350Z vs Audi TT according to Nissan
Yeah, and to think that I was getting ready to go for a TT right when I found out about the Z, it was fate. I think I would have grown tired of the TT bug likeness and lack of power.
Registered User
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 623
Likes: 0
From: siphonband.com
To be fair, I went to an Audi dealer to check out the TT interior room. Two things he mentioned to me:
- 4 year, 48,000 mile warranty
- During warranty all service, even routine oil changes and brakes, are covered
Of course, the Z is still way better.
- 4 year, 48,000 mile warranty
- During warranty all service, even routine oil changes and brakes, are covered
Of course, the Z is still way better.
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,253
Likes: 0
From: Sun Diego
Originally posted by ordare
please, if there is one thing Nissan can't hold a candle to on an Audi it's the Quattro system.
please, if there is one thing Nissan can't hold a candle to on an Audi it's the Quattro system.
anyway, one comment on the full service thing. My friend who has a VW also hooked up with free service, but she ends up going to Jiff lube or something because they always give her appointments in 2-weeks, and if she has to work that day, they are very unaccomodating. Most of time the time is for Sat. @8am, and you have to drop the car off for the 1st part of the afternoon. That is sooooo not worth anything to me.
ALSO...I was with Nizl that day when we looked at the TT, and he failed to mention that our eyes went
when regarding the sheer style and quality of the interior. yes...I agree that the audi TT gives up 12% function for 25% style BUT WHEN MONEY IS NOT A FACTOR...DUHThe TT we looked at *comparable* to the Z touring was $42,000
I mean give me a ****ing break. They will NEEEEED to offer a 6 cylinder REAL soon...
Trending Topics
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Originally posted by ordare
please, if there is one thing Nissan can't hold a candle to on an Audi it's the Quattro system.
please, if there is one thing Nissan can't hold a candle to on an Audi it's the Quattro system.
What makes the Quattro system so much more spectacular, Ordare?
Registered User
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,572
Likes: 0
From: maryland
I think the quatro system is good for rain and snow, but I don't plan on driving the Z in the snow, and I try to drive slower in the rain and the VDC should be helpful in the Z in the rain.
In other words if I were going fast in the rain the quatro system might be helpful, but I don't really race in the rain.
For everyday driving I think I would prefer to have a RWD car, the wheels that do the steering do not have to. handle power delivery.
Also the really sporty cars that have AWD like the lambo and the 911 and 911 turbo have more rear power distribution and only send power to the front if they are losing traction at the rear.
If you are such a big tt fan I suggest you try to find the comparo in road and track between the Boxster S, S2000, tt convert, and the M roadster. The audi was beat in every performance test by the other three cars including the most important one of race track time.
I don't make any predictions regarding the 350Z beating the M roadster, Boxster S, or the S2000 around any given track. But barring a rain storm, I feel confident the 350Z will beat the tt on any and every track (quatro system and all).
In other words if I were going fast in the rain the quatro system might be helpful, but I don't really race in the rain.
For everyday driving I think I would prefer to have a RWD car, the wheels that do the steering do not have to. handle power delivery.
Also the really sporty cars that have AWD like the lambo and the 911 and 911 turbo have more rear power distribution and only send power to the front if they are losing traction at the rear.
If you are such a big tt fan I suggest you try to find the comparo in road and track between the Boxster S, S2000, tt convert, and the M roadster. The audi was beat in every performance test by the other three cars including the most important one of race track time.
I don't make any predictions regarding the 350Z beating the M roadster, Boxster S, or the S2000 around any given track. But barring a rain storm, I feel confident the 350Z will beat the tt on any and every track (quatro system and all).
The Quattro system is simply one of the most advanced AWD systems on the road. My old Audi TQC had a differential bias to adjust the power 50/50 F/R, but it was defaulted to 30/70 F/R.
Registered User
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,572
Likes: 0
From: maryland
Originally posted by Hedonist
The Quattro system is simply one of the most advanced AWD systems on the road. My old Audi TQC had a differential bias to adjust the power 50/50 F/R, but it was defaulted to 30/70 F/R.
The Quattro system is simply one of the most advanced AWD systems on the road. My old Audi TQC had a differential bias to adjust the power 50/50 F/R, but it was defaulted to 30/70 F/R.
Lets look at MB, BMW, and audi.
If Audi offers a car that is not quatro then it's fwd. Now given a choice between fwd and awd than I think we all agree awd is better.
Now BMW and MB sell RWD or a few AWD cars. If you can give me a number of the awd cars by these two (not counting SUV). I would guess it is less than 5%. Gee I wonder why people seem to prefer RWD to AWD in this segment?
Porsche offers AWD, but in it's highest performance car the GT2 it reverts to RWD. I don't think there is a REAL driver that would take a 911 turbo over the GT2.
I am not saying awd sucks, but to me it is no better than RWD for the type of driving I do.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Originally posted by Hedonist
The Quattro system is simply one of the most advanced AWD systems on the road. My old Audi TQC had a differential bias to adjust the power 50/50 F/R, but it was defaulted to 30/70 F/R.
The Quattro system is simply one of the most advanced AWD systems on the road. My old Audi TQC had a differential bias to adjust the power 50/50 F/R, but it was defaulted to 30/70 F/R.
I still haven't heard anyone tell me why the Quattro system is so well respected (not that I think it's bad). Being a tech head it would neat to know.
I did a google on Quattro and didn't find too much info on why it's so good. 
I know BMW has some really sophisticated suspension system on the new 7-series. That was interesting to read about.
Guest
Posts: n/a
OK...let's get a few things straight.
The Quattro system in the TT is not the same system that is in ALL other Audi's. The TT uses a transverse engine. This means that the AWD system needs to make several 90 degree bends to reach all four wheels (see the Aug. R & T article on WRC). Thus it uses a Haldex system that is the smae as the VW 4 motion, BMW Xi, and MB 4 matic systems.
The Quattro that all other Audi's use is perhaps the best AWD design built to date. It's advantage is not only for foul weather which is the reason why it was banned from competition in Europe.
http://www.audiworld.com/news/02/fsi/
The dry road advantages of Quattro allow for power to be applied earlier and harder when exiting a corner. In a Quattro car the more gas you give the harder the car corners. Having many days of track time in both my Audi (click www) and my father's NSX, I can say that the AWD system is in no way a disadvantage other than the weight it adds to a car. Quite simply the Quattro is an amazing set up for all types of conditions, although you do drive the car quite differently than a RWD vehichle.
Last thursday we had a local track rented for a group of 20 or so enthusiasts. We aslo recieved over 5 inches of rain before noon when it finally cleared up. During the first two sessions I was turning times 15-20 seconds faster than the Vettes and the S2000's on a 1.9 mile 10 turn track. Quattro at it's best.
I was not questioning the Z in any way with my post, rather I was arguing that the Quattro system is one thing Audi has got absolutley right and that the comparison has viewed with less than nuetral eyes.
The Quattro system in the TT is not the same system that is in ALL other Audi's. The TT uses a transverse engine. This means that the AWD system needs to make several 90 degree bends to reach all four wheels (see the Aug. R & T article on WRC). Thus it uses a Haldex system that is the smae as the VW 4 motion, BMW Xi, and MB 4 matic systems.
The Quattro that all other Audi's use is perhaps the best AWD design built to date. It's advantage is not only for foul weather which is the reason why it was banned from competition in Europe.
http://www.audiworld.com/news/02/fsi/
The dry road advantages of Quattro allow for power to be applied earlier and harder when exiting a corner. In a Quattro car the more gas you give the harder the car corners. Having many days of track time in both my Audi (click www) and my father's NSX, I can say that the AWD system is in no way a disadvantage other than the weight it adds to a car. Quite simply the Quattro is an amazing set up for all types of conditions, although you do drive the car quite differently than a RWD vehichle.
Last thursday we had a local track rented for a group of 20 or so enthusiasts. We aslo recieved over 5 inches of rain before noon when it finally cleared up. During the first two sessions I was turning times 15-20 seconds faster than the Vettes and the S2000's on a 1.9 mile 10 turn track. Quattro at it's best.
I was not questioning the Z in any way with my post, rather I was arguing that the Quattro system is one thing Audi has got absolutley right and that the comparison has viewed with less than nuetral eyes.
Guest
Posts: n/a
[edit: oops, ordare beat me to most of this.. ]
"Quattro" is a marketing label for any AWD Audi, it doesn't describe the technology in use. The system in the TT shares nothing with the one in the A4/S4/A6/S6/RS4/A8/S8. It's not a VW-based vs Audi-based thing, it's a transverse vs longitudinal engine thing (the Passat and Phaeton use a different system identical to their respective Audi cousins). All TTs are basicly FWD, however on the "Quattro" versions there is an electrohydraulic clutch mechanism that engages the rear drivetrain when the front begins to slip. It's a good system, just a shame that they tuned it to run the front wheels most of the time. Despite that, the dynamics of the TT are very good.. the computer system is very quick to adapt and you can get the tail out even on the newer ones with the suspension tweaks to make them more docile. The other current Quattros use purely mechanical Torsen(tm) center diffs that are 50/50 in normal operation. It's not Audi's design, just something they sourced. The same diffs are used in the Hummer among others. Older Quattros have used everything from viscous couplings to truck-like manual differential locks. It's not that they're so well respected for having the best AWD systems (they certainly do not), it's just that it's their signature feature. They don't offer anything to compare with the system in the R34 skyline.
The current TT is really not in the same league performance wise, though Audi sure does offer a slick interior. They're very different cars. The TT just isn't designed to be a pure driver's car. It's too luxurious and overweight even compared to the Z. As usual: Luxury, performance, affordability- pick any two.
P.S., you can have the GT2.. I'll take the Turbo. 460hp, rear weight bias, RWD, on the street? On the track, sure, but on the street you're just a pothole away from sliding ***-first into something unpleasant. In the real world the AWD Turbo will be quicker and probably more rewarding.
"Quattro" is a marketing label for any AWD Audi, it doesn't describe the technology in use. The system in the TT shares nothing with the one in the A4/S4/A6/S6/RS4/A8/S8. It's not a VW-based vs Audi-based thing, it's a transverse vs longitudinal engine thing (the Passat and Phaeton use a different system identical to their respective Audi cousins). All TTs are basicly FWD, however on the "Quattro" versions there is an electrohydraulic clutch mechanism that engages the rear drivetrain when the front begins to slip. It's a good system, just a shame that they tuned it to run the front wheels most of the time. Despite that, the dynamics of the TT are very good.. the computer system is very quick to adapt and you can get the tail out even on the newer ones with the suspension tweaks to make them more docile. The other current Quattros use purely mechanical Torsen(tm) center diffs that are 50/50 in normal operation. It's not Audi's design, just something they sourced. The same diffs are used in the Hummer among others. Older Quattros have used everything from viscous couplings to truck-like manual differential locks. It's not that they're so well respected for having the best AWD systems (they certainly do not), it's just that it's their signature feature. They don't offer anything to compare with the system in the R34 skyline.
The current TT is really not in the same league performance wise, though Audi sure does offer a slick interior. They're very different cars. The TT just isn't designed to be a pure driver's car. It's too luxurious and overweight even compared to the Z. As usual: Luxury, performance, affordability- pick any two.
P.S., you can have the GT2.. I'll take the Turbo. 460hp, rear weight bias, RWD, on the street? On the track, sure, but on the street you're just a pothole away from sliding ***-first into something unpleasant. In the real world the AWD Turbo will be quicker and probably more rewarding.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
I think the Haldex system was the keyword here... so I looked it up and found some interesting info.
Some brief info for tech heads about the AWD in Skyline, Quattro, and Porche.
http://autozine.kyul.net/technical_s...ion_4wd_21.htm
Thanks all for the info. It was very interesting to learn something regardless if it was Z related or not.
Some brief info for tech heads about the AWD in Skyline, Quattro, and Porche.
http://autozine.kyul.net/technical_s...ion_4wd_21.htm
Thanks all for the info. It was very interesting to learn something regardless if it was Z related or not.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I used to own an Audi TT so the Audi message boards used to be a bible for me. Most TT owners respect the Z for the heat it packs under the hood. Some think it's another copy of the TT style (like the Lexus roadster). The main dislike TT owners have of the Z is it's interior. It's not classy enough they say. Many of the components on the car are plastic. What appears to be aluminum in the Z are actually plastic, what appears to be aluminum in the TT are actually Aluminum. All in all, TT owners do like and appreciate the Z, but every forum is biased and will always stick to their own kind. I don't own a Z, but I can agree with everyone that it is a thing of beauty.
~moonrokk
~moonrokk
