It's here: The standard Golf GTI reviewed!

[Sootchucker]

I think the car must have adaptive chassis control fitted, as in one of the photos it clearly shows the driver profile modes, and the first one is "Comfort" which is only there if ACC is fitted.

[Gryzor]

Didn't it have the pro nav installed as well?   Seems to be me like apart from from the lack of PP, the car is far from standard.  OK, nav doesn't affect performance and handling, but DCC does.

[PGTD]

The first and best piece on a non-PP Mk7 was by George Karcher in recent CAR mag. It's a bit misleading of VW & the press to make all these comparisons between PP & standard cars. The only thing to settle it would be a real road (non-track) back to back test between a PP and standard with otherwise identical spec.
Karcher was mightily impressed with the non-PP car, that's all.

[HA54SYM`]

There I another review of a non PP car on the Top Gear Website.

It still says its a very good car without, but they would spec it of course.

Dave

[Bill_the_Bear]

The first and best piece on a non-PP Mk7 was by George Karcher in recent CAR mag. It's a bit misleading of VW & the press to make all these comparisons between PP & standard cars. The only thing to settle it would be a real road (non-track) back to back test between a PP and standard with otherwise identical spec.
Karcher was mightily impressed with the non-PP car, that's all.

And you can't tell them which they are driving until after they've done the test and given their opinions!  If you do confirmation bias may (will) invalidate the results.

EDIT:
Inevitably this means virtually all car comparisons are of a subjective nature which we are all well aware of, so perhaps I'm being too keen here and should just let them get on with giving their opinion and then treat it as just that!

[mcmaddy]

But the whole point of the review is it says it is normal gti meaning to me standard with no extras. if its got dcc or acc then the article Is misleading as its not a standard gti. its quite annoying that VW give all the test cars for reviewers with virtually every option box ticked when in the real world not every one can afford to do this. standard to me is a car with no extras at all.

[Gryzor]

EDIT:
Inevitably this means virtually all car comparisons are of a subjective nature which we are all well aware of, so perhaps I'm being too keen here and should just let them get on with giving their opinion and then treat it as just that!

You hit the nail on the head there.  The problem is, you will seek to find reviews that tell you what you want to hear, and interpret things one way or the other to justify things to yourself.  It's the same regardless of whether it's a car, games console or whatever - the more time you spend on forums, and the more reviews and comparisons you read, the more confused you become and less satisfied with what you originally thought you wanted.  It's just the way we humans are, to more or lesser degrees! 

[mk7gti]

http://www.topgear.com/uk/car-news/first-drive-the-new-golf-gti-2013-05-01

[Exonian]

http://www.topgear.com/uk/car-news/first-drive-the-new-golf-gti-2013-05-01

That's a nice review.

[mcmaddy]

No its not a nice review! Once again a supposedly standard car has the 'optional' acc fitted!! Its just a regurgitation of other reviews with the same car! Why can't someone just do a standard car review?