boxster or tt... which would you choose
 

I have the itch to get back into the boxster as i sold my previous 97 due the rms leak and me not wanting to fork over the repair cost. I'm actually looking at a base and also looking at an audi tt. The audi tt is the quattro so its awd and has the 225hp turbo engine. Price not being a factor, just looks and style which would you buy.. I know it may be a little biased due to this is a boxster forum but just wanted to hear your views. There is also a convertible tt so no comparisons on the top down appeal... thanks.

I would take a Boxster, with a potential for an RMS leak or even an actual RMS leak, over a mint Audi TT any-day-of-the-week. :)

Silly question. :D

Now go do the right thing! :dance:

i thought u meant the 911 tt .. that would be a good discussion

boxster no doubt

The old TT vs. the 986 - The 986 clearly wins.
The 986 is built better (the old TT's had a lot of plastic) , it look better (my opinion), and it handles better. My cousin has an old TT and had a lot of problems with it. Unles syou want straight line power get the 986.

The new TT vs. the 987 - Depends on your preference.
I really like the way the new TT coupe looks, but not the convertable. As far as quality, craftsmanship, and handling the 987 wins. But the TT does have a different look that appeals to some people.

Just my opinion! :cheers:

I used to be a VW guy, so this isn't completely biased. In short, it's an image car. That's it. It isn't especially fun to drive, the 1.8t is one of the more boring engines on the market, and when it comes down to it, the TT is a tarted up fourth generation Golf. That isn't to say it can't be an enjoyable car to own, just that it isn't a performance car on the same level as a Boxster. The chassis is floppy and the engine is pretty laggy, especially in 225 form.

On the flip side, the TT has a more modern and higher-quality interior than a 986 Boxster. It is going to be more comfortable and probably get better mileage. Quattro is a cool technology, but in that generation TT, all it did (aside from let you go in the snow) was provide loads of boring understeer.

Reliability-wise, the 1.8t has know to need a few things from time to time (coil packs, there has been the occasional sludge problem if the incorrect oil is used), and it is a VW product... so, over time, it will most likely nickel and dime you.

Now, if you're stuck on the TT looks, go for a 3.2 VR6 car. Great engine, and it sounds incredible. Here's a Top Gear review, complete with Clarkson's um, unique style:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnXoLJclfng

Just for the record, you can drive a Porsche in snow just fine. I did all last year with no problems, even in snow storms. Good snow tires are better than an AWD system, but the AWD can help.

My best customer's wife has a first gen, I think third year TT coupe. Drove it to Road Atlanta last year while I was looking at boxsters. No comparison, to me.
I didn't like the seats or the seating position. I disagree with "newer" interior design, but that is opinion, I didn't like it. I'm not all that tall (6'0"0), but while it feels as if there is alot of headroom, I felt like I was almost crouching down because the windsheild felt low at the top. I say feel, or felt, because I really think it was some sort of illusion, not real. The chassis isn't in the same city, let alone ballpark, and if felt unresponsive on initial turn in which turned to annoying understeer. In all fairness, this car needed new tires all around. The torgue of the TT left alot to be desired, especially compared to 987 S. Brakes were okay, but as an entire package, I didn't come home thinking about a TT instead of a box.
I re-read this and noticed I didn't mention the 6 spd. transmission. It was, well......unremarkable. Gear ratios were kinda weird, like they couldn't decide if they wanted it to be close ratio or good mileage and the shift linkage felt like my wife's old 87 Jetta.

This is true. I should have clarified - Quattro makes it go better in the snow, all else equal. And yes, drive wheels are much less important than tires when it comes to snow... stopping and to a certain extent turning are things that AWD can't help.

A 986 vs a new gen TT Cab w/ DSG... that would be a tough choice.

I have no real-world experience with the TT, I have always liked the shape of the tt but my armchair analysis says the boxster is the best (fun) choice. :cool:

I think the silhouette of the Boxster is the best looking roadster out there. The tt is not the least bit sexy looking to me.

looks to be a wrong forum to post this in?
do the same on audi forum and you will get a lot of "boxster is a girl car" and so on posts..
as for me, before i got the boxster, 2-3 cars before it, i placed a bid on a TT, won it, and then the guy never called me back haha, or replied to his emails so i never got it :rolleyes:
im actually still kinda mad about it, because it was so nicely modded with wheels, coilovers, bigger turbo, exhaust, and all the kinks fixed, and in the fastest color red :(

o well, maybe i still get one one of these days couse now u can get one for almost free

Audis do have nice interior. No fake aluminum stuff.

TT is front engine, Boxster is mid-engine, end of discussion. :cool:

yeah...
BUT, mucho FUN with AWD and Turbos :)

987 doesn't have fake aluminum stuff either, but I do believe his comparison was 986 to 1st gen TT.

The Audi coupe does have two seats in the back that would fit my kids, plus with the rear hatch there may be more practical space available. I've been thinking about getting a first gen TT (about $15K for one with 225 HP and 40K miles) as a daily driver. There are lots of reviews that compare it to the Boxster. Most of those reviews basically say that the TT is NOT nearly the sports car that the Boxster is, with poorer handling and brakes. So I guess it depends on what you're looking for. As I already have a fun Boxster S for the weekends and twisty roads I would pick a TT as a daily driver rather than having a base Boxster. If it were my only car, I'd pick the Boxster as it doesn't snow where I live now, but if I was living in Wisconsin I'd pick the TT. You could make the TT handle better with some suspension mods and there are certainly aftermarket bits available for that purpose.

Kirk

I test drove a 2.0t DSG FWD TT a few months ago, and while it is a much better car than the first generation, it still isn't up to the Boxster level of fun. My main annoyances were the sensation of sitting in a bathtub and the fart-like noise of the exhaust on every lightning-fast upshift. The handling is much improved, and can even be described as fun, but it's not the same.

I used to tell people that too before I got an all wheel drive car. There's no comparison. You can get by with a RWD car with the right tires in the snow. You can really enjoy driving in the snow with the right tires with an AWD car.

..and then I bought another AWD car, and then I bought ANOTHER AWD car.

I've driven my dad's 4x4 Jeep in the same snowy conditions as the Boxster. I'll admit that the 4x4/AWD helps, but I actually felt safer in the Boxster because it doesn't lean as much in curves, and has a similar amount of traction.
But it doesn't matter what drive system you have when you hit a patch of ice at 40mph in a curve, which I did in the Boxster and recovered from very well because once it gained grip I was able to maneuver quickly back into my lane.

You're talking about two different things. Handling and traction.

Jeeps have traction with their high weight and ground clearance. I've been riding along in Jeeps driving through snow that I would have thought impossible to get through. However, they cannot handle worth a damn. They're numb, crude, and physically challenged. You have no idea what's going on underneath you beyond what you can see from the windshield. Even the little Jeep sucks. I don't understand why people drive those stupid things all year round, or any SUV for that matter. But back to the subject.

The Boxster just oozes with chassis feedback, it gives you confidence in it's handling abilities, which on dry roads is very high. Even when it's slippery out, you know what's going on with the ends of the car almost before anything happens. After living with the car for a while, you can predict how it will behave in certain situations and you will know what to do when the situations come up. This man/machine coordination is a thing of beauty. All this makes it more confidence inspiring when you are in conditions where traction is low, but make no mistake, it has less traction than the Jeep.

Now combine the two, put AWD in a 3000 pound car that on dry roads can tell you what the chassis is doing and that you can feel like you can control. Something that doesn't feel like your driving a 10 story building ready to tip over. A car that communicates and has AWD will have a combination of traction and feedback that you can't get in a RWD or FWD car or a Jeep. The chassis may not be as easy to rotate as the Boxster, but it's a world away from the Jeep. You can drive up slippery inclines, move from a dead stop without spinning the tires and loosing steering control, and maintain control in an emergency situation much better.

I spent several years driving a RWD Mazda Rx-7 in the winter. I'd switch to snow tires when it would snow and I could get around pretty easily, but still had to be careful of understeer/oversteer transitions and there were some places that I just couldn't go. Then I switched to a FWD sports coupe and left the sports car in storage during the winter. Less oversteer was nice to have and the car only weighed 2600 pounds, so it was pretty fun to drive in the winter, but as soon as I bought my first Impreza, I knew I wouldn't buy anything other than an AWD car for winter driving.

As I've mentioned before, there's no way I'd buy an Audi or VW as a daily driver, from my past experience they are very expensive to maintain, especially once the value of the car gets into the "I don't want to fix that" range. Things go south fast. But as far as AWD vs RWD in the snow, there's no comparison.