Audi TT 1999 vs Toyota Celica 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 180 HP | 143 HP | |
| Torque: | 235 NM | 170 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.4 seconds | 8.7 seconds | |
|
Audi TT is more dynamic to drive. Audi TT engine produces 37 HP more power than Toyota Celica, whereas torque is 65 NM more than Toyota Celica. Thanks to more power Audi TT reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.0 | 7.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.0 l/100km | 7.8 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Celica is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Audi TT consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Celica, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Audi TT could require 195 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Audi TT consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Celica. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 910 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 280'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Audi TT engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3, Seat Ibiza, Seat Leon | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Corolla, Toyota RAV4, Toyota Corolla Verso | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Audi TT engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
| Audi TT 1999 1.8 engine: The engine is considered reliable, with a lifespan from 300,000 km.
The primary causes of unstable operation include air leaks through the crankcase ventilation system, throttle body malfunctions, idle air ... More about Audi TT 1999 1.8 engine Toyota Celica 2002 1.8 engine: The 1ZZ-FE engine is more advanced, lighter, and simpler than its predecessor, emphasizing fuel efficiency and output. However, these improvements have come at the cost of reduced durability compared to earlier cast-iron engines. The engine block features an open-deck cooling design for easier production and lower ... More about Toyota Celica 2002 1.8 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.04 m | 4.35 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.34 m | 1.32 m | |
| Audi TT is 31 cm shorter than the Toyota Celica, 2 cm wider, while the height of Audi TT is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 220 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Audi TT is 0.4 metres less than that of the Toyota Celica, which means Audi TT can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`690 | 1`200 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 4800 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi TT has
|
Toyota Celica has
| |