GTI Performance or Cupra

[mcmaddy]

It was in the brochure thing I downloaded from the site. Actually ignore that I've just rechecked the brochure and I'm not able to draw an imaginary line across the spec sheets 

[HappyGtd]

I've not checked the forum in a few days and come back to find quite a lively discussion has gone on 

I was watching the Carwow review between the GTI Performance and the Golf R and Matt says the Golf performance is a great car but just not that fast (other reviews are available and I've watched all those too).

There's always compromises so with a GTI Performance the compromise is power and with the Cupra the compromise is a slightly poorer ride comfort and slightly not as nice interior. Power wins for me 

[fredgroves]

I'm not convinced that VAG's FWD engineering allows that extra power to be put down onto the road though. Not without the extra bits that the CSS had. In stock form I suspect the Cupra won't be any noticeably different.

A straight power output comparison is one thing, but other than bragging rights, I don't think it will translate much into real world capability - maybe not even track times.

Again, just my two cents worth...

[HappyGtd]

When you're on the move, say doing 50, and need to execute a quick overtake, you'll not light up the front wheels if you boot it. The traction deficiency is only apparent in standing starts or booting it out of 2nd gear corners. It's also well documented that when on the move, as in the situation above, the Cupra will show an R or an S3 a clean set of heels when on the move (providing it's dry).

[Exonian]

If you strip it all back to the bare bones components then there’s little between the A3, Golf and Leon in the bare metal.
The Cupra has the added expense of the R engine internals and bolt ons, PP/CS/TCR diff, PP/CS/R brakes, DCC, standard 19’s, etc etc
It does without various luxuries like the gas strut bonnet lifter and some slightly nicer internal fittings.

The TCR and CS don’t get slated on here (running the same engine and tune) for the lack of traction. The off the line issues are more to do with the level of torque going through the front wheels which will be a similar number between the PP and Cupra, TCR etc . The VAQ will cope with it all on both Golf and Leon once on the fly.
The PP will be better on fuel and the Cupra will perform much more satisfactorily at higher revs, the latter being more important to a performance car enthusiast in most cases!

The Golf styling more classically pretty, the Leon more edgy and in nicer colours.

Ya pays yer money...

Moving “back” (or paying significantly less retail cash) from a less equipped A3 to a Leon I can understand the concerns over lack of padded interior niceties in the Leon, but between a Golf and Leon there ain’t much in it.
Considering a brand new 290 PS Cupra can be had on Broadspeed for just over £24k which is Polo GTI money (when taking into account you have to pay for paint and nav on a Polo) it’s not a bad proposition.

[HappyGtd]

Picking up a 68 plate Copra* next week for £23k with just over 1000 miles on clock (nicely run in for me!).

The only thing I'll miss is adaptive cruise as the Leon doesn't have it

*The Cupras are on their run out, so to speak, now that the MK4 Leon is imminent. The Seat 'S' badges have all changed to a sort of copper colour inside and out, so the Cupra enthusiasts have christened it the Copra.

[barrym381]

When you're on the move, say doing 50, and need to execute a quick overtake, you'll not light up the front wheels if you boot it. The traction deficiency is only apparent in standing starts or booting it out of 2nd gear corners. It's also well documented that when on the move, as in the situation above, the Cupra will show an R or an S3 a clean set of heels when on the move (providing it's dry).

Yes if the s3 and r are tied to trees 

[HappyGtd]

When you're on the move, say doing 50, and need to execute a quick overtake, you'll not light up the front wheels if you boot it. The traction deficiency is only apparent in standing starts or booting it out of 2nd gear corners. It's also well documented that when on the move, as in the situation above, the Cupra will show an R or an S3 a clean set of heels when on the move (providing it's dry).

Yes if the s3 and r are tied to trees 

It's true mate, it's down to less weight in the Cupra and the extra drive train friction of the Haldex in the R and S3. In wet conditions the Cupra is obviously going to suffer. It's all well evidenced on tinternet

[HappyGtd]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXV8xW1Mekc&t=169s

The Golf R is faster on the 0 to 100kmh but the Cupra is faster on the 100 to 200kmh

[kmpowell]

When you're on the move, say doing 50, and need to execute a quick overtake, you'll not light up the front wheels if you boot it. The traction deficiency is only apparent in standing starts or booting it out of 2nd gear corners. It's also well documented that when on the move, as in the situation above, the Cupra will show an R or an S3 a clean set of heels when on the move (providing it's dry).

Yes if the s3 and r are tied to trees 

It's true mate, it's down to less weight in the Cupra and the extra drive train friction of the Haldex in the R and S3. In wet conditions the Cupra is obviously going to suffer. It's all well evidenced on tinternet

This isn't scientific, but half way through this video is a rolling start GTI(stage 1) v R:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8Pq191ezCA