GolfGTIforum.co.uk
Model specific boards => Golf mk3 => Topic started by: Cupra Turbo on 19 December 2003, 00:12
-
ok... just to clear this whole
mk2 is light compared to the mk3.
mk3 = 1250 (ish...depending on engine)
mk2 = 1150 (ish...depending on engine)
... 100 is the difference... alot of fuss over 100 (i forgot the measurement)
-
it's kg.
i suppose it is a lot of fuss. as long as the cars are all a laugh to drive who cares which one hits 60 quickest ???
-
well I had either kg or lb in my head... its late, im tired. :P
... yes 100kg is alot of fuss... and the mk3 is hella better built.
-
might be tonnes, could even be old ma's knickers.
probably Kilograms.
-
but the mk2 looks sooo much better..
-
your ma's knickers??? ... she had a thong on last night. :-*
HAHAHA j/k
-
she ain't wearing none tonight.. ;D
-
but the mk2 looks sooo much better
...?
I had a pair of shoes that came in a similar shaped box. :D
-
she ain't wearing none tonight..
My appointment aint till later on :D
-
second in the line then.. like the mk3 against a mk2 :D
-
she ain't wearing none tonight..
My appointment aint till later on :D
whats that with the fat bird out of pop idol?
-
She was leaking. ;)
-
that's a big leak! :o
-
Shes handy to have in a fire.
-
I'd chuck her on it to smother it. Should cover any house ;)
-
Yeah she can create one helluva draft by waving her arms its the flabs of skin under her pits that do it... there like giant seal flippers
-
she'd be useless in a swimming pool.. it'd just be her sat in the bottom whilst the waters f*cked off elsewhere
-
shes a seal... there good swimmers...
OMG HOW OFF TOPIC ARE WE??? ::) ::)
-
Shes got stunning looks too, enough to crack any mirror
:D
-
Lets not talk about her gaping crack.
oh... u werent... nevamind
-
it's kg.
i suppose it is a lot of fuss. as long as the cars are all a laugh to drive who cares which one hits 60 quickest ???
I didn't know the 8v could make it to 60
Ho Ho :D
-
i couldn't even make up a way of getting from golfs to the fat bird on pop idol. it's just not right
-
I didn't know the 8v could make it to 60
I didnt realise the VR6 was the idea from a competition run my VW for girls aged 5-13 in 1991 and was won by the fat bird off pop idol...
nice fat? phat? car
-
:) :)
-
...
cant beat a bit of smily
:)
-
my thoughts exactly :) ;D :) ::)
-
ok boys now behave while im gone... i gotta grab sum kip...
ciao - Daz
ciaobella - VR6 ... :-*
-
is that the time?
i gotta get up at 5. damn.
c ya all later! ::)
-
damn Im still here....
ciao
-
::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
-
I didn't know the 8v could make it to 60
I didnt realise the VR6 was the idea from a competition run my VW for girls aged 5-13 in 1991 and was won by the fat bird off pop idol...
nice fat? phat? car
Your car is just as fat just minus about 60bhp ;)
-
58Bhp!!!
get it right ;D
-
59bhp actually ::)
-
115bhp vs 173?
-
Vr6 AAA lump is actually 174bhp as standard :)
-
Lump....
couldnt have said it better myself.
;D
-
whats in the 8v.. a "lu".. lol...
-
Lump....
couldnt have said it better myself.
;D
Would you say 'no' to one then? :)
-
Yep. Cos I plan on buying a more modern car... moving away from the mid 90's era and moving toward W - 51 plate cars. (2000-2001) .. maybe consider a mint 1999 T/V plate. ;)
-
Still its a bit silly to try and put down a vr6 when you only own an 8v.
That would be like me putting down an Audi S4.
::)
-
I was kinda doing it as a laugh....
Id take a VR6... if someone would pay the insurance for me.
PS: But I still love my GTI badge over the VR6 badge.
-
Well i did drive veedubgti8v's mk2 8v yesterday, its not bad. Probably very similar to the mk3.
Problem is i haven't had anything else except valvers and a vr6 for the last 4 years.
Thats the thing, if ya owned a few fast cars, the 8v wouldn't seem very quick anymore. I don't even think my vr6 is that quick now, just get used to the extra performance and want MORE. :D
-
Well Ive actually drove alot of cars, (cos've my sister being a car sales person) and the 8v is quicker than a Zetec 1.8 Focus.
same bhp
-
Audi S4? Pah. Give me an M3 any day of the week. Oversteer is your friend :)
-
If i remember rightly the new m3 went up against the new s4 on top gear. The s4 was the fastest round the track :-*
The quattro cars are some of the best handling cars in the world.
-
Autocar tested the two round a track also. The M3 was 2 seconds faster in the dry if I remember correctly, and 5 seconds on a wet track believe it or not. I didn't until I saw the explanation - the heavy V8 in the front of the S4 means that in the wet, the nose washes wide far in advance of the M3, meaning that despite the S4's traction advantage, the M3 can nail it round wet bends.
Until they sort out the understeer and lifeless steering, the S4 will always be inferior to the M3 as a driver's car imo. Plus, it's got half a McLaren F1 engine :D :D :D
-
Well the S4 was definately faster on top gear. I would prefer the rs4 or rs6, where would that leave the m3?
answer - miles behind
hehehe :D
-
Audi RS6
0-60 4.5 secs
0-124 17.5 secs
:-*
-
Well if you're going to bring the RS models into it............
I'll have an M3 CSL. Or the upcoming M5 with a 500bhp V10. Now you're talking.
-
M3 CSL
0-60 4.2 seconds
-
Not bad. I think the m3 and rs models are both sh!t hot. My wife wants an m3 in estoril blue. I just prefer the audi.
-
M3 CSL
0-60 4.2 seconds
Er no, the 0-60 is actually 4.9 secs
0.2 slower than the Audi RS6 ;D
courtesy of BMW.com
-
evo list the CSL at 4.2
this website has it at 4.3
http://www.cars-cars-cars.org/0-60-Times-Calculator.htm
tis faster. :)
-
M3 CSL
0-60 4.2 seconds
isnt the McLaren F1 quoted at 3.9secs.....and the Porsche GT3 quoted at 4.2secs
U saying the M3 can keep with a Porsche 911 GT3?
-
McLaren F1 does it in 3.2. The GT3 is around 4.1 iirc. But, again, according to Autocar, if the road is smooth enough, a CSL will keep pace with just about anything, including a GT3 and a 360CS. It's a ferociously fast car.
-
evo list the CSL at 4.2
this website has it at 4.3
http://www.cars-cars-cars.org/0-60-Times-Calculator.htm
tis faster. :)
Er no, the spec is 4.9 secs as listed on BMW website.
www.bmw.com
-
Manufacturer's figures (except in the case of the Italians) are always at least half a second on the pessimistic side (the Italians do it the other way round). The best source imo for 0-60 times is evo magazine, pretty much the bible as far as performance cars are concerned.
The comparitive 0-60 times according to the bible?
RS4 0-60 4.8 secs
RS6 0-60 4.8 secs
M3 CSL 0-60 4.5secs (4.2 was taken from the preview article)
Don't get me wrong I like Audis, and the RS models are obscene (if only they weren'y bloody estates), but M3's are in another league imo, and the CSL is one of the finest performance cars of all time imo.
Merry christmas anyway tho :)
-
CSL has that silly cardboard boot.. me subs + skateboard would fall right through the floor.. lol
-
I wouldn't know as i don't read evo magazine. Infact i don't read any of the boy racer mags.
I do agree that manufacturers performance figures are usually understated. However both bmw and audi state practically identical times for the m3 csl and rs6.
So i think it is unlikely that one is any slower than the other really. I certainly wouldn't claim the m3 is in a different league as in reality the performance is probably pretty much identical to the rs6.
Out of interest, back to the cars we actually can afford to own, what did evo say about the mk3 8v gti?
Happy christmas :D
-
The Audi RS6 is available in saloon and estate versions.
BHP 450 0-60 4.7 secs.
The RS4 is only available as an estate.
BHP 380 0-60 4.9 secs.
-
evo isn't a boy racer mag in the slightest. It was born from the ashes of Performance Car magazine if you remember that far back, and focuses far more on how a car is to drive than how many bhp you can get a Nova to produce by putting a 10litre quad turbo V12 in the back seat. I'm not entirely sure what their verdict on the GTi 8v Mk3 was, as the data hasn't been retained in The Knowledge.
-
Maybe the 8v wasn't fast enough to feature in evo magazine? he he ;)
-
No, they just stopped making it before evo was first printed :p
-
yep
-
either way mk3 8v's are slow.......
-
lol ;D
-
your car looks tidy overseer :)
-
thx.. it needs a wash right now.. lol
-
Autocar tested the two round a track also. The M3 was 2 seconds faster in the dry if I remember correctly, and 5 seconds on a wet track believe it or not. I didn't until I saw the explanation - the heavy V8 in the front of the S4 means that in the wet, the nose washes wide far in advance of the M3, meaning that despite the S4's traction advantage, the M3 can nail it round wet bends.
Until they sort out the understeer and lifeless steering, the S4 will always be inferior to the M3 as a driver's car imo. Plus, it's got half a McLaren F1 engine :D :D :D
Out of interest , can u scan that article in for me? i can't believe the quattro would have bad road holding. I've driven a couple and they stick to the road like they are super glued.
Autocar website doesn't list the Audi S4 at all.
I watched the race between the S4 and the M3 on top gear so thinking the S4 doesn't grip sounds a bit bollox to me.
Total respect to the M3, still quattro's are cool ;D
-
I can't unfortunately, I read it in an Airport Departure lounge when I was waiting for a flight and promptly left it there :(
It's all because of weight distribution with Audis - they still like flinging the engine and transmission overhanging the front axle which, when you get a heavy V8 involved, means that on the limit the nose will wash wide, slowing it down. You won't notice this in everyday driving - in fact all the way up to about 8/10ths it will grip like a motherf**k*r. But if you intend on any track work the M3 will be you best bet every time.
I noticed evo have lap times for both listed in the back, and they agree with Top Gear that the S4 is around 1s a lap faster, however in the stat that matters, the S4 gets 4/5 and the M3 gets a perfect 5, in fact was their pick of its class (including 911's) from its launch until just recently, when a reworked 911 (the C4S) snatched the title back. But that's a whole other discussion :)
-
technically 911's shouldnt handle like they do cos of that engine way out back but they do ???
m3's are balanced 50/50 so perfect weight distribution!
-
Aye, mainly cos Porsche have had 30 years to figure out how to stop the 911 from spitting you off the road if your foot so much as waivers on the power going round a corner. Heaven help you if you tried the brakes in the same situation in an old 911.............
-
lol!
so many must have ended up in fields.....
-
I think it is the most written off sportscar of all time. It has to be, in fact.
-
i would have to agree there!
i wouldnt mind a gt2 tho.....
-
GT2's are nice. But tbh, the 911 in Bad Boys > all other 911's. Even without cup-holders :)
-
yeah alrite i will let you win that argument! :P
-
yeah alrite i will let you win that argument! :P
Heh thanks, altho I suspect the one in Bad Boys may well be a GT2, in which case we'll call it a draw :)
It's either that or a Turbo S afaik.
-
I just want to say that the MK3 16V has 30% more power than the 8V so this more than makes up for the extra weight
-
Yep and the vr6 has even more :D
-
But if you intend on any track work the M3 will be you best bet every time.
I noticed evo have lap times for both listed in the back, and they agree with Top Gear that the S4 is around 1s a lap faster,
You've said it yourself , the audi is faster round the track, even the 'bible' says so.
:-*
-
sorry the porsche 911 is one of the most 'everyday' supercars on the market and if they didnt change the design for 30years or so then they were onto a good thing dont u think????, it is also an 'icon' in the 'supercar' world if it has been 'stacked' more than any others its because they were more affordable so more people could afford them!!!!, jusst my point ive been a vw (aircooled and water fan for years) and (porsche is my 'fav' brand of supercar) all german all quality all hold values!!!enuff said
-
But if you intend on any track work the M3 will be you best bet every time.
I noticed evo have lap times for both listed in the back, and they agree with Top Gear that the S4 is around 1s a lap faster,
You've said it yourself , the audi is faster round the track, even the 'bible' says so.
:-*
I never said it would neccessarily be faster round a track (although remember Autocar found it to be faster by quite some margin), I just said, it would be better, as in a lot more fun (always thought that was the point of trackdays, considering none allow racing). However if beating those pesky understeering S4's really is top of your priorities, fit a set of CSL spec semi-slick Michelin Pilot Sport tyres.
kniterider you are correct when you say that the 911 is the most popular supercar, and this does contribute to the high number that get trashed, however up until about 5-8 years ago, the 911 was also the supercar most likely to stick you in a hedge if you got it wrong because of that engine flung out over the back wheels.
-
Who cares what Autocar says? i thought evo was the bible?
One of the mags you quoted actually said the steering on the M3 was dull and unresponsive, must depend on what you read.
The S4 obviously grips much better than the M3, as i originally said, but then again thats actually quite obvious, and i didn't need Evo mag to tell me that.
-
Heh, Autocar just like to think they're the bible :)
Like you say it all depends on what you read. At the end of the day, just about every mag is in agreement that the M3 is a better car. Sounds like a good place to leave it to me.