OT: Audi TT vs. Boxster?
04-05-2003 | 12:12 PM
#17
Burning Brakes
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
From: Tallinn, Estonia
TT has 180 hp and is 1280 (1410 quattro) kgs
Boxter has 228 hp and weights just 1275 kgs.
Boxter made the "ring" in 8.32 (S model)
TT respectivly in 8.49 (turbo quattro model). We know how impossible is to shave off 17 secs in Nurburgring.
So, performance-wise it is simple choice.
Boxter has 228 hp and weights just 1275 kgs.
Boxter made the "ring" in 8.32 (S model)
TT respectivly in 8.49 (turbo quattro model). We know how impossible is to shave off 17 secs in Nurburgring.
So, performance-wise it is simple choice.
04-05-2003 | 03:50 PM
#18
Instructor
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
From: New York
For Boston winters: TT Roadster.
I live in NY and I had one that I traded for a 996 Cab. I had to get a second car for the NY winters.
I compared the TT to the Boxster back-to-back before I bought one and the TT's interior sold me. I loved all the design elements and aluminum trim. To me it just seemd like more car for the $$$. Of course, IMHO, the performance wise the Boxster's performance and handling blew the TT away, but the TT worked out to be cheaper and turned out to be a great daily driver.
Just my $.02
I live in NY and I had one that I traded for a 996 Cab. I had to get a second car for the NY winters.
I compared the TT to the Boxster back-to-back before I bought one and the TT's interior sold me. I loved all the design elements and aluminum trim. To me it just seemd like more car for the $$$. Of course, IMHO, the performance wise the Boxster's performance and handling blew the TT away, but the TT worked out to be cheaper and turned out to be a great daily driver.
Just my $.02
04-06-2003 | 07:02 PM
#20
Thread Starter
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,104
Likes: 16
From: Boston
Good advice, you all ... thanks for the input.
The convertible quattro TT's are 225 hp, they have an additional intercooler, slightly lower compression and must run a little more boost.
Time to start haggling ...
Vic
95 C4
The convertible quattro TT's are 225 hp, they have an additional intercooler, slightly lower compression and must run a little more boost.
Time to start haggling ...
Vic
95 C4
04-07-2003 | 01:02 AM
#21
Rennlist Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 6,604
Likes: 879
From: Gaithersburg, MD.
I happen to like the Audi TT in the bright red or silver color with the black interior. My friends on the otherhand think they look like a "squashed bug/ VW beetle".
My 47 year old neighbor has a red with black interior MB SLK 230 and she LOVES that little car. Great to have the hardtop convertible, as it can't really be vandalized like the ragtop.
I'd vote for a silver boxster with a blue top. Sharp color combo. My uncle has this color and it's nice in person.
sr
My 47 year old neighbor has a red with black interior MB SLK 230 and she LOVES that little car. Great to have the hardtop convertible, as it can't really be vandalized like the ragtop.
I'd vote for a silver boxster with a blue top. Sharp color combo. My uncle has this color and it's nice in person.
sr
04-07-2003 | 12:24 PM
#22
Nordschleife Master
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,801
Likes: 3
From: Lebanon, OH
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Originally posted by PeterS:
<strong>I haven't driven a TT, but dynamically the Boxster should be much more fun to drive based on everything I've read.
Don't discount the S2000 if you or she ever want to do a track day. Those cars are almost unbeatable on a track, beyond even our 993's, I'm sorry to say.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">S2000's????????????? WHAT!!!! A modified one maybe. I have driven in the s2000's vs a stock boxster on a track and the boxster ate the S2000 alive. (really underbraking).. I know that atleat from driving both cars a 993 stomps a boxster so? I really am confused on this one.
<strong>I haven't driven a TT, but dynamically the Boxster should be much more fun to drive based on everything I've read.
Don't discount the S2000 if you or she ever want to do a track day. Those cars are almost unbeatable on a track, beyond even our 993's, I'm sorry to say.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">S2000's????????????? WHAT!!!! A modified one maybe. I have driven in the s2000's vs a stock boxster on a track and the boxster ate the S2000 alive. (really underbraking).. I know that atleat from driving both cars a 993 stomps a boxster so? I really am confused on this one.
04-07-2003 | 12:40 PM
#23
Nordschleife Master
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,801
Likes: 3
From: Lebanon, OH
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Originally posted by Jack Ennuste:
<strong>TT has 180 hp and is 1280 (1410 quattro) kgs
Boxter has 228 hp and weights just 1275 kgs.
Boxter made the "ring" in 8.32 (S model)
TT respectivly in 8.49 (turbo quattro model). We know how impossible is to shave off 17 secs in Nurburgring.
So, performance-wise it is simple choice.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">were you get this information (very cool)
<strong>TT has 180 hp and is 1280 (1410 quattro) kgs
Boxter has 228 hp and weights just 1275 kgs.
Boxter made the "ring" in 8.32 (S model)
TT respectivly in 8.49 (turbo quattro model). We know how impossible is to shave off 17 secs in Nurburgring.
So, performance-wise it is simple choice.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">were you get this information (very cool)
04-07-2003 | 03:17 PM
#24
Three Wheelin'
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,543
Likes: 1
From: L.A.
The 350Z is better than both of those, and if you need a backseat go with the G35 coupe. Having ridden in the TT 225, Boxster and Boxster S, driven the S2000 for maybe a week, I would take the 350Z over all of them except a Boxster S. You should go down to the Nissan dealer and drive one, you won't be disappointed.
04-07-2003 | 05:28 PM
#25
Thread Starter
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,104
Likes: 16
From: Boston
If the Z was a convertible, maybe that would be an option (I understand that is coming) ...
Although my better half looked at the Infiniti G35 coupe, which is essentially the Z by Infiniti, and didn't care for the shape.
Women are so particular :-)
Vic
95 C4
Although my better half looked at the Infiniti G35 coupe, which is essentially the Z by Infiniti, and didn't care for the shape.
Women are so particular :-)
Vic
95 C4
04-08-2003 | 02:57 AM
#26
Race Director
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 13,058
Likes: 614
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Originally posted by Fishey:
<strong> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Originally posted by PeterS:
<strong>I haven't driven a TT, but dynamically the Boxster should be much more fun to drive based on everything I've read.
Don't discount the S2000 if you or she ever want to do a track day. Those cars are almost unbeatable on a track, beyond even our 993's, I'm sorry to say.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">S2000's????????????? WHAT!!!! A modified one maybe. I have driven in the s2000's vs a stock boxster on a track and the boxster ate the S2000 alive. (really underbraking).. I know that atleat from driving both cars a 993 stomps a boxster so? I really am confused on this one.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">I done track days with a bunch of S2000's twice at Laguna Seca this year. The cars had transponders so lap times were recorded. The best stock engined S2000's were lapping about 1:43 and 1:44 with the usual suspension, brake pad and tire tweaks.
The PCA track record at Laguna for class Ni, where a similarly prepped 993 or Boxster S would run, is 1:49.9.
I can't speak for your experience other than to say that the S2000 is a very high revving car with a narrow powerband and takes some time to learn how to drive properly. Your Boxster may have felt faster, but lap times don't lie.
<strong> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Originally posted by PeterS:
<strong>I haven't driven a TT, but dynamically the Boxster should be much more fun to drive based on everything I've read.
Don't discount the S2000 if you or she ever want to do a track day. Those cars are almost unbeatable on a track, beyond even our 993's, I'm sorry to say.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">S2000's????????????? WHAT!!!! A modified one maybe. I have driven in the s2000's vs a stock boxster on a track and the boxster ate the S2000 alive. (really underbraking).. I know that atleat from driving both cars a 993 stomps a boxster so? I really am confused on this one.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">I done track days with a bunch of S2000's twice at Laguna Seca this year. The cars had transponders so lap times were recorded. The best stock engined S2000's were lapping about 1:43 and 1:44 with the usual suspension, brake pad and tire tweaks.
The PCA track record at Laguna for class Ni, where a similarly prepped 993 or Boxster S would run, is 1:49.9.
I can't speak for your experience other than to say that the S2000 is a very high revving car with a narrow powerband and takes some time to learn how to drive properly. Your Boxster may have felt faster, but lap times don't lie.
04-08-2003 | 04:27 PM
#27
Instructor
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
From: UK
To follow up Jack's data...
S2000 has 240hp and 1260kgs
Boxster S has 260hp and 1320kgs
I have a '95 993, with the engine re-mapped to make 290hp and my wifes S2000 (bone stock) is not much slower at all.
She wanted an Audi TT, but I dislike turbo cars so talked her out of it and we tried both a Boxster and the S2000. Driven properly the S2000 will murder a Boxster 2.7 or TT, it's performance is very similar to a Boxster S and at over £10K (UK pounds) less before you put any options on the Porka it is an absolute bargain.
It has an amazing engine, once you get the hang of revving it all the way to 9K revs very little will stay with it. On the twisty stuff you never seem to have to change gear which is also a big plus.
However, throw the sort of winter weather I understand you get in Boston in to the mix and I guess the 4wd TT makes a lot of sense.
Mark
S2000 has 240hp and 1260kgs
Boxster S has 260hp and 1320kgs
I have a '95 993, with the engine re-mapped to make 290hp and my wifes S2000 (bone stock) is not much slower at all.
She wanted an Audi TT, but I dislike turbo cars so talked her out of it and we tried both a Boxster and the S2000. Driven properly the S2000 will murder a Boxster 2.7 or TT, it's performance is very similar to a Boxster S and at over £10K (UK pounds) less before you put any options on the Porka it is an absolute bargain.
It has an amazing engine, once you get the hang of revving it all the way to 9K revs very little will stay with it. On the twisty stuff you never seem to have to change gear which is also a big plus.
However, throw the sort of winter weather I understand you get in Boston in to the mix and I guess the 4wd TT makes a lot of sense.
Mark
