2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe 2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe

Vital Stats

Engine:
Turbo 2.0L I4
Power:
211 HP / 258 LB-FT
Transmission:
6-Speed DCT
0-60 Time:
5.3 Seconds
Top Speed:
130 MPH *Ltd
Drivetrain:
All-Wheel Drive
Curb Weight:
3,153 LBS
Seating:
2+2
MPG:
22 City / 31 HWY
Least Costly TT Gives Entry-Level A Very Positive Meaning


2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe - Click above for high-res image gallery

Audi invited us out to a California track a little more than a year ago for some hot laps in its new TT RS. Fresh out of development, the enthusiast-tuned variant of its ever-stylish coupe was fitted with a turbocharged 2.5-liter five-cylinder sending 340 horsepower to every corner through Audi's Quattro all-wheel-drive system. Quick, nimble and offered only with a six-speed manual, the gussied-up two-seater was not only the ultimate expression of the chassis' capabilities, it was a gift to those with a passion for driving.

Last September, after a successful Facebook petition, Audi decided to bring the TT RS to the States. As word of the announcement spread, we're guessing that more than a few Porsche Boxster and Mercedes-Benz SLK owners felt chills go up their spines.

Fourteen months after blasting around Willow Springs Raceway in the talented TT RS, we found a TT 2.0T Quattro sitting in our driveway. For those unfamiliar with Audi's lineup, the 2.0T is relegated to the bottom of the pole as the least expensive and least powerful model in the franchise.

So... just how would we swallow the entry-level coupe with the taste of the wondrous TT RS still fresh in our mouths? As it happened, we were pleasantly surprised.

Audi has been doing some consolidating recently. Just a couple years ago, its TT was offered in two bodystyles (coupe and convertible) with two engines (2.0-liter inline-four and a 3.2-liter V6) two drivelines (front- or all-wheel drive) and two transmissions (six-speed manual or dual-clutch). Today's Audi TT is still available in both fixed and drophead forms, but all (with the exception of the yet-to-be-introduced TT RS) share variants of the same four-cylinder engine, dual-clutch gearbox and Quattro all-wheel drive powertrain.

2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe side view
2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe front view2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe rear view

Along with the simplifications came improvement. With the platform was entering its fifth year (it was introduced in 2007), Audi took the opportunity to freshen the 2011 TT lineup with a new front bumper design, reworked grille accents, a dab of chrome trim and standard LED daytime running lamps. New colors were introduced, new options appeared on the order sheet and most importantly, a new engine greatly improved fuel economy and power.

In this case, our test car wears a verbose name: The 2011 Audi TT 2.0 TFSI Quattro S-Tronic Coupe. Its base price is pegged at $38,300, but the Oolong Gray metallic paint adds $475 (the black leather is no charge) and there are a few other upgrades. These include navigation with Audi Music Interface ($2,070), Audi Magnetic Ride with sport button ($1,900) and heated front seats ($475). Destination ($875) brings the bottom line to a very reasonable $44,070 - the TTS starts at $47,875, while the TT RS will likely run nearly $60,000 when U.S. pricing is finally announced.

2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe wheel2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe rear spoiler2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe taillights2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe exhaust tip

For comparison's sake, a standard Porsche Cayman starts at $51,900 while the all-new Mercedes-Benz SLK starts at $54,800 – both are exclusively rear-wheel drive. Depending on the buyer, the TT may also find itself cross-shopped against the rear-wheel drive BMW Z4 convertible (base price $47,450) or even the upcoming front-wheel drive Mini Cooper Coupe (estimated to start below $25,000).

Last year's turbocharged 2.0-liter four-cylinder, Volkswagen Group's TSI variant, was rated at 200 horsepower and 207 pound-feet of torque. For 2011, it's been replaced by the TFSI variant which dropped under the hood of its sibling A4 in 2009. Thanks to the newest version of Audi Valvelift System (AVS), the turbocharged engine generates 211 horsepower and an impressive 258 pound-feet of torque – the latter equaling the torque provided by the 3.5-liter V6 under the hood of the 2011 Mercedes-Benz E350 Sedan. To keep the power on the ground, the automaker's full-time Quattro all-wheel drive system is standard. Sadly, a six-speed manual is no longer, offered so rowing of gears is done exclusively by Audi's six-speed S Tronic dual-clutch gearbox.




While the TFSI engine is truly an award-winning jewel, it's the TT's chassis that has admirably withstood the test of time. Constructed with Audi Space Frame (ASF) technology that mixes lightweight steel and aluminum in the build process, the engineers have built a very rigid platform for the independent suspension – MacPherson struts up front with a four-link rear design. Our test car, fitted with Audi Magnetic Ride, also featured dampers filled with magnetically charged fluid which could change viscosity in just a fraction of a second. With disc brakes at all four corners and five-spoke 19-inch alloys wearing summer compound Pirelli P-Zero Rosso tires (245/40ZR19), our TT was optimally configured for performance duty.

2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe engine

Boasting added torque, low mass (the curb weight is just 3,153 pounds) and slick bodywork (drag coefficient of .30), Audi says that the TT Coupe will sprint to 60 mph in just 5.3 seconds. We have no reason to doubt them, as it feels quick. The top speed is electronically limited to just 130 mph.

The little black two-plus-two spent a week with us, and we'll readily admit we had a blast.

From the outside, the TT hides its interior space well. The coupe's cabin is configured as a two-plus-two (the convertible loses the rear area for roof storage), but the rear seats are best left for luggage as legroom is non-existent. Further compounding the problem, there are no head restraints and the sloping roof drops precariously low limiting headroom. Increasing usefulness for items other than humans, the rear seats fold nearly flat to reveal a surprisingly cavernous space easily accessible from the hatchback. Even without folding the seats forward, the cargo area will swallow a couple of roll-on bags, a camera bag and a carry-on.

2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe interior2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe front seats2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe rear seats2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe rear cargo area

The cabin is typical "Audi-riffic" in both design and execution, even if it is a bit old and bland compared to the automaker's newer, more opulent offerings. The two front seats are comfortably firm and upholstered with grippy Alcantara centers and leather bolsters. There is plenty of headroom and legroom (even for your six-foot, two-inch author), but the small padded center armrest piggybacking on the parking brake is uselessly goofy. The instrumentation is concise and easy to decipher, with a multi-function trip computer display between the big dials.

Our tester arrived optioned with navigation. Its gloss-black frame stands out as the only real oddity in the cabin, looking a bit out of place (almost aftermarket, as some suggested). Newer Audi interiors suffer no such indignities, and we're guessing the next TT will have a better-integrated solution. Regardless, the flat-bottom steering wheel is a very nice touch that serves as a constant reminder that the TT is engineered for driving pleasure.

Ten inches shorter overall than a Porsche 911, but with a wheelbase stretching five inches longer, the TT provides an impressive balance of agility and ride comfort – especially when optioned with Audi Magnetic Ride. Unlike most electronically controlled suspensions which offer subtle adjustments between modes, Audi's system delivers a genuinely Jekyll and Hyde performance. Activated via a small "S" button just below the shifter, the difference between Normal and Sport mode was so dramatic (and harsh) that we found ourselves only using Sport only when driving aggressively.

2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe center console buttons

When not left in Sport, the TT 2.0T was perfectly hospitable as a daily driver. The engine and transmission interacted like best buddies, delivering decent frugality for the amount of power extracted (we averaged about 23 miles per gallon in the city and saw an indicated 30 mpg on the highway). Don't expect a buttery-smooth luxury car ride or low levels of road noise, however, as that's not what the TT is about. Do expect a fun two-plus-two that is a pleasure to shoot around town, enjoyable on a commute and perfectly amiable on an extended highway tour.

What impressed us most, however, was how well the standard TT handled in the California mountains – it became a slot car. With its Magnetic Ride switched to Sport (the system also adjusts steering boost and exhaust note) and the S Tronic gearbox dropped into the same mode, the tenacious little coupe stuck amazingly well in the corners. The turbocharged four was both strong and responsive, and the rear-biased Quattro driveline ensured the torque was spread evenly to each of the wheels without slip (the only downside to the 2.0-liter engine is that downshifting for compression braking is a moot point). The standard brakes are likely the car's Achilles heel if pushed to the limit, but they never faltered during our stints.

2011 Audi TT 2.0 Quattro Coupe rear 3/4 view

We are not going to attempt to pull the wool over your eyes: compared to the standard TT, the heavily refined Porsche Cayman is a better sports car and the all-new 2012 Mercedes-Benz SLK will undoubtedly be a more luxurious cruiser – those facts are practically indisputable. Taking it one step further, the TT is no TT RS. Audi's standard mode lacks the muscle that turns a gifted high school athlete into an Olympian (in this case, the deficit is 129 horsepower, 74 pound-feet of torque, oversized brakes and sportier suspension tuning).

But our week with the 2.0T suggests that none of those deficiencies really matter on public streets. The TT may not be as quick as the TT RS on Mulholland, but the grin on your face will be nearly identical and your wallet will be $20,000 thicker. Trust us; you will be smiling.

The 2011 Audi TT 2.0T reminds us of cars like the standard Porsche 911 Carrera, the base Mazda MX-5 Miata and the entry-level Nissan 370Z. None of these cars share the glitzy spotlight with their more heavily optioned siblings, but each is a very talented yet underestimated player that just happens to sit at the bottom end of the price scale. Sometimes cars like this aren't just the cheapest, they're the best picks of the draft.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 55 Comments
      bobmarley
      • 3 Years Ago
      I dont understand why they dont tune this engine up to produce more power? Can someone explain to me why Hyundais 2.0T puts out 270hp and VW's 2.0TFSI only puts out 211hp? ...looks and sounds like a great car but it seems like they are leaving a little something on the table
        QAZZY
        • 3 Years Ago
        @bobmarley
        VW has a much more dated design, with only the 265hp version of the 2.0TSFI having direct injection, and all having a cast iron block. It's time to update, but Audi's motor still has better torque. I think the 265hp engine should be the standard (at the same cost), leave the 211hp for VWs.
          montoym
          • 3 Years Ago
          @QAZZY
          Umm no, all versions of the 2.0T have DI. That's the FSI part of the TFSI they had before it was changed to TSI. FSI - Fuel Stratified Ignition, Audi-speak for DI. The 2.0T was the first engine to combine DI and a turbo. http://www.insideline.com/audi/tt/2011/2011-audi-tt-gets-new-2-0-tfsi-engine.html quote - "The new turbocharged and direct-injected, 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine is good for 208 hp and 258 pound-feet of torque from 1,600-4,200 rpm in the 2011 Audi TT. Compare this with 197 hp and 207 lb-ft on the 2010 TT coupe and roadster. The big upgrade on the new engine is a two-stage variable exhaust-valve lift." -
        montoym
        • 3 Years Ago
        @bobmarley
        They can and do tune this motor to produce more power. In the TTS it produces 270hp. 211hp is perfectly fine for the base TT. It still does 0-60 in under 6sec which the more powerful Sonata can't do (not that they are competitors, but you brought it up). Weight plays a large role into that. The TT is a 2+2 which weighs in at 3,153lbs while the Sonata is a large (according to the EPA) family sedan which weighs in at between 3338-3452lbs.
      nardvark
      • 3 Years Ago
      Oh my God (the Almighty, the Creator), do not use parentheses (a piece of punctuation) in every sentence (it is not a proper replacement for a separate sentence). It makes it impossible to read (because there are breaks in every point you are trying to make) the freaking article. Do you understand how annoying (which is a word that means that your writing bothers me) it is to read something (by "something" I mean your blog posts) that is filled with extraneous (meaning extra, or unnecessary) parentheses?
      tantareanujellob
      • 3 Years Ago
      Nice beetle.
      Ak74
      • 3 Years Ago
      I don't but the front look blunt and boring to me.
      Wolf Stewart
      • 3 Years Ago
      I own a 2009 TT with the 2.0 motor, quattro, and DSG. After going from a 3 series coupe to an A4 sedan I wanted something sportier with AWD. I cross shopped Corvettes and Caymans. I'm very happy with decision I made. After the APR ecu update it's a completely different car. As someone who preferred manuals I don't see myself buying anything but a dual clutch transmission again. Once you've adjusted to it I think it's just as much fun as a manual. And it's nice in traffic to be in auto. The handling with the Haldex AWD feels more neutral and balanced than my A4. With similar options and RWD the Porsche Cayman was at least 10k more. For something that goes 0-60 under 6 seconds and still gets over 25 mpg combined with AWD it's been a great car so far.
      Mark C
      • 3 Years Ago
      Without a manual wouldn't even consider it. VW/Audi need to wake up and understand enthusiasts are market-leaders.
        Saminlp
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Mark C
        I believe the extra (useless) seats in the back are specifically for lower insurance premiums. Especially in Europe...
        Mayoman
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Mark C
        Considering how low the percentage of new cars bought in north america are manual, I would argue that enthusiasts are market-leaders.
        Snowdog
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Mark C
        What panzies are marking him down for wanting a manual? I won't buy anything without a MT, though I am not a huge Audi fan, so no loss for me there, but another friend of mine was intersted in a TT, but the lack of MT turned him away. He is in a BMW now. They are definitely losing some sales to this.
        Jonathan Arena
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Mark C
        Enthusiasts don't drive TT's. When they come out with a mid-engine R4 it may be a different story, but for now, offering this in a manual will not help sales.
          zamafir
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Jonathan Arena
          Enthusiasts do drive tt's, they drive the tt-s, and they see pretty amazing track times as a result. go track one and get back to us.
      zamafir
      • 3 Years Ago
      "It'll lock out 6th gear on the highway" care to back that up with any documentation autoblog? I've seen sixth in sport, it's north of 130mph, but it's there. Just because you can't reach it legally doesn't mean it's impossible.
      zamafir
      • 3 Years Ago
      pretty insane, all audi needs to do is barely tweak the TT's engine to give it 135i levels of punch. Sure it's off by a fraction of a second, but that's damn impressive none the less. Oh that BMW would return to building LIGHT cars, they'd have little problem doing the same if they weren't getting so piggily wiggily.
        simianspeedster
        • 3 Years Ago
        @zamafir
        Typical Zamafir misinformation about BMW and Audi. Let's look at some facts, shall we? TT 2.0T Convertible = 3,241 lbs. Z4 sDrive 3.0i (folding hardtop convertible) = 3,252 lbs. Difference? The BMW weighs 11 pounds more. Let's try again: TT 2.0T Coupe = 3,241 lbs. 128i Coupe = 3,208 lbs. Difference? The BMW weighs 23 pounds LESS. All figures pulled directly from BMW's and Audi's US websites. Sorry, Zamafir -- you're pulling it out of your ass again.
          zamafir
          • 3 Years Ago
          @simianspeedster
          @graphlkzking - reread my post. My point, which poor poor simianspeedster got his panties in a wad about, is that it is impressive Audi can take car which debuted with a naught to sixty of around 6.4/6.6 seconds and through a series of ridiculously minor tweaks, keep it competitive with the 135i five years later. That's all. It's a point I'll not stop driving home until BMW's RWD models are lighter across the board than Audi's AWD (135i, 5seriesGT, 5 series, 7 series, damn near everything). The 135i is a ton of fun, more fun than the TT and a LOT more involving than the 335i, I've driven all of them. yet my original post isn't about HP wars, or what is more fun, it's simply that I'm impressed Audi, through their focus and foresight as far as lightness is concerned, can make their base TT competitive with the 135i while being so deficient on power and so much simpler in how it arrives. I miss the days when BMW had a healthy advantage over everyone as far as speed handling etc were concerned and don't get BMW fans that argue they're better off increasing weight while audi's slashing it aggressively and Mercedes is simultaneously is pulling insane amounts of power out of their engines on the other end.
          simianspeedster
          • 3 Years Ago
          @simianspeedster
          Zamafir, You're all over the map. First, you want apples to apples. Well, you can't have them because Audi does not offer a manual transmission. So if you want to compare performance as if you were a performance oriented buyer, you have to look at a 128i with a manual tranmission because that's what BMW offers. No fair saddling BMW with Audi's lack of options. As far as the 135i goes, multiple reviews have clocked 135i's in the high 4 second range. BMW's 5.x second estimate on their website is conservative. Edmunds also clocked a 128i 0-60 in 5.9 seconds (http://www.edmunds.com/bmw/1-series/2009/) I both price and performance, the 128i is the natural competitor to this TT. The 135i's closest Audi counterpart in both price and performance is the TT-S. Also in the category of apples to apples -- while the rear seats in the 128i and 135i are not terribly usable, they're far more usable than those in the TT. That factors into weight. I haven't even mentioned the fact that either BMW engine is far nicer to listen to and drive than the buzzy, peaky 2.0T in the Audi (yes, I've driven two Audi's with that engine). Face it -- you think all BMWs suck and they're all overweight, but you don't like sticking to the facts. The 128i and TT are the closest natural competitors in the same price range and performance spectrum and they weigh about the same for all intents and purposes.
          zamafir
          • 3 Years Ago
          @simianspeedster
          Lets try some reading comprehension. I mentioned the 135i. The 128i doesn't compare to the TT, it hits sixty over a second and a half slower with auto (apples to apples) or the better part of a second slower (manual). The difference in track times are even more staggering. As is the price. Strange concept for you, huh, here in the real world? Comparing cars of like price, performance, etc? Must be tough. Let's try again= TT 2.0T Coupe = 3,241 lbs, 0-60 in 5.3 BMW 135i Coupe = 3439 apples to apples, or 3373, 0-60 in 5.1/5.0 When trying to troll me with 'facts' at least be some what coherent and compare similar cars, cars of LIKE PRICES and LIKE PERFORMANCE, kind of like i did in the post you replied to, kinda not like how you're , typically, picking unrelated cars :D. Sorry mate, you're pulling it out of your ass again, and inviting it back in for a typical reaming.
          graphikzking
          • 3 Years Ago
          @simianspeedster
          That's not fair.. why not add HP into the equation: TT 2.0T - 211 hp Z4 3.0 (non turbo)- 255hp Z4 3.0 (Twin Turbo) - 300hp - but the car weighs much more. 128i - 230hp (and the car costs $9000 less). I don't think Audi is winning in this segment unless there are enough uninformed women who like the car. If they could lop off 150lbs and add about 60hp I'd be seriously impressed. 262hp / 2996lbs - hmm.. that would be the same as the LAST generation Z4 softtop. 260hp / 2950lbs. That thing was actually pretty nice and would beat my 350z every day of the week.
        • 3 Years Ago
        @zamafir
        [blocked]
          Hans
          • 3 Years Ago
          BMW 135i Coupe= 1485 kg Audi TT S coupe== 1395 kg. for Audi as usual the facts speak.
      tantareanujellob
      • 3 Years Ago
      LOL @ 211hp. Hyundai has like what? 270hp from their 2.0 and it costs half as much. Pathetic.
        ACSRHS
        • 3 Years Ago
        @tantareanujellob
        Yeah but the TT is lighter by a couple hundred pounds.
      tantareanujellob
      • 3 Years Ago
      WOW even the base audi beetle engine sucks.
      Aaron Bluestone
      • 3 Years Ago
      I thought this had the haldex AWD system which is FWD until slip is detected and simply badged as quattro?
        You guy
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Aaron Bluestone
        Its sad that it took this long for Haldex to catch up to Subaru, if that multi-gen thing is true.
        simianspeedster
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Aaron Bluestone
        That's exactly what I was going to write. True quattro has traditionally meant Torsen differential with full time AWD. I'm fairly certain the TT still uses a Haldex which defaults to FWD and shifts power to the rear only as needed, Please clarify, Autoblog.
          Georg
          • 3 Years Ago
          @simianspeedster
          the 4. generation Haldex build into Audis can do this... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzFnmcG3OtA
          Georg
          • 3 Years Ago
          @simianspeedster
          they currently use 4. generation of Haldey awd... 1. generation was basic 98/2% to 50/50% front rear power split it was front based but the rear wheel always recived power even if only 2% 2. generation was basic 95/5% it featered a pre charge pump that allowed quicker reaction and a more adjust power delivery on different grounds from tramac to loose gravel 3. generation is a improved 2. Generation used in the Landrover Frelander it has all benefits of a full time 4x4 system with the consuption benefit of a on demand system 4. generation can now transfer power from 100/0 to 0/100% front rear as needed under crusing to readuce wear and tear the rear wheels recive 5-10% power with eLSD this system also can send up to 85% of the torque to a single wheel I donĀ“t know what version the base TT quattro use but the TT-S, TT-RS and RS3 use the 4. generation of Haldex
        Jonathan Arena
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Aaron Bluestone
        Thats what I have been told as well.
      jdshanks3000
      • 3 Years Ago
      So the TT-RS will do 0 - 60 in under 4 seconds (per Automobile magazine) with DSG tranny, but it will ONLY be offered with a manual in the US. Seems silly to me, you would basically have an Audi that could legitimately keep up with anything on the street...at least for a while. Meanwhile, the more basic, slower TT models will ONLY be offered with DSG. Seems backwards to me. Manuals are great and all but if I can get a TT-RS that has the DSG and effortless sub 4 sec 0-60 runs, sign me up. However, a car with only decent performance like a regular TT needs the 6 speed to make it more fun.
    • Load More Comments