Author Topic: V5  (Read 1933 times)

Offline Martz

  • Forum Supporter
  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,273
Re: V5
« Reply #20 on: 20 November 2009, 15:33 »
I guess what attracted me to the v5 is the smoothness of the v5 engine,but I did think it would be abit juicy for a daily,I have my mk2 16v to have fun In so am looking for something smooth with abit of luxury and the v5 seemed a good choice,I'm just bored of my mk3 really it's getting old now and am not as passionate about it as my mk2 so just want to get sumink newer and easier to drive rather than spend money on it when the time comes,I'll have a look at the 20v turbos,thanks for the advice  :smiley:

A lot of those 20vT would have been thrashed I am sure.........................

Offline DazVR6

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,705
  • mk3 VR6...FEEL THE GRUNT.
Re: V5
« Reply #21 on: 20 November 2009, 17:12 »
Sound really nice with a stainless exhaust though....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uyPm44ocI-s

Offline AlanD

  • 10k hero
  • *
  • Posts: 10,012
  • MK5 2.0T 16v
Re: V5
« Reply #22 on: 20 November 2009, 20:43 »
Sound really nice with a stainless exhaust though....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uyPm44ocI-s

So does a 1.8T with a Milly . . .

Really don't think they are worth it. For the sake of a "smooth" engine you'll be better off spending that little bit extra and go the whole hog and get the 2.8 V6.

Offline T_J_G

  • Serious forum addict
  • *
  • Posts: 8,279
Re: V5
« Reply #23 on: 21 November 2009, 10:40 »
which are still slower than a mapped 1.8t :D

R32 or 1.8t for petrol Golfs

Offline richw911

  • 10k hero
  • *
  • Posts: 18,680
  • The Linkmeister and an OEM Freak.
Re: V5
« Reply #24 on: 21 November 2009, 11:35 »
which are still slower than a mapped 1.8t :D

R32 or 1.8t for petrol Golfs

+1

MKIV Mod Squadâ„¢ a part of the headlight police.

Offline AlanD

  • 10k hero
  • *
  • Posts: 10,012
  • MK5 2.0T 16v
Re: V5
« Reply #25 on: 21 November 2009, 11:37 »
which are still slower than a mapped 1.8t :D

R32 or 1.8t for petrol Golfs

I agree, but you get the 4WD in the V6 and 200bhp vs 200bhp (ok the V6 weighs a bit more) there isnt going to be much in it.

I'd still rather have the 1.8T.

Offline mac456

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 578
Re: V5
« Reply #26 on: 21 November 2009, 23:38 »
am i right to think that the 2.8 v6 4wd would leave the 1.8t on the bends?

Offline Wayne

  • Sir Postalot
  • *
  • Posts: 32,055
Re: V5
« Reply #27 on: 22 November 2009, 00:21 »
am i right to think that the 2.8 v6 4wd would leave the 1.8t on the bends?

Yes and no, will suffer more understeer.
Quote from: Diamond Hell
You suck at buying cars, please take the pointy D hat from Wayne and go sit in the corner.

Offline AlanD

  • 10k hero
  • *
  • Posts: 10,012
  • MK5 2.0T 16v
Re: V5
« Reply #28 on: 22 November 2009, 13:19 »
am i right to think that the 2.8 v6 4wd would leave the 1.8t on the bends?

MK4 and bends dont really go to well, 4WD or not. You would need some choice mods to make the MK4 handle better.