New Golf Gti
- Thread starter Amchlolor
- Start date
Right,that was fun !
I took my car and young colleague (who has an A3 Fsi) took the Gti.
He's a quick driver,so I know he was trying.
There's little straightline difference in performance,certainly up to the 100mph or so that we reached in our limited wee thrash.
The Golf was pulling away,but not ridiculously so.
Then we swapped for the journey back.
First impressions are that the Golf feels really high and almost like a mini MPV compared with the A3.
Secondly,the interior is awful.Really hard plastics everywhere.No class.
Straightline performance is okay,but obviously quite top-endy,which isn't helped by quite a slow gearchange which loses you revs.You can dab the clutch to get things going though.Interstingly it does not feel any quicker than my MkIV golf Gti turbo,despite the claimed 50bhp more.
The handling is good.Nice turn-in on or off the brakes and quite a supple feel to the suspension,but with more body roll than my S-line.Obviously a softer set up.
The brakes are better than my car for sure.Even repeated hard braking,which got the ABS going on dry roads,and there was zero fade.
All in all though,it doesn't feel like 200bhp and it certainly doesn't feel like a £20K+ car.
Most interesting comment was from my young colleague who usually drives the Fsi A3.
He said the Gti and my Tdi make his Fsi feel so utterly limp that he's thinking of getting it checked over ! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cry.gif
I took my car and young colleague (who has an A3 Fsi) took the Gti.
He's a quick driver,so I know he was trying.
There's little straightline difference in performance,certainly up to the 100mph or so that we reached in our limited wee thrash.
The Golf was pulling away,but not ridiculously so.
Then we swapped for the journey back.
First impressions are that the Golf feels really high and almost like a mini MPV compared with the A3.
Secondly,the interior is awful.Really hard plastics everywhere.No class.
Straightline performance is okay,but obviously quite top-endy,which isn't helped by quite a slow gearchange which loses you revs.You can dab the clutch to get things going though.Interstingly it does not feel any quicker than my MkIV golf Gti turbo,despite the claimed 50bhp more.
The handling is good.Nice turn-in on or off the brakes and quite a supple feel to the suspension,but with more body roll than my S-line.Obviously a softer set up.
The brakes are better than my car for sure.Even repeated hard braking,which got the ABS going on dry roads,and there was zero fade.
All in all though,it doesn't feel like 200bhp and it certainly doesn't feel like a £20K+ car.
Most interesting comment was from my young colleague who usually drives the Fsi A3.
He said the Gti and my Tdi make his Fsi feel so utterly limp that he's thinking of getting it checked over ! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cry.gif
You are talking about a regular 2.0 FSI as opposed to a 2.0T FSI? Interesting that we feels that way about the TDI. Not really surprising that the GTI has the goods over a regular FSI engine though.
JaminBen
Registered User
Thanks for the writeup.How many miles did it have under its belt? I only ask because of the "clutch blipping" comment, which could indicate the engine was slow to rev?
Engine probably is not run in yet. and yes, it may be 200bhp, but consider that it must weigh a fair bit more than a MkIV 1.8T so may not be that much quicker.
Rich
Rich
[ QUOTE ]
Engine probably is not run in yet. and yes, it may be 200bhp, but consider that it must weigh a fair bit more than a MkIV 1.8T so may not be that much quicker.
Rich
[/ QUOTE ]
On paper it's a fair bit quicker at around 6.3secs to 60. The Mkiv 150GTI couldn't match that. It could have been tight if on low miles.
Engine probably is not run in yet. and yes, it may be 200bhp, but consider that it must weigh a fair bit more than a MkIV 1.8T so may not be that much quicker.
Rich
[/ QUOTE ]
On paper it's a fair bit quicker at around 6.3secs to 60. The Mkiv 150GTI couldn't match that. It could have been tight if on low miles.
I seem to be the only person on the planet that thought the Mark V GTI had loads of LAG, something my old Mark IV never had. People seem to claim the reverse. What did you think Bowfer???
BTW agree on the interior, un-******-believable for VW IMO
BTW agree on the interior, un-******-believable for VW IMO
I didn't notice a lot of lag,but I did notice that it was slow to release the boost pressure.
It would 'run on' a bit after you released the throttle,like the dump valve was slow or something.
You know,I didn't check the mileage but it was certainly well worn !
Scuffed alloys and everything.
I wouldn't be scared to take one on over a twisty road.
Might be different on a straight road though,but I bet a chipped Tdi wouldn't have much trouble.
It would 'run on' a bit after you released the throttle,like the dump valve was slow or something.
You know,I didn't check the mileage but it was certainly well worn !
Scuffed alloys and everything.
I wouldn't be scared to take one on over a twisty road.
Might be different on a straight road though,but I bet a chipped Tdi wouldn't have much trouble.
Bowfer
What about a DSG Version??
Would you try the golf DSG to see if you have the same problems as the Audi. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif
What about a DSG Version??
Would you try the golf DSG to see if you have the same problems as the Audi. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif
You know,I did think that DSG would be perfect for the Gti,provided it lets you rev out.
Perhaps even with more gears,to keep it 'on the boil'.
Something like a seven speed close-ratio DSG (that doesn't change up near the red line) would have suited the Gti,in my opinion.
The interior though....oh dear....
My laptop is made of nicer plastics.
Perhaps even with more gears,to keep it 'on the boil'.
Something like a seven speed close-ratio DSG (that doesn't change up near the red line) would have suited the Gti,in my opinion.
The interior though....oh dear....
My laptop is made of nicer plastics.
[ QUOTE ]
You are talking about a regular 2.0 FSI as opposed to a 2.0T FSI? Interesting that we feels that way about the TDI. Not really surprising that the GTI has the goods over a regular FSI engine though.
[/ QUOTE ]
Eh cause the 2.0 FSi has no torque and requires you to rev the nuts off it!
Don't agree with you though Bowfer, it's much more livlier than the 150 bhp MKIV and the brakes on the A3 don't bite anywhere near as much or pull you down like the GTI.
You are talking about a regular 2.0 FSI as opposed to a 2.0T FSI? Interesting that we feels that way about the TDI. Not really surprising that the GTI has the goods over a regular FSI engine though.
[/ QUOTE ]
Eh cause the 2.0 FSi has no torque and requires you to rev the nuts off it!
Don't agree with you though Bowfer, it's much more livlier than the 150 bhp MKIV and the brakes on the A3 don't bite anywhere near as much or pull you down like the GTI.
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps they should take a leaf out of Renault's book and produce two versions.
A basic 'cup' version for £18K and a nicely kitted out one for £20K+.
Just a thought.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's called the Anniversary, will be out in 2007, and will be a lighweight version offering 250bhp
(in my humble opinion.)
Lets hope Audi follow suite with a stonking S3!!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif
Perhaps they should take a leaf out of Renault's book and produce two versions.
A basic 'cup' version for £18K and a nicely kitted out one for £20K+.
Just a thought.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's called the Anniversary, will be out in 2007, and will be a lighweight version offering 250bhp
(in my humble opinion.)
Lets hope Audi follow suite with a stonking S3!!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif
[ QUOTE ]
Don't agree with you though Bowfer, it's much more livlier than the 150 bhp MKIV and the brakes on the A3 don't bite anywhere near as much or pull you down like the GTI.
[/ QUOTE ]
Errr...
I said the Gti brakes were better...
Don't agree with you though Bowfer, it's much more livlier than the 150 bhp MKIV and the brakes on the A3 don't bite anywhere near as much or pull you down like the GTI.
[/ QUOTE ]
Errr...
I said the Gti brakes were better...
[ QUOTE ]
Performance testing regularly runs the standard GTI at 6.0 to 6.3 seconds to sixty ( manual or DSG), that's faster than an A3 3.2, R32, etc,
[/ QUOTE ]
The two GTI's I tested would have both been whooped by my 3.2.
There is no way (regardless of what the mags/figures say) that a GTI could beat an A3 3.2, R32 or S3. My 3.2 would be in second while the golf is still licking the tarmac for grip.
On the twisties however, you'd have the edge, although quite a bit of understeer on the golf for my liking. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
Performance testing regularly runs the standard GTI at 6.0 to 6.3 seconds to sixty ( manual or DSG), that's faster than an A3 3.2, R32, etc,
[/ QUOTE ]
The two GTI's I tested would have both been whooped by my 3.2.
There is no way (regardless of what the mags/figures say) that a GTI could beat an A3 3.2, R32 or S3. My 3.2 would be in second while the golf is still licking the tarmac for grip.
On the twisties however, you'd have the edge, although quite a bit of understeer on the golf for my liking. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
the oldies amongst us will remember that checked cloth from early GTi's. I think its meant to be some form of tribute?
Leon
Registered User
I test drove one and thought it was pretty good. It handled well for a front wheel drive car and went well. Felt like 200bhp to me but it didn't have the surge like my (then standard 210bhp) S3, although I guess they have tried to refine it for economy purposes. I also think it looks quite smart and is certainly an improvement over the previous golf in the looks dept.
The problem is the price. The one I drove had the the leather interior, Sat Nav, 18" alloys, Xenons, and other options so would have cost over £25K which was ridiculous. At minimum the leather, and wheels are needed which still brings it to over £22K.
I'd buy a year old S3/R32 if I had that money to spend now.
The problem is the price. The one I drove had the the leather interior, Sat Nav, 18" alloys, Xenons, and other options so would have cost over £25K which was ridiculous. At minimum the leather, and wheels are needed which still brings it to over £22K.
I'd buy a year old S3/R32 if I had that money to spend now.
