Toyota Celica 2002 vs Audi TT 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 143 HP | 180 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 235 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.7 seconds | 7.8 seconds | |
|
Audi TT is a more dynamic driving. Toyota Celica engine produces 37 HP less power than Audi TT, whereas torque is 65 NM less than Audi TT. Due to the lower power, Toyota Celica reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 8.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 9.0 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Celica is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Toyota Celica consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Audi TT, which means that by driving the Toyota Celica over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Toyota Celica consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Audi TT. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 670 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 870 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota Celica gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 420'000 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: | 12 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Corolla, Toyota RAV4, Toyota Corolla Verso | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3, Seat Ibiza, Seat Leon | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| 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. | |||
| 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 Audi TT 1998 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 1998 1.8 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.35 m | 4.04 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.32 m | 1.35 m | |
| Toyota Celica is 31 cm longer than the Audi TT, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Toyota Celica is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 270 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota Celica is 0.4 metres more than that of the Audi TT, which means Toyota Celica can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`200 | 1`665 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 2600 | 4800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota Celica has
|
Audi TT has
| |