GolfGTIforum.co.uk
Model specific boards => Golf mk3 => Topic started by: JayGTi on 28 April 2003, 15:41
-
Chaps, Please help me out.
Im currently driving a MK3 Gti. Its a really good motor but cant beat my previous MK2 GTi, especially performance wise.
Im about to put the MK3 on the market but want to replace it with either a fully loaded MK3 16V or a VR6.
But which one?
The VR6, obviously I hear your cry, especially if its performance I want. The big question is that Ive heard the VR6 is a gas guzzler??? Is it that BAD????
Shall I be smart and go for a 16v.
Any help appreciated......
Signed
Confused Bloke.
-
depends how heavy your foot is. If you drive it sensibly then you will not have a problem. It will be worth is in the long run. It will be more efficient at higher speed and will use less petrol that the gti.
I am looking to get a VR6 soon myself
-
thanks for that bit of advice. Youre right in that its really upto the driver.
Im very careful when driving and I dont always put my foot down. But its nice to know that if you want power, ITS THERE!!! 8)
What I dont want is the car to be driven reasonably, but not return a reasonable mpg.
-
I would deffo sway towards the VR6, fuel consumption as previously advised is spot on - mine delivers about 32mpg when cruising and about 23-25mpg when you open it up. Plus soon as you put your foot down its all there, no red-line required - gotta be the 'wolf in sheeps clothing'
-
Thanks Steve T. That is exactly what I needed to hear.
My real concerns are the fuel consumption :-/
None the less, can I ask if you are very pleased with your fuel consumption. Im not by any means a heavy footed driver but I would like the reassurance that it wont just eat me out of house and home. How many miles does yours do REASONABLY in a full tank? And what is the capacity of the tank in litres?
My current car is a GTi Mk3, that gives me about 330 miles to a full tank, with only the occasional foot to the floor.
-
330 miles? Should be able to get 400 miles. Mine a 97 Gti 8v. Depends on ur mph. Best place, if u can stick it is 55 - 60 mph, which gets u 42-43 mpg. 70 mph is 38 mph and the long term mpg is 38.7, all using the on board mfa except the 400 per tank.
I had thought of getting the 16v, the insurance was too high, see insurance tread. The vr6 mpg figures in the car mags are 22-30 mpg ... hmmm thats ok only if ur doing 100 mile per week, never mind the extra on insurance.
Will eventually modify the engine, pipercross filter, stright thru exhaust and superchip as most guys here say that the mpg is not affected, as long as the right foot dosen't get stuck on the floor.
-
HHmm, this is gettin more and more confusing.
I think the smart thing to do is head the 16 Valve way. Also, living in London can suck the juice out of the tank when sitting in traffic.
None the less, my MK3 GTi 8v is on the market. Let me know if anyone is interested.
It has FSH, Recent Service, New Pirellis all round, and only 64,000 miles on the clock. Its an excellent example.
Does anyone know any careful seller, selling a 16v?, Leathers, Air-Con, Low Miles....?? Let me know Chaps.
Is there much difference in performance between 8v and 16v?, Has anyone had the chance to drive both??
-
JayGTI, is the insurance mega down your way?? The Mk 3 GTI 8/16 v are quite similar in performance etc whereas the VR6 is completely different. I tend to get about 240-300 miles from the VR6 for a ?40.00 spend which isn't bad but as you've mentioned if you do want to put your foot to the floor watch the needle...
-
SteveT, Living in London dont help. I think Insurance plays a small part but Im worried about fuel consumption rather than anything else. I guess this is to do with the congestion in London generally.
Anyways, ive starting swaying 16v way. Ive put mine on the market now(reluctantly), and if it sells, I will hook myself up with a fully loaded 16v
-
Hi guys
Just purchased a mk3 16v in silver, one owner with full VAG. (pic available) I really am quite smitten. Gonna pick it up on saturday. There's nothing like getting a new car! Took me ages to find one tho. I decided on one after reading an article in Volkswagen driver mag. Basically it said that it was better than a VR6. I know theres not as much power but i think a vr6 would make my insurance man cry!
Laters
sherbert ;D
-
the thing i like most about the VR6 is the pure grunt out of it,nothing sounds as nice as the vr6.i drove a few gti,s then drove a vr6 which i,m glad i did as it certainly opened my eyes.my advice is not to rush into anything and drive a vr6 first before u lay any cash down on anything.i used to have a mk2 16v golf which was a very quick car,personally i reckon it would give a vr6 a run for its money in down low lift,but over 80 the vr6 would probably eat it.
-
Good luck with the motor Sherbert though they have absolutely nothing on a VR6 apart from the insurance and mpg! Unfortunately ever since the MKI then MKII VW have made their cars so much heavier (safety etc..) and it took their wisdom to throw a 2.8 lump in the MkIII.
I don't deny you'll have got yourself a pretty looking car but just watch out for that 'wolf in sheeps clothing'!!!
Black vr6 hit the nail on the head - 'AVE IT!!!!!
-
there both good in there own way. do you want to zing about, or cruise and roar????? ive had 3 abf s mk3s and just bought a auto vr. fuel cons on both i find is almost the same fella. there both group 16 ins so do what u like. well be here to help you either way. :tongue:
-
7 year old thread alert!
(http://www.psdgraphics.com/file/red-warning-sign.jpg)
-
At least he used the search button :laugh:
-
:grin: :grin: :grin: :grin: :grin: