GolfGTIforum.co.uk
Model specific boards => Golf mk7 => Topic started by: Brenbo on 28 January 2014, 12:39
-
I am unsure if anyone has asked this question already, I suspect they have. But anyway here goes. If you could only afford either a stock base model Golf R or highly specced Golf GTI with all the extras you require which would you go for?
Although I would love to have a Golf R, it does look a bit ordinary from the front, I am leaning towards the GTI with extras configured.
The reason i ask this question is I have just spoken to someone at work about possible new cars he's looking in to purchasing. He was looking at a GTI but now tells me he can get a Golf R for £28400. He is not putting any extras on the car except for Metallic Paint & DSG which I suspect may push this price a bit.
-
It depends how much depreciation matters to you.
Optional extras retain around 20-25% of their retail value over three years, whereas the car will have retained approx 50%. If a larger proportion of a GTI is extras, it stands to reason that it will depreciate by more money than an otherwise standard .:R, even if they start out with the same OTR price.
-
It depends what is more important to the person. If power is more important then the R, if a spec'd up car , then GTi.
I, personally, would rather have the GTi spec'd up over a basic R.
-
It's a good question
Firstly, speccing the car your work colleague is talking about on the DTD website you are looking at £29,100 after discount (based on 3 door). I paid less than that for my GTI which included over £4k of options.
The R is very tempting to me because of the additional power and the 4wd capabilities but i would find it extremely difficult not to add some options. Funnily enough the one option that im least impressed with in the GTI is the one option that i would have to have on the R and that is the DCC purely because it adds a race mode :evil:.
That then bumps the price up to £30k which is £3k more than i paid for the GTI
-
I paid more than the £29100 for my GTI with almost all options except 19" Wheels, Leather, DSG and DCC. I too would find it hard to have a premium car without the extra's that make it that little bit more special and premium. I think I would get fairly bored of the spec if I had a Golf R with no extra's.
It's like you say I would also have to put the DCC on the Golf R to get Race mode, but on the GTI I find the passive suspension really great and do not wish in the slightest I spent out on the DCC. I specced the Golf R with the options I would most to have on the configurator and it came to nearly mid £34K+.
Is the differential in the Golf R a 4WD variant of the e-diff or is it a variant of the XDS?
If i was choosing between the MK6 GTI or Golf R it would be the Golf R hands down but the MK7 has me divided in opinion. I really love my GTI PP. But the performance of the Golf R Mk7 is impressive for the money.
-
I wonder if the whole GTI or .:R choice will become a little easier once we actually see .:R's in the flesh?
-
Maybe
I have to admit my GTI looked a lot different in the flesh than it did in the photos and videos online.
-
I have to admit my GTI looked a lot different in the flesh than it did in the photos and videos online.
Better or worse in the flesh?
-
The way to look at is if the Golf GTI had an optional extra that gave it 70more BHP and 4-wheel drive, would you tick it? I'm guessing yes. Even if it was a few grand.
-
I would say my car looked better in the flesh. Also Mr Savage makes a good point, and I would also say yes I probably would tick the option for 70bhp more and 4WD but the added bonus would be the car would still look like the GTI not the plainer front of the Golf R (which may look better in the flesh, lets hope so, but in the photos is a little dull from certain angles). Photos can be deceptive though.
-
Just to chime in here, I think the front LED fogs add a lot to appearance of the GTI with the 'intake looking' black trim pieces leading to them. Can't see any reference to LED fogs on the R and when choosing the R in the VW comparison page before configuring nothing lights up as it does for the GTi and GTD.
http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/new/golf-gti-vii/which-model (http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/new/golf-gti-vii/which-model)
-
I know that the Golf R does have the double U shape daytime running lights as well. But this aside I have to agree the Audi R8 style black rakes going back in to the Fog lights adds a lot to the appeal of the GTI. I suspect I may see a Golf R in the near future and think it looks great but the styling of the GTI has more going for it from what I have seen of both cars and the added bonus is you can spec your GTI up to a higher spec for similar money to a Golf R. Just don't expect to keep up with one in your GTI if you see it at lights.
The Golf R is going to be a fantastic car if the GTI is anything to go by. But I just feel more could have been done with the front Skirt and styling of the car. The Golf R Mk6 looks stunning I so wanted one but could not afford it back then.
-
Im not really bringing anything to this thread other than to give you a laugh... :laugh:
http://app.volkswagen.ie/ihdcc/en/configurator.html#summary/30670/30021/5G1RXU$GPLAPLA$GW4BW4B$GZCAZCA/2014/1/F14 0Q0Q/F56 TW/+/+/+
-
http://app.volkswagen.ie/ihdcc/en/configurator.html#summary/30670/30021/5G1RXU$GPLAPLA$GW4BW4B$GZCAZCA/2014/1/F14 0Q0Q/F56 TW/+/+/+
-
Hmmmm, I think most people in the market for a GTI will look towards the R and wonder…
Wigit went to see the R in the flesh in Germany when it was launched so can share his thoughts on the styling more accurately than most of us. I think the front bumper is very similar to the German R Line spec with added vents so will be quite beefy in the flesh but still very understated.
The GTI has real presence and my car gets loads of approving comments, and a mate was sat in work looking at used GTIs (older ones) but mk7's came up in the search and I looked at the price of some of them.
Nearly £40k for some used GTI's!!! C'mon!
So what we have here is VW know that people will buy a GTI because its a GTI and will spec it highly as they can afford to. They might not have the desire for an R as to them it's overkill.
I think an R will appeal to a different buyer in general and will generally be bought by very discerning buyers who just want the ultimate model no matter whether they have the use for the extra performance or not.
Would I rather have 300 bhp and 4wd as standard? Yes
Can I afford an R? Yes, probably, don't see why not as it's not hugely more expensive than a GTI PP.
Will I look at getting an R to replace my GTI in a few years? I don't owe anything on my GTI so it all depends on the deal BUT at the end of the day I'm more than happy with the GTI.
I prefer the looks, I can make it as quick as an R in theory (ignoring the 4wd traction) and for me lighter body weight is far more important than extra BHP.
The most fun cars I've ever owned or had use of weren't that powerful - Polo G40, Lupo GTI (6speed) and 205 GTI 1.9 so it's not all about big numbers on congested roads.
Horses for courses.
-
http://app.volkswagen.ie/ihdcc/en/configurator.html#summary/30670/30021/5G1RXU$GPLAPLA$GW4BW4B$GZCAZCA/2014/1/F14 0Q0Q/F56 TW/+/+/+
So what youre saying is that a golf R is £43,616.53 standard in Ireland, best go to Ulster and buy one, then get a private plate depending where you live :smiley:
-
Ive only ever seen 1 Mk6 R here.
Driving a Mk7 R here would take the feeling of exclusivity to a whole new level!!
-
I have a feeling the R will look better in the flesh. I may be in a minority but I rather like the understated quality of it, though there is some disparity between the subtle styling of the front and the agressive rear with the quad exhausts. The R looks like a sleeper.
There are elements of the gti that look more agressive, but I still don't like the red stripe in the headlights at all.
If he's trying to choose between a a fully loaded gti or a vanilla spec R, he needs to think a little down the line. Day in, day out, would your friend really miss those additional options? Or would the performance of the R outweigh that?
I think Exonian makes some good points. I am leaning towards an R in 2015 but only if I can afford it with my wish list options. If not, then it would have to be a high spec gti. Only your friend can know what is most important to him.
-
My friend at work is leaning towards a vanilla spec Golf R. It is a choice between a vanilla spec Golf R or Range Rover Evoque which costs £15K more?
-
Golf R all day long, the GTi will always be in its shadow as a lower spec model regardless of the number of boxes ticked on the options list.
-
I'm currently torn between the R and the GTi Performance pack. To be fair, both are only mildly spec'd with servicing, keyless entry and winter pack, although if I go for the GTi i'd have the DNS Pro.
I wanted to have it ordered this week, so I've got to make my decision soon.
-
Quite an interesting thread this one, there are so many angles to look at it from.
I can think of literally dozens of things gazing into my crystal ball looking at resales etc and the marketing and direction VW will take.
Begs the question - where will the ED40 eventually squeeze in?!!!
-
Now the Edition 40 GTI will be quite interesting regarding the Performance Pack on the GTI already provides such delights as 10bhp more, bigger brakes and e-diff. What will they put in the Edition 40 to mark out as a special edition above the GTI PP.
Will the Edition 40 make the difference in performance between a GTI and Golf R even less (not counting the 4WD of course).
-
Look at the Leon Cupra (which is available in a curious two versions making the lower spec one redundant in many ways) for the answer to likely power increases and engine type but it's the 'standard' options they'll put on the ED40 that will be curious and give the marketing people a challenge!!
Nobody bought 6Rs in any numbers but 7R's will be closer in price to the GTI PP with a massive power gain (on paper); get yourselves out of that little problem VW, bearing in mind they daren't upset GTI owners this early in the lifecycle by massively discounting the model or dropping the used values too much so that its unlikely existing GTI 7 owners would return to VW in a rush.
I'm wondering whether VW will end up saddled like SEAT were with the last generation Leon FR's in that the TDI was a cracking car that sold in big numbers with excellent resale values and nobody bought the petrol version as the GTI was more attractive to look at and the Cupra offered far more for your money than a TFSI or TSI FR petrol model. So almost nobody bought a petrol 2.0 FR despite it being hugely cheaper than the GTI cousin.
Here we have an attractively priced Cupra (give or take), a middle ground slightly overpriced GTI PP and a decently priced (comparatively) 7R.
The issue for me is I prefer the quicker spooling smaller turbo in the GTI PP (which can easily be increased in the power department anyway) and has a superbly sorted chassis as standard. But if we put £££££ into it then figures can be dressed up how you want them...
-
With seemingly not much room between the GTI PP and the .:R for a possible ED40 to fit, and seeing that model runs that seem to be getting shorter and shorter, maybe the ED40 with 240PS will become the only GTI option? A bit like the runout models of the Mk2 etc.
-
Well it wi'll have to be 240 if it follows suit of the last two, doubt it will be the only Gti option available, maybe stick to 240 but crank up the torque to R levels and drop some weight
-
Maybe 4WD on the ED40? I'm not sure how much they can do before the price gets so close to the R it become pointless.
-
Well I can say that if I was ordering my car again now, that I would have have been close to this same dilemma.
Assuming I could afford to run either and that the R wasn't any harsher in terms of ride quality then I would have probably gone for the R :)
As it stands now, by the time the R's really start appearing I will be 12 months closer to the next car, so all is good :D
-
This comment from EVO's Golf R review sums it up for me "Although the R is only £2780 more expensive than the performance pack-equipped GTI, previous experience has suggested that 'R' Golfs often struggle to justify their supplements over their lesser rivals."
GTI with its VAQ (e-diff) has virtually no understeer, Haldex based systems often do.
The Golf R is no light car, so which do you prefer, a straight line performance car or a fun car in the corners? :)
-
In regards to the Edition 40. I reckon when it is released they may scrap the GTI PP in favor of the Edition 40 with a few extra horses, possibly 250bhp?
-
In regards to the Edition 40. I reckon when it is released they may scrap the GTI PP in favor of the Edition 40 with a few extra horses, possibly 250bhp?
The Edition 40 due in a few years will probably be a detuned S3 engine with a bigger turbo if previous models are anything to go by. It would make sense to give it 240bhp but I don't think that's enough power increase to justify it over a GTI. I reckon they'll go 40 BHP over the standard GTI at 260BHP and aim it more towards the Megane RS.
I'm not confident they'll even do an Edition 40, what with the R being so close to the price bracket and with the Golf R Evo being announced (360bhp) then I don't think VW would consider it to be a viable gap in the market. The Edition 40 would be the same price as the R with out 4 wheel drive.
-
In regards to the Edition 40. I reckon when it is released they may scrap the GTI PP in favor of the Edition 40 with a few extra horses, possibly 250bhp?
When is the GTI's 40th anniversary? :)
-
When is the GTI's 40th anniversary? :)
[/quote]
2017. Plenty of time to keep saving. :smiley:
-
That's 4 years away mmm perfect timing to replace the GTI perhaps lol :)
-
That's 4 years away mmm perfect timing to replace the GTI perhaps lol :)
3 years :wink: Even your sig says it's 2014 now. :laugh:
-
Well it wi'll have to be 240 if it follows suit of the last two, doubt it will be the only Gti option available, maybe stick to 240 but crank up the torque to R levels and drop some weight
Torque and power are directly related... increase torque at particular revs and you will increase the power at the same revs.
HP = Torque(lbft) x RPM ÷ 5252
So without reducing the revs you can't keep the power the same and increase the torque
-
Well it wi'll have to be 240 if it follows suit of the last two, doubt it will be the only Gti option available, maybe stick to 240 but crank up the torque to R levels and drop some weight
Torque and power are directly related... increase torque at particular revs and you will increase the power at the same revs.
HP = Torque(lbft) x RPM ÷ 5252
So without reducing the revs you can't keep the power the same and increase the torque
But you can have a higher bhp while keeping torque the same?
-
Only at higher revs - torque and power are directly related.
If you have 200lbft of torque at 5000 rpm you have about 190hp, the same torque but at 6000 means you have about 228hp... but if the torque is generated at 4000 you would have about 152hp.
The same torque in each case but different power outputs depending on revs...
-
Only at higher revs - torque and power are directly related.
If you have 200lbft of torque at 5000 rpm you have about 190hp, the same torque but at 6000 means you have about 228hp... but if the torque is generated at 4000 you would have about 152hp.
The same torque in each case but different power outputs depending on revs...
i see...
So does this explain why the Cupra 280 has the same torque as the GTI and not the R or S3?
-
i see...
So does this explain why the Cupra 280 has the same torque as the GTI and not the R or S3?
yes, they must have different maps which means the Cupra generates it it power/torque at different revs
-
There is also the old argument of how much power do you need.
There are many threads about gti being perfect all round car.
Will 4 wheel drive make less fun, will it be as we'll balanced.
Will extra weight of 4x4 affect it .
I guess we'll have to wait for proper reviews
-
Problem with the R pics is it looks a bit normal until you see it next to a normal Golf, i personally think the GTI front looks better, that said the R bumper is deeper and their is extra cooling, the R felt a bit more special.
When it came to the Mk6 the 35 pulled at my heart strings more than the 6R, now i want something a bit different and personally putting 300+ bhp on a modded GTI through the front wheels does not appeal and i'd rather have 4wd. Personally i'd only ever buy an Anniversary or Limited Edition GTI anyway.
My wife wanted a Mk7 GTI but detests the Austins so when I have compared R v GTI there is about £1,600 difference and I have agreed to pay the difference, why, really she wants an Ed40 but Pirelli is getting on a bit, she will take a hit on the GTI if she changes it in a couple of years for a ED40 so in reality may as well have the R as she will get 5 years of ownership.
I've never been one for raiding the options list so would take the better base car
-
I am absolutely torn at the moment. Since my last post on the matter I have spec'd up a car that is identical, apart from one being a Golf GTi PP and the other an R. As soon as I've made that decision I'm ordering the car. Forms are here waiting to go!
As it stands, there is £10pcm between the two (three year PCP with £4500 down, 6% APR and 9% discount).
It would seem obvious to some that the R should be the one, but the reality is that I prefer the look of the GTi, my missus prefers the Jacanta interior and there is just something about the name 'Golf GTi' that wil always make me want it. On the other hand I absolutely love the understated looks of the R. I love that only someone who really knows the car will realise what it is when out on the road. the 4WD also appeals to me.
other factors are the drop in MPG and the fact the R is twice as much in tax. Normally running costs like that wouldn't factor in, but when I am so closely torn between the two.
-
I've never been one for raiding the options list so would take the better base car
Interesting that you say you would take the 'better' base car...
Yes, the R will be faster and yes, it will be more stable in all weather driving conditions but does this mean it's better?
In that case, the GTI is 'better' in the economy, looks, handling (maybe, depending on the weight penalty of 4WD), and tax aspects.
Personally, the whole experience of owning one of these cars is in how it makes you feel. A higher spec car with a few toys enhances the ownership experience rather than thinking 'I wish I'd have gone for ACC & Sat Nav' etc... I'd pick the GTI and load it up with options!
-
I was just about to type the same about the experience of owning the car and how it makes you feel when you both look at it and drive it, being one of the important factors when deciding about which car.
Not ruling out the Golf R myself, but a specced up GTI does make it that extra bit special to own and I know I will not be saying what if. I know the GTI is not 4WD but the e-diff must make a difference in compensating for not having 4WD. I know it will not pull as well and grip will be less on certain conditions but all in it must be better than not having a diff at all.
-
Personally I'd wait a couple of years and buy the highest specced used car that I could afford, once it's done the most of it's depreciating. Many of the pros and cons in this thread relating to new cars become irrelevant then.
-
If it were a high specced used Golf R you may have to do a lot of looking as I suspect there may not be many of these around due to the price speccing it up when it was new?
-
If it were a high specced used Golf R you may have to do a lot of looking as I suspect there may not be many of these around due to the price speccing it up when it was new?
Looking at the R forum and going from the used 6R's available from VW I'd say R buyers were somewhat less financially constrained than GTI drivers
-
I sense this is going to be one of those never ending threads.
My £0.02/final thought would be, if you buy a mk 7 Golf R now with its 0-60 in under 5secs, what do you change it with in 3 years?
A M3 or 911?
What is going to be able to give you that excitement buzz jump next?
Why not buy a GTI now, enjoy the buzz off that, and then buy an R/S3 in three years after more kit comes as standard.
Im 26 and thats what im doing, by the time I get I get to the end of owning a R for 3 years i'll probably have to get a diesel estate (VRS comes to mind, im no badge snob i come from a Leon after all :smiley:) due to boring practicallity reasons that will come with age and the wifes no doubt broody nature.
-
Aren't 3 or 4 year old R's about the same value as a new GTi? They seem to hold their value really rather well...
-
Slightly off topic but... who would spec the .:R with manual over DSG?
-
I saw one the other day in a VW forecourt for about £20K for a 2010 plate. I may be completely wrong but I would say the depreciation may be the same per year but the final price of a 3 or 4 year old Golf R is not quite the same as a new GTI.
-
I would go for Manual on a Golf R over the DSG. I like being more involved with the car when I drive it. I am also the type of person who would spec Gran Turismo on the Playstation when i used to play it to manual as it was more fun changing gears etc,. :smiley:
-
In that case, the GTI is 'better' in the economy, looks, handling (maybe, depending on the weight penalty of 4WD), and tax aspects.
Of those, only two of those are a matter of fact, the other two are a matter of opinion. In the end only someone in the market for both can decide whether the premium of the R is worth it... You've made your opinion clear...
Personally, the whole experience of owning one of these cars is in how it makes you feel. A higher spec car with a few toys enhances the ownership experience rather than thinking 'I wish I'd have gone for ACC & Sat Nav' etc... I'd pick the GTI and load it up with options!
Again, you're entitled to that opinion; however, is there anything essential missing from the Golf R, yes adaptive suspension, sat nav etc. are nice to have but by not having them do they make the car that disappointing.
Many would have the opinion that £1700+ for the ProNav is daylight robbery - even £750 for the Discover system could be close to that when you can buy a more functional top spec TomTom for less than £300.
As for the adaptive suspension at £815... it looks like a lot of money when there was a thread on here not so long ago where many who had specified it could tell no difference between the modes and those without it are more than happy.
I'm not saying that those are my opinions but they are a valid alternative. Depending on a test drive (because to me it is how these cars drive that makes the difference, not the trinkets) I suspect I would take the R over a GTI specced up to the same price...
It is not a choice I will have to make for a few years because I got my GTD as a company car to save me money - it costs me only the benefit in kind (~£150 per month) and saves me putting silly miles on my 996 Carrera 4S and the associated servicing and maintenance costs...
-
Fair comment Corgi, sincere apologies if I caused any offence by voicing my opinion, it certainly wasn't my intention.
That is the beauty of the levels of personalisation you can go to in cars now isn't it? You can create your perfect car by adding/not adding different options. I think the proof in the pudding is that we see so many spec variations arriving each week in the New Arrivals thread, which just goes to show that we all have different requirements.
I'm sure that I'm in the minority in not ordering the Performance Pack on my GTI, but I've done that as for my own needs, 10bhp wasn't enough of a power gain to justify the outlay (I won't drive the car hard enough to get the most out of the uprated diff/bigger brakes). However, had I not been constrained to a budget, I most certainly would have optioned it.
-
Fair comment Corgi, sincere apologies if I caused any offence by voicing my opinion, it certainly wasn't my intention.
No offence taken.
The point of my little tirade which was not aimed at you specifically :embarrassed: was not to do with people expressing opinions, I like to read opinions... it is just that sometimes opinion and fact become confused :smiley:
You're right, of course, that one man's essential is another's wtf... which results in the number of variations - the other factor is budget as you say...
As for the Performance Pack... for me it is not the 10bhp (which could easily be less than the difference between and good GTI engine and a not so good one), or the brakes (which look great but do not, imo, offer that much of an upgrade over the standard kit)... no the real value of the PP is in the diff, which on a relatively powerful fwd car could be very useful on the road as well as on the track... As a result I think, unusually for VW, the Performance Pack is pretty good value... go and try to purchase and have fitted a mechanical limited slip diff for much less...
-
The e-diff was mainly the reason I configured the Performance Pack as well.
-
Fair comment Corgi, sincere apologies if I caused any offence by voicing my opinion, it certainly wasn't my intention.
No offence taken.
The point of my little tirade which was not aimed at you specifically :embarrassed: was not to do with people expressing opinions, I like to read opinions... it is just that sometimes opinion and fact become confused :smiley:
You're right, of course, that one man's essential is another's wtf... which results in the number of variations - the other factor is budget as you say...
As for the Performance Pack... for me it is not the 10bhp (which could easily be less than the difference between and good GTI engine and a not so good one), or the brakes (which look great but do not, imo, offer that much of an upgrade over the standard kit)... no the real value of the PP is in the diff, which on a relatively powerful fwd car could be very useful on the road as well as on the track... As a result I think, unusually for VW, the Performance Pack is pretty good value... go and try to purchase and have fitted a mechanical limited slip diff for much less...
The value lies with the LSD and the brakes. Considering its the same brake set up on the R then there must be a noticeable difference between the standard and the upgraded ones on the PP
-
The value lies with the LSD and the brakes. Considering its the same brake set up on the R then there must be a noticeable difference between the standard and the upgraded ones on the PP
I didn't say there was no difference but that the upgraded brakes, imo, don't appear to offer an awful lot in terms of performance over the standard setup... and they are not, for me, the main value of the PP
-
The value lies with the LSD and the brakes. Considering its the same brake set up on the R then there must be a noticeable difference between the standard and the upgraded ones on the PP
I didn't say there was no difference but that the upgraded brakes, imo, don't appear to offer an awful lot in terms of performance over the standard setup... and they are not, for me, the main value of the PP
Unless you are intending on tracking your car (which perhaps you are) then you aint going to notice any difference between a car with an LSD and one without.
-
I do agree Craig, especially given the standard setup comes with the XDS+ diff mimicking setup. For me, on the road this will be sufficient.
That said, I also think that the standard brake setup will be more than adequate for the road.
Having said all that, would I have specc'd PP if I had the extra ££ to spend... Yes I would. It just wasn't as important to me as ACC, Winter Pack, Keyless & Sat Nav.
-
After three Civic Type-R's without an LSD, I noticed the difference on the fourth which did have one fitted. But then this all depends on the setup of each model of car not just whether it has an LSD or not.
-
After three Civic Type-R's without an LSD, I noticed the difference on the fourth which did have one fitted. But then this all depends on the setup of each model of car not just whether it has an LSD or not.
I'm with Brenbo on this one.
I have had a number of powerful front wheel drive cars without an LSD (Saab 900 T16 S, Fiat Coupe 20v Turbo, Peugeot 406 V6 Coupe) and some with (most notably 2 x Honda Integra Type R). The first group were unruly and the other much less so. With an LSD traction is much less of an issue in the dry, the cars understeer less - in reality an LSD allows you to get more out of your car than could could without. I know the Golf comes with XDS+ but this is an electronic device which is suspect (and I can't say for certain) is inferior to the electro-mechanical device fitted to the PP GTI.
My GTD can be unruly in the damp if you are heavy with the throttle and I reckon the PP diff, were it available, would make it far less prone to this.
All this before we start discussing the value of limited slip diffs on rear wheel drive :cool:
-
The PP is my first car with an LSD and boy do I notice it.
I've owned 20 odd powerful front wheel drive cars, many of which were remapped and all sorts of chassis mods, and even on the road at sensible and legal speeds the LSD is apparent with the GTI PP having almost zero understeer. It really does not feel like a front wheel drive car.
The LSD and bigger brakes combo were the entire reason I changed from a mk6 (which I loved) to the mk7.
So for less than a grand you get an excellent value LSD, bigger brakes that will easily handle any future uprated power and a "Meh" 10 bhp that's only there because they thought they had to.
I guess the type of roads you drive on will have an effect but living in the West Country we have hills, bends, mud, poop and all manner of other 'challenges' to deal with and the diff soon becomes apparent. I don't think I've spun the wheels on the GTI once yet. Not that I've tried to but my mk6s, mk5's, mk4's, VR6's, TDI's etc all used to spin up an inside wheel all too easily and all had traction control not too far removed from XDS on the later cars or you'd get body movement and understeer when you didn't want it. Hats off to the chassis designers for the GTI mk7.
-
I guess the type of roads you drive on will have an effect but living in the West Country we have hills, bends, mud, poop and all manner of other 'challenges' to deal with and the diff soon becomes apparent.
We have similar around here (but perhaps not as narrow and hilly as Cornwall) but at the moment they are mainly... wet!
-
I would even go as far, as saying some of the B-Roads around Cornwall are what the e-diff was designed for. They can be great fun in a Hot Hatch like the GTI on a summers day early morning with no one on the roads.
But getting back to topic I would honestly say the Performance Pack was worth every penny and you really can feel the difference on normal road conditions. You do not have to be on a track.
The Performance Pack was one of the deciding factors why I gave the GTI a second thought and bought one. After having an LSD on my previous car Civic Type-R Championship White, I will not buy a car without one. I am not up on exactly how the XDS works but I have heard it is electronic and fakes a diff by applying the brakes etc, (am I correct). If this is the case how can it compare to a mechanical e-diff configuration.
I would say the e-diff makes a front wheel drive car as close to being 4WD without actually being 4WD. It will never compare in certain extreme conditions but most of the time you will not notice the difference on normal roads. I have tested the e-diff on a tight corner and it really does feel like you are on rails.
-
How many of you pps have driven an non pp?
-
I guess I should say , and vice versa.
-
I am currently driving a GTI without PP. Although it does take a lot to get the front end unstuck during acceleration, the inside wheel does spin up you can feel the brake being applied on that side. It does work to a certain extent but it doesn't feel very natural and you can feel that progress is being hampered.
I take delivery of a PP GTI in March, as soon as i have some miles on it i will comparing the differences between the two.
J
-
I am currently driving a GTI without PP. Although it does take a lot to get the front end unstuck during acceleration, the inside wheel does spin up you can feel the brake being applied on that side. It does work to a certain extent but it doesn't feel very natural and you can feel that progress is being hampered.
I take delivery of a PP GTI in March, as soon as i have some miles on it i will comparing the differences between the two.
J
I may have to deliberately avoid that in the fear that I will spend the rest of my ownership wishing I'd ordered the PP afterall! :grin:
-
JBirchy, don't worry about it. The standard GTI is an incredible car. I honestly can't think of much that is quicker than it point to point when on twisty B roads.
It certainly won't disappoint :cool:
J