GolfGTIforum.co.uk
Model specific boards => Golf mk6 => Topic started by: FroGTI on 21 May 2010, 19:19
-
I think I am going to have to vote for option 2, simply because the Golf is FWD. Other than that, it's pretty much perfect.
-
:smiley:
-
Coming from a background of about 23 years driving VAG products I have to doff my hat to the mk6 GTI. It does everything that it does supremely well. So much so that it's a bit too clever for it's own good.
I'm having impure thoughts about chopping mine in for a forthcoming Polo GTI at present as I'm sure that will have a little more 'edge' to it (ie. not be quite so competant thus have a bit more character).
Having said that I'm pretty certain that I'll get a pretty crap deal so will end up happily keeping the mk6 for a good while.
The MK6 is typically VW GTI, not brilliant in any one area but unbeaten as a whole package. Sometimes the only way to remind yourself of how good it is as a package you need to sit in an Astra or Focus. The subtleness of the quality just smacks you in the face when you get back in the Golf. :cool:
-
Makes me smile inside everyday.
I love mine. :cool:
Not sure why there are so many moaners on here VW have done a brilliant job with this car.
-
Yep, i'd say it is.
-
I voted for the I wish I never bought one. Rattley gearbox, sent letter to VW no reply as of yet. Once they have your money they are not interested. Shall I buy a mk7, I doubt it at this rate. :angry:
-
I guess a lot of it depends on what you've come from.
A lot of ex 40k Merc/BMW/Porsche 'downsizers' on here....
Look back through the earlier posts. Most of us were very chuffed to have such a fantastic car and to be able to afford it.
(Only just in my case).
The mk6 Golf GTI is not perfect. But it is the best car of its type for the money at the moment.
I love mine dearly.
-
Only time will tell.
-
Tough one...it is certainly up there as a whole package.
Tidy enough handling, quick enough, reasonable fun, reasonably entertaining and utterly practical.
Sure, you can buy faster, better handling, quicker accellerating, better to drive, more fun etc...but most of those that excell in one area are way short in others...so overall it's probably a fairly well balalnced car, and up in the top few.
The brakes are a weak point though...I was scared for the first time in years the other day after giving it a proper hard stop - it was moving lanes under braking...I think a decent front brake upgrade could be on the cards.
-
Sometimes the only way to remind yourself of how good it is as a package you need to sit in an Astra or Focus. The subtleness of the quality just smacks you in the face when you get back in the Golf. :cool:
Agreed. Our household also has a Ford Transit van and a Renault Espace to remind me how nice the Golf is. To be fair on the Transit, I actually think it's nicer to drive than the Espace :lipsrsealed:
-
Yes. Definitely
And I can't agree with the brakes are a weak area. They saved my life back in September as many of you will remember me posting.
The first car I've ever had that I've not got bored of in a year and the first that I genuinely look forward to driving every time I get in it.
-
I dont think the brakes are weak or dangerous.. although they do suffer from fade.
Not the best car.. but up there as a great all-rounder :cool:
-
I dont think the brakes are weak or dangerous.. although they do suffer from fade.
They are grabby at low speed, over-servo'd and indeed can fade when hot.
I can just about live with that...but the amount of correction I was having to do with the steering when braking hard was alarming. Sop either the suspension bushes are made of marshmallow, or the brakes can be improved.
I'd just like it to brake in a straight line, not keep trying to turn left, right, left, right etc under heavy braking.
Not the best car.. but up there as a great all-rounder :cool:
Indeed so.
-
Not the best car.. but up there as a great all-rounder :cool:
+1. A Gallardo is nicer to drive, a Citroën C1 nicer to park in town and the Transit nicer to move house with, but as you say, as an all-rounder, the Golf is hard to beat.
-
Let me own up.
I am the guy who has voted 'slightly disappointed'.
Reasons in order of disappointment:-
(1) Tyre roar at speeds over 60 mph - very annoying.
(2) The steering wheel does not have enough reach so I cannot get fully comfortable.
(3) Lack of mid-range acceleration - easily corrected with a re-map.
-
At the moment it's the best car i have owned, but long term reliability has to come into the equation. So went for option 2.
-
its not the nicest for me. its the best vw i have bought. our family have had 5 golf's and i had a polo sport. for me the driving position isn't very good- too high, maybe i'm too used to my previous audi tt mark2 which the driving position is excellent, nice and low. the interior is such a let down. golf's a pretty sedated but the only distinction from a normal golf is some chrome bits here and there. im disappointed in the width of the tyres, means curbing is too easy. i currently drive a porsche boxster 987 gen 2- it is truly amazing to drive, the feedback from the steering wheel is superb. the noise from the engine is immence and power is predictably good. how can one hate a porsche? even the audi tt was a belter. the sound from the exhaust was incredible with the farting exhaust note, lets not forget the auto raising of the rear spoiler. i loved how it would rise when i go past 80mph and with a push of a button it would go up or down at the traffic lights. the tt takes the gti engine, but adds a better chassis and components is maximise the full potential of the engine, sacrificing practicallity for pure driving pleasure.
it is the best car in that category imo.
-
(3) Lack of mid-range acceleration - easily corrected with a re-map.
If I hadn't had mine remapped, I would probably have voted 'slightly disappointed', too. A remap is a must in terms of power, the only problem then is traction... which is why I miss RWD :rolleyes:
-
I've just driven a one week old BMW 335d M Sport saloon, 18" wheels, leather etc. Oh dear, what a 'mild' disappointment. The inside plastics seemed low rent compared with the Golf, the leather had the appearance of plastic, was very dimpled, crumpled and hard, the ride was very lumpy but the engine and auto box were a peach. Both internal and external design was very ordinary and close to ugly. However, it really is mentally fast. Is it worth £45k he paid for it. No, no, no!
The Mercedes C Class 350CDI Sport Auto looks much nicer, feels and looks more upmarket and drives just as well. This is IMO.
Now, where is this going you may ask. Well, if the VW Golf R fully loaded costs £40k+ and compared to both these above named saloons I now feel is well worth it! So is the GTi which I feel is very good value for money. Yes, VW have done a superb job of updating the Mk5.
I am therefore changing my vote from 'mild disappointment' to 'probably one of the best cars I have owned.'
One lives and learns all the time!
-
So far this is the best car i've owned although some things are annoying me at the moment, esp in the warm weather.
-
So far this is the best car i've owned although some things are annoying me at the moment, esp in the warm weather.
Getting rapidly to 'The best car I have ever owned' once I have it re-mapped! :smiley:
-
I like my mk1 better than then mk6 :evil: My mk1 is better engineered.
-
(3) Lack of mid-range acceleration - easily corrected with a re-map.
If I hadn't had mine remapped, I would probably have voted 'slightly disappointed', too. A remap is a must in terms of power, the only problem then is traction... which is why I miss RWD :rolleyes:
+1
-
(3) Lack of mid-range acceleration - easily corrected with a re-map.
If I hadn't had mine remapped, I would probably have voted 'slightly disappointed', too. A remap is a must in terms of power, the only problem then is traction... which is why I miss RWD :rolleyes:
+1
+2 (RWD/AWD)
-
I like my mk1 better than then mk6 :evil: My mk1 is better engineered.
Give your head a shake Snoopy lad... :wink:
Bendy bodyshell, twist beam rear end, no brakes, 2 candle-power front lights etc...better engineered?
The Mk1 is no doubt more of a hoot, and I very much doubt your Mk6 won't look quite as good in 28 years time...but engineering progress is hard to deny.
-
Give your head a shake Snoopy lad... :wink:
Bendy bodyshell, twist beam rear end, no brakes, 2 candle-power front lights etc...better engineered?
The Mk1 is no doubt more of a hoot, and I very much doubt your Mk6 won't look quite as good in 28 years time...but engineering progress is hard to deny.
I don't agree but not everyone looks at things the same way. As an engineer i think the mk1 GTI is better engineered
Twist beam rear end nothing wrong with that in such a small light chassis. Its only when you get bigger and heavier that a multilink helps more. Remember VW still use it on there small cars.
Light weight, less than a lotus elise, shells stiff enough if you don't play silly buggers with the shocks/springs or if you do, you need to know what the limits are (BRM did many don't). Never noticed it twist unlike some other makes.
Brakes nothing wrong with the brakes its a journo BS, you look after the rear brakes and there adjustment they work fine. Otherwise they are as the myth says. Just not as over servo'ed as modern numb machines. People use to have muscles :wink:
I have read the design papers on the EA888 and control systems of the mk5/6 and the mk1 is far better engineered. The mk1 GTI was designed by engineers, the mk6 was designed by committee and accountants.
-
The MK6 is typically VW GTI, not brilliant in any one area but unbeaten as a whole package. Sometimes the only way to remind yourself of how good it is as a package you need to sit in an Astra or Focus. The subtleness of the quality just smacks you in the face when you get back in the Golf. :cool:
Don't agree that it has no brilliant areas, what about:
The driving position and seats combined with the performance? What about the overall appearance of the car? In my opinion, the car is already a classic, being visually pleasing and satisfying from all angles :cool:[There's no "bad" angle which you get with some cars] Also, you won't find any cars in the price bracket that offer this combination of looks, body hugging comfort, driveability and performance, isn't that brilliant? [Having said that I haven't driven similar priced cars of this type] but I can speak for looks, it's unbeatable in the price bracket. You can also short-shift whilst maintaining quick acceleration if you don't want to boot it to max, in fact it almost encourages quick short shifting.
Could mention more but don't want to go on about it too much. All in all a most excellent car, I voted for best car I've owned :smiley: :cool: :smug:
-
Don't agree that it has no brilliant areas, what about:
1)The driving position and seats
2)combined with the performance?
3)What about the overall appearance of the car? In my opinion, the car is already a classic, being visually pleasing and satisfying from all angles :cool:[There's no "bad" angle which you get with some cars]
4)Also, you won't find any cars in the price bracket that offer this combination of looks, body hugging comfort, driveability and performance, isn't that brilliant? [Having said that I haven't driven similar priced cars of this type] but I can speak for looks, it's unbeatable in the price bracket. You can also short-shift whilst maintaining quick acceleration if you don't want to boot it to max, in fact it almost encourages quick short shifting.
Could mention more but don't want to go on about it too much. All in all a most excellent car, I voted for best car I've owned :smiley: :cool: :smug:
Just my views and so im not saying your wrong just putting my views on your views across, Different views imo are always useful.
1)Driving position needs more reach on the steering wheel. Driving position meens you cannot see the end of the bonnet thats also a design issue.
2) That stupid electonic drive by wire crap spoils it as does the floor mounted throttle. The amount of times i have stalled it trying to pull away because the car cannot keep up with my foot movements.
3) Bland bland bland. Typical euro box bland. Its not the best looking car and has little style imo. I could like other manufactures do and blaim it all on EU rules about crash tests etc. But Alfa sometimes manage to produce a good looking car that does not look bland. Also park next to a fiat stilo and notice some of the design fetures VW pinched :grin: a car that was slated on its looks by journos. :grin:
-
I don't agree but not everyone looks at things the same way. As an engineer i think the mk1 GTI is better engineered
Twist beam rear end nothing wrong with that in such a small light chassis. Its only when you get bigger and heavier that a multilink helps more. Remember VW still use it on there small cars.
Twist beam is cheap, always has been.
Multi-link/double wishbones are better, but dearer.
If cost (and packaging) wasn't a problem, then even VAGs light cars (Ha!...still heavy next to the likes of an ITR or early CTR) would use multi-link rears at the very least as it has such a huge impact on the overall chassis performance.
I agree about weight though...that's the key!
Light weight, less than a lotus elise, shells stiff enough if you don't play silly buggers with the shocks/springs or if you do, you need to know what the limits are (BRM did many don't). Never noticed it twist unlike some other makes.
Brakes nothing wrong with the brakes its a journo BS, you look after the rear brakes and there adjustment they work fine. Otherwise they are as the myth says. Just not as over servo'ed as modern numb machines. People use to have muscles :wink:
Nothing wrong perhaps.
Just not as good as a more modern set-up.
That's progress...
Where bodyshells are concerned, still is best. End of.
From a still base, all else hangs and stays where you put it.
I have read the design papers on the EA888 and control systems of the mk5/6 and the mk1 is far better engineered. The mk1 GTI was designed by engineers, the mk6 was designed by committee and accountants.
An engine is an in-efficient old hector.
Anything you can do to improve the efficiency, is a good thing....especially if you can reduce wasted energy (unburned fuel) whilst doing so....and to improve the efficiency requires engineering progress.
So explain how a 8v 1.8 is more efficient (or if you prefer, 'better' engineered) than a 16v FSI engine running full computer controlled management, with variable valve timing and a turbocharger etc?
More power and less emissions = better engineering in my book.
-
Here we agree:
1)Driving position needs more reach on the steering wheel. Driving position meens you cannot see the end of the bonnet thats also a design issue.
Spot on.
2) That stupid electonic drive by wire crap spoils it as does the floor mounted throttle. The amount of times i have stalled it trying to pull away because the car cannot keep up with my foot movements.
Spot on. You can't blip the throttle as it's got lag measured using a sundial!
Give me a cable anyday...but then the electronic fun police can't intervene...fine by me. I'd rather have it without.
3) Bland bland bland. Typical euro box bland. Its not the best looking car and has little style imo. I could like other manufactures do and blaim it all on EU rules about crash tests etc. But Alfa sometimes manage to produce a good looking car that does not look bland. Also park next to a fiat stilo and notice some of the design fetures VW pinched :grin: a car that was slated on its looks by journos. :grin:
Agree to a point...
The Mk6 GTI is a very good (great?) car in a sea of utter drivel and blandness.
Not necesarily a very good car in the history of things with 4 wheels and an engine.
-
Twist beam is cheap, always has been.
Multi-link/double wishbones are better, but dearer.
If cost (and packaging) wasn't a problem, then even VAGs light cars (Ha!...still heavy next to the likes of an ITR or early CTR) would use multi-link rears at the very least as it has such a huge impact on the overall chassis performance.
Early civics and i meen the first couple of generations back in 70s-80s had independent rear suspension and the golf out handled them :wink:
It does not have as big an impact as people are lead to beleave imo.
Nothing wrong perhaps.
Just not as good as a more modern set-up.
That's progress...
Adds weight destroys handling and feel. Thats why lotus is lotus.
An engine is an in-efficient old hector.
Anything you can do to improve the efficiency, is a good thing....especially if you can reduce wasted energy (unburned fuel) whilst doing so....and to improve the efficiency requires engineering progress.
So explain how a 8v 1.8 is more efficient (or if you prefer, 'better' engineered) than a 16v FSI engine running full computer controlled management, with variable valve timing and a turbocharger etc?
More power and less emissions = better engineering in my book.
Not when its by electronics. Mechanical reliable engineering wins over electrical engineering anyday for long term reliability. (I design both for a living so know how crap electronics are). don't just base emissions off Co2 :wink:
The mk1 engine does better mpg as it does not have that fat ass to drag about. :grin: is reliable and will always start unlike anything electronic controlled. :evil: Mechanical engineering wins over electrical anyday of the week. You may also find alot of the EA888 mechanicals is based off the old 1.8 funny that.
-
Bugger the engineering. :wink: Safety first. If I was to be in a major accident, I would rather be in a Mk6 than a Mk1. I'll have a good chance of surviving.
Remember modern products are throw away products and that's that, fortunately or unfortunately. :rolleyes:
I've just got up and am in a bad mood as my car is covered with bird poo! :angry:
-
Bugger the engineering. :wink: Safety first. If I was to be in a major accident, I would rather be in a Mk6 than a Mk1. I'll have a good chance of surviving.
Remember modern products are throw away products and that's that, fortunately or unfortunately. :rolleyes:
I've just got up and in a bad mood as my car is covered in bird poo! :angry:
The thing is in the mk1 you will see the accident going to happen so can avoid it. Were as the amount of blind spots in modern cars meens you cannot see jack sh1t so end up crashing.
I have had two accidents in a mk1 (Luckily the other one i use to own) One an old bloke had just been to the opticians and has eyes were dilated and he drove into the back of me at 40mph at a set of traffic lights as he did not see me or the lights!!! (I had nowere to go as there was school children crossing so i had to hold the brakes on as hard as i could as well as pull the handbrake on full so did not go into the kids. (was a tuff call kids or car :grin: )
The other one someone decided they did not like the front end and wanted to try and remove it by going straight acorss a crossroads at high speed ~60mph. That sort of killed the car. Both times myself and passenger unhurt.
Remember modern cars are built to meet Euro encap crash tests thats not what happens in real life imo. Ever noticed how in a crash brakes are normally applied and so angles and forces change :wink: and we don't hit at exact angles like they check at :wink:
I have had two accidents in modern cars one a SEAT Ibiza only a couple years old= broken ribs and nose. A SEAT leon a couple years old that broke my ankle and foot. Both imo were lower speed impacts than the golf ones and i felt worse afterwords.
Im all for modern stiffer body shells as it helps in a crash (look at F1 for stiffness) (as long as it does not impact weight to much), but i find it upsetting that there are huge compromises i often get told about made to meet certain standards set by the EU/USA crash tests just to help marketing. I also find it a problem having to have so many blind spots and over selling saftey to the point people forget how to drive because they think they won't get hurt is worrying.
-
Snoops: Your post is full of logic, but it had me in stitches. I know I am a bit sick by this reaction, but you can be so funny when one least expects it!
I hope you are all healed now. :smiley:
-
Early civics and i meen the first couple of generations back in 70s-80s had independent rear suspension and the golf out handled them :wink:
It does not have as big an impact as people are lead to beleave imo.
I was referring to early CTRs or ITRs - cars that outhandle ANY VW to date.
Adds weight destroys handling and feel. Thats why lotus is lotus.
Didn't the 7 have double wishbones?
Wasn't that a Lotus?
Not when its by electronics. Mechanical reliable engineering wins over electrical engineering anyday for long term reliability. (I design both for a living so know how crap electronics are). don't just base emissions off Co2 :wink:
And I, like many, use them both for a living...and electronics = progress.
We aren't stuck in the dark ages...
Emissions/efficiency = better burn of hydrocarbons = less unburned hydrocarbons.
Care to explain the swirl advantages (hence better mixing, and more complete combustion) of a 8v head over a properly designed 16v head?
The mk1 engine does better mpg as it does not have that fat ass to drag about. :grin: is reliable and will always start unlike anything electronic controlled. :evil: Mechanical engineering wins over electrical anyday of the week. You may also find alot of the EA888 mechanicals is based off the old 1.8 funny that.
Weight accepted. We will never see the likes of the Mk1 again as long as we have to share the road with idiots in 2.5T SUVs.
When you say "alot of the EA888 mechanicals is based off the old 1.8"
You mean it's made of metal, has physically similar in dimensions, has 4 cylinders and a crankshaft.
That's like saying I'm roughly based on Algelina Jolie as I am human with two arms and two legs.
Hardly the same...they are polar opposites.
-
When you say "alot of the EA888 mechanicals is based off the old 1.8"
You mean it's made of metal, has physically similar in dimensions, has 4 cylinders and a crankshaft.
That's like saying I'm roughly based on Algelina Jolie as I am human with two arms and two legs.Hardly the same...they are polar opposites.
:laugh: :laugh:
This is turning into the best posts ever.
You two are ace!
-
As usual I'm going to back Snoopy on this one. The mk1 was engineered, the mk6 is manufactured.
I'm not going to stick my neck out and say that the mk1 was better though. The early ones were rust buckets and the one I had was the most unreliable car I ever had. In fact it blew it's head gasket on my effing wedding day!
If they still made a mk1 with a galvanised shell and a 2.0 150bhp engine, power steering (sorry Snoops I hated the unasisted steering as I have no muscles) I'd get that over the eurobox mk6 in a flash.
BTW I have found a cure for the godawful throttle on the mk6 (and mk5 for that matter as it's not much better). It cost me £100 plus VAT though and makes the car a little jerky at times. However you can move off on a sniff of throttle and you don't have to stretch your leg 2 foot to get full acceleration.
And it has a neat little switch that enables you to power it off in traffic if it's gets a bit too jerky.
It's called a Sprintbooster. Hideously overpriced for what it is but I found it necessary.
Quick edit: I don't agree about the Alfas though. I find most modern Alphas fugly. I think it's the funny grille that does it mostly. Not as fugly as BMWs though.
-
Is this it?
http://www.sprintbooster2.com/
Or,
http://www.wheelandtyre.co.uk/tuning/sprint-booster/
£118! Expensive.
I was looking at this just yesterday! :smiley:
-
That's the ones. They are expensive but necessary IMO.
I asked REVO when they did my re-map if they could improve the throttle response any more and they said they had it as good as it could be got. So the Sprintbooster was to my eyes a necessary addition.
Makes the car more like a 205 GTI. Touch throttle and off it goes.
The Golf is more prod throttle, wait, move a bit, stretch you leg right out, move faster, dip clutch, change gear and repeat previous steps. Very refined I'm sure but not what I want.
-
That's the ones. They are expensive but necessary IMO.
I asked REVO when they did my re-map if they could improve the throttle response any more and they said they had it as good as it could be got. So the Sprintbooster was to my eyes a necessary addition.
Makes the car more like a 205 GTI. Touch throttle and off it goes.
The Golf is more prod throttle, wait, move a bit, stretch you leg right out, move faster, dip clutch, change gear and repeat previous steps. Very refined I'm sure but not what I want.
Agreed. Along with the turbo lag this is one thing that i miss from the old R, instant torque and no pootling around waiting for something to happen. Hate to think what a CTR must be like :undecided:
-
As usual I'm going to back Snoopy on this one. The mk1 was engineered, the mk6 is manufactured.
Hmm...anyone know the story of how the Mk1 GTI came about?
A parts bin special knocked up by Engineers in their spare time, using parts available from other models.
Now lets see...which was engineered, and which was manufactured from existing bits?
BTW I have found a cure for the godawful throttle on the mk6 (and mk5 for that matter as it's not much better). It cost me £100 plus VAT though and makes the car a little jerky at times. However you can move off on a sniff of throttle and you don't have to stretch your leg 2 foot to get full acceleration.
And it has a neat little switch that enables you to power it off in traffic if it's gets a bit too jerky.
It's called a Sprintbooster. Hideously overpriced for what it is but I found it necessary.
This is something I've almost bought several times...as the Mk6 GTI really needs it.
If it solves the problem, I'm having one.
You got the original or the adjustable version?
-
Although mine is not a GTI, I'm still going tosay yes!
As I'm 'fairly' young, I'm still at the stage where each car is a bit more expensive and better than the previous.
I'm sure my next car will be better... or perhaps it will be a family car in a couple of years :cry:
-
I am glad that you feel the same.
I am not happy with the throttle response being so 'gentlemanly'. Adds boredom to the drive.
My Type R GT had this instant feel to it which I really loved and made driving it an absolute hoot. Slightly jerky in traffic, but I got used to it.
More bloody expense! :rolleyes:
-
The Mk6 Golf GTI is definitely the best car I ever own to drive to work
1. Good pace and decent economy
2. Sporty but subdue styling which generate admiration rather than envy
3. Reasonably compact to make town driving a doddle but big and refine enough for the motorway.
4. Manual+Winter tyres+Front wheel drive with not too much power---got thru this aweful winter unscathe while my colleagues in their reardrive Jag and Beemers all struggle to go
to work
My other cars at home is both faster and more fun to drive but none of them I would like to take to work everyday!
-
As I'm 'fairly' young
'Fairly' more like 'bloody'! :wink:
Enjoy it whilst it lasts as when you get that 4x4 you know it's time to reserve a plot! :evil:
-
As I'm 'fairly' young
'Fairly' more like 'bloody'! :wink:
Enjoy it whilst it lasts as when you get that 4x4 you know it's time to reserve a plot! :evil:
4x4 not an issue - his R is 4WD...as were my last two cars.
It's whan you buy a Scitroen Picasso you have lost the will to live.
-
It's whan you buy a Shcitroen Picasso you have lost the will to live.
:sick:
...and turn us all in Manic Depressives. So many of the those Picos and MDs around! I am losing the will to live, though slowly..... :laugh:
-
As usual I'm going to back Snoopy on this one. The mk1 was engineered, the mk6 is manufactured.
Hmm...anyone know the story of how the Mk1 GTI came about?
A parts bin special knocked up by Engineers in their spare time, using parts available from other models.
Now lets see...which was engineered, and which was manufactured from existing bits?
BTW I have found a cure for the godawful throttle on the mk6 (and mk5 for that matter as it's not much better). It cost me £100 plus VAT though and makes the car a little jerky at times. However you can move off on a sniff of throttle and you don't have to stretch your leg 2 foot to get full acceleration.
And it has a neat little switch that enables you to power it off in traffic if it's gets a bit too jerky.
It's called a Sprintbooster. Hideously overpriced for what it is but I found it necessary.
This is something I've almost bought several times...as the Mk6 GTI really needs it.
If it solves the problem, I'm having one.
You got the original or the adjustable version?
The mk1 was knocked up by some very talented engineers. Thus it was engineered in my book!
I've started a new topic on the sprintbooster just for you and the other guys who've expressed and interest in it, just to keep this thread 'tidy'. Some hope of that anyway! :grin: