GolfGTIforum.co.uk
General => General discussion => Topic started by: boneybradley on 17 May 2013, 11:17
-
Back to the important matter of the fastest Golf GTI of those first four iterations. Folklore has it that each new GTI has been slower than the previous model. However, like many urban myths, this was an urban myth. Each new GTI was indeed heavier than its predecessor, and Volkswagen’s careful (or stingy, depending on your view) power increases from one model to the next never seemed to be enough to make up for the added lard.
When the Mk4 GTI was released, Autocar’s Steve Sutcliffe and BTCC driver Phil Bennett put this ‘newer equals slower’ thing to the test. They took all four GTI iterations from the Volkswagen press museum to Castle Combe, where they achieved the following lap times:
Mk1: 1min 33.6sec
Mk2: 1min 33.1sec
Mk3: 1min 31.2sec
Mk4: 1min 27.2sec
taken from pistonheads shed of the week... which is a mk3 16v :cool:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=23&t=1286470&mid=271170&nmt=RE%3A+SOTW%3A+Volkswagen+Golf+GTI+16V (http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=23&t=1286470&mid=271170&nmt=RE%3A+SOTW%3A+Volkswagen+Golf+GTI+16V)
discuss :whistle:
-
Which version of each mk was used? :nerd:
-
Presumably, the MK3 was the only one timed on a flying lap?
-
Looks like its a 16v Mk3 and a 1.8T Mk4. No mention of the other two marques.
Very surprised that a Mk4 with the same bhp but heavier than a Mk3 is faster? :huh:
-
Looks like its a 16v Mk3 and a 1.8T Mk4. No mention of the other two marques.
Very surprised that a Mk4 with the same bhp but heavier than a Mk3 is faster? :huh:
didnt expect a 4sec quicker mk4...
-
the mk4 1.8t will possibly be in it's peak power/torque band more than the mk3?
I am going to try and find a copy of that autocar story, as it would be good to know the exact models used
(I guess 1.8 MK1 - Mk2 16v - mk3 16v and 150bhp 1.8t) oh and do you think as it was a new mk4 press car it had slightly up'd boost settings? :huh: :undecided:
-
Admittedly, the Mk2 they had was practically unused, with a tight engine, so at the end of the day these results may only really show what a difference improvements in grip and braking can make. But if you shout these numbers at your drinking buddies and then immediately change the subject, you’ll very likely make your point stick.
-
Mk4 was as a guess better suited to the track, lets be honest a std mk3 would be all at sea on a track in terms of handling.
-
Figures would always be misleading anyway, for starters a Mk3's speed would be measured in Knots, and not MPH!
Thom
-
Figures would always be misleading anyway, for starters a Mk3's speed would be measured in Knots, and not MPH!
Thom
:grin: :grin: :grin:
my mk3 16v felt quicker than my std mk4 1.8t, but then i tuned the 1.8t too.. :evil:
-
Anyone ever seen a drag race between the two?
-
Mk4 was as a guess better suited to the track, lets be honest a std mk3 would be all at sea on a track in terms of handling.
Are you serious?....the mk3 is no lotus i'll grant you but the mk4 is a total shambles in the handling dept.
-
are was talking about speed,
or depreciation
or rotting
:whistle:
-
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/34/Tugboat_MS_HEMIKSEM.jpg)
-
are was talking about speed, mk4 wins
or depreciation mk3 wins
or rotting mk3 again takes the title
:whistle:
:laugh:
-
Mk4's have lots of problems. I'd say it's the most unreliable golf of them all.
Mk4 = Utter pants in all but R32 form. Well made though. Out of all the golfs the Mk4 would be the one I
would avoid. Sorry.
-
must be hard to take that the golf everyone hates on is quicker then everyone thought, over taken by a tug! :grin:
-
must be hard to take that the golf everyone hates on is quicker then everyone thought, over taken by a tug! :grin:
brads mk3 would destroy most mk4s :grin:
-
Mk4's have lots of problems. I'd say it's the most unreliable golf of them all.
Mk4 = Utter pants in all but R32 form. Well made though. Out of all the golfs the Mk4 would be the one I
would avoid. Sorry.
Ever driven a mapped MK4? Pisses on all mk3's without significant engine work.
Mk4 was as a guess better suited to the track, lets be honest a std mk3 would be all at sea on a track in terms of handling.
Are you serious?....the mk3 is no lotus i'll grant you but the mk4 is a total shambles in the handling dept.
Having owned both standard I have to disagree, they're both as bad as each other. Saying the MK3 handles better than a MK4 is like saying you'd rather take a bath in cow sh!t than horse sh!t.
-
Mk4's have lots of problems. I'd say it's the most unreliable golf of them all.
Mk4 = Utter pants in all but R32 form. Well made though. Out of all the golfs the Mk4 would be the one I
would avoid. Sorry.
Ever driven a mapped MK4? Pisses on all mk3's without significant engine work.
Mk4 was as a guess better suited to the track, lets be honest a std mk3 would be all at sea on a track in terms of handling.
Are you serious?....the mk3 is no lotus i'll grant you but the mk4 is a total shambles in the handling dept.
Having owned both standard I have to disagree, they're both as bad as each other. Saying the MK3 handles better than a MK4 is like saying you'd rather take a bath in cow sh!t than horse sh!t.
Nah..sorry but my headlight has never exploded for no reason nor has my mk3 suffered total electrical failure unlike my brothers mk4... i get very tired of seeing the mk3 berated but i'm afraid to say its a much better car than either the mk2 or mk4.... and i'm aware i'll get some flack for that.
-
(http://i1213.photobucket.com/albums/cc477/gavv8/946163_524437440927206_673513107_n_zpse08f4d9f.jpg) (http://s1213.photobucket.com/user/gavv8/media/946163_524437440927206_673513107_n_zpse08f4d9f.jpg.html)
At least the mk3 isn't a tractor.
-
Comparing N/A against forced induction. Sums up the study tbh.
-
I agree Gav. Mk4 are sh!te. Will never buy one again
-
Mk4's have lots of problems. I'd say it's the most unreliable golf of them all.
Mk4 = Utter pants in all but R32 form. Well made though. Out of all the golfs the Mk4 would be the one I
would avoid. Sorry.
Ever driven a mapped MK4? Pisses on all mk3's without significant engine work.
Mk4 was as a guess better suited to the track, lets be honest a std mk3 would be all at sea on a track in terms of handling.
Are you serious?....the mk3 is no lotus i'll grant you but the mk4 is a total shambles in the handling dept.
Having owned both standard I have to disagree, they're both as bad as each other. Saying the MK3 handles better than a MK4 is like saying you'd rather take a bath in cow sh!t than horse sh!t.
Nah..sorry but my headlight has never exploded for no reason nor has my mk3 suffered total electrical failure unlike my brothers mk4... i get very tired of seeing the mk3 berated but i'm afraid to say its a much better car than either the mk2 or mk4.... and i'm aware i'll get some flack for that.
I'm not disputing the reliability of the MK4, I was referring to the handling of both cars in standard form.
If you're going to go down that route though I'll leave you with these:
(http://i395.photobucket.com/albums/pp35/madmanmart666/Picture017-1.jpg)
(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ8sqPai1YyIDKpT7VuoJJ9YZ1Qh-oifmxVMsNeGVYkRp6Sljd8FQ)
-
Rust can be fixed...inherent crapness can't.
-
Cabriolet Edition:
(http://www.popularmechanics.com/cm/popularmechanics/images/8a/amphibious-cars-03-0812-lgn.jpg)
-
Cabriolet Edition:
(http://www.popularmechanics.com/cm/popularmechanics/images/8a/amphibious-cars-03-0812-lgn.jpg)
Are you Thoms little disciple?
-
I'm just messing around :tongue:
-
With superb build quality the mk4 was a great ownership proposition but a GTI it was not. Even with a
turbocharged 180bhp under the bonnet, this Golf was simply too heavy and too slow to capture the
imagination. Dull-witted handling didn't help and the Mk4 was a shadow of the original.
-
The mk1 was the finest and in campaign spec was ..in my opinion...perfect.
-
All mk3's are classed as bangers. The mk4 is not, thats the main difference
-
All mk3's are classed as bangers. The mk4 is not, thats the main difference
yeah not a banger, just dull, fat and ugly looking
-
:grin: :grin: :grin: plus very common
-
From my own experience my 16v mk3 felt quicker than my dads 1.8t but I wasnt really pushing the mk4 and it had done 180k :grin: However I do know that my current mk4 tdi wagon makes mince meat of mk3 8vs havent came up against a 16v as of yet :grin:
-
All mk3's are classed as bangers. The mk4 is not, thats the main difference
I'd rather drive a banger than the chav's favorite motor.
-
Mk5's are becoming chav cars round my way, Mk4's are two a penny and being sold for scrap.
Mk3's are just dissolving quietly and unloved :grin:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/gallery/2012/may/06/shipbreaking-yards-chittagong-in-pictures#/?picture=389700523&index=1
-
Mk5's are becoming chav cars round my way, Mk4's are two a penny and being sold for scrap.
Mk3's are just dissolving quietly and unloved :grin:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/gallery/2012/may/06/shipbreaking-yards-chittagong-in-pictures#/?picture=389700523&index=1
seen couple slammed mk5's round mine with wide wheels and camber. Just isnt right on mk's :undecided:
-
The PH article just confirms what i've always believed, that the mk3 is right up there with the best of the GTi's and every bit as good if not better than the mk2, even the 8v gets some very favorable comments..proof that the mk3 always was and still is a great car.
-
lets face it, you see more Mk3 and 4s being broken to keep Mk1 and 2s alive these days - shows which ones are worth saving :whistle:
-
All down to personal choice I am affraid. Having owned a Mk1, Mk2, two Mk3's and a Mk4 I would say a Mk3
16v with mods is my fav :cool:
-
you`re right in saying it`s down to personal choice, i`ll give you that..
i can`t really comment on a mk1 or mk2 as i have never owned either. but i have owned a mk3 16v and still own a mk4 1.8t. what let`s the mk4 down is its comfort and convenience bullsh!t. take all that away and it`s a tidy motor. i`ve stripped my mk4 and the weight on the recaro interior is rediculous.
but you either have build quality or performance.. now that i have stripped the interior the difference in drive is night and day.
i loved my mk3 but if i were to choose between both i would hands down choose my mk4 every time.
it would piss over a vr6 on a stage 1 generic map..
obviously older cars have less in them so thats a little advantage for them, less parts to go wrong etc.
though, if i could have a mk1 or mk2 i would love to have one. moslty because they were the cars about when i was growing up (not so much the mk1, i was still in bhagdad).
just my 2p worth, i dont have a fouvourite as i havent tryed all the flavours. but out of the mk3 and mk4 i would choose the 4 :smiley:
-
What hav u stripped out to make it lighter?
-
alot :smiley:
-
Tell :cool:
-
about 100kg+ worth, i did a post somewhere, was about a year ago. weighed everything individually and documented it. the heaviest were the front seats and the rear back rests came in second.
-
Without Mk1 and 2 bloodline the later cars would have paled into insignificance, if it were not for the "Golf" and "GTI" branding...
If the starting point were the Mk3, would there really be events like GTI International, Wörthersee etc
Thom
-
Without Mk1 and 2 bloodline the later cars would have paled into insignificance, if it were not for the "Golf" and "GTI" branding...
If the starting point were the Mk3, would there really be events like GTI International, Wörthersee etc
Thom
you have a valid point. but the R`s have taken the Gti place.
-
lets face it, you see more Mk3 and 4s being broken to keep Mk1 and 2s alive these days - shows which ones are worth saving :whistle:
Just goes to show how needy and labour intensive mk2's are...their day in the sunshine is coming to an end.
-
lets face it, you see more Mk3 and 4s being broken to keep Mk1 and 2s alive these days - shows which ones are worth saving :whistle:
Just goes to show how needy and labour intensive mk2's are...their day in the sunshine is coming to and end.
:laugh: :laugh:
Funniest thing I've read all day week!
-
Without Mk1 and 2 bloodline the later cars would have paled into insignificance, if it were not for the "Golf" and "GTI" branding...
If the starting point were the Mk3, would there really be events like GTI International, Wörthersee etc
Thom
Yes because the 'Euro' crowd are essentially a bunch of unimaginative sheep.
-
Without Mk1 and 2 bloodline the later cars would have paled into insignificance, if it were not for the "Golf" and "GTI" branding...
If the starting point were the Mk3, would there really be events like GTI International, Wörthersee etc
Thom
you have a valid point. but the R`s have taken the Gti place.
This is my point, they are not "Golfs" any longer, they are just called Golfs! the essence that VW managed to capture in the 80s "GTI" was completely lost in translation when they gave us the Mk3... Its like comparing Mk1 and 2 Ford Escorts, to the FWD Mk3 Escort, a completely different car, with the same name. A Ford Focus has more in common with a Mk3 Escort than any of the others!
The fact that a Mk3 Golf is a "Volkswagen" is its redeeming feature...
Thom
-
For me the best will always be the mk1 simply because it re-defined motoring and created a class of car that people still aspire to now even if the brand itself has become diluted, the mk3 was of its time but in no way does it stand in the shadow of the mk2..not in my opinion.
-
(http://www.rms-republic.com/albums/People/aad.jpg)
this man had an opinion too, he was wrong aswell :laugh:
-
6 pages now and we havent come to a conclusion...
So, who has the biggest willy?
-
(http://www.rms-republic.com/albums/People/aad.jpg)
this man had an opinion too, he was wrong aswell :laugh:
Blimey..he actually looks a bit like me!
-
6 pages now and we havent come to a conclusion...
So, who has the biggest willy?
Mk3 drivers do.....mk2 drivers just have the biggest knobs.
-
can you verify that?
-
Golf L Engine bhp per 1000kg
Mk4 3.2 24v 156.7
Mk3 2.8 12v 150.6
Mk2 1.8 8v G60 148.6
Mk4 2.8 24v 145.6
Mk4 1.8 20vT 180 139.6
Mk3 2.0 16v 134.7
Mk1 1.6 8v 133.3
Mk2 1.8 16v 132.3
Mk1 1.8 8v 130.4
Mk4 1.8 20vT 150 124.7
Mk2 1.8 8v 117.9
Mk3 2.0 8v 111.1
^ only a rough guide using
bhp vs weight, you can see:
the Mk3 16v isn't far behind the Mk4 1.8T 180
the Mk3 16v is ahead of the Mk4 1.8T 150
The Mk1 performs well due to being so light.
The article involves circuit driving so handling & braking come into play,
which means the bhp/weight figures are less important than with say a drag race.
They mention the vehicles are not well used examples & are not running the same tyres.
Doesn't sound like an equal playing field really.
So conclusion is that test was a load of b0llox.
-
(http://www.rms-republic.com/albums/People/aad.jpg)
this man had an opinion too, he was wrong aswell :laugh:
Blimey..he actually looks a bit like me!
Well he would!
Holed or scuttled, its the same sh!t just a different day :grin: :grin:
Thom
-
Without Mk1 and 2 bloodline the later cars would have paled into insignificance, if it were not for the "Golf" and "GTI" branding...
If the starting point were the Mk3, would there really be events like GTI International, Wörthersee etc
Thom
yes there would, clearly a perfect car to carry the name, people hate for no reseon, this article proves its not as bad as people say,
-
haters gonna hate
-
All the usual crap used as argument. All the usual defences too.
@Thom. The mk2 is the not the be all and end all. If this were the case this forum would be dead. Also, of the mk3 was a tugboat then surely the shell would be better rust proofed?
@all those with the modded versions. This wasn't the point. For funks sake...mapped mk6 GTIs are gonna kill all opposition, and engine transplants don't count...if you can retro fit the higher BHP motors into most Gti chassis then the lightest chassis will likely to be fastest in straight line and BHP/weight ratio.
@The scene. It is what you make it. If the mk1&2s disappear and no one saves the mk3 or 4 then heritage is lost regardless. And the point is the Golf in any guise is still a family affordable car in similar price range to other brands. And their equivalent hot hatch cars are priced roughly the same, pretty much nothing has changed since back in the day. Focus has ST N RS, VW has GTI and R. Vauxhall have VXR. Oh and Jap motors still destroy most in reliability, power and Minging looks
-
Just goes to show how needy and labour intensive mk2's are...their day in the sunshine is coming to an end.
Actually their day in the sunshine is being maintained by killing Golf3s to survive. :grin:
More than anything, this thread proves Golf3 and Golf4 owners are still the touchiest of them all. :grin:
-
Just goes to show how needy and labour intensive mk2's are...their day in the sunshine is coming to an end.
Actually their day in the sunshine is being maintained by killing Golf3s to survive. :grin:
More than anything, this thread proves Golf3 owners are still the touchiest of them all. :grin:
corrected for you mate. :wink: :cool:
-
Tbh I would pick a mk3 vr over all the gti's because the sound of it get me hard :grin:
-
Just goes to show how needy and labour intensive mk2's are...their day in the sunshine is coming to an end.
Actually their day in the sunshine is being maintained by killing Golf3s to survive. :grin:
More than anything, this thread proves Golf3 and Golf4 owners are still the touchiest of them all. :grin:
Says the mk3 owner.
-
Tbh I would pick a mk3 vr over all the gti's because the sound of it get me hard :grin:
wouldn`t an R32 make a simular if not better sound?
-
Yes but
Tbh I would pick a mk3 vr over all the gti's because the sound of it get me hard :grin:
wouldn`t an R32 make a simular if not better sound?
h
Yes but for the price difference between a r32 and a vr ill have the vr :grin:
-
Mk3 GTI's are great cars, they are just Rott boxes.
Magically at the stroke of midnight on their 10th birthday they start to dissolve at an alarming rate, this is the best time as the power to weight ratio dramatically improves until it fails its final MOT
-
mk3 and 4's i've never really thought of as GTi's they are motorised shopping trolleys or family wagons. if thats what you want they arn't the worst choice but if you want a GTI to drive for the pleasure of driveing it buying a mk3 or mk4 is full of fail as they just don't have that GTi ness.
-
No. But neither do the mk1 and 2 as they are 70s and 80s equivalents. Do people not remember that as we age our perception changes? My mums mk1 was our run around till she gave it my uncle and he did the same and used it to get from a to b and take the family places and do shopping. :grin:
Buying a performance car unless you have a) no kids or b) too much money to have it as a toy means it gets used for basics as well as fun. :kiss:
-
For funks sake...mapped mk6 GTIs are gonna kill all opposition
:evil:
Mk1 was an icon, still would love one to this day, unfortunately VW lost their way a bit with the mk3 and definitely with the mk4 GTi's :sad:
-
Do people not remember that as we age our perception changes?
Eh? Golf1 and Golf2 were iconic. Golf3 was slated on launch because it was significantly heavier than the G2.
And the looks had gone all Mr Blobby.
And it didn't handle as well as the 1 & 2.
And the build quality was rubbish.
Let's face it - only the Golf3 was featured in this way:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v627/diamondhell/Lemon.jpg)
My perception hasn't changed - they're a nice little run around, but the GTI should have been badged GLi.
Times may change but out of the box the Golf 1&2 have the sparkle sadly lacking from the 3&4, whatever laptimes may say.
-
Tbh I would pick a mk3 vr over all the gti's because the sound of it get me hard :grin:
wouldn`t an R32 make a simular if not better sound?
No not quite the same, 12v (VR6) vs 24v (R32). 12v sounds better IMO
-
it's an accsepted fact that the VR6 is good at makeing noise and anchoring boats :evil:
-
it's an accsepted fact that the VR6 is good at makeing noise and anchoring boats :evil:
:grin: :grin: not so good at anchoring boats ... Last thing it needs is salt water to aid the rusting :grin:
-
Do people not remember that as we age our perception changes?
Eh? Golf1 and Golf2 were iconic. Golf3 was slated on launch because it was significantly heavier than the G2.
And the looks had gone all Mr Blobby.
And it didn't handle as well as the 1 & 2.
And the build quality was rubbish.
Let's face it - only the Golf3 was featured in this way:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v627/diamondhell/Lemon.jpg)
My perception hasn't changed - they're a nice little run around, but the GTI should have been badged GLi.
Times may change but out of the box the Golf 1&2 have the sparkle sadly lacking from the 3&4, whatever laptimes may say.
The weight i'll give you as there is about 200kgs in it but it was also considerably safer than a mk2
The looks are personal choice, i think the mk2 and mk3 are both good looking cars.
The handling was an issue but can be sorted fairly easily and the mk2 was hardly a precision machine.
The build quality was and still is better than the mk2.
1997 Which? Magazine Best Buys: Best Family Car.
European Car of the Year: 1992.
1992 What Car?: Car of the Year.
-
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
-
Do people not remember that as we age our perception changes?
Eh? Golf1 and Golf2 were iconic. Golf3 was slated on launch because it was significantly heavier than the G2.
And the looks had gone all Mr Blobby.
And it didn't handle as well as the 1 & 2.
And the build quality was rubbish.
Let's face it - only the Golf3 was featured in this way:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v627/diamondhell/Lemon.jpg)
My perception hasn't changed - they're a nice little run around, but the GTI should have been badged GLi.
Times may change but out of the box the Golf 1&2 have the sparkle sadly lacking from the 3&4, whatever laptimes may say.
DH. I know that in the past you have sung the praises of the mk3 16v as a track car with some weight stripped. At the end of the day tho...it's all the same. Porsche guys b!tch about air cooled changing to water. RWD to 4WD. Minis changing to BMW and turbo powered.
-
we still haven`t come to a conclusion though :undecided:
-
my conclusion is that my mk3 16v i sold today would beat any mk4 1.8t standard 150bhp anywhere any time as proved several times as for mk1's and 2's i don't know because i have never been able to race one !
-
we still haven`t come to a conclusion though :undecided:
they are all sh!t :laugh:
-
my conclusion is that my mk3 16v i sold today would beat any mk4 1.8t standard 150bhp anywhere any time as proved several times as for mk1's and 2's i don't know because i have never been able to race one !
yep, i`d say my mk3 16v was quicker than my std 150 1.8t. i felt the difference as soon as i bought my 1.8t off dan apps and said that to him. but then the 1.8t is way more tunable. it would cost a mk3 16v owner a fortune to keep up with my 1.8t now. and i`m not comparing n/a to f/i.
each to their own and that... i like golfs over escorts and astra`s etc.. mind you, i`d love a mint mk2 astra gte, but you`d never find one.
-
my conclusion is that my mk3 16v i sold today would beat any mk4 1.8t standard 150bhp anywhere any time as proved several times as for mk1's and 2's i don't know because i have never been able to race one !
yep, i`d say my mk3 16v was quicker than my std 150 1.8t. i felt the difference as soon as i bought my 1.8t off dan apps and said that to him. but then the 1.8t is way more tunable. it would cost a mk3 16v owner a fortune to keep up with my 1.8t now. and i`m not comparing n/a to f/i.
each to their own and that... i like golfs over escorts and astra`s etc.. mind you, i`d love a mint mk2 astra gte, but you`d never find one.
i know of a white c-plate mk2 gte that only gets took to the mot station every year then parked back up :laugh: guy has a 4x4 sierra sittin next to it :smiley:
-
Tbh I would pick a mk3 vr over all the gti's because the sound of it get me hard :grin:
wouldn`t an R32 make a simular if not better sound?
24v engines sound a bit more raspy & fary compared to the silky smooth 12v VR soundtrack
That being said they still sound awesome
-
Golf L Engine bhp per 1000kg
Mk4 3.2 24v 156.7
Mk3 2.8 12v 150.6
Mk2 1.8 8v G60 148.6
Mk4 2.8 24v 145.6
Mk4 1.8 20vT 180 139.6
Mk3 2.0 16v 134.7
Mk1 1.6 8v 133.3
Mk2 1.8 16v 132.3
Mk1 1.8 8v 130.4
Mk4 1.8 20vT 150 124.7
Mk2 1.8 8v 117.9
Mk3 2.0 8v 111.1
^ only a rough guide using
bhp vs weight, you can see:
the Mk3 16v isn't far behind the Mk4 1.8T 180
the Mk3 16v is ahead of the Mk4 1.8T 150
The Mk1 performs well due to being so light.
The article involves circuit driving so handling & braking come into play,
which means the bhp/weight figures are less important than with say a drag race.
They mention the vehicles are not well used examples & are not running the same tyres.
Doesn't sound like an equal playing field really.
So conclusion is that test was a load of b0llox.
AH! Some sense of the actual point of this thread!
It would be very difficult to get "equal" examples of cars spanning 20 od years!
-
moral of the story, you cant have your cake and eat it. youre full leather recaro interior might look nice but you`d be better off round the track with deck chairs from a mk1.
-
Moral of the story all golfs are relativly slow and handle poor. A 20 year old mr2 is faster then the newest r32 dsg
-
Moral of the story all golfs are relativly slow and handle poor. A 20 year old mr2 is faster then the newest r32 dsg
MR2 GT Sports 2 door
7.7 secs, 137 mph, 168 bhp.
MR2 turbo (as you know only imported to Uk)
5.5 secs, 155 mph limited?, 241 bhp
Mk6 R32 DSG
5.5 secs, 155 mph limited, 266bhp
:undecided:
-
so be fair, i would take a jetta over a mk2, a vento over a mk3 and wouldnt want a bora or a mk4 :laugh:
-
To be honest i don't really give a toss, i love my crappy old mk3 despite all its faults and if i was lucky enough to own a mk2 or a mk1 i'd love them too.
-
I have a MK2 with turbo bolted on... it's definately the slowest out of all of them at the moment :embarrassed:
-
Looks like its a 16v Mk3 and a 1.8T Mk4. No mention of the other two marques.
Very surprised that a Mk4 with the same bhp but heavier than a Mk3 is faster? :huh:
Fortunately I have the article and all I can say is what an odd selection of Golfs to compare.
Mk1, 1.6
Mk2, 1.8 8v
Mk3, 2.0 16v
Mk4, 1.8T 180PS (Anniversary)
And if you saw the images from the article, the Mk2 looks the softest handler of all and the Mk3 a bit tail happy. But then this is dramatized for an article.
Perhaps if a later Mk1. with the 1.8 engine was used and a Mk2 16v the lap times would have been so much different. If everything was kept 8v then perhaps older would still be better. A pointless test. I hope this brings the thread into line.
-
Fortunately I have the article and all I can say is what an odd selection of Golfs to compare.
can you scan it and post on here??
-
Well no wonder the Mk4 won then!
-
Fortunately I have the article and all I can say is what an odd selection of Golfs to compare.
Mk1, 1.6
Mk2, 1.8 8v
Mk3, 2.0 16v
Mk4, 1.8T 180PS (Anniversary)
Hmm seems fair...
-
I would just like to add that on the latest autotrader advert, mk3 get's binned off in favour of a mk2.
(http://typogeorge.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/add-fuel-to-the-fire.jpg)
-
need to go to coomb and set some times. mk2 16v ftw
-
Come on guys it's the saxos/clios/106s/corsas etc that we should be picking holes in not each other, anyway we all know the mk5 is clearly the best
-
Yeah Mk5 Gti edition 30 :cool:
-
Come on guys it's the saxos/clios/106s/corsas etc that we should be picking holes in not each other, anyway we all know the mk5 is clearly the best
lol.. ok. i agree to an extent.
but those cars are in a smaller class.. lets make it fair by slating focus`s, meganes, astra`s and Ds3`s etc :undecided: :tongue: :grin:
-
The 8v's have more torque though
-
The 8v's have more torque though
very true well for the TDi's anyway :nerd:
-
The 8v's have more torque though
very true well for the TDi's anyway :nerd:
:laugh:
-
Ahhhh, Ive missed this...... :rolleyes:
Glad to be back on the forum though - driving a Golf mk4 non turbo which everyone knows is the best. :wink: :grin:
Oh and just to add my two penneth in - I think the mk3 is far more 'GTI' than a mk4, however, the mk4 is a far superior 'car'.
-
we still haven`t come to a conclusion though :undecided:
The mk1 is best, it was the first. End of discussion. :whistle:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjoDRI1ppXk
lol mk1 rules vr6 turbo :evil: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXCryn0rrjQ