2 V6 isn't all that "sports car-ish". It wants to be, but for some reason Audi's engineers won't let it. It's not a bad car, but it is by no means a genuine sports car, especially when compared to the Cayman. Not sure though, with Porsche digging its claws deeper into Volkswagen, that Porsche will allow that to happen.
Reply
YourNameHere 12:43PM (7/25/2008)
why compete with the boxster? i mean really whats the point. slot the TT under the Boxster in price and performance. and it will turn into a stepping stone into a Porsche.
Reply
azzo45 5:40PM (7/25/2008)
I say Audi should go for it... the top TT is what $70,000? Thats too damn much. The 1st gen TT was 45-$50,000.
I know this new generation TT is much better but $20,000+ better? NFW! Bring on mid engine & keep the price about the same.
Majarvis 1:04PM (7/25/2008)
Hmmm... a baby R8? I like the sounds of that!
Reply
Charlie 1:19PM (7/25/2008)
"When stacked against the front-engine BMW Z4 and mid-engine Porsche Boxster/Cayman, the current Audi TT holds its own..."
Um, no it doesn't. I mean, not on a track anyways. I'm sure the front-wheel-drive-biased porker is a great street car though.
But wow will VW AG's new owners feel about a legitimate Cayman competitor?
Reply
Bill Montgomery 1:31PM (7/25/2008)
Actually the 3.2 TT is pretty quick and bests 0-60 times against the standard Z4 and Cayman. However the steering doesn't benefit from Audis new chassis (new B8 chassis on the A4 and S5).
Audi is launching the TT-S in the U.S. next month which is getting great reviews for hitting the sportscar mark more than its 3.2 sibling. Better yet is the TT-RS which is in it's final development stages. With a 350bhp turbo engine, and even lighter weight than the already lightweight TT it will make serious waves in this segment. Any 'RS' badge from Audi warrants respect as Quattro GmbH knows how to fine tune Audis to be class leaders. The TT-RS will snuff the competition of Caymans, SLK, and Z4s - and if Audi builds a baby R8 named the R4, it will wipe the asphault with the other makes, just as the R8 did with the 911 standard - you can bet on that one.
Charlie 1:52PM (7/25/2008)
Okay, fanboy. I'm glad the new TT-RS will "snuff the competition" of less expensive, less powerful, and significantly older boulevard cruisers.
The performance numbers provide a distinction, not a qualitative difference (although on numbers alone, I don't understand why people are always comparing the $110K R8 to the $75K base 911). The meaningful difference is this: A proper Porsche communicates with its pilot -something Audi has never really figured out. Next time you have the opportunity, jack up a TT next to any Porsche. You'll see that there's a real qualitative difference in the construction of each car. One is a sporty street car, the other was born on the track and refined into something streetable.
mk 1:52PM (7/25/2008)
@Bill...
The TT is a VW-based car, with a transverse engine and Haldex AWD. the Haldex system is 4-motion on VW, and badged Quattro on Audis, although it has nothing in common with longitudinal Quattro.
It has NOTHING in common with the old or new Longitudinal layout A4.
It has more in common with the Beetle, Scirrocco, GTI, and other FWD/AWD VWs than the A4/A5/A6/A8, which are all front engine longitudinal drive cars.
It would be easier to turn the body the other direction on the chassis, and make the car rear-transverse-engine, RWD/AWD than to put it on the B8 chassis. Besides, it would only compete with the A5 coupe and convertible if it were on the same B8 chassis.
A front-biased TT-RS might have more power than a base Z4 or Boxster/Cayman, but it is not going to handle as well or as consistently as the 986/7, which itself is better than the Z4.
And a very limited RS-model of the TT would be much less widely produced than a base model Z4 or mid-engined Porsche. Limited edition is not quite the same as base model of a higher price base car.
rsfourever 2:05PM (7/25/2008)
"Next time you have the opportunity, jack up a TT next to any Porsche. One is a sporty street car, the other was born on the track and refined into something streetable."
if you really believe that a Boxster (or a Cayenne or Panamera) is "born on the track", I've got a bridge in Brooklyn that I'd like to sell you.
Chase 3:23PM (7/25/2008)
Charlie, the new TT is hardly pure, but its a great sports car. On that, I'd like to note that the entire front end of its chassis is different from any other VAGmobile on the same platform. The new one is leagues better than the previous one.
Have you ever driven one? Have you ever driven one on a track? I have. They are fast as hell. The FWD 2.0T with chip is faster than an STI on a track.
In five or ten years, the base 2.0T TT will be a terrific platform to race-prep -- much like how E36 BMWs are now-a-days. Its light. It has a terrific motor with tons of tuning potential. It has terrific suspension. Its consistent and easy to drive at the limit. Its parts are relatively cheap. What other car has a half-aluminum chassis?
Bill Montgomery 1:23PM (7/25/2008)
Called the "R4"
Do it Audi, and I will buy!!!!
Reply
Serge K. 1:23PM (7/25/2008)
If Audi does go with the mid-engined TT and keep the price difference between Cayman/Boxster at the current level, then the impact on Porsche's market share will be minimal, or whatever it is today.
No harm done to either manufacturer, and Audi would win because better handling TT is awesome!
Reply
mk 1:43PM (7/25/2008)
I think they should bring the price down, and re-configure the TT.
Turn the car around. Rear transverse inline engine, with rear-biased AWD.
With the rear engine, it keeps enough room to have it's vestigial rear seats, which keeps it in a separate insurance class, and differentiates it a bit further from Cayman/Boxster.
As long as the front end has a decent size trunk... so to have the bare base of practicality, it should be fine. A bit of a new Audi Beetle.
For that matter, they could transfer the VW New Beetle, and a speedster VW (as rumored a few days ago...) to the same layout, Rear engine transverse rear-wheel drive.
Just turn the FWD chassis around and drive it backwards :D
Beetle at 16-26k, VW speedster at ~28k. they could maybe even convert the second iteration of the new Scirrocco as a coupe foil to the speedster, above the Beetle, but still more affordable and RWD than the AWD Audi.
Audi TT/R4 Quattro-AWD (transverse haldex, but at least favoring the rear wheels instead of the front...)
coupe and convertible from 32-40k. Mini-R8 styling. More affordable than a Porsche, more technical than a VW.
Porsche Boxster and Cayman above $40k, as two-seat mid-engined proper sports cars, as they are now.
Reply
Chase 4:59PM (7/25/2008)
I have a fleeting feeling this move from VAG to make MR cars is a joint move with Porsche so Porsche can increase the economies of scale of the Boxster.
If the Boxster's platform was sold with less powerful motors in Audi and VW packages, the total volume of the platform would likely quadruple, and thus because of economies of scale, it would cost a lot less to produce a unit. That'd probably amount to $5,000 extra profit per Boxster sold. That is simply a ludicrous amount of profit in a day when many cars don't make any.
The Toureg, Cayenne, and Q7 have shown that the three brands can manage to be different enough -- in that case, VW is subdued, Porsche is racy, and Audi is techy.
The previous VW MR report fits in well to this idea. If it had less than 200 hp (170 is reported), people will immediately bin it as drastically slower than a Boxster, which means the two will never be cross-shopped. An MR TT is much more tricky to brand, so I'm curious to see how that develops. I bet they will mainly play off of high-tech and ostentatious Audi vs classic and simple Porsche.
mk 5:36PM (7/25/2008)
It would be VERY hard to fit a vertical inline transverse engine in the space that the longitudinal flat boxer engine occupies in the Boxster and Cayman.
It isn't as if a tall Inline 4 or VR6 will fit under the car where a flat boxer with a much lower height, currently resides.
Cayman would loose rear cargo room and visibility, and Boxster would have to stow the top completely differently if that chassis were entirely re-configured to accept a taller engine.
It is more likely that VW/Audi will do one of two things.
Mid-rear transverse layout, like the Elise, and MR2...
Or a slight variation of that, putting the engine behind the axle line, and making it technically a REAR engine situation in much the same space.
The Artega GT concept and production car uses the VW 3.2 V6 and DSG in just such a rear-engine configuration.
The rear engine arrangement would expose the transaxle to the central tunnel, rather than being aft of the engine crank-case, and much more easily facilitate haldex AWD to send power to the front axle, and it being an Audi, AWD is likely to be at least optional.
The weight difference would likely be negligible between the engine in front or behind the transaxle in the back end of the car. The DMC Delorean was rear-engined with a forward facing longitudinal transaxle. The rearward weight bias difference between that and a mid-engined arrangement was a couple of kilograms only.
swept rearward half-shafts would put the crankshaft centerline almost directly between the rear hub centerline. perhaps only a few centimeters behind the axle line through the wheel hubs. The same principle is used the other direction to minimize front overhang in front engined cars driving the front wheels, including Longidutinal AWD Audis and Subarus front half shafts.
I don't see Porsche handing over a boxer chassis to Audi for an inline or V engine, when Audi and VW already have transverse engine layouts in place, that could just be re-located to the back of the chassis, under a new body.
Paullll 1:57PM (7/25/2008)
Of course they are not considering it.
This is only a rumor spread by their marketing department to keep publicity up and running.
Reply
Bruxell 2:08PM (7/25/2008)
Let me be the one who begins the chant: Build it, build it, build it...
Reply
wushu 2:04PM (7/25/2008)
Porsche AG is such an evil arrogant company that they'd never let an Audi product outshine even a purposely crippled purposely overpriced Cayman. Companies like Audi and Nissan build the best cars they can for the price --- Porsche AG builds the worst car it can for the price. Don't let Porsche get away with it: 1. Boycott all Porsche purchases 2. Lobby the EU to force Porsche to divest its Audi shares.
Reply
mk 2:45PM (7/25/2008)
What the heck are you smoking???
Chase 5:12PM (7/25/2008)
Though I don't think its that extreme, he is coming from a valid point. Porsche isn't the most profitable car company in the world because it gives people the most for their buck.
Nissan and VAG leverage their platform sharing advantages to put more content into their volume cars. Porsche cuts costs just to make more profit. Example: Porsche charges $1,000 for HID lamps (next year they are standard), while nissan and VAG have had them standard on many low-cost models for many years.
Something tells me that only a small bit of that $1,000 is for the lamps; the rest is for Porsche to stuff their pillows with and to keep their bathrooms well stocked with toilet paper.