GolfGTIforum.co.uk
Model specific boards => Golf mk7 => Topic started by: GTI_Redpath on 19 July 2013, 09:44
-
In the specs for the GTI, the 0-60 times are exactly the same for manual and DSG. anyone know if this is the case in real life runs? I've seen a video somewhere of someone doing a 6.1 second run in a DSG. anyone been able to do this in a manual? I know it depends on how good the driver is just curious if someone can match the super fast changes of the DSG
-
Suggest posting here: http://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=257058.0
-
Depends. 0-60 only involves one gear change, and in manual you have more control over the revs and when you change, so in reality it will depend a lot on the driver.
-
Although the brochure does state the same 0-62 times for both, i find it very hard to believe that the manual will be a as quick as the DSG??
-
Manual is more variable:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRwfvnDt7BA
I do think we should keep 0-60 in one thread though... :whistle:
-
The Car & Driver sub 6 seconds was in a manual if I remember correctly?
-
Its impossible for a manual to beat a DSG under identical conditions because a DSG can operate exactly like a manual, yet perform the shifts faster than is physically possible to move the clutch pedal.
-
Depends. 0-60 only involves one gear change, and in manual you have more control over the revs and when you change, so in reality it will depend a lot on the driver.
I think it would be possible if its just the one gear change, would need to be a really good driver!
-
The Car & Driver sub 6 seconds was in a manual if I remember correctly?
Yes... how on earth did Car & Driver achieve their stated time (I think it was 5.7 secs if memory serves me correct).
That's not just a bit quicker than the official quoted time... it smashes it to pieces :shocked:
-
The Car & Driver sub 6 seconds was in a manual if I remember correctly?
Yes... how on earth did Car & Driver achieve their stated time (I think it was 5.7 secs if memory serves me correct).
That's not just a bit quicker than the official quoted time... it smashes it to pieces :shocked:
Down hill? Following wind? Uncalibrated stop watch? Military grade rocket fuel? :grin: :grin: :grin:
I think they may have gone 0-60 instead of 0-62, also in my opinion they should repeat the time in the reverse direction then average the two results. I doubt they did.
-
I agree, with identical revs and otherwise identical conditions, DSG will beat manual by a fraction of a second purely because it is a faster gear change. But, with a manual you have more driver control.
-
So if VW state 0-62 is 6.5 (PP 6.4), what are the actual 0-60 times - 0.2 secs off the 0-62?
In a straight line from a standing start, as much as I hate to admit it having ordered a manual, the DSG would be fractionally ahead. I love a ultra quick gear change when nailing it, but no way that is quicker than a paddle flick.
-
So if VW state 0-62 is 6.5 (PP 6.4), what are the actual 0-60 times - 0.2 secs off the 0-62?
In a straight line from a standing start, as much as I hate to admit it having ordered a manual, the DSG would be fractionally ahead. I love a ultra quick gear change when nailing it, but no way that is quicker than a paddle flick.
Every launch control start I have seen from the MK7 DSG GTI has sounded like it bogged down massively. I reckon with full control over the revs in a manual you could beat the DSG car. Harder to get consistency in a manual but has the control to be faster.
-
So if VW state 0-62 is 6.5 (PP 6.4), what are the actual 0-60 times - 0.2 secs off the 0-62?
In a straight line from a standing start, as much as I hate to admit it having ordered a manual, the DSG would be fractionally ahead. I love a ultra quick gear change when nailing it, but no way that is quicker than a paddle flick.
Every launch control start I have seen from the MK7 DSG GTI has sounded like it bogged down massively. I reckon with full control over the revs in a manual you could beat the DSG car. Harder to get consistency in a manual but has the control to be faster.
You are right, I was just trying to be nice to my DSG brothers, of course I'd beat a DSG off the line!! :grin:
-
theres only one way to find out! someone whos lucky enough to already have a manual needs to try a 0-60/62 run and film it
-
theres only one way to find out! someone whos lucky enough to already have a manual needs to try a 0-60/62 run and film it
Bang on - come on, someone must be able to do that....today....!!
-
You can launch control the DSG and I would expect 9/10 times the DSG would win. Also there is minimal boost loss between changes.
Of course you can install WOT box for the manual but I don't have any experience with them.
DSG has been shown to stick with slightly higher powered cars:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBoyIq8zNOY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBoyIq8zNOY)
-
You can launch control the DSG and I would expect 9/10 times the DSG would win. Also there is minimal boost loss between changes.
Of course you can install WOT box for the manual but I don't have any experience with them.
DSG has been shown to stick with slightly higher powered cars:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBoyIq8zNOY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBoyIq8zNOY)
Why do all the videos of the MK7 GTI DSG bog down for what feels like at least a second at the end of first gear?
Watch this 6.1s run for example:
http://youtu.be/r9S3BvBXJD8
At the top of the rev range in first it just sits there not accelerating at all for ages, my hand and feet would be way quicker into second gear.
-
You can launch control the DSG and I would expect 9/10 times the DSG would win. Also there is minimal boost loss between changes.
Of course you can install WOT box for the manual but I don't have any experience with them.
DSG has been shown to stick with slightly higher powered cars:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBoyIq8zNOY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBoyIq8zNOY)
Why do all the videos of the MK7 GTI DSG bog down for what feels like at least a second at the end of first gear?
Watch this 6.1s run for example:
http://youtu.be/r9S3BvBXJD8
At the top of the rev range in first it just sits there not accelerating at all for ages, my hand and feet would be way quicker into second gear.
There is a long pause perhaps paddle shift intervention would help but there's so many variables it's hard to say.
-
You can launch control the DSG and I would expect 9/10 times the DSG would win. Also there is minimal boost loss between changes.
Of course you can install WOT box for the manual but I don't have any experience with them.
DSG has been shown to stick with slightly higher powered cars:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBoyIq8zNOY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBoyIq8zNOY)
Why do all the videos of the MK7 GTI DSG bog down for what feels like at least a second at the end of first gear?
Watch this 6.1s run for example:
http://youtu.be/r9S3BvBXJD8
At the top of the rev range in first it just sits there not accelerating at all for ages, my hand and feet would be way quicker into second gear.
There is a long pause perhaps paddle shift intervention would help but there's so many variables it's hard to say.
All other mk7 DSG 0-60 runs seem the same.
-
All other mk7 DSG 0-60 runs seem the same.
Possibly this thread is talking about this?
http://www.golfmkv.com/forums/showthread.php?t=52202
Also:
http://www.vwgticlub.co.za/forum/viewtopic.php?p=112924
Ok... it might be something to do with complaints that in S-mode the car would upshift too early on cornering so an adjustment was made. Stick it in manual and use the paddles and this won't happen. Can Hardly find anything on the web about this though, is it really happening in every DSG launch control video? Are they all using S-mode?
-
I don't know why you'd want to try a 0-60 run without using the paddles?? That way you can optimise the power and gear change. If you've got DSG use the paddles!!
-
Right boys, when we all eventually get our GTI's, next Spring we race down the Mall, I'm sure Elizabeth (God Save The Queen) will be :cool: with that. I mean her ancestors would love it, Brits in German motors :grin:
I am part German and more part British so it's ok, I will ask her when I see her next week.
-
Her Majesty has spoken.
She is busy for the next week with the impending birth, therefore my idea will not come to fruition.
Sorry if anyone had already planned for this. I will make it up to you :smiley:
God save the GTI.
-
Why is she spending time on that when she should be calling VW to explain that " one is most displeased"? Come on let's get our priorities right and all.
-
Why is she spending time on that when she should be calling VW to explain that " one is most displeased"? Come on let's get our priorities right and all.
Very well said Sir, however Her Majesty Is 'Not Amused' rather than displeased, she will be calling Germany as soon as possible (commitments pending)
-
Why is she spending time on that when she should be calling VW to explain that " one is most displeased"? Come on let's get our priorities right and all.
Very well said Sir, however Her Majesty Is 'Not Amused' rather than displeased, she will be calling Germany as soon as possible (commitments pending)
Comments duly posted :smiley:... exactly what will she be calling the Germans?
-
Autocar seem to agree with me the manual will get a quicker 0-60 time:
But it’s only the lack of a decent launch control mode that prevents the GTI from performing better against the clock. With the traction control on, the software regulation is – like so many ASR systems – too heavy-handed for the perfect standing start.
With it off, the gearbox calibration overcompensates, giving you far too much spin at the driving wheels. We’d expect to take at least a couple of tenths off that 0-60mph time in a manual-equipped GTI, putting it there or thereabouts with the likes of the Focus ST and Mégane 265.
-
Autocar seem to agree with me the manual will get a quicker 0-60 time:
But it’s only the lack of a decent launch control mode that prevents the GTI from performing better against the clock. With the traction control on, the software regulation is – like so many ASR systems – too heavy-handed for the perfect standing start.
With it off, the gearbox calibration overcompensates, giving you far too much spin at the driving wheels. We’d expect to take at least a couple of tenths off that 0-60mph time in a manual-equipped GTI, putting it there or thereabouts with the likes of the Focus ST and Mégane 265.
The problem with launching the car with DSG is the lack of AWD on the GTI and hence the initial lack of traction. Therefore the advantage of launch control is negated as a result. If the car had AWD there would be no contest as no human can possibly change gears quicker than an automatic box
-
I know this thread had been about the GTI, but curious on people's thoughts on the GTD. Does the DSG rev too high taking the engine out of its optimum power band? Are we still talking one shift for the gtd to hit 60 or would it be quicker with two?
-
I know this thread had been about the GTI, but curious on people's thoughts on the GTD. Does the DSG rev too high taking the engine out of its optimum power band? Are we still talking one shift for the gtd to hit 60 or would it be quicker with two?
I think the GTDs biggest problem will be putting it's power down from a standing start with the torque it has. I can (in my 170TDI Scirocco) get up to 15mph in 2nd, floor it and get it to wheelspin. The DSG has lower gearing than the manual so it's likely you'd need to be just into 3rd with the DSG. My dad hasn't started getting too heavy footed with his DSG GTD just yet for me to know when it will upshift if you're accelerating hard, but it wouldn't make much sense for the GTD DSG to hold on to it's gears beyond the torque band (4200rpm top end).
-
Why is everyone so worried about 0-60 times... I seems like a lot of pointless willy waving to me :evil:
-
Why is everyone so worried about 0-60 times... I seems like a lot of pointless willy waving to me :evil:
Because it's a GTI and it's bought for it's performance capabilities among other things
-
Why is everyone so worried about 0-60 times... I seems like a lot of pointless willy waving to me :evil:
Says the man with a C4S :rolleyes: :laugh:
-
Why is everyone so worried about 0-60 times... I seems like a lot of pointless willy waving to me >:D
Says the man with a C4S ::) :D
Perhaps he's compensating? :-X :D
-
Why is everyone so worried about 0-60 times... I seems like a lot of pointless willy waving to me >:D
Says the man with a C4S ::) :D
Perhaps he's compensating? :-X :D
Says moderator :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :drool: :smug: :whistle: :tongue: :rolleyes: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :lipsrsealed:
-
Why is everyone so worried about 0-60 times... I seems like a lot of pointless willy waving to me >:D
Says the man with a C4S ::) :D
Perhaps he's compensating? :-X :D
Says moderator :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :drool: :smug: :whistle: :tongue: :rolleyes: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :lipsrsealed:
Wouldn't mind doing a bit of compensating myself tbh!!
-
Why is everyone so worried about 0-60 times... I seems like a lot of pointless willy waving to me :evil:
Because it's a GTI and it's bought for it's performance capabilities among other things
And 0-60 times are an effective measure of performance?
You've obviously been listening to the likes of Clarkson for too long...
And for those of you that think I bought a C4S Cabrio :cool: for its 0-60 times or for any reason other than it being a great car... Are you on drugs?
-
Why is everyone so worried about 0-60 times... I seems like a lot of pointless willy waving to me :evil:
Because it's a GTI and it's bought for it's performance capabilities among other things
And 0-60 times are an effective measure of performance?
You've obviously been listening to the likes of Clarkson for too long...
And for those of you that think I bought a C4S Cabrio :cool: for its 0-60 times or for any reason other than it being a great car... Are you on drugs?
:grin: Just jesting corgi, I've driven the C4S and its an amazing car!
-
Why is everyone so worried about 0-60 times... I seems like a lot of pointless willy waving to me :evil:
Because it's a GTI and it's bought for it's performance capabilities among other things
And 0-60 times are an effective measure of performance?
You've obviously been listening to the likes of Clarkson for too long...
And for those of you that think I bought a C4S Cabrio :cool: for its 0-60 times or for any reason other than it being a great car... Are you on drugs?
Only jokin mate, i'd love a Porsche but it'd need to be a hard top! People would see my beer belly otherwise! :laugh:
-
Why have a six-pack, when you can have a barrel :grin:
You can, of course, have a coupe version of the C4S... and you're right it is a great car
-
Why is everyone so worried about 0-60 times... I seems like a lot of pointless willy waving to me :evil:
Because it's a GTI and it's bought for it's performance capabilities among other things
And 0-60 times are an effective measure of performance?
You've obviously been listening to the likes of Clarkson for too long...
And for those of you that think I bought a C4S Cabrio :cool: for its 0-60 times or for any reason other than it being a great car... Are you on drugs?
Of course it's an effective measure of performance. What planet are you living on? Pretty much all manufacturers quote 0-60 times and so do all those who review cars.
-
So, you spend all your time drag racing from the lights to see if you can match the claimed 0-60 times?
0-60 times are one measure of performance - one that frankly is affected by gearing; can you reach 60 in 2nd or do you have to change to third? An isolated view of a single stat does not give a rounded view of the performance of any car...
If I had a high powered front-wheel drive car I'd be looking for another stat, say 30-70 through the gears, perhaps...
I had a 1.4 SuperSport Caterham, it would get from 0-60 in about 5 seconds, but from 80-100 a 1.4 Corsa would have been as quick because of the gearing, aerodynamics etc.
Just because Clarkson witters on about stats like these doesn't mean they are an accurate indication of a car's overall performance.
-
So, you spend all your time drag racing from the lights to see if you can match the claimed 0-60 times?
0-60 times are one measure of performance - one that frankly is affected by gearing; can you reach 60 in 2nd or do you have to change to third? An isolated view of a single stat does not give a rounded view of the performance of any car...
If I had a high powered front-wheel drive car I'd be looking for another stat, say 30-70 through the gears, perhaps...
I had a 1.4 SuperSport Caterham, it would get from 0-60 in about 5 seconds, but from 80-100 a 1.4 Corsa would have been as quick because of the gearing, aerodynamics etc.
Just because Clarkson witters on about stats like these doesn't mean they are an accurate indication of a car's overall performance.
Are you having a laugh, comparing a caterham to a corsa. What was the 0-60 time of the corsa? On a drag race the caterham would leave a corsa for dead because of its acceleration at 0-60
-
from 80-100 a 1.4 Corsa would have been as quick because of the gearing, aerodynamics etc.
:grin: :grin: corsa's don't go over 80 do they?!
-
Are you having a laugh, comparing a caterham to a corsa. What was the 0-60 time of the corsa? On a drag race the caterham would leave a corsa for dead because of its acceleration at 0-60
Are you trying or does it just come naturally? :wink:
I didn't say a 1.4 Corsa would have beaten my (or any) Caterham to 60, far from it. My point was that the 60 target is arbitrary, the Caterham would have disappeared up to 60 but from 60-80 there would be little in it.
0-60 times are effectively meaningless in day-to-day driving...
What stat will you quote when you bump into an Astra VXR driver?
-
What stat will you quote when you bump into an Astra VXR driver?
That my steering wheel isn't trying to break my wrists just because I mashed the throttle into the carpet. :laugh:
-
Are you having a laugh, comparing a caterham to a corsa. What was the 0-60 time of the corsa? On a drag race the caterham would leave a corsa for dead because of its acceleration at 0-60
Are you trying or does it just come naturally? :wink:
I didn't say a 1.4 Corsa would have beaten my (or any) Caterham to 60, far from it. My point was that the 60 target is arbitrary, the Caterham would have disappeared up to 60 but from 60-80 there would be little in it.
0-60 times are effectively meaningless in day-to-day driving...
What stat will you quote when you bump into an Astra VXR driver?
This is just nonsense. By the time the corsa had reached 60 the caterham would have been long gone.
-
This is just nonsense. By the time the corsa had reached 60 the caterham would have been long gone.
I think he means if the Caterham and Corsa are both side by side at 60 and then both floor it.
Its still pointless though because no stat will ever be related to actual driving. To be similar to actual driving requires actual driving. i.e. actual driving is not a stat or set of stats.
-
Ok so what is an effective measure of performance if not 0-60?
-
0-60 times are effectively meaningless in day-to-day driving...
I disagree. Yes, the 30-70 acceleration is more important, or even 70-100 on the motorway, however you can't disregard the 0-60 time - there are plenty of opportunities to utilise a car's acceleration from a standing start.
And it doesn't matter what car you're driving, if you're beaten by a Corsa then you need to go back to the drawing board! :laugh:
-
And it doesn't matter what car you're driving, if you're beaten by a Corsa then you need to go back to the drawing board! :laugh:
:laugh: :laugh:
Reminds me of my friend's Chevrolet Matiz, a 0.8L car that I don't think has a 0-60 time since it can never get there. Was 3 of us in it going up a gentle incline once and it just went slower and slower. Really did think it was going to be get out and push time! :laugh:
-
Reminds me of my friend's Chevrolet Matiz, a 0.8L car that I don't think has a 0-60 time since it can never get there. Was 3 of us in it going up a gentle incline once and it just went slower and slower. Really did think it was going to be get out and push time! :laugh:
I can beat that - my first car was a Fiat Panda - 750cc - I literally could walk faster! :laugh:
-
Are there any 50-70 comparison times for the GTI or GTD? I'd be interested in both.
Definitely think there's a place for measuring performance in 0-60 though, it jus shows you the raw acceleration. Obviously you can't base a whole judgment on 0-60 but I think it's more relevant to everyday users than the Nurbergring or other lap times
-
Are there any 50-70 comparison times for the GTI or GTD? I'd be interested in both.
Definitely think there's a place for measuring performance in 0-60 though, it jus shows you the raw acceleration. Obviously you can't base a whole judgment on 0-60 but I think it's more relevant to everyday users than the Nurbergring or other lap times
On the German website there are 80-120kmph (approx 51mph - 77mph) acceleration times in 4th and 5th for GTI and GTD.
In a GTD, 4th/5th gear 80-120km is 6.0s and 7.5s respectively.
In a GTI its 5.0s and 6.0s.
In a Scirocco 2.0TSI 210PS (same engine as MK6 GTI) it is 6.0s and 7.5s, same as the MK7 GTD - that 10PS and a lot more torque has gone a long way.
Initial torque surge does seem to punish the TDI to get the power down off the line - very easy to overcook a 170TDI PD, less so for a CR unit, but not impossible.
The MK5 170TDI GT was 0.6s slower than the Audi TT TDI with the same engine and quattro (which was standard). The TT weighed more and it was only 0.3s behind a MK5 GTI 200PS on 0-62
-
Ok so what is an effective measure of performance if not 0-60?
There are many 30-70 through the gears (the Golf GTI should not be handicapped by traction on this one), 50-70 in a single gear, 70-100, time exposed to danger (TED) etc.
All of these reflect more common day-to-day driving scenarios than a drag race from the lights (unless you wear your baseball cap backwards and hang around out of town burger restaurants at night)....
What's relevant to one driver/car combination might not be to another e.g. there was an advert when the Seat Ibiza TDI Cupra (or whatever) came out comparing its 50-70 time in 5th with that of a 911GT3, the Seat was, according to the ad, faster on this measure... no mention of the fact that your 911GT3 driver could be doing that split in 2nd, 3rd or 4th gears... all of which would have been faster than the Ibiza (much faster)...
Given that the GTI is a relatively high powered front wheel drive car and therefore traction limited, I'd have thought that you'd have picked a measure where the layout does not unduly impact the performance...
-
Corgi I think you are over thinking this a bit (normally something I'm guilty off as the lads here occasionally remind me!).
While I agree 0-60 is not the be all and end all, it is the de facto performance statistic. Performance is far too subjective to be measured by a single statistic, and I don't think 0-60 is intended to be a "real world" test as such, but rather it is a way of comparing cars objectively. Rather than replacing it with something else we just need to avoid becoming too obsessed with the 0-60 as it is.
-
All of these reflect more common day-to-day driving scenarios than a drag race from the lights (unless you wear your baseball cap backwards and hang around out of town burger restaurants at night)....
I neither wear baseball caps nor hang around burger joints at night - but if someone pulls up next to me and wants a cheeky race off the lights for a bit of fun then I'm more than willing to oblige - obviously only up to the speed limit - most of the time the other person just wants to see how fast the car goes from a standing start anyway. Granted, this doesn't happen very often but still.
I'm sure the motoring world should bow to your knowledge corgi :whistle: but bottom line is that performance stats are always measured and defined by the 0-60 time first - that's just the way it is. Saying to someone my 30-70 time is 5 seconds doesn't have the same ring to it :laugh:
-
obviously only up to the speed limit
Yes. Obviously. Let it be known from now until forever that no one here exceeds the speed limit. We're actually physically unable to keep the throttle open when that speedo hits 70.
Just so there is no doubt.
-
All good fun this debate.
My personal view, as others, is that the 0-60 time is a benchmark for comparing vehicles. However in the real world 30-50 and 50-70 times show how potent your car really is. So, big torque figures will help enormously. It's great news that the new GTI has such beefy torque for a petrol engine. Will help see off previously potent turbo diesels :laugh: Ha Ha
What I'd really like to know is how the Performance Pack may help put all the power down off the mark compared to the standard GTI? From what I've read I think it might.
-
What I'd really like to know is how the Performance Pack may help put all the power down off the mark compared to the standard GTI? From what I've read I think it might.
Surely only if one wheel has less grip than the other? If they both have grip, or both do not then would it make a difference?
-
What I'd really like to know is how the Performance Pack may help put all the power down off the mark compared to the standard GTI? From what I've read I think it might.
Surely only if one wheel has less grip than the other? If they both have grip, or both do not then would it make a difference?
Given the GTI is front wheel drive and has more than enough torque to defeat the grip of both front tyres, there will be little difference between a standard and performance pack GTI until they reach the speed where they are no longer traction limited.
Then, depending on the relative power/torque curves the Perf Pack should pull away... but looking at their relative 0-60 times a difference of 0.1 seconds... about 8 feet, just over half a car length.
The limited slip diff will have little effect in a drag race but should be a big help in and getting out of corners where there is a difference in grip across the front axle (mainly due to weight transfer across the car), then you should be able to make use of more power sooner because the diff will deliver power to the wheel with more grip when the one with the lesser grip breaks traction...
I don't know how much better the mechanical lsd is than the abs/software based XDS+
-
I don't know how much better the mechanical lsd is than the abs/software based XDS+
Gotta assume its a lot better right? One system delivers full power where needed, the other cuts power to aid cornering. Must be light and day. Question is how often does the situation when you'll actually need it arise?
-
Just over 1/2 car length, that'll do me thanks :smiley:
-
I don't know how much better the mechanical lsd is than the abs/software based XDS+
Gotta assume its a lot better right? One system delivers full power where needed, the other cuts power to aid cornering. Must be light and day. Question is how often does the situation when you'll actually need it arise?
You'd hope so, given what is being charged for it :wink:
My understanding of XDS+ is that it doesn't cut power but modulates the power using the braking system but works in conjunction with the traction control which may well cut the power...
I guess the situation will not arise all that often - depending on the type of driving you do. Useful on the track and, I suspect, of limited use in some situations on the road... I remember in my Integra Type-R(s) that the (torsen) lsd was helpful in pulling out of side roads quickly - much less wheel spin - but of very limited value in the snow...
The plate type lsd on my mate's rally car; however, is much more progressive and is very useful in the snow...
-
Just over 1/2 car length, that'll do me thanks :smiley:
Better not take a passenger then (or if you do only a thin one) as that could turn the tables the other way :laugh:
-
My understanding of XDS+ is that it doesn't cut power but modulates the power using the braking system but works in conjunction with the traction control which may well cut the power...
Yeah thats what I meant by cut power. Any use of the brakes is cutting power from what could be delivered even if it ultimately delivers more than would be possible without the brakes. Both the e-diff and XDS+ are designed to improve the cornering but the by product of one of them is reduction in power delivered and the other is redistribution of full power.
-
What Car September 2013
1st BMW 135i Auto (thrilling handling) £32,500
2nd Golf GTI DSG PP (Not the vivid driving tool some want) £29,000
3rd A250 (poor ride & gearbox) £29,000
BMW 0-60 4.9
Golf 0-60 6.8
Merc 0-60 6.9
30-70 through gears
BMW 4.1
Merc 4.3
Golf 5.3
Lots of other in-gear times if you want it?
-
What Car September 2013
1st BMW 135i Auto (thrilling handling) £32,500
2nd Golf GTI DSG PP (Not the vivid driving tool some want) £29,000
3rd A250 (poor ride & gearbox) £29,000
BMW 0-60 4.9
Golf 0-60 6.8
Merc 0-60 6.9
30-70 through gears
BMW 4.1
Merc 4.3
Golf 5.3
Lots of other in-gear times if you want it?
They look more like GTD figures, maybe the DSG really slows it down :sad:, can't think why there figures are so much slower than all the other reviews/tests?
-
Yes, versus 6.5 in Autocar from last week.
In fact looking at the number plates its the same car!
And, Autocar's 30-70 was 5.9 versus What Car 5.3
-
No DSG is faster to 60 than the manual. :wink:
A lot of factors affect times.
-
No DSG is faster to 60 than the manual. :wink:
:grin:
-
No DSG is faster to 60 than the manual. :wink:
:grin:
Do you claim otherwise? :tongue:
-
No DSG is faster to 60 than the manual. :wink:
A lot of factors affect times.
DSG combined with AWD will be quicker than a manual. Launch control cannot be beaten
-
No DSG is faster to 60 than the manual. :wink:
:grin:
Do you claim otherwise? :tongue:
Yes, and have stated this throughout this thread. The DSG is horrible when going flat out from 1st to 2nd, loads of wasted time sat between gears at full revs.
-
No DSG is faster to 60 than the manual. :wink:
:grin:
Do you claim otherwise? :tongue:
Yes, and have stated this throughout this thread. The DSG is horrible when going flat out from 1st to 2nd, loads of wasted time sat between gears at full revs.
Sorry mate you are wrong, I constantly beat my mate with both our mk5 and 6. His was manual and I destroyed him everytime from stop.
-
No DSG is faster to 60 than the manual. ;)
;D
Do you claim otherwise? :P
Yes, and have stated this throughout this thread. The DSG is horrible when going flat out from 1st to 2nd, loads of wasted time sat between gears at full revs.
I can feel a drag at inters next year comin on?? :drool:
-
Well we all know it's been shown the DSG is faster. Youtube of R vs R DSG for example. IIRC the DSG beats the manual by up to a whole second on one ocassion and by half a second on average (which is over 10% faster).. It also shows how variable the results can be in a manual. Or there is the drift king vid that has been posted on here before somewhere. Some personally prefer to drive manual, some personally prefer to drive DSG, but the DSG is measureably faster.
-
I'd go along with Bear and Johnc41 on this. The DSG simply can't be beaten by manual on a standardised, launch control 0-62 mph drag race. Not rubbing anyone's nose in it, its just fact! (See factual evidence on YouTube)
I'll tell you this though, if I didn't have to drive in heavy, sh*tty traffic all the time I'd have the manual in an instant. It's a sublime, sweet shifting manual box. And, I'd have saved myself £1,400 in the process :wink:
The DSG does make you lazy though, so one day I'll go back to manual. Maybe a classic 911 3.2 Carrera for the weekend when I'm retired :whistle:
-
I saw somebody claimed a 5.8 seconds 0-60 in a manual stock mk7 earlier in the thread and I just lol'd and stopped reading there
Dreamers:
-
I saw somebody claimed a 5.8 seconds 0-60 in a manual stock mk7 earlier in the thread and I just lol'd and stopped reading there
Dreamers:
Actually it was 5.6 by a Car magazine, so it can be done.
-
I saw somebody claimed a 5.8 seconds 0-60 in a manual stock mk7 earlier in the thread and I just lol'd and stopped reading there
Dreamers:
Actually it was 5.6 by a Car magazine, so it can be done.
Down hill? :grin:
-
I saw somebody claimed a 5.8 seconds 0-60 in a manual stock mk7 earlier in the thread and I just lol'd and stopped reading there
Dreamers:
Actually it was 5.6 by a Car magazine, so it can be done.
Down hill? :grin:
:grin:
-
I do think that these "0-60" times that are waay lower than published figures may actually be "0-60" rather than "0-62" that is the published norm - hence the shorter times.
-
Please obey the speed limit and avoid knocking down any simon's they are a protected species.
-
Please obey the speed limit and avoid knocking down any simon's they are a protected species.
Who's Simon?
-
Please obey the speed limit and avoid knocking down any simon's they are a protected species.
Who's Simon?
Do you know one Jimble?
-
Please obey the speed limit and avoid knocking down any simon's they are a protected species.
Who's Simon?
Do you know one Jimble?
I know two actually. ;D
-
Please obey the speed limit and avoid knocking down any simon's they are a protected species.
Who's Simon?
Do you know one Jimble?
I know two actually. ;D
:cool:
-
Actually it was 5.6 by a Car magazine, so it can be done.
So quote the new gti manual is 0.1 sec slower to 60 then the outgoing golf R DSG
-
Actually it was 5.6 by a Car magazine, so it can be done.
So quote the new gti manual is 0.1 sec slower to 60 then the outgoing golf R DSG
I didn't write the article my man! Just telling you what they wrote! :smiley:
-
Ok for those saying DSG shifts "horribly" I've a few links:
http://youtu.be/jXosABtjlQ4
http://youtu.be/Zl6_Nm1JYjo
But the sometimes there is this:
http://youtu.be/zNX4NyljQ4U
Still very very quick though.
-
Ok for those saying DSG shifts "horribly" I've a few links:
http://youtu.be/jXosABtjlQ4 (http://youtu.be/jXosABtjlQ4)
http://youtu.be/Zl6_Nm1JYjo (http://youtu.be/Zl6_Nm1JYjo)
But the sometimes there is this:
http://youtu.be/zNX4NyljQ4U (http://youtu.be/zNX4NyljQ4U)
Still very very quick though.
He properly fluffed that first change in the GTI! ::)
Still quite impressive though, i'd like to see them head to head on a wet country road though! :drool:
-
I know this does not describe difference between DSG and Manual but the review on the link below states times of the GTI tested around a track and compared to other rival cars it comes out quicker. Check it out
http://www.iol.co.za/motoring/cars/volkswagen/vw-raises-the-bar-with-new-golf-7-gti-1.1560154#.UgYKQW046nw
-
I know this does not describe difference between DSG and Manual but the review on the link below states times of the GTI tested around a track and compared to other rival cars it comes out quicker. Check it out
http://www.iol.co.za/motoring/cars/volkswagen/vw-raises-the-bar-with-new-golf-7-gti-1.1560154#.UgYKQW046nw
Lovely review.
@Brenbo post the link in the GTI review thread :smiley: (unless its already been posted)
-
You can see the tuning potential of this car :evil: :evil:
http://www.autoevolution.com/news/golf-7-gti-tuned-to-over-300-ps-and-400-nm-by-hg-motorsport-video-photo-gallery-63556.html
-
I would take those figures with a pinch of salt....it's still early days.
-
I would take those figures with a pinch of salt....it's still early days.
The engine has been around for a while and is very tuneable thanks to the VVT.
Abt reckon 300 bhp stage 1 with their piggy back ECU and last year before the GTI was properly announced (but people were guessing that the new VVT Audi 2.0 EA888 engine would be the one is has been launched with) it was getting the tuners excited.
Even the DTUK tuning box thing gets over 30bhp extra out of it which will have a lot less parameters than a full ECU remap.
Oettinger reckon 340 bhp with a series of bolt on mods added such as intercooler and induction.
-
Oettinger reckon 340 bhp with a series of bolt on mods added such as intercooler and induction.
Sweet, but... how the feck are you gonna get 340 bhp through the front wheels without setting them on fire :evil:
-
Oettinger reckon 340 bhp with a series of bolt on mods added such as intercooler and induction.
Sweet, but... how the feck are you gonna get 340 bhp through the front wheels without setting them on fire :evil:
By ordering the car with the "no brainer PP" !!! :laugh:
Seriously though, I was taken round Castle Combe in REVO's 340 or so Leon Cupra a couple of years ago by a proper race driver and you'd be surprised how well the car coped putting that power down.
And either way you look on it, you'd have fun trying!!!! :evil:
-
Well we will just have to wait and see :smiley: but let's be honest there is often embellishment in figures coupled with some ambitious dyno readings.