GolfGTIforum.co.uk
Model specific boards => Golf mk3 => Topic started by: SCHOIE11 on 01 March 2011, 19:15
-
NEW TO THE GOLF MK3 SCENE, WHICH ONE IS BEST?
-
16v. Good performance without having to be a banking exec to run it as with the vr6, and a good base for more power if u want in future. 8v is a bit too tame but can be had for bugger all at the mo.
-
Not sure why you have 2 threads but no such thing as which is best.
Buy what suits your needs.
These threads have a habit of turning into 20 pages with no clear answer.
:smiley:
-
That#s because there is only one answer.
VR6 :grin:
-
i wouldnt have a VR personally tho, cost loads to run when you do the miles i do and fuel prices are now taking the piss and they are not ALL that fast as standard.. id say the GTI's are best all round, depends what you want from it tho..
all 3 are basically same spec other than engine so best thing to do is try all 3, then check insurance and tax costs and go with what suits you personally the best
this thread will turn into aload of ball bags
-
this thread will turn into aload of ball bags
(http://www.demotivator.org/photos/136/9de1cb189c54ef394542ed55f2a10761.jpg)
-
http://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=121567.0
-
8v pro`s - cheap , reliable , mpg , cons - slow slow slow...
16v pro`s - performance , reliable , cheap , cons - insurance , bhp gains...
vr6 pro`s - sound , straight line performance , cons - reliability , insurance , understeer , mpg
i`m biased towards the 16v cos i own one , but best all round & if ya sort the handling out (like mine) then there good fun with just enough power :grin:
-
I own a 16v and find the running costs are pretty good, considering the price of petrol. I would like a VR6 purely out of the fact it's a bit more powerful and I'm stupid like that.
I'd say test drive them and decide for yourself.
-
8v pro`s - cheap , reliable , mpg , cons - slow slow slow...
16v pro`s - performance , reliable , cheap , cons - insurance , bhp gains...
vr6 pro`s - sound , straight line performance , cons - reliability , insurance , understeer , mpg
i`m biased towards the 16v cos i own one , but best all round & if ya sort the handling out (like mine) then there good fun with just enough power :grin:
Care to expand on 'sorted out the steering'???
-
Where does he say that?
-
8v pro`s - cheap , reliable , mpg , cons - slow slow slow...
16v pro`s - performance , reliable , cheap , cons - insurance , bhp gains...
vr6 pro`s - sound , straight line performance , cons - reliability , insurance , understeer , mpg
i`m biased towards the 16v cos i own one , but best all round & if ya sort the handling out (like mine) then there good fun with just enough power :grin:
Care to expand on 'sorted out the steering'???
yeah cos they handle like a bag of sh!t as standard... i lowered mine on sports shocks and springs , fitted powerflex bump stops , new top mounts , and a strut brace up front...
-
All mk3's are uber ghey on the twistys until you fettle.
-
All mk3's are uber ghey on the twistys until you fettle.
i know , first thing i sorted when i got mine , someone had fitted some aftermarket springs & it was doing a permanent wheelie!! strange how the mk1 & mk2 were reknown for handling & the mk3 was the complete opposite...
-
ok, cool, I wasn't sure if you meant serious modification. I'm skint, but plan to get a strut brace as soon as I can afford one. Out of interest, you can buy them on ebay nonbranded for £30, or you can buy known brands for considerably higher prices. Is there much difference?
I've dropped mine to the floor and there is no movement in the suspension, that made a world of difference, but I want to also upgrade the tyres.
-
strut braces are more aesthetic than any thing else on a mk3 unless you're screaming it round a race track every so often.
-
Doesn't matter what you have as long as its 3dr....
On a serious note 16v all day long due to speed and bullet proof reliability.
-
5drs are supposedly stiffer though.
I own a late 5dr 16v for the record.
-
8v pro`s - cheap , reliable , mpg , cons - slow slow slow...
:smiley: http://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=121567.0 8v is quicker mid range than a 16v
-
Cant see how anyone can say any of them are the best tbh there all good and bad in there own ways but each car suits a individual for there needs and what you want out of the car.Best thing to do is drive a mk3 as you might not like any of them.
-
The mk3 is sh!t. Fact.
-
The mk3 is sh!t. Fact.
Why drive one then :huh:
-
The mk3 is sh!t. Fact.
Why drive one then :huh:
Because i like them! :grin: :grin:
But when you get these sort of questions, you realise they really did make some major mistakes witht the mk3 :sad:
-
The mk3 is sh!t. Fact.
Why drive one then :huh:
Because i like them! :grin: :grin:
But when you get these sort of questions, you realise they really did make some major mistakes witht the mk3 :sad:
Not really mistakes, look at all the Golf's through the years they all got heavier etc as safety increased :smiley:
-
If you actually go down to interchangable components the Mk3 suspension is virtually the same as the Mk2 and actually handles about the same.
Yes the 5 door is a little stiffer, but a little heavier. If I wanted a Mk3 track car I would chose a 3 door.
But a 16v everytime! :wink:
-
8v is the fastest.
-
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
-
I think it was RJ that pointed it out. The Mk3 was actually a better car overall than the Mk2. It had a stiffer shell, better engine, better balance, etc. The only thing that let it down, and gave it the crap reputation was the Mk2 suspension components and soft suspension. The Mk2 was lighter so it coped better, the Mk3 was heavier so the soft suspension didn't really like it, hence why it probably has the boat name.
Take a well sorted mk2, and a well sorted mk3 and I'm sure the mk3 would win it.
As for engines, 16v is best of both worlds. Decent fuel economy, good power, not very heavy compared to VR6 and smooth delivery too.
-
I reckon there is somethin wrong with my suspension then. Mine is so bumpy and hard its unreal not soft at all. Okay id does have body roll , but it is hard , harde than my mates scooby and thats on standard.
-
Khare - you love the sound of my VR :cool: :evil: :evil: :evil:
-
They do sound gorgeous :drool: :drool: :drool:
-
I honestly thought the valver would run away with this :shocked:. Didnt think the 8v would get many votes at all, but its even beating the VR. He He :grin:
-
I can't believe the 8v got that many votes, everyone I spoke to when I was looking put me off of them. Haha
-
Trouble is with the VR is its a great car but you need a petrol tanker to follow you round with the current petrol prices at the moment.The 16v on the other hand dont sound as good but isnt far behind the VR performance wise and no tanker required.The 8v well no one every said it was quick with only 115bhp its never gonna be fast fast but its still nippy round town and good on a run offers decent mpg and cheap to maintian etc it suits people who are not really to fussed on performance why it suits me.
-
Petrol is not bad on the vr at all.
Try owning my car :rolleyes:
-
bam! solve all your problems and get a mk2 8v :laugh:
-
Petrol is not bad on the vr at all.
Try owning my car :rolleyes:
Is yours the V8 or V6 :smiley:
-
4.2L 30V 300bhp :tongue:
17mpg :sick:
-
4.2L 30V 300bhp :tongue:
17mpg :sick:
Ouch with the fuel costs at the moment.
-
It doesn't get used that much :grin:
-
It doesn't get used that much :grin:
Thats lucky then, saying that I only did 101miles last month :smiley:
-
It doesn't get used that much :grin:
Thats lucky then, saying that I only did 101miles last month :smiley:
:shocked: I've already done over 200 miles this month!
-
8v pro`s - cheap , reliable , mpg , cons - slow slow slow...
:smiley: http://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=121567.0 8v is quicker mid range than a 16v
that really doesn`t make any sense , how can it 7.8 secs to get from 30-70 & 8.2 secs 30-50?! have i misread it...
-
8v pro`s - cheap , reliable , mpg , cons - slow slow slow...
:smiley: http://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=121567.0 8v is quicker mid range than a 16v
that really doesn`t make any sense , how can it 7.8 secs to get from 30-70 & 8.2 secs 30-50?! have i misread it...
Tests are done in different gears.
-
8v pro`s - cheap , reliable , mpg , cons - slow slow slow...
:smiley: http://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=121567.0 8v is quicker mid range than a 16v
that really doesn`t make any sense , how can it 7.8 secs to get from 30-70 & 8.2 secs 30-50?! have i misread it...
Tests are done in different gears.
at the end of the day my 16v has smoked many an 8v thats all i need to know.. :smug:
-
8v pro`s - cheap , reliable , mpg , cons - slow slow slow...
:smiley: http://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=121567.0 8v is quicker mid range than a 16v
that really doesn`t make any sense , how can it 7.8 secs to get from 30-70 & 8.2 secs 30-50?! have i misread it...
Tests are done in different gears.
at the end of the day my 16v has smoked many an 8v thats all i need to know.. :smug:
As I'm sure a VR6 would do to yours. I'm not sure the power is in question :grin: :grin: :grin:
-
It doesn't get used that much :grin:
Thats lucky then, saying that I only did 101miles last month :smiley:
:shocked: I've already done over 200 miles this month!
:shocked: 4 so far for me, 101miles in the car last month was balanced out by cycling 314miles
-
anything but an 8v
-
I really think the 8v gets way to much flank for what the car actually is.Its only 115bhp it was never going to be a rocket but it isnt slow either.8v and 16v 0-60 are vertually the same if anythink I would say the 8v might just nick it due the 16v doesnt really open up till it hits the higher revs I agree once it does the 16v comes into its own but its should do its 35bhp more.The VR6 sounds great when you boot it cant beat the sound of that V6 but thats it really I still think that there is very little between the the 16v and the VR if the VR didnt sound the way it did they wouldnt be as popular as they are.
-
I really think the 8v gets way to much flank for what the car actually is.Its only 115bhp it was never going to be a rocket but it isnt slow either.8v and 16v 0-60 are vertually the same if anythink I would say the 8v might just nick it due the 16v doesnt really open up till it hits the higher revs I agree once it does the 16v comes into its own but its should do its 35bhp more.The VR6 sounds great when you boot it cant beat the sound of that V6 but thats it really I still think that there is very little between the the 16v and the VR if the VR didnt sound the way it did they wouldnt be as popular as they are.
A straight line race between an 8v and 16v would be decided by the driver tbh, if you nailed every gear change in an 8v and whoever was in the 16v fluffed one then that could decide it!
-
I really think the 8v gets way to much flank for what the car actually is.Its only 115bhp it was never going to be a rocket but it isnt slow either.8v and 16v 0-60 are vertually the same if anythink I would say the 8v might just nick it due the 16v doesnt really open up till it hits the higher revs I agree once it does the 16v comes into its own but its should do its 35bhp more.The VR6 sounds great when you boot it cant beat the sound of that V6 but thats it really I still think that there is very little between the the 16v and the VR if the VR didnt sound the way it did they wouldnt be as popular as they are.
A straight line race between an 8v and 16v would be decided by the driver tbh, if you nailed every gear change in an 8v and whoever was in the 16v fluffed one then that could decide it!
Sorry but no. 35hp difference + power on for longer is a big difference.
-
People forget how easy it is to mod a VR!
The mods i have done to my VR would not get the same results with a 16v or 8v
Decat, cat back system and a BMC CDA saw a 13.5bhp increase! :evil: :cool:
-
I really think the 8v gets way to much flank for what the car actually is.Its only 115bhp it was never going to be a rocket but it isnt slow either.8v and 16v 0-60 are vertually the same if anythink I would say the 8v might just nick it due the 16v doesnt really open up till it hits the higher revs I agree once it does the 16v comes into its own but its should do its 35bhp more.The VR6 sounds great when you boot it cant beat the sound of that V6 but thats it really I still think that there is very little between the the 16v and the VR if the VR didnt sound the way it did they wouldnt be as popular as they are.
A straight line race between an 8v and 16v would be decided by the driver tbh, if you nailed every gear change in an 8v and whoever was in the 16v fluffed one then that could decide it!
Sorry but no. 35hp difference + power on for longer is a big difference.
I disagree, on paper there isn't much more than a second between the 0-60 times, one messed up gear change could easily decide it.
-
I really think the 8v gets way to much flank for what the car actually is.Its only 115bhp it was never going to be a rocket but it isnt slow either.8v and 16v 0-60 are vertually the same if anythink I would say the 8v might just nick it due the 16v doesnt really open up till it hits the higher revs I agree once it does the 16v comes into its own but its should do its 35bhp more.The VR6 sounds great when you boot it cant beat the sound of that V6 but thats it really I still think that there is very little between the the 16v and the VR if the VR didnt sound the way it did they wouldnt be as popular as they are.
A straight line race between an 8v and 16v would be decided by the driver tbh, if you nailed every gear change in an 8v and whoever was in the 16v fluffed one then that could decide it!
Sorry but no. 35hp difference + power on for longer is a big difference.
I disagree, on paper there isn't much more than a second between the 0-60 times, one messed up gear change could easily decide it.
On paper, but the real world is different.
-
I see a fast and a furious type race happening here...
8v Dom v 16v Khare... :grin: :grin:
At the end of the day whether or not a driver fluffs the gear changes, doesn't make one car quicker then the other. Fact is the 8v is slower..
Having been behind a VR6 when i had my 8v and both putting our foots down, i was left in the dark!!
Now my VR6 is quicker then his!!
-
I see a fast and a furious type race happening here...
8v Dom v 16v Khare... :grin: :grin:
At the end of the day whether or not a driver fluffs the gear changes, doesn't make one car quicker then the other. Fact is the 8v is slower..
Having been behind a VR6 when i had my 8v and both putting our foots down, i was left in the dark!!
Now my VR6 is quicker then his!!
I'm not disputing the fact that it is quicker, i'm just saying it's not that much quicker :smiley:
-
I see a fast and a furious type race happening here...
8v Dom v 16v Khare... :grin: :grin:
At the end of the day whether or not a driver fluffs the gear changes, doesn't make one car quicker then the other. Fact is the 8v is slower..
Having been behind a VR6 when i had my 8v and both putting our foots down, i was left in the dark!!
Now my VR6 is quicker then his!!
I'm not disputing the fact that it is quicker, i'm just saying it's not that much quicker :smiley:
Your right it is not much quicker. :smiley:
-
People will always argue on this one usually the 16v owners saying how rapid the valver is when truth is they ent rapid at all not upto 60-70mph anyway.Sorry to say it as well but the VR ent much better both only really prove there worth when you get upto 70 -80 mph then they do pull well through the gears.Just my point that the 8v gets way to much stick considering its not the one with the `150 to 172 bhp.
-
Having owned a standard 8v, modified 8v and a 16v I can say the 16v is the quickest of the 3 by far. The standard 8v was pretty poor to be honest, it's not 1.1 saxo slow, but it's not quick. The modified 8v was more lively and it was great until just under 5800 rmp, then it lost the will to live completely. The 16v is a completely different machine. It loves being revved and the harder you push it the harder it rewards you unlike the 16v. It pulls very smoothly and evenly all the way to the limiter. The modified 8v would get a nice push at 3500 rpm till about 4600 rpm, then again at 5000 rpm to 5400rpm then give up 5800rpm. The 16v is far more progressive and feels smooth and even all the way round the rev range. Above 4000rpm it'll push you back into the seat pretty firmly and it'll happily delivery smooth linear power to the limiter at 6800rpm, without loosing puff like the modified 8v.
Here are the charts from the 3, look for yourselves. 16v, modified 8v then standard 8v.
(http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh115/kharekatoh/golf%20mk3/abfdyno.jpg)
(http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh115/kharekatoh/golf%20mk3/RtechUKdynochart.jpg)
(http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh115/kharekatoh/golf%20mk3/dynochart1-1.jpg)
-
I struggle to believe that an 8v would stand much of a chance against a 16v. I was driving to the 8ball diner with an 8v and whenever we both put our foot down I left him behind. Admittedly this was between 40-70 and 50-70, but can't really blame the driver as we were both in third or fourth at the same times...
-
my mate has a farm and has a 1.1/1.2 mile straight bit of road. my old 16v that done 100,000 miles would hit 135mph (clock read out) my 8v with 27,000 miles will do 120mph.
it's fair to say the 8v would get spanked. But I love my 8v over my 16v. it's not about straight lines it's about corner speed and the 8v corners better than a vr6!!!
-
Im not trying to say the 8v is quicker or faster top end than a 16v or a VR6 out the box standard cars the 8v upto 60mph will live with a 16v of course once you get into the higher gears and revs the 16v will pull away I agree.If your after more BHP then the 16v and VR6 are by far the best cars to go for but if on the other hand your not to fussed about engine mods BHP etc then the 8v is a decent car and as said its not fast fast but its fine round town decent on a run and offers good mpg.I just think sometimes the 8v gets to much slack when its not that bad a car at all.
-
8v pro`s - cheap , reliable , mpg , cons - slow slow slow...
:smiley: http://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=121567.0 8v is quicker mid range than a 16v
that really doesn`t make any sense , how can it 7.8 secs to get from 30-70 & 8.2 secs 30-50?! have i misread it...
Tests are done in different gears.
at the end of the day my 16v has smoked many an 8v thats all i need to know.. :smug:
As I'm sure a VR6 would do to yours. I'm not sure the power is in question :grin: :grin: :grin:
in a straight line obviously but i`d be glued to your arse on a winding road :wink:
-
I really think the 8v gets way to much flank for what the car actually is.Its only 115bhp it was never going to be a rocket but it isnt slow either.8v and 16v 0-60 are vertually the same if anythink I would say the 8v might just nick it due the 16v doesnt really open up till it hits the higher revs I agree once it does the 16v comes into its own but its should do its 35bhp more.The VR6 sounds great when you boot it cant beat the sound of that V6 but thats it really I still think that there is very little between the the 16v and the VR if the VR didnt sound the way it did they wouldnt be as popular as they are.
A straight line race between an 8v and 16v would be decided by the driver tbh, if you nailed every gear change in an 8v and whoever was in the 16v fluffed one then that could decide it!
Sorry but no. 35hp difference + power on for longer is a big difference.
& mine would be 47bhp dfference thanks to the remap & the short shift might help also :cool:
-
I really think the 8v gets way to much flank for what the car actually is.Its only 115bhp it was never going to be a rocket but it isnt slow either.8v and 16v 0-60 are vertually the same if anythink I would say the 8v might just nick it due the 16v doesnt really open up till it hits the higher revs I agree once it does the 16v comes into its own but its should do its 35bhp more.The VR6 sounds great when you boot it cant beat the sound of that V6 but thats it really I still think that there is very little between the the 16v and the VR if the VR didnt sound the way it did they wouldnt be as popular as they are.
A straight line race between an 8v and 16v would be decided by the driver tbh, if you nailed every gear change in an 8v and whoever was in the 16v fluffed one then that could decide it!
Sorry but no. 35hp difference + power on for longer is a big difference.
& mine would be 47bhp dfference thanks to the remap & the short shift might help also :cool:
So you believe a remap has given you 12bhp :rolleyes:
-
I am a bit dumb when it comes to those graphs, so please explain. Why are there two lines on each graph? and the second one shows about 130bhp for the standard 8v?
-
My 8v Gti is better than a vr6 I saw the other day because it has a glove box, for that reason I think it should be crowned the best. :smiley:
-
My 8v Gti is better than a vr6 I saw the other day because it has a glove box, for that reason I think it should be crowned the best. :smiley:
:grin: :grin: :grin:
-
I am a bit dumb when it comes to those graphs, so please explain. Why are there two lines on each graph? and the second one shows about 130bhp for the standard 8v?
One is BHP, the other is torque.
-
Im gonna have to agree with Blu on this one as i was very surprised when i picked my missus 8v up for her! Drove it back from rotherham way and it was surprisingly good! I was a bit hesitant at first, it looked good but i thought 115bhp??? Nowai!!
Low and behold on the trot home, i gave it a bootfull from a standing start and the grin stretched from ear to ear! Not to mention throwing it round the twisties on the b-roads! Couldnt beleive how much it was!
As an entry into the mk3 world i would recommend the 8v anyday, then work up to a VR should you feel the need to.
I would get one myself but im a bellend so id have to get a VR if anything cos i love the 6cyl roar!
This by the way, is coming from somebody whos daily is a Vectra Gsi V6. So its not like ive jumped out of a 1.2 punto and thought the gti was rapid.
That is all, Peace and apples,
Mike
-
As an 8v driver I would just add that's is very revealing that from about 1986/7 (when the first 16v came out) VW chose to continue to produce the 8v side by side with the 16v. Arguably, if the 16v head was a normal evolution (along the lines of fuel injection, disc brakes, ABS etc) then how come VW carried on with the 8v format both in 1.8 for the MK2 and 2.0 for the MK3? Answer: because they got it right first time round!
When the normally aspirated 20v 1.8 came out in the MK4 it only lasted one of two years to be replaced by the 2.0 8v from the Mk3 because although it was 'only' 115bhp compared to 125bhp 1.8 but it actually made some useful torque which is what you need for the real world.
I'm NOT slating the 16v engine just sticking up for the underdog 8v: just like VW themselves did!
:grin:
-
I feel the 8v love coming through :grin: :grin:
-
Ive owned all three and have enjoyed all of em i think the 8v gets a hard time and it is what it is, not the fastest car in the world but still fun and well built the 16v ive get at the moment is a real rev happy motor but i prefered the 8v gear change but i have to say my favorite out of the 3 is my old VR6 it was lowered with an induction kit bora alloys and had an enlarged throttle body, yes they do cost a fair bit in juice but my god when ya give it its legs in 3rd the noise is to die for. : :shocked:
So as a few people have said its not a case of which is the best but more of what suits your needs the 16v suits me to the ground not to bad on fuel but still quick enough to not leave me embarassed :embarassed: at the lights.