2007 Audi TT Review

Jay Shoemaker
by Jay Shoemaker
2007 audi tt review

The last generation Audi TT had more show than go. The German roadster’s dynamics were tarnished by massive turbo lag, an over-eager paddle shift gearbox and an entirely flappable suspension. In fact, the TT’s iconic exterior design and interior quality were its only saving graces. Now that TT 2.0 has arrived, and a decent enough amount of time has passed since Hugh Grant’s loathsome character drove a TT in “About a Boy," is Audi finally ready for a little Boxster bashing? Yes and no.

The original TT was a rolling realization of Bauhausian anti-bling– to the point where the tiny tail spoiler (added to correct high speed stability “issues”) stuck out like a Black Sabbath T-shirt on Michaelangelo's David. Audi's designers folded and crimped the old TT’s sheetmetal and flame surfaced the sides. They ended-up with a more modern and less distinctive car. At the risk of offending the TT's core supporters, Audi’s ministrations delivered unto them a mucho macho model, flared wheel arches and all.

The aesthetic discord hasn’t disappeared; it’s simply moved to the front. Audi’s trademark “Billy the Big Mouth Bass” grille gives the TT a distinctly lopsided appearance. While the oversized schnoz and the new fastback eliminate the polarizing push-me, pull-you proportions (a.k.a. the bathtub-on-wheels effect), the features add gun slit aggression to the TT’s profile and destroy the original’s “oval uber alles” purity of form. Thankfully, when it comes to Audis, beauty is more than skin deep.

When I sat in the new TT in Paris, the interior was a let down. Now that I’ve driven the R8, I feel better about the TT’s strikingly similar cabin– and less impressed with the R8. Thanks to the TT’s added length, width and price, the new model’s cockpit is significantly more spacious and luxurious than its predecessor. The TT’s squashed crown symbolizes its sporting aspirations, while the ergonomics, build and materials quality are damn near perfect.

But not quite. The TT coupe’s rear three quarter blind spots are as dangerous as ever. The exposed phone cradle at the rearmost part of the center console (behind the driver’s elbow) is a turd in a rock garden. And the standard sound system lacks depth, clarity and power. Still, there's no question that the new TT is a much more pleasant place in which to do business.

The business in question: driving. As you’d expect, the TT’s dynamics are roughly akin to the hip, hot and harmonious VW GTI upon which it’s based. My front-wheel drive tester holstered the same 2.0-liter turbocharged four as the GTI, complete with VW’s latest direct injection technology. Thanks in part to an aluminum diet, the 200hp TT blasts to 60mph in a tick less than six seconds. There’s a little lag off the mark, a sweet exhaust note and encouraging popping noises between shifts.

In fact, the new TT drives like an enthusiastic puppy. Turn-in is immediate and aggressive. The S-Tronic’s (nee DSG) paddle shift cog swapper isn't as slam bam as the previous model’s, but it ain't slow neither; given the new TTs more mature demeanor, seamless shifts were the right choice. Switch off the ESP handling nanny, and the standard 17” wheels still offer enough grip to keep all but the lunatic fringe from cutting themselves on the edge of the TT’s envelope.

Even the short wheelbase and [optional] 18” run flat tires can’t kill the coupe’s wonderfully compliant ride– aside from the occasional abrupt response to broken pavement. The TT’s incredibly light electromechanical steering is the only major blot on its dynamic copy book. At low speeds, you're golden. At highway velocities, the helm's lack of road feel tests your mettle, and turns turns into an intellectual exercise.

Compared with the competition– Porsche Boxster/Cayman, Mercedes SLK and BMW Z4– absolute handling prowess goes to the mid-engined Porsches. Stunting and flossing rights belong to the SLK, with its three-pointed star and retractable hardtop. And the much-improved Z4 wins pistonhead props for its BMWness. But the Audi has the most compliant ride, the quietest and most beautiful interior, the coolest transmission and the best visibility (although that’s not saying much). Trump card: the TT is significantly cheaper than these natural born thrillers.

But then the VW GTI is significantly less expensive than the TT, far more practical, cheaper to run and no less fun to drive. Is it worth paying an extra $10k+ for an high-class image and a more luxurious cockpit? Believe it or not, there are plenty of buyers who wouldn’t be caught dead in a GTI. And there are plenty of drivers who crave a four-wheeled, four-ringed designer object, regardless of its handling chops. For both of these groups, Audi’s expensive creases are a necessary price of admission. Once inside, they will not be disappointed.

Join the conversation
2 of 49 comments
  • Sandi beale Sandi beale on Aug 04, 2007

    But what about the reliability of VW? I have an '02 GTI (been caught in it alive now for 5 years) and I love it...when it's not in the shop. Can't say I have had major problems, but enough trips and recalls to think about getting rid of it soon. Looking at the TT, a little higher than I want to go $ wise, but....if it's more reliable than a VW, it would be worth it to me.

  • Pelle Schultz Pelle Schultz on Aug 08, 2007

    I had a first gen TT (1.8T)...talk about a love/hate relationship. Beautiful on the inside and out, beset by electrical problems and rattles, underperforming relative to many competitors and very skittish at the limits (which were lower than they should have been in the first place). It sounds like Audi made this one more of the driver's car the first one wasn't, but the exterior styling is a huge disappointment to my eyes. Audi should have taken a page from the Porsche playbook and made the changes a little more evolutionary. Why remake sheer beauty?

  • ToolGuy CXXVIII comments?!?
  • ToolGuy I did truck things with my truck this past week, twenty-odd miles from home (farther than usual). Recall that the interior bed space of my (modified) truck is 98" x 74". On the ride home yesterday the bed carried a 20 foot extension ladder (10 feet long, flagged 14 inches past the rear bumper), two other ladders, a smallish air compressor, a largish shop vac, three large bins, some materials, some scrap, and a slew of tool cases/bags. It was pretty full, is what I'm saying.The range of the Cybertruck would have been just fine. Nothing I carried had any substantial weight to it, in truck terms. The frunk would have been extremely useful (lock the tool cases there, out of the way of the Bed Stuff, away from prying eyes and grasping fingers -- you say I can charge my cordless tools there? bonus). Stainless steel plus no paint is a plus.Apparently the Cybertruck bed will be 78" long (but over 96" with the tailgate folded down) and 60-65" wide. And then Tesla promises "100 cubic feet of exterior, lockable storage — including the under-bed, frunk and sail pillars." Underbed storage requires the bed to be clear of other stuff, but bottom line everything would have fit, especially when we consider the second row of seats (tools and some materials out of the weather).Some days I was hauling mostly air on one leg of the trip. There were several store runs involved, some for 8-foot stock. One day I bummed a ride in a Roush Mustang. Three separate times other drivers tried to run into my truck (stainless steel panels, yes please). The fuel savings would be large enough for me to notice and to care.TL;DR: This truck would work for me, as a truck. Sample size = 1.
  • Art Vandelay Dodge should bring this back. They could sell it as the classic classic classic model
  • Surferjoe Still have a 2013 RDX, naturally aspirated V6, just can't get behind a 4 banger turbo.Also gloriously absent, ESS, lane departure warnings, etc.
  • ToolGuy Is it a genuine Top Hand? Oh, I forgot, I don't care. 🙂