GolfGTIforum.co.uk
Model specific boards => Golf mk5 => Topic started by: Brando13 on 29 May 2007, 03:05
-
I see a lot of talk about ed 30, someone care to explain what this means what year is this GTI? Whats special about it? Im in the market right now was thinking about buying an older r32 but then went to the dealer and he talked me intoa 2008 r32. Anyone care to talk some sense into me. Is the 2008 R32 worthe buying for 33k? Is there sumthin else i should be looking at? Any advice would as im looking to make a purchase soon. Thanks
-
http://www.carenthusiast.com/roadtests.html?mode=article&id=1893
http://uk-mkivs.net/blogs/uk-mkivs_articles/archive/2007/03/25/Golf-GTI-Edition-30-Review.aspx
R32 and GTI are, different beasts, IMHO. I was also choosing between R32 and GTI. Went with GTI. To me cost-effectiveness was an important factor, the ratio between fun/performance and cost of owning. I think this ratio is heavily in GTI's favour.
http://data.carmagazine.co.uk/cars/reviews/review.aspx?model=1449
http://www.carenthusiast.com/roadtests.html?mode=article&id=1297
"Overall, the R32 has the arsenal to easily see off rivals such as the BMW 130i, but ironically finds itself undermined by another, supposedly lesser, Golf, the GTi. Unless the status of owning the top of the range model is of the utmost importance I'd be tempted to save the £5,000 price difference and stay with the Golf GTi. It can do at least 95% as much as the R32, but at 80% of the cost and would deliver the same depth of enjoyment of driving experience with a lower purchase price, running costs, and if previous trends repeat, less depreciation. "
-
http://www.carenthusiast.com/roadtests.html?mode=article&id=1893
I'd be tempted to save the £5,000 price difference and stay with the Golf GTi.
Except it's not a £5k difference,as the R32 has metalic paint, 18" wheels and xenons all as standard, so if you add them together £1540 ish means about £3.5k difference, plus your getting 4wd, which might not be a selling point to some people I know, but worth considering.
-
Can you put any price on the sound of that V6? :smiley:
R32 and GTI are, different beasts, IMHO. I was also choosing between R32 and GTI.
I absolutely agree with this. I drove both GTI and R32 and they are BOTH amazing cars. They have completely different characteristics particularly in relation to power delivery. It is a very individual decision. For me I simply loved the look for the Deep Blue R and the noise she makes and was prepared to pay a bit extra up front, knowing however that the standard spec was higher. I dont class the R32 as any 'higher' than a GTI, if thats the term to use. Yes it is VWs flagships Golf in their brochures but I believe it is fantastic that VW can offer two (and now 3 if you include the ED30) all at the top of the Hot Hatches as the Golf range toppers!
-
Also, I think you can do much more in terms of tuning when it comes to GTI. It's very expensive to tune R32. You can easily soup up GTI and it will have same or better in-gear times then R32. Also, the power delivery of R32 is very linear, kind of sedate in my opinion. Four wheel drive is the scheisse :cool: and the sound of the six is sexy, no argument. :smiley:
Hard choice, hard...
I was also looking at S3, but it is in another league (at least in terms of price).
I'd buy R32 if I had the dough to put a HGP bi-turbo inside. Costs 22000 euro, gives 435hp/595Nm, 0-100 in 4, 0-200 in 13, and 280+ top speed.
Now, that is something! :shocked:
-
R32 mate.
We have a GTI and love it absolute bits. But you must admit. That R32 is just plain stunning. The sound, all wheel drive, sound, rims, sound :grin:
If you can afford the R32 then I would buy it. But i'm only saying that cos to me the R32 is a completely different beast to the GTI. And cos I'm a spoilt brat :rolleyes:
Its a hard choice me thinks.
-
just sat in a bog standard R32 at the dealers (no I didn't test drive it I know)
Glad I bought the GTI, although as many have said, the noise is great in the R32
-
R32 mate.
We have a GTI and love it absolute bits. But you must admit. That R32 is just plain stunning. The sound, all wheel drive, sound, rims, sound :grin:
If you can afford the R32 then I would buy it. But i'm only saying that cos to me the R32 is a completely different beast to the GTI. And cos I'm a spoilt brat :rolleyes:
Its a hard choice me thinks.
obviously, the sound is quite important to you, Micsta.
Yesterday I saw Ed30 on the move in the city for the first time. (THere are very few GTIs here, as well, and I spot them right away, they look so classy!). It was gray with black rims. Looked great. Sounded great as well!!!
So, even with Ed30 you get quite nice noise. :cool:
-
I realise that of course the GTI does have its won growl. I have never heard the Ed 30 so I cant really judge. Will look on youtube for a sound clip.
-
I agree with all the points above. The V6 sounds great. But the running costs are higher.
Coming from a MKIV GT TDI the shock of now visiting the petrol station once a week and watching the petrol gauge plummet was ........erm shocking at first. But the performance is in a different league. The ED30 does have a nice exhaust note but not as good as the R32 burble.
If it was me it would depend who was paying for the petrol. Company or myself? So far having fun in the ED30 27mpg avg. On a long run at a reasonable speed 34-6 mpg.
Both great cars though
-
If you do buy an earlier R32 say pre march 2006 you won't get stung for the full £400 a year road tax, it's ONLY £300 :rolleyes:
-
I agree with all the points above. The V6 sounds great. But the running costs are higher.
Coming from a MKIV GT TDI the shock of now visiting the petrol station once a week and watching the petrol gauge plummet was ........erm shocking at first. But the performance is in a different league. The ED30 does have a nice exhaust note but not as good as the R32 burble.
If it was me it would depend who was paying for the petrol. Company or myself? So far having fun in the ED30 27mpg avg. On a long run at a reasonable speed 34-6 mpg.
Both great cars though
lol I came from a MKV GT TDI - it took me a while to get used to the quick movement of the petrol needle going down. I agree though, totally worth it :smiley:
-
Love the R32 :cool:
Love the ED30 more :evil:
It has an "edge" to it that the R32 doesn't. Sure the R32 may be the Halo model, but the GTI is the definitive ICON :wink:
VW nailed it with the MKV GTI and enhanced the breed with the ED30. By comparison the R32 is an overweight beast of a car by over 200kg :shocked:
Power to weight the ED30 has the R32's measure, as does it with in gear times and as for the standing quarter...I didn't see a MKV R32 go down the Pod in under 14.6 seconds and I went down in 14.3@98.27mph :smug:
The R32 knocks the ED30 into a cocked hat in the wet as we all know it will with 4WD, but again this is it's downfall if you value mpg as much as mph. However on those balmy dry days on a set of switchback B roads it's the ED30 that would have the measure of the R32 and would be more pleasureable to be in to boot. With the R32 you feel as though it is the 4WD that is doing the work, with the ED30 it is all you :evil:
-
Love the R32 :cool:
Love the ED30 more :evil:
It has an "edge" to it that the R32 doesn't. Sure the R32 may be the Halo model, but the GTI is the definitive ICON :wink:
VW nailed it with the MKV GTI and enhanced the breed with the ED30. By comparison the R32 is an overweight beast of a car by over 200kg :shocked:
Power to weight the ED30 has the R32's measure, as does it with in gear times and as for the standing quarter...I didn't see a MKV R32 go down the Pod in under 14.6 seconds and I went down in 14.3@98.27mph :smug:
The R32 knocks the ED30 into a c*cked hat in the wet as we all know it will with 4WD, but again this is it's downfall if you value mpg as much as mph. However on those balmy dry days on a set of switchback B roads it's the ED30 that would have the measure of the R32 and would be more pleasureable to be in to boot. With the R32 you feel as though it is the 4WD that is doing the work, with the ED30 it is all you :evil:
Driving "flat out" isn't everything, going quick isn't just about top speed, but pace and ability to cover ground in smooth controlled way, and if you buy either car with fuel economy in mind your missing the point IMO.If you want MPG get a GT TDi, which has more torque than a GTi, the reason you won't see many R32 at the Pod is because point and shoot type cars are all about power to weight ratio's. which are far less relevent in real world day too day driving conditions.
I don't feel 4wd play too much importance in everyday driving either, unless conditions are really poor, when they might get you out of trouble, the R32 feel much better planted than the GTi aand as I've mentioned before better over the rough stuff, which there are too much of on the UK roads.
The two cars are very close to each other, but cater too slightly different buyer/owners. :smiley:
-
OK, it is a shock coming from a car that does 50mpg to a car that does 30mpg. But the ED30 gives me the performance that I want for a reasonable mpg ( ask a VXR + ST owner). Also I would rather keep more of my money in my pocket than giving it to this robbing government. :evil:
Also the performance is in a different league to a Diesel. Ok, I did like the large slug of torque that you get, but not the just a few more revs please! But I like the alround performance of the TFSI engine.
-
Anybody noted how remarkably close the ED30 in gear times are to the new S3............. I noted ED 30 is quicker from 30 to 50 and only 0.2 secs slower 50 to 70. There you are £5k difference for 0.2 secs!
Reference - Performance Tuner for ED 30 figures - this months EVO for S3 :nerd:
Now where's my anorak?? :wink:
-
If you do buy an earlier R32 say pre march 2006 you won't get stung for the full £400 a year road tax, it's ONLY £300 :rolleyes:
Not with you on that one CC, its £300 this year then £400 next year for the top band of CO2 emission cars, which the R32 falls into. It has nothing to do with the age of you car, just what you put out the pipe. :nerd:
-
In answer to the original question, I would drive both cars and make my mind up from that. Having driven both, they do offer somewhat of a different driving experience. Only thing to bear in mind is that the R32 will probably cost you more to run due to fuel ecomomy, tax servicing etc. If moneys no object, things become a little more complicated. :evil:
-
If you do buy an earlier R32 say pre march 2006 you won't get stung for the full £400 a year road tax, it's ONLY £300 :rolleyes:
Not with you on that one CC, its £300 this year then £400 next year for the top band of CO2 emission cars, which the R32 falls into. It has nothing to do with the age of you car, just what you put out the pipe. :nerd:
It's my understanding that only cars manufactured on or after March 06 that got clobbered for £400, and all pre that date are £300, have I gotten that wrong?
-
If you do buy an earlier R32 say pre march 2006 you won't get stung for the full £400 a year road tax, it's ONLY £300 :rolleyes:
Not with you on that one CC, its £300 this year then £400 next year for the top band of CO2 emission cars, which the R32 falls into. It has nothing to do with the age of you car, just what you put out the pipe. :nerd:
It's my understanding that only cars manufactured on or after March 06 that got clobbered for £400, and all pre that date are £300, have I gotten that wrong?
I'm pretty sure that if you're in the top CO2 band, regardless of age, then its £300 this year then £400 the next. I hope I haven't rained on you parade, so to speak. :undecided:
-
If you do buy an earlier R32 say pre march 2006 you won't get stung for the full £400 a year road tax, it's ONLY £300 :rolleyes:
Not with you on that one CC, its £300 this year then £400 next year for the top band of CO2 emission cars, which the R32 falls into. It has nothing to do with the age of you car, just what you put out the pipe. :nerd:
It's my understanding that only cars manufactured on or after March 06 that got clobbered for £400, and all pre that date are £300, have I gotten that wrong?
I'm pretty sure that if you're in the top CO2 band, regardless of age, then its £300 this year then £400 the next. I hope I haven't rained on you parade, so to speak. :undecided:
Mine's definitely due fro £400 a year already, as it was manufactured after March 2006, it's just weather or not cars before March 2006 will cop it for £400 next year, or stay £300 as they are at the mo.
-
Creepy, your car WILL be taxed at £400 next year, its nothing to do with the cars age WHATSOVER, all cars that admit over 225 Carbon dioxide WILL all be paying the same tax, forget the age thing, makes no difference matie
-
Creepy, your car WILL be taxed at £400 next year, its nothing to do with the cars age WHATSOVER, all cars that admit over 225 Carbon dioxide WILL all be paying the same tax, forget the age thing, makes no difference matie
Band G (the big 300/400 tax band) only comes into effect for cars registered after 23rd march 2006 so it has everything to do with age. For cars registered before that date the max is band F - currently £205/year.
-
yes apoligises, have checked it out, and its true, seems abit irish to me, an older car pumping out as much CO2 as a brand spanking new motor????. surely if they wanna save the planet, then they should price owners off the road rather then doing what they have done :huh:
-
Yes I must eat humble pie, cars registered before March 06 can't be in Band G. :embarassed: I also read that the CO2 bands don't apply at all for cars registered before March 01. So its complete horse manure, if your cars old and undoubtedly more polluting you don't have to worry about how much CO2 you're producing. God this country is really messed up. :angry:
-
yes apoligises, have checked it out, and its true, seems abit irish to me, an older car pumping out as much CO2 as a brand spanking new motor????. surely if they wanna save the planet, then they should price owners off the road rather then doing what they have done :huh:
And that's my gripe Phil, not so much the amount, but the way they implemented it.Gordon Brown is a complete and utter Crunt IMO :angry:
-
And don't forget pre '73 motors - they must be the worst of all and you don't pay any tax!
-
And don't forget pre '73 motors - they must be the worst of all and you don't pay any tax!
Its just complete bo**ocks! :angry: Up the revolution! :wink:
-
And don't forget pre '73 motors - they must be the worst of all and you don't pay any tax!
Yep, a bloke I work with runs around in an old Moggy 1000, stinking pile of sh!te :sick:, and it's tax exempt :angry:
-
The tax issue - in one respect, the new VED bands do reward more environmentally friendly cars, because certain fuel sniffing new motors pay zero VED. OK, there are anomolies, and yes, the extra £100 a year might seem a little unfair, just because one car was registered one one day, and an identical car was registered a few days earlier/later.
However, you are all missing the bigger picture - and that is fuel duty. A less environmentally friendly car will consume more fuel, and hence will pay more fuel duty. So if you do 10k miles a year in a Moggy Minor, and 10k miles a year in say a GTI, I bet the Moggy will be paying more duty overall (fuel duty plus VED) than a GTI. :nerd:
The four wheel drive issue - the R32 does not have a permanent full-time four wheel drive system. It (along with all Haldex sytems, such as all Audi A3 quattros, S3, Golf 4motion, Audi TT) has a part-time system, which is basically a glorified traction control system. It relies completely and soley on electronics to operate. When there is no wheel spin from the front axle, then no power is sent to the rear axle. When used in "anger", a Haldex 4wd system is very un-nerving, especially when accelerating hard on slippery corners - the "grip-slip-grip-slip" sensation actually upsets the handling. It is a very similar feel to the Mitsubishi Evos, which use electronically controlled diffs. Under about 95% of the time, even on wet roads - only front wheel drive is utilised!
The R32 handling - the R32 has been proven in many tests to actually handle worse than the standard GTI. It understeers more, due to the much heavier VR6 engine, which sits ahead of the front axle. Comfortwise, again, the R32 has a harsher ride than the GTI - this may be fine for rock steady handling down an autobahn at V-max with a heavy cross wind - but in real case scenario "everyday" motoring, the GTI has again been described as the better set-up. OK, handling and comfort can be very subjective, and personal preference; or bias; will play a huge part!
-
Comfortwise, again, the R32 has a harsher ride than the GTI - this may be fine for rock steady handling down an autobahn at V-max with a heavy cross wind - but in real case scenario "everyday" motoring, the GTI has again been described as the better set-up.
Sorry I disagree with that, the R32 might push on more in corners, but IMO you adapt to it's characteristics , just like any other car, and as for the ride, I think it's extra weight actually irons out rut's and bump's better than the GTi, and it doesn't cock a rear wheel when you turn in hard,
In fact the quicker you go in the R32, the better things get. :nerd:
-
re: emissions, my old 1967 mini can pump out whatever fumes it wants, as the MOT tester said they only have to look for visible smoke. :grin:
-
TT's nailed it IMO!
-
re: emissions, my old 1967 mini can pump out whatever fumes it wants, as the MOT tester said they only have to look for visible smoke. :grin:
Yeah takes the Pi@@ don't it. :angry: :smiley:
-
Comfortwise, again, the R32 has a harsher ride than the GTI - this may be fine for rock steady handling down an autobahn at V-max with a heavy cross wind - but in real case scenario "everyday" motoring, the GTI has again been described as the better set-up.
Sorry I disagree with that, the R32 might push on more in corners,
That is exactly my point. Too much understeer, compared to the GTI. And because it isn't a "real" 4wd, you cant rely on the back end digging in under hard acceleration, in order to reduce the understeer. On a Torsen quattro, if they understeer, then give it more gas, the rears bite harder, taking some of the weight off the front end, and allowing better steering control.
but IMO you adapt to it's characteristics ,
Oh, agreed!
as for the ride, I think it's extra weight actually irons out rut's and bump's better than the GTi,
Hmmm, I can sort of see where you are going with this, but unfortunately, more weight ultimately means more effort (stronger springs and/or dampers) to maintain the same level of handling control. Otherwise, F1 cars would be 10-tonne monsters! :nerd:
and it doesn't c*ck a rear wheel when you turn in hard,
It is actually set up like that, to prevent the Haldex from cooking itself.
In fact the quicker you go in the R32, the better things get. :nerd:
I dont doubt you there! :wink: :smiley:
-
as for the ride, I think it's extra weight actually irons out rut's and bump's better than the GTi,
Hmmm, I can sort of see where you are going with this, but unfortunately, more weight ultimately means more effort (stronger springs and/or dampers) to maintain the same level of handling control. Otherwise, F1 cars would be 10-tonne monsters! :nerd:
I wasn't suggesting it has a good power to weight ratio, and yes it's heavy at 1500 KG, but the reason big cars give that "Big car ride" is there weight and wheelbase, I think if we were to drive an F1 car on our public roads we'd have no spines left afterwards, due in part to there lightweight contruction and firm spring rate with very little travel. :huh:
Let be honest most of what were debating here really dosn't effect us in 99% of our driving, and if we were to really throw up some of the MK5's weaknesses, we'd be driving like complkete idiots, if it were on public roads :smiley: