GolfGTIforum.co.uk
Model specific boards => Golf mk6 => Topic started by: countrytrucker on 01 September 2009, 16:47
-
Has anyone lowered a new GTD yet?
I am having no luck finding springs or coilovers to fit this car!
-
Have you spoken to any of the suspension manufacturers, suppliers or VW performance specialists? Surely they can tell you.
Eibach list the same springs for the 2.0TDi and GTI. The GTD is a 2.0TDi with a bit more power and a GTI bodykit, so it'll have a similar front axle weight and will be fine using those springs.
Part No. E20-85-014-02-22 for the sportline kit, which according to Eibach's website lowers a GTI by roughly 20mm, so expect a similar amount for the GTD.
I'd expect coilovers and possibly spring/damper kits to be the same situation.
-
I spoke to a few people.
The suspension on the GTD is apparently completely different to the GTI and the 2.0 TDi.
I don't know what to do!
-
I spoke to a few people.
The suspension on the GTD is apparently completely different to the GTI and the 2.0 TDi.
I don't know what to do!
Might be better to ask in a GTD forum rather than a GTI one ?
http://www.vwdiesel.net/forum/index.php
-
As VW are marketing the GTD as a Diesel GTI (On road performance is going to be very similar) it's fair to ask it in here. Trouble is the GTD is very new and I doubt there are many people who have taken delivery of one yet. Some dealers have sold their demos but most buyers are probably still waiting for their order to come through just like the GTI.
The suspension isn't completely different to the GTI, far from it. It will very likely have the same rear springs and different fronts to counter the added weight of the TDI engine. I would guess that some of the German suppliers will have GTD specific springs available very soon. Try contacting Eibach in Germany directly to see how far they are from production. They will probably tell you something very similar to what mac7 posted above but may be awaiting TUV approval for that particular model.
-
As VW are marketing the GTD as a Diesel GTI (On road performance is going to be very similar) it's fair to ask it in here. Trouble is the GTD is very new and I doubt there are many people who have taken delivery of one yet. Some dealers have sold their demos but most buyers are probably still waiting for their order to come through just like the GTI.
The suspension isn't completely different to the GTI, far from it. It will very likely have the same rear springs and different fronts to counter the added weight of the TDI engine. I would guess that some of the German suppliers will have GTD specific springs available very soon. Try contacting Eibach in Germany directly to see how far they are from production. They will probably tell you something very similar to what mac7 posted above but may be awaiting TUV approval for that particular model.
Incase it was picked up wrong, it wasnt meant to be a 'why are you here goto a GTD forum' it was merely to try and help as he has a GTD. I thought it would help as there will be other GTD owners who may have done the same thing or as its new, know much more about the car than us, as there is not going to be many GTD owners around a GTI forum.
-
No offense taken.
I was just asking here as I htought you guys would know.
After all, they are very similar cars.
-
I spoke to a few people.
The suspension on the GTD is apparently completely different to the GTI and the 2.0 TDi.
I don't know what to do!
Might be better to ask in a GTD forum rather than a GTI one ?
http://www.vwdiesel.net/forum/index.php
Why? :huh:
We don't just cater for GTI's - we welcome everyone
-
Ring around a few companies and get some advise.
-
Why does everyone want the cars so low anyway? I appreciate it's thought to look nicer, but when it interferes with performance, why is it worth it?
I know that the limiting factor in my speed on hilly B roads is the fact that my car is low-slung. At the bottom of every dip I hear a scuffing noise as the chassis grounds, and I know if I go any faster it will become a bang.
I believe the Golf GTi is even lower than the Peugeot GTi.
Is this all a cunning plan to make me stop speeding on B roads?
Rolfe.
-
Why does everyone want the cars so low anyway? I appreciate it's thought to look nicer, but when it interferes with performance, why is it worth it?
I know that the limiting factor in my speed on hilly B roads is the fact that my car is low-slung. At the bottom of every dip I hear a scuffing noise as the chassis grounds, and I know if I go any faster it will become a bang.
I believe the Golf GTi is even lower than the Peugeot GTi.
Is this all a cunning plan to make me stop speeding on B roads?
Rolfe.
It doesn't interfere with performance......it will most likely interfere with comfort but thats a different aspect anyway
Don't forget the GTI and indeed all Golfs have to be built to bridge the gap between looks, performance and comfort.
There are those of us who want more performance so lower our cars using spring / shocks or coilovers. The trick is finding the setup which suits you and what you use the car for
E.G I've lowered my car just on springs as I wanted to improve the handling yet maintain a comfy ride as I commute approx 50 miles everyday
-
I spoke to a few people.
The suspension on the GTD is apparently completely different to the GTI and the 2.0 TDi.
I don't know what to do!
Might be better to ask in a GTD forum rather than a GTI one ?
http://www.vwdiesel.net/forum/index.php
Why? :huh:
We don't just cater for GTI's - we welcome everyone
I didnt think we didnt welcome everyone, that was not the help I was trying to give.
Surely the ratio of GTD owners or potential GTD owners on the vwdiesel site outweight us. If its such a big deal he could ask his questions on both sites.
Will have to think twice before I offer any help in future.
-
Ring around a few companies and get some advise.
I tried about 5 or 6 but all they could tell me was that the part for the GTD wasn't listed and to try again in a couple of months.
Why does everyone want the cars so low anyway? I appreciate it's thought to look nicer, but when it interferes with performance, why is it worth it?
I know that the limiting factor in my speed on hilly B roads is the fact that my car is low-slung. At the bottom of every dip I hear a scuffing noise as the chassis grounds, and I know if I go any faster it will become a bang.
I believe the Golf GTi is even lower than the Peugeot GTi.
Is this all a cunning plan to make me stop speeding on B roads?
Rolfe.
Well, I am getting the GTD so I am not buying it to be racing everywhere. Even though I drive at a reasonable speed, I am on decent enough roads to not risk damaging the car. When the car is lowered on 19s I personally think it looks great. I have had a few MK4s on 19s and coilovers and I was more than happy with the ride quality. I will be using springs to lower the MK6 so it should still be a very comfortable ride.
The car will be used for 300 miles a week on A roads so I won't be affecting the best part of the GTD which is the fuel economy.
-
The mk6 sits fairly low anyway, the new R will probably sit slightly lower again though so a set of springs for one of these would be ideal for a GTI (but not GTD)
For info, I've no idea why people think keeping standard shocks will stop lower springs stiffening the ride. It's more the other way round. Lower springs will be stiffer, end of. I've been changing suspensions on various VWs and SEATs over the last 20 odd years and ALL lowering springs make the ride stiffer. Some are much, much worse than others admittedly.
When you're young and vain then you will suffer the ride quality, when you get past your late 30s you won't want to! :grin:
-
I am still in my mid 20s so I can handle the harder suspension.
I was comparing the springs to coilovers which were a lot stiffer.
I had a few sets of Bilstein PSS9s on my last few cars and they were awesome. Fully adjustable for height, rebound etc. Bit out of my price range now though!
-
When the car is lowered on 19s I personally think it looks great.
Couldn't agree more. Whatever Mk6 I end up getting, it'll be lowered on 19's.
-
I'm still trying to decide what wheels though, that is the hard part!
-
Will have to think twice before I offer any help in future.
you mean you have offered help in the past :grin:
oh and LOW is the way to go :wink:
-
I still don't get it. Slowing down because my chassis is coming in contact with the road is not my idea of a good time.
Rolfe.
-
I dont understand why someone would buy a new car then lower it. Seems you bought the wrong type of car.
-
I still don't get it. Slowing down because my chassis is coming in contact with the road is not my idea of a good time.
Rolfe.
Exactly. And 19ers look chav. Buying a new car then turning it into a chavmobile...some people.....
-
I dont understand why someone would buy a new car then lower it. Seems you bought the wrong type of car.
I'm afraid I am suffering from insomnia tonight, so to kill time I'm going to answer your query. In fact, I will be buying exactly the right sort of car. Here follows a defense for all those of us wise enough to drive a lowered car with big wheels.
Twenty years ago I bought a brand new Golf GTI. I wanted to improve the handling because although great, it could be made better. The suspension kit which I bought was designed to lower the car as part of that improvement. The larger wheels and wider, lower profile tyres also helped and the end result was far superior to a standard GTI. VW themselves later produced the GTI G60 which had the same size tyres and similar lowering as my car as part of its standard equipment.
The modifications were made to my car when it was just a few weeks old by GTI Engineering - a Volkswagen approved tuning company. I used that car every day for 12 years and covered nearly 100,000 miles and not once did the chassis touch the road, even when negotiating speed bumps. I've been doing it to my new cars ever since.
I would also mention wheels are a very important aesthetic cue on a car. Putting wider, lower profile tyres on a car visually accentuates the gap between the tyre and the arch - lowering the car a little brings this gap back into 'visual proportion' with the sidewall of the tyre. Just take a look at any car which has had a set of lower profile tyres fitted and hasn't been lowered. They tend to look a little bit awkward - like off-roaders. Car designers and stylists understand this, which is a part of the reason the GTI sits lower than a standard Golf.
Like all engineering solutions, the ride height, stiffness, tyre size, etc used on a car are a compromise chosen to give a desired result. Today, as in 1989, VW set up the GTI lower and with bigger wheels than the lesser Golfs to improve the handling in line with the greater engine performance, as well as improving the aesthetic of the car, at the expense of a little comfort and convenience. So by choosing to buy a GTI over an SE you are making the decision to have a car which is lowered and with bigger wheels than a 'standard' Golf.
You are therefore all subscribing to the same ethos that I am. The only difference is that I choose to move the engineering compromise slightly further towards the performance end of the spectrum and a little further away from the comfort end. If you need to climb steep driveways, traverse kerbs, boat ramps, scale mountains or just have really big speed bumps where you live, obviously you might choose to leave your car standard. Or buy a Touareg.
The defence rests.
-
Nicely put Mac7.
-
When I was younger I couldn't afford a lowering kit for my Capri so bought a pair of "Spring Clamps"
It didn't half stiffen the ride but by god it made it look good. Or at least so I thought, 20 years ago :laugh:
-
I still don't get it. Slowing down because my chassis is coming in contact with the road is not my idea of a good time.
Rolfe.
you've really got to be going some to twit your chassis on the road. Only other way is to go stupidly low which most people don't do.
I dont understand why someone would buy a new car then lower it. Seems you bought the wrong type of car.
that coming from someone who bought a car off Ebay, didn't test drive it and moaned about it since :rolleyes:
Nicely put Mac7.
+1 - at least some of us 'get it'
-
I'm not a fan of lowering cars, the manufacterers tend to design them so they perform well on public roads, and if you buy a Golf you primarily use it on public roads. If you want a trackday car buy a second hand Lotus 2/11 or Caterham or something that was designed by experts for that purpose. That's what I'd do anyway.
Nothing worse than driving on public roads with 19s and getting terrible tyre noise, having to avoid speed bumps etc. No fun whatsoever.
-
I'm not a fan of lowering cars, the manufacterers tend to design them so they perform well on public roads, and if you buy a Golf you primarily use it on public roads. If you want a trackday car buy a second hand Lotus 2/11 or Caterham or something that was designed by experts for that purpose. That's what I'd do anyway.
Nothing worse than driving on public roads with 19s and getting terrible tyre noise, having to avoid speed bumps etc. No fun whatsoever.
have you not read what myself or Mac have written? :huh: Manufacturers design cars to strike a balance between performance and comfort.
Where has anyone said they're trying to turn the GTI into a trackday car? :huh:
As for running a car with 19's - can't see how tyre noise is increased unless you're running ultra budget tyres.
-
I'm not a fan of lowering cars, the manufacterers tend to design them so they perform well on public roads, and if you buy a Golf you primarily use it on public roads. If you want a trackday car buy a second hand Lotus 2/11 or Caterham or something that was designed by experts for that purpose. That's what I'd do anyway.
Nothing worse than driving on public roads with 19s and getting terrible tyre noise, having to avoid speed bumps etc. No fun whatsoever.
have you not read what myself or Mac have written? :huh: Manufacturers design cars to strike a balance between performance and comfort.
Where has anyone said they're trying to turn the GTI into a trackday car? :huh:
As for running a car with 19's - can't see how tyre noise is increased unless you're running ultra budget tyres.
Really? Michelin tend to be noisy tyres, lower profile tyres tend to be noisier than higher profile ones. Read this tyre test the Hankooks are the quietest by far:
http://global.hankooktire.com/Tech/Autobildsportscark107_catalog.pdf
The cost of a tyre does not tend to tell you anything about how noisy they'll be. And my point was fitting 19s and lowering is going to have negative impacts on comfort and day to day useability.
-
Really? Michelin tend to be noisy tyres, lower profile tyres tend to be noisier than higher profile ones. Read this tyre test the Hankooks are the quietest by far:
http://global.hankooktire.com/Tech/Autobildsportscark107_catalog.pdf
The cost of a tyre does not tend to tell you anything about how noisy they'll be.
Really. I've found Michelins to be the quietest tyre I've used over the years. And yes lower profiles tyres are nosier but the difference is negligible especially in modern cars with all the soundproofing
Cost = overall performance. I've learnt the hard way fitting Falkens; never again. I'll be buying Michelins or Goodyears next time as I like to keep my hearing and keep my car on the road
-
Michelins tend to be one of the noisiest there was an Auto Express test recently which found the same. In the Auto Express test the Kumhos were quietest. Just because you had a bad experience with Falkens doesnt mean you should tar every cheaper tyre with the same brush.
I'm not saying Michelins are bad tyres but they do tend to be above average for noise from what I've seen (and heard in my dad's old car).
-
Michelins tend to be one of the noisiest there was an Auto Express test recently which found the same. In the Auto Express test the Kumhos were quietest. Just because you had a bad experience with Falkens doesnt mean you should tar every cheaper tyre with the same brush.
I'm not saying Michelins are bad tyres but they do tend to be above average for noise from what I've seen (and heard in my dad's old car).
So you believe everything you read in Auto Express :rolleyes:
When i first had my MK2 that had cheap tyres - they were rubbish - swapped them for something better which cost more.
End of the day those 4 corners are you're only contact with the road. Don't see the point in skimping on that.
-
Michelins tend to be one of the noisiest there was an Auto Express test recently which found the same. In the Auto Express test the Kumhos were quietest. Just because you had a bad experience with Falkens doesnt mean you should tar every cheaper tyre with the same brush.
I'm not saying Michelins are bad tyres but they do tend to be above average for noise from what I've seen (and heard in my dad's old car).
So you believe everything you read in Auto Express :rolleyes:
When i first had my MK2 that had cheap tyres - they were rubbish - swapped them for something better which cost more.
End of the day those 4 corners are you're only contact with the road. Don't see the point in skimping on that.
I'm not telling anyone to skimp. Yes some cheap tyres are rubbish - I'm not surprised, I'm more surprised you think that means they all are. I like to read reviews because they are able to test far more tyres than any one person is ever going to be able to, and under strict conditions and with strict measurements. And you can end up discovering some really good bargains rather than just following the herd.
And as for believing everything I read, well they did do proper sound level measurements of all the tyres, as did the other test I showed you, whereas you havent and I dont even know what and how many different tyres you've compared them with. Do you see my point?
I shall be purchasing the Hankook Ventus S1 Evos when I need new tyres because they came out very well in that test, with the lowest noise, lowest rolling resistance, best times in the wet and dry laps and they are not that expensive either.
-
I'm not telling anyone to skimp. Yes some cheap tyres are rubbish - I'm not surprised, I'm more surprised you think that means they all are. I like to read reviews because they are able to test far more tyres than any one person is ever going to be able to, and under strict conditions and with strict measurements. And you can end up discovering some really good bargains rather than just following the herd.
And as for believing everything I read, well they did do proper sound level measurements of all the tyres, as did the other test I showed you, whereas you havent and I dont even know what and how many different tyres you've compared them with. Do you see my point?
I shall be purchasing the Hankook Ventus S1 Evos when I need new tyres because they came out very well in that test, with the lowest noise, lowest rolling resistance, best times in the wet and dry laps and they are not that expensive either.
Tyres are a subjective thing - what is good for one person is not for another. The Falkens are raved about by BMW and Merc drivers and even some members on here. I got them and find them appalling.
That test you posted a link to used a Porsche Cayman as the car used. How on earth can you compare it to a family hatchback :huh:
-
Well it had 19 inch tyres on. You are right results may vary slightly between models of car but I still find these tests interesting.
I agree about Falken tyres, and incidentally Which? magazine gave the Falken Ziex ZE 512 (205/55R16V) 15% in a tyre test and gave them a "Dont Buy" tag. (I dont buy Which? I just subscribed for 1 month for £1 btw). I dont think I've ever seen a good review of a Falken tyre though. (Falken are a Goodyear/Dunlop brand, as are Fulda, if you're interested).
-
I'd agree that tyre noise is more down to tread pattern and hence tyre make than anything else. In the past I've gone from 225/45R17's to 225/40R18's in the same brand of tyre without a really noticeable increase in tyre roar. This time I'll probably be using 225/35R19, so I'd imagine there won't be much change in noise as long as I pick the right tyre.
Interestingly that Autobild report says the Hankooks were quietest measured from outside, but sounded 'overwhelming' inside... maybe a translation error. I've traditionally run Bridgestones but have to be honest I had no idea whether they were noisier than other brands until reading that.
-
Interestingly that Autobild report says the Hankooks were quietest measured from outside, but sounded 'overwhelming' inside... maybe a translation error. I've traditionally run Bridgestones but have to be honest I had no idea whether they were noisier than other brands until reading that.
Hmm, hadnt noticed that actually. Looks like the measurements they took were for outside. I dont see the point in that tbh who cares how loud it is for pedestrians!
-
Hmm, hadnt noticed that actually. Looks like the measurements they took were for outside. I dont see the point in that tbh who cares how loud it is for pedestrians!
As far as I can tell, it's only our socialist comrades in the EU who actually care. If they can measure it, means they can put a limit on it and use it to control us, as is their way. And I believe they have, 74db(A), if memory serves.
-
Let me defend the Falken's here. I have the Falken FK452's (the 'sporty' version) which generally do have excellent reviews. Certainly they were a huge leap forward from the dunlop shytemax's they replaced. If you do some research on them they are generally regarded to be excellent.... except for mk4 owners. I don't know what would be the difference other than they don't seem to compliment that chassis.
Certainly for me the grip wet and dry is excellent. That said wear is maybe not the best but I wasn't expecting michelin primacy standards there anyway.
I thought Falken was an independant Japanese manufacturer?
-
Really? Michelin tend to be noisy tyres, lower profile tyres tend to be noisier than higher profile ones. Read this tyre test the Hankooks are the quietest by far:
What a load of bollox! :rolleyes: Michelin are very well known to be the quietest tyres available! Looks like you have been reading too much ChavPower MaxPower magazine!
The cost of a tyre does not tend to tell you anything about how noisy they'll be. And my point was fitting 19s and lowering is going to have negative impacts on comfort and day to day useability.
What a load of bollox - part deux! Cheap tyres are cheap because their manufacturers spend considerably less money on R&D. Michelin and the likes spend millions - which is why their tyres are used on some of the fastest, heaviest, and demanding cars, trucks and busses in the world. I don't see many Hankooks being fitted to Bugatti Veyrons, or Porsche 911, or RenaultSport Megane Cup cars! :rolleyes:
-
Really? Michelin tend to be noisy tyres, lower profile tyres tend to be noisier than higher profile ones. Read this tyre test the Hankooks are the quietest by far:
What a load of bollox! :rolleyes: Michelin are very well known to be the quietest tyres available! Looks like you have been reading too much ChavPower MaxPower magazine!
The cost of a tyre does not tend to tell you anything about how noisy they'll be. And my point was fitting 19s and lowering is going to have negative impacts on comfort and day to day useability.
What a load of bollox - part deux! Cheap tyres are cheap because their manufacturers spend considerably less money on R&D. Michelin and the likes spend millions - which is why their tyres are used on some of the fastest, heaviest, and demanding cars, trucks and busses in the world. I don't see many Hankooks being fitted to Bugatti Veyrons, or Porsche 911, or RenaultSport Megane Cup cars! :rolleyes:
yeah the test i refered to was a load of bollox :rolleyes:
Honestly, if you think I meant all cheap tyres are good then you're not a very good reader. Some are good. Those Honkooks are good and out-perform Michelin etc. You seem to be one of those people with no concept of it being possible for a non-premium brand producing anything decent. That's fine, just dont talk to me.
-
I thought Falken was an independant Japanese manufacturer?
It's a bit complicated but Falken are a subsidiary of Sumitomo Rubber Industries, who own the Dunlop brand, and Sumitomo formed a joint venture in 1997 with Goodyear and they agreed to manufacture tires for each other's markets, including Dunlop branded tires. As part of the agreement, Goodyear acquired 75% interests in Dunlop Tyres, the UK company which Sumitomo had formed, and in Dunlop Tire Corporation. Goodyear and Sumitomo also made investments in each other.
-
Really? Michelin tend to be noisy tyres, lower profile tyres tend to be noisier than higher profile ones. Read this tyre test the Hankooks are the quietest by far:
What a load of bollox! :rolleyes: Michelin are very well known to be the quietest tyres available! Looks like you have been reading too much ChavPower MaxPower magazine!
The cost of a tyre does not tend to tell you anything about how noisy they'll be. And my point was fitting 19s and lowering is going to have negative impacts on comfort and day to day useability.
What a load of bollox - part deux! Cheap tyres are cheap because their manufacturers spend considerably less money on R&D. Michelin and the likes spend millions - which is why their tyres are used on some of the fastest, heaviest, and demanding cars, trucks and busses in the world. I don't see many Hankooks being fitted to Bugatti Veyrons, or Porsche 911, or RenaultSport Megane Cup cars! :rolleyes:
yeah the test i refered to was a load of bollox :rolleyes:
Erm - yes, it was - utter bollox, for a shed-load of reasons:
- the load index for each tyre was NOT stated - were they the standard load, or were they extra load, or what?
- Porsche require a specialist 'N' tyre rating - yet only TWO makes they tested had this - the others did NOT!
- The test included a massive change in tyre bias from the standard Porsche sizes - the rears up from 265 to 295, yet the front widths remained unchanged!
- those 295 width tyres have massively deformed sidewalls, becauase they were mounted on rims designed for 265! Look at the pictures in the article. That is seriously dangerous. :angry: It places the shoulders of the tyre under massive stresses, an WILL cause the tyre to catastrophically blow out if used at three figure speeds on autobahns
- Porsche spend thousands of hours and miles testing to get the optimum tyre sizes - but some journos think they no better!
- Porsche spend thousands of hours and miles testing to get the 'best' tyre type and brand - and if Porsche found that Korean shyte Hanfook tyres made a Porsche perform better than with the Mich or Contis which they normally use - then Porsche would factory fit them - but they don't! Wonder why? :rolleyes:
- due to the massive tyre shoulder deformation, ALL of their tests which involve ANY cornering should be voided, for two reasons - firstly, the Porsche was NOT designed to use those sizes (and will not have been 'set-up' to use them), and secondly, the tyre manufactures did NOT design their tyres to work with such a sidewall deformaton
And you think that test is a 'reliable source'? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Honestly, if you think I meant all cheap tyres are good then you're not a very good reader.
Erm, how well a tyre may perform in a certain restricted aspect of a test does NOT determine the overal 'rating' of a tyre. Even if it were to come tops in all the tested categories, there are still many other variables - the obvious being different cars. As another posted pointed out, a tweaked version of a front wheel drive family hatchback (ie a Golf GTI) will respond very differently to a rear engined rear wheel drive purpose-built sports car!
Then you need to consider 'customer service' - both Continental and Michelin have absolutely superb customer service, whereas most of the Japanese and asian, along with Goodyear/Dunlop have shockingly poor customer service! Yet customer service is NEVER reported in these tyre tests
Some are good. Those Honkooks are good and out-perform Michelin etc. You seem to be one of those people with no concept of it being possible for a non-premium brand producing anything decent.
That test was SERIOUSLY FLAWED - so Hanfook didn't 'out-perform' anyone!
And I am NOT 'blinkered' to some kind of 'premium' brand loyalty. If someone asked me which luxury mid sized limo-type car was the most reliable - I would positively steer them away from a Merc E class, and point them to a Lexus GS. And if the same 'reliability' question was asked for a small family car, then I would ONLY recommend a Toyota Corolla.
But with tyres, then ONLY THE ABSOLUTE BEST should do - they are the ONLY thing which is in contact with the tarmac. You could have the most powerful engine, the best suspension, the most powerful brakes, and the most gifted driver - but the weakest link will ALLWAYS be the tyres. That is why I personally will NEVER compromise on tyres.
That's fine, just dont talk to me.
Erm, it's an open forum, and I'll respond to anyone who I think fit, not you! :angry:
-
Interestingly that Autobild report says the Hankooks were quietest measured from outside, but sounded 'overwhelming' inside... maybe a translation error. I've traditionally run Bridgestones but have to be honest I had no idea whether they were noisier than other brands until reading that.
Hmm, hadnt noticed that actually. Looks like the measurements they took were for outside. I dont see the point in that tbh who cares how loud it is for pedestrians!
The actual 'measurements' were taken from the outside - the big microphone in the picture gives that away!
But the comment about it sounding 'overwhelming' on the inside, from what I can gather, are just the opinion of the test driver whilst in the car. So maybe the Hanfooks are creating some kind of resonance which is being transmitted through the drivetrain?
-
Interestingly that Autobild report says the Hankooks were quietest measured from outside, but sounded 'overwhelming' inside... maybe a translation error. I've traditionally run Bridgestones but have to be honest I had no idea whether they were noisier than other brands until reading that.
Hmm, hadnt noticed that actually. Looks like the measurements they took were for outside. I dont see the point in that tbh who cares how loud it is for pedestrians!
The actual 'measurements' were taken from the outside - the big microphone in the picture gives that away!
But the comment about it sounding 'overwhelming' on the inside, from what I can gather, are just the opinion of the test driver whilst in the car. So maybe the Hanfooks are creating some kind of resonance which is being transmitted through the drivetrain?
Well that's pure speculation and shows how poor that part of the test was, concentrating on outside noise is just ridiculous. What driver is going to give two sh*ts about that?
-
oh Mr T_T
new dleivery for ya, you have been using them up at a fair rate in this thread
(http://i427.photobucket.com/albums/pp359/chuffs69/A-Load-of.jpg)
-
^^ LOL :grin:
for what its worth when i put my 19" wheels on my R they did effect the handling, fuel consumption, and ride. Handling was worse. fuel consumtion was worse. Ride quality was better :grin:
-
If the car has gives good feedback you should notice these things.
As for the Auto Bild test, I guess if what T_T has pointed out is true then it's a pretty shoddy test and I'm disappointed.
It is quite stupid to use a Porsche actually since T_T is right they do have their own tyre standards. What's more baffling though is using rear tyres that are wider than normal.
-
Yes, lower it.
(http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj183/jayton82/lilred/Photo-0428-1.jpg)
:grin:
-
oh Mr T_T
new dleivery for ya, you have been using them up at a fair rate in this thread
(http://i427.photobucket.com/albums/pp359/chuffs69/A-Load-of.jpg)
Huh, wft ARE you on about, Chuff? I certainly ain't being BSing in this thread! :rolleyes:
Anyway, your constructive contribution is . . . . .? :smug:
-
Interestingly that Autobild report says the Hankooks were quietest measured from outside, but sounded 'overwhelming' inside... maybe a translation error. I've traditionally run Bridgestones but have to be honest I had no idea whether they were noisier than other brands until reading that.
Hmm, hadnt noticed that actually. Looks like the measurements they took were for outside. I dont see the point in that tbh who cares how loud it is for pedestrians!
The actual 'measurements' were taken from the outside - the big microphone in the picture gives that away!
But the comment about it sounding 'overwhelming' on the inside, from what I can gather, are just the opinion of the test driver whilst in the car. So maybe the Hanfooks are creating some kind of resonance which is being transmitted through the drivetrain?
Well that's pure speculation and shows how poor that part of the test was, concentrating on outside noise is just ridiculous. What driver is going to give two sh*ts about that?
Sadly, 'drive by' exterior noise tests are quite high on the EUs priorities! :rolleyes:
-
for what its worth when i put my 19" wheels on my R they did effect the handling, fuel consumption, and ride. Handling was worse. fuel consumtion was worse. Ride quality was better :grin:
But were the differences between the 18s and the 19s identical (sorry, that sentance is shyte grammar, :embarassed: but you get the jist). Were the tyres an identical make, tread pattern, load index, tread rubber compound, appropriate tyre pressures - etc? :undecided:
-
If the car has gives good feedback you should notice these things.
As for the Auto Bild test, I guess if what T_T has pointed out is true then it's a pretty shoddy test and I'm disappointed.
It is quite stupid to use a Porsche actually since T_T is right they do have their own tyre standards. What's more baffling though is using rear tyres that are wider than normal.
Sadly, that is usually what happens when you let 'journalists' carry out these kinds of tests. :rolleyes: Similar flaws occured in the Evo tyre test a couple of years ago - and peeps just clung to the 'headline' figure, yet completely failed to see the blatant bias, which would have seriously affected the results of the test.
I'm sure if you got professional vehicle dynamics engineers to carry out the test in a more professional manner - then their findings would be much more valuble. But 'magazines' need to sell from the shelves of newsagents, and generally, just like in all forms of journalism, if you can somehow 'sensationalise' an issue - you will usually get bigger sales.
At least it provokes a good discussion. :afro:
-
for what its worth when i put my 19" wheels on my R they did effect the handling, fuel consumption, and ride. Handling was worse. fuel consumtion was worse. Ride quality was better :grin:
But were the differences between the 18s and the 19s identical (sorry, that sentance is shyte grammar, :embarassed: but you get the jist). Were the tyres an identical make, tread pattern, load index, tread rubber compound, appropriate tyre pressures - etc? :undecided:
Both were running on Goodyear Eagle F1 assyms. Same tyre pressure also. But what was noticable is that the 19" bbs rims are somewhat heavier than the 18" omanyt's.
-
I didn't know I was going to start this up when I asked the question!
In my defense (or is that defence?) I will be putting 19s on no matter what.
I think the visual benefits vastly outway any downsides the bigger wheels may bring (be it less fuel consumption, more road noise, bumpier ride).
I don't think it is a bad idea to put 19s on because the car looks so good with them. (Did VW not offer 19s as an option on the MK5 R32?)
-
Did VW not offer 19s as an option on the MK5 R32?
No. they just gave it 18" as std