GOLFMK7
GOLFMK6
GOLFMKV
VW GTI MKVI Forum / VW Golf R Forum / VW Golf MKVI Forum / VW GTI Forum - Golfmk6.com



Go Back   VW GTI MKVI Forum / VW Golf R Forum / VW Golf MKVI Forum / VW GTI Forum - Golfmk6.com > Volkswagen GTI / Golf Topics > Mk6 vs......


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 04-30-2010, 11:11 AM   #29
DanielStevenMkVI
Oval Newbie
 
DanielStevenMkVI's Avatar
 
Drives: '02 Chevy Silverado, No MkVI yet :\
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diego View Post
__________________
I like the Tuna here.
DanielStevenMkVI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2010, 03:14 AM   #30
Bruno2000
FIA GT Newbie
 
Drives: 2010 GTI 2dr red
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Québec
Posts: 876
Gti can be faster that a r32 on track ;

http://www.caranddriver.com/features..._3a19.3_page_2

While the GTI produced the slowest lap time of this event, the improvements over the previous, nearly identical 2007 GTI we drove at the 2006 Lightning Lap are nothing short of staggering. The biggest change to the 2010 model, aside from its sheetmetal, is a retuned suspension. This GTI improved by 5.8 seconds over the previous iteration, with sector-time enhancements across the board. Moreover, it was 2.5 seconds quicker than the more powerful, 250-hp VW R32 from the ’08 event.

and this is stock for stock, add a stage1 to the Gti, on track, to see probably higher score!

I had the choice between an r32 and a 2010 gti too.

I dont regret my 2010 red gti.
Bruno2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2010, 03:36 PM   #31
Ronan1
Drag Racing Champion
 
Drives: 2008 GTI
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno2000 View Post
Gti can be faster that a r32 on track ;

http://www.caranddriver.com/features..._3a19.3_page_2

While the GTI produced the slowest lap time of this event, the improvements over the previous, nearly identical 2007 GTI we drove at the 2006 Lightning Lap are nothing short of staggering. The biggest change to the 2010 model, aside from its sheetmetal, is a retuned suspension. This GTI improved by 5.8 seconds over the previous iteration, with sector-time enhancements across the board. Moreover, it was 2.5 seconds quicker than the more powerful, 250-hp VW R32 from the ’08 event.

and this is stock for stock, add a stage1 to the Gti, on track, to see probably higher score!

I had the choice between an r32 and a 2010 gti too.

I dont regret my 2010 red gti.
I've driven both, and while I like the R32 a lot, the MKVI GTI gets my vote. It's just a nice all rounder. The revised interior and suspension set up do it for me.

I also prefer the look of the mkVI. Let's keep our fingers crossed for the mkVI R.

Not knocking the R32, I think I'd rather have the newer car. The weight of the R32 and low mpgs (I drive a lot of miles, 30k + per year) fouls the 32 for me.
Ronan1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2010, 07:23 PM   #32
DubbinIt
FIA GT Champion
 
DubbinIt's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 CSGTI
Join Date: May 2010
Location: EP TX
Posts: 1,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boo View Post
In my opinion the R32 has two things working against it- the fact it can only be had with a DSG, and the weight penalty of the VR6 and the AWD. Modern cars are getting too heavy; take the lightest one you can get. Between these two, that would be the GTI.
Well first of all, it depends on what he wants: the DSG isn't bad at all--I enjoy the quick engagement/disengagement of gears on my dad's R32; the VR6, in my personal opinion, is a plus just because I love the sound; the AWD really kicks ass compared to the traction you'd get on a FWD vehicle.

What's wrong with the weight? Possibly less power, but it all depends on what he wants.
And why go with the lightest?

The only few complaints I have are the gauge cluster/MFD looks a little outdated compared to my 2010 GTI, and some of the interior materials seem a bit more un-refined and cheap-ish.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno2000 View Post
Gti can be faster that a r32 on track ;

http://www.caranddriver.com/features..._3a19.3_page_2

While the GTI produced the slowest lap time of this event, the improvements over the previous, nearly identical 2007 GTI we drove at the 2006 Lightning Lap are nothing short of staggering. The biggest change to the 2010 model, aside from its sheetmetal, is a retuned suspension. This GTI improved by 5.8 seconds over the previous iteration, with sector-time enhancements across the board. Moreover, it was 2.5 seconds quicker than the more powerful, 250-hp VW R32 from the ’08 event.

and this is stock for stock, add a stage1 to the Gti, on track, to see probably higher score!

I had the choice between an r32 and a 2010 gti too.

I dont regret my 2010 red gti.
I don't think anyone would regret either one, unless you're looking to beat times on the track, of course.
They are both amazing vehicles: test drive 'em and see which you feel more comfortable with and which you desire most.

My last input goes along with purchasing any pre-owned vehicles. Closely inspect the wear-and-tear of the vehicle, and you really never know if it's been abused and not taken care of.
__________________
2010 GTI APR Stg 2 (Gone)
My Build Thread

2013 TT-RS--in safe storage
2013 MINI Cooper S
DubbinIt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 08:23 PM   #33
MrClean
FIA GT Champion
 
MrClean's Avatar
 
Drives: 10 GTI 4dr / 06 CS / 12 TTRS
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Powell, OH
Posts: 1,044
I looked at a 2008 R32 before pulling the trigger on the GTI.

The main reason I did not get the R32 - 3 door hatch instead of a 5 door hatch.

=====
I preferred the the feel of the R32 on the road. The AWD was the biggest contributor to that. The suspension and weight also helped make it preferable for me. The interior was a little dated in the R32, but still felt upscale with more attention given to it to create that very feel over the lesser GTIs.

I drove the car in inclement weather and the car flet secure/planted, like my previous Audi A4 quattro.

One thing that really surprised me about the R32 (in a negative way) was the gas mileage. It was bad for a 3.2 six banger; something like 18-19 mpg avg. I remember better mileage with my 2004 TT 3.2 that had the same powertrain setup. However, my real world experience in the GTI has returned on avg 24 MPG, well below the combined 28 MPG I should be getting.

In the end, I'm very glad I got the GTI, but wish I had AWD with as much as it slips/grips on turns while accelerating.
__________________
2010 GTI 4dr, Red/Titan DSG,
Nav, Autobahn, BiXenon, Dynaudio,
Bluetooth , 18" Detroit Wheels,
Clearbra, VW DGs, 38% Tint
Black Roof, & R Taillights

Last edited by MrClean; 06-27-2010 at 08:33 PM.
MrClean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 09:56 PM   #34
dsm1983
Formula 5000 Champion
 
Drives: ...
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: ...
Posts: 2,959
4motion is not really AWD in the sense that people think it is. Unless you mod it. I'm just sayin'.
dsm1983 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2010, 08:13 AM   #35
gottaluvvw
Passed Driver's Ed
 
Drives: R32
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Keller, Texas
Posts: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsm1983 View Post
4motion is not really AWD in the sense that people think it is. Unless you mod it. I'm just sayin'.
you're right, in fact, imho it's better than people think...

it's primarily FWD (for better gas mileage) until you need AWD, and then it's there for you, immediately...

i have been to the dragstrip many times and i have never lost traction from the start (even if the ET's are only in the low 14's)...i have driven it uphill (my driveway) in 1 foot of snow and AWD was there for me...just yesterday it was pooring here in Texas and i never lost traction in the rain, even when nailing it from red lights...

now, i understand your point, that if you're tracking it you might enjoy the feel of full time AWD and that can be done for less than $1000 with a controller

FWD cars with this much hp and torque lose traction from a start even in the driest of conditions...just sayin'
gottaluvvw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2010, 08:26 AM   #36
MrClean
FIA GT Champion
 
MrClean's Avatar
 
Drives: 10 GTI 4dr / 06 CS / 12 TTRS
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Powell, OH
Posts: 1,044
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsm1983 View Post
4motion is not really AWD in the sense that people think it is. Unless you mod it. I'm just sayin'.
Yeah, yeah, you're right about the AWD vs 4Motion (but I figured enthusiasts on here would understand what I meant). The haldex setup, as mentioned above, is primarily FWD till slip occurs, then it transfers power to the rear wheels. It is not a true AWD setup and I would not recommend doing that mod to make it AWD. The car's got a wheelbase that is too short to have a stable, controllable car.
__________________
2010 GTI 4dr, Red/Titan DSG,
Nav, Autobahn, BiXenon, Dynaudio,
Bluetooth , 18" Detroit Wheels,
Clearbra, VW DGs, 38% Tint
Black Roof, & R Taillights
MrClean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2010, 08:56 AM   #37
VR6Growl
Formula 3000 Driver
 
VR6Growl's Avatar
 
Drives: '12 Jetta 2.5 SEL; '14 328D xDrive
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Swan Point MD
Posts: 3,925
I am not trying to start arguments or anything, but I really don't like to see erroneous information being spread so I would like to correct a couple non-factual statements here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dsm1983 View Post
4motion is not really AWD in the sense that people think it is. Unless you mod it. I'm just sayin'.
First off: 4Motion is just the VW name for whatever all-wheel drive system they are currently using in their cars. It has been used to refer to multiple different versions of all-wheel drive so saying "4motion is not really AWD" is like saying a Mercedes isn't fast... Really depends on which Mercedes you are talking about.

Second: Haldex Gen II (the All-wheel drive system in the MKV R32) sends power front or rear whenever needed; with its standard, straight line, no-slippage cruising setup as 95% power to front, 5% power to rear. If having power to all wheels at all times, and more to the rear whenever needed isn't all-wheel drive, I would love to hear what your definition is (not trying to be a jerk or anything, I am really curious what you are using as an AWD definition).

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrClean View Post
Yeah, yeah, you're right about the AWD vs 4Motion (but I figured enthusiasts on here would understand what I meant). The haldex setup, as mentioned above, is primarily FWD till slip occurs, then it transfers power to the rear wheels. It is not a true AWD setup and I would not recommend doing that mod to make it AWD. The car's got a wheelbase that is too short to have a stable, controllable car.
Again; power is applied to any and all wheels as needed in less than 1/7th of a revolution (depending on wheel speed that would be in the neighborhood of .005 second...). What exactly do you consider a true all-wheel drive setup? The majority of modern AWD systems in use outside race cars are primarily FWD or RWD and apply power where needed when slippage begins. That does not mean they aren't AWD it just means they are more practical for daily street use. Quattro is the obvious exception

My only guess is that you are both basing your definition on Quattro (which is just Audi's term the same as 4Motion is VW's) with its 60/40 base split. If this is so, however; it would be interesting to note that VW's current 4Motion system and Audi's current Quattro system are both the same generation of Haldex AWD. They simply have different programming and proportioning valves to change the base split parameters...

Here is a pretty solid definition of the Haldex Generation II system:
Quote:
The second generation of Haldex coupling is an electronically controlled permanent 4x4 system with a Haldex differential calculating how much drive should be directed to the rear wheels. The Haldex system automatically distributes power between the front and rear wheels depending on slippage, but normally sends 95% of the power to the front wheels. It can react in as little as one seventh of a revolution of any wheel. Power transfer in the second generation is much more effective. Electronic sensors and controls can modify the system's response characteristics, for better operation in conditions ranging from dry pavement to loose gravel, snow, ice, or mud. A pre-charge pump charges the hydraulic system to allow the coupling to engage quickly.
Sounds pretty solidly like AWD to me
__________________
-Jason G. --
2012 Jetta 2.5 SEL
2014 BMW 328D xDrive

Last edited by VR6Growl; 06-30-2010 at 09:26 AM.
VR6Growl is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.