Audi TT Forum banner
1 - 20 of 37 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,580 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
As some people are having a massive paddy about people saying nasty things on the 1.8 advise/discussion thread! Here is a place where we can slate each others cars to the hills without people crying about it!

V6 clearly the better engine and can not be compared to the 3.2 m3 as some say, as the m3 has throttle bodies etc with a similar amount of modding the v6tt can achieve this power..... Come on LES get your ore in :lol:

Ps Please dont stray off topic as im massively sensitive and could flip :-*

This should make for some intresting replys.. :lol:

I think we should organise a group meet at santa pod soon and have some stock v6s race mapped 225 etc an array of comparisons, Even though Stevec put all you 225s to rest at santa pod we need to make sure this time!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,157 Posts
if i wanted a v6 i would buy a 350z with a standard 300bhp and then if i wanted it to be ridiculous then i would buy either the single turbo or twin turbo kit which is a straight bolt on, get it set up all for roughly 6k then you would have around 450bhp, i know you could spend 6k on a TT v6 and see similar horse power but i prefer jap cars, build quality and engines are better :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,580 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
You seen the inside of a 350? Plastic fantastic although the later ones were slightly better quality.... Did i mention that the V6 is faster than the 1.8? :roll:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,157 Posts
in all fairness, speed isnt really the issue, i agree the v6 is better looking because of all the extra's us 1.8 owners have to buy if we want it to look as good but both cars power wise can fly past the national speed limit of 70mph so why does it really matter whats faster between the two when the maximum speed that should ever be achieved is 70mph??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,580 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
denimblue225turbo said:
in all fairness, speed isnt really the issue, i agree the v6 is better looking because of all the extra's us 1.8 owners have to buy if we want it to look as good but both cars power wise can fly past the national speed limit of 70mph so why does it really matter whats faster between the two when the maximum speed that should ever be achieved is 70mph??
Your right! Its all just a bit of banter really... The v6 will get to 70 quicker :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,157 Posts
i have no come back, fact is fact, but does it still get there faster if you show it a bend? or does it just understeer you into a ditch with that big heavy lump upfront :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
denimblue225turbo said:
i have no come back, fact is fact, but does it still get there faster if you show it a bend? or does it just understeer you into a ditch with that big heavy lump upfront :p
Mine used to but now with a Blue Haldex it loves corners!!!!!!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,157 Posts
I reckon we should have a race, but before we do, you better make sure your dsg is working and i will make sure i havent got any boost leaks or equivalent issues :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,565 Posts
denimblue225turbo said:
i have no come back, fact is fact, but does it still get there faster if you show it a bend? or does it just understeer you into a ditch with that big heavy lump upfront :p
No, as there is only a couple of kilos in it, due to us v6's having an alloy engine. I couldn't possibly expect you to know that of course, not without you thinking.

You could be thinking things like, let me see Jap cars are built better :lol: :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,157 Posts
oi......get back in your own section mr mk2!! :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,580 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
He has a V6 its relevant as they carried this engine over to the mk2 because it is sooooo good, Believe they binned the 1.8 :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,157 Posts
they just felt bad the fact they're ripping all the v6 owners off with only giving them 25bhp more when they have almost double the cubic capacity. So naturally they had to do something to broaden the gap in power, so they put an underpowered 2.0 in and kept the v6, now they can justify the difference in capacity against power. its all good business [smiley=bomb.gif]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,580 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
So what we are saying here is that the 3.2 V6 is clearly better? I want to see a mapped 225 vs a stock V6 and a mapped V6 vs a mapped 225 etc..... Anyone have any links..... Or want to arrange a Santa pod meet?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,754 Posts
lol

For the final time let's put this to bed shall we?

Both standard = v6 wins (but V6 is more expensive)

225 mapped & v6 standard - 225 easy win

Both mapped = 225 still wins due to better gains with forced induction

Anything above this is more to do with the money you spend. Steve C's car has almost double spent on it and he beat mine by 0.2 of a sec. Both Caneys and VSpurs car demolished all our times.

I'm not really sure where the argument is?

Is it quicker with a few bolt on mods? No

More tuneable? No

Lighter? :lol:

The results from Santapod looked like this:
Vspurs and Caney's £00000s :roll:
Steve's V6 with £3k+ spent and counting
Mapped cars with more mods
Mapped cars
Standard Cars

Therefore I conclude £= bhp lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
342 Posts
i was expecting a lot more caning than this, but then i am not gona rock the boat too much.

i went for the V6 over the 225 because the 225 had no torque what so ever on normal pull away. i will admit it was fun when the turbo spooled up and a mapped one should be better. but i still love the noise, the lazy power, and that despite most 225 owners thinking their car is better, they still bolt on all the V6 mods, bumper, spoiler valance. me thinks deep down you wished you had gone for the bigger engine :)
 
1 - 20 of 37 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top