Titanium--in--Quartz geothermometry, originally pioneered by Wark and Watson [2006] then later modified by Kawasaki and Osanai [2008] and Thomas et al. [2010] promises accurate quartz crystallisation temperature determinations from straightforward measurements of Ti within the quartz lattice. These geothermometers are tested by applying them to a suite of contact metamorphosed quartzites from around the Ballachulish Igneous Complex in West Scotland. Results show that the original Ti--in--Quartz geothermometer gives results broadly in agreement with thermal modelling and pre--existing geothermometry data from Ballachulish and the latter geothermometers give temperatures which are consistently too low. However, despite a broad agreement between published temperature values and those derived from the original thermometer of Wark and Watson [2006], there is a lack of correlation between distance from the igneous contact and determined temperature, as well as unacceptably large errors in some cases. Furthermore, a rigorous test of the methodology employed in this and other studies suggests that the system is more complex than assumed, and a greater understanding of the substitution of other elements in quartz (such as aluminium) is necessary. In addition, various issues have been raised by other workers regarding the validity of Ti--in--Quartz as a geothermometry tool at all, inasmuch as the original equations were constructed with a disregard for a range of complicating factors. This study adds further weight to a growing mass of critiques of this technique of geothermometry and suggests a much greater understanding of the processes is necessary before Ti--in--Quartz can be convincingly upheld as a viable tool.