Compare Cadillac ATS Coupe vs Audi TT RS 8J vs Audi TT FV facelift
Variants
2.0
2.0 AT
2.0 AWD
3.6 AT
3.6 AWD AT
ATS-V
ATS-V AT
2.5 TFSI
2.5 TFSI DCT
2.5 TFSI plus
2.5 TFSI plus DCT
40 TFSI
45 TFSI
45 TFSI MT
45 TFSI quattro
Capacity
Cargo Capacity
295 L / 10.4 cu-ft
290 L / 10.2 cu-ft ~ 700 L / 24.7 cu-ft
Coolant Capacity
10.0 L / 10.6 qt
Engine Oil Capacity
5.7 L / 6.0 qt
Fuel Capacity
60.0 L / 15.9 gal
Passengers
4
4
4
Payload
400 kg / 882 lbs
360 kg / 794 lbs
Chassis
Brakes | Front
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Brakes | Rear
Ventilated discs
Disc
Power Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Suspension | Front
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
Suspension | Rear
Multi-link
Multi-link
Multi-link
Tire Size
245/40 R18
225/50 R17
Construction
Body Style
2-door Coupe
2-door Coupe
2-door Coupe
Dimensions
Size | Height
1342 mm / 52.8 in
1353 mm / 53.3 in
Size | Length
4198 mm / 165.3 in
4191 mm / 165.0 in
Size | Width
1841 mm / 72.5 in
1842 mm / 72.5 in | 1952 mm / 76.9 in (mirror unfolded)
1832 mm / 72.1 in | 1966 mm / 77.4 in (mirror unfolded)
Track Width | Front
1555.0 mm / 61.2 in
1572.0 mm / 61.9 in
Track Width | Rear
1546.0 mm / 60.9 in
1552.0 mm / 61.1 in
Wheel Size
9J x 18
8J x 17
Wheelbase
2775 mm / 109.3 in
2468 mm / 97.2 in
2505 mm / 98.6 in
Performance
Coefficient Of Drag
0.32
Top Speed
298.0 km/h / 185.2 mph
250.0 km/h / 155.3 mph
Towing Capacity
454 kg / 1001 lbs (w/o brakes)
Powertrain
Drivetrain Layout
Front-engine (transverse), All-wheel drive
Emission Standard
Euro 5
Euro 6d
Engine | Bore
82.5 mm / 3.2 in
Engine | Compression Ratio
10.0:1
Engine | Displacement
2.5 L / 151.3 cu-in / 2480.0 cc
2.0 L / 121.1 cu-in / 1984.0 cc
Engine | Stroke
92.8 mm / 3.7 in
Engine | Type
Turbocharged direct-injected petrol inline-5 DOHC engine with 4 values per cylinder
Turbocharged direct-injected petrol inline-4 engine with 4 values per cylinder
Production
Availability
2018
Reviews
Neofiliac score
69%
67%
49%
Pros
- Decent performance
- Up to enjoyable 7200rpm redline
- Good 0.28 drag coefficient
- Good styling
- Rather quick and fast
- Good interior (but tight)
- More muscular styling
- Adequate performance
Cons
- Stuck with MacPherson struts in the front
- Low cargo capacity
- Very tight inside
- Stuck with MacPherson struts in the front
- Exaggerated wing
- Cramped interior
- No powerful engine options
- Only available with small engines
- Stuck with MacPherson struts in the front
Remove
Remove
Remove
Add up to 4 products to the comparison using the search bar above
Information on this page is provided on an as-is basis. No warranty on accuracy is implied. This page may contain affiliate links to third-party merchants such as Amazon and eBay. If you make a purchase using the supplied link, we may receive a commission. Neofiliac places the utmost respect for your privacy. We use no cookie whatsoever beyond that needed for the proper functioning of the website.