GolfGTIforum.co.uk

General => General discussion => Topic started by: VeeDubGTI16v on 22 March 2004, 00:47

Title: GTI or CL?????
Post by: VeeDubGTI16v on 22 March 2004, 00:47
i think we should all chip in and get black gti the original badge for his car


http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2468675542&category=36677

Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Veedubgt18v on 22 March 2004, 00:49
LOL!  ;D
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Cupra Turbo on 22 March 2004, 00:56
This is why I need to be a moderator.
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: modulater on 22 March 2004, 01:00
LOL nut house this place
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Veedubgt18v on 22 March 2004, 01:02
This is why I need to be a moderator.

You a moderator! but then no one would be allowed to post unless they first agreed that mk3 8v was best! man your easy..........
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Cupra Turbo on 22 March 2004, 01:03
how much quicker is the 8v mk2 over the 8v mk3?


just PLEASE answer me that.
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Veedubgt18v on 22 March 2004, 01:12
only a little bit but its a smaller engine  ;)
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: vixteris on 22 March 2004, 01:12
(http://img38.photobucket.com/albums/v118/misscab/argue.gif)
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Cupra Turbo on 22 March 2004, 01:14
Quote
only a little bit but its a smaller engine  

want more figures?

mk3 8v = 127lb/ft torque
mk2 16v = 121lb/ft torque


.. mk2 8v? lol dont care to know.  :D
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Veedubgt18v on 22 March 2004, 01:16
that will be because of the 0.2l increase in displacement, but why is it still slower? oh yeah i forgot its HEAVIER!  ;D  :P  :-*
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Cupra Turbo on 22 March 2004, 01:20
87kg heavier

More torque
More bhp
More safety
More security
More comfort
Bigger alloys
Sexier
More modern


... nuff said.. id sacrifice the 0.4secs to 60 for those extra's  8) :D ;)


on a side note

mk1 - mk2 115Kg heavier, same engine.

mk1 = 8.4secs to 60.  ... add 115kg and no extra power ... u aint getting to 60 in under 9secs.  :D ;)
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Veedubgt18v on 22 March 2004, 01:21
Sexier? More bhp? i thought we had argues about that before anyway?

waht size are your alloys?
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: modulater on 22 March 2004, 01:22
alloys, surely you got steels?
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Cupra Turbo on 22 March 2004, 01:23
15's and the anni had 16's

read my extra bit i added to the above post.  8)
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Veedubgt18v on 22 March 2004, 01:25
errrr......i got 15's on mine as standard? so hows yours bigger?

yours is bigger, heavier, less power and a larger engine and it is still slower, for the life of me i cant think why?????
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: modulater on 22 March 2004, 01:27
yeah anyone for jelly?
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Veedubgt18v on 22 March 2004, 01:29
im gonna go to bed cos im struggling to see the keyboard, laters peeps!
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Cupra Turbo on 22 March 2004, 01:36
well, mk2 GTI 8v's started with 14's.


Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Dizzie on 22 March 2004, 01:50
mine started on 13's steelies ;D
with my bodykit ;D
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Cupra Turbo on 22 March 2004, 02:03
Ur bodykit huh?

Check the thread thats in this forum   ::) ::)

 :D
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Blue MK2 on 22 March 2004, 10:11
f**kin ell, u lot smash it :D
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: tinman on 22 March 2004, 11:20
Quote
only a little bit but its a smaller engine  

want more figures?

mk3 8v = 127lb/ft torque
mk2 16v = 121lb/ft torque


.. mk2 8v? lol dont care to know.  :D

Yup, need more figures.

Looking around this morning and found the Mk3 8v rated at 122lb/ft and the original 16v Mk2 at 123.5lb/ft.

Tin
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: richy on 22 March 2004, 13:18
87kg heavier

More torque
More bhp
More safety
More security
More comfort
Bigger alloys
Sexier
More modern


... nuff said.. id sacrifice the 0.4secs to 60 for those extra's  8) :D ;)


on a side note

mk1 - mk2 115Kg heavier, same engine.

mk1 = 8.4secs to 60.  ... add 115kg and no extra power ... u aint getting to 60 in under 9secs.  :D ;)

... and you want to be a moderator!!!

They're all Golf GTIs.  Give it up.
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: golfvr6 on 22 March 2004, 15:19
The mk2 16v does have 123.5lb ft torque at about 4500rpm, will check the handbook for the mk3 8v.
The fact is the 16v will produce much more torque over the 8v higher up the rev range(even 1.8 16v compared to 2.0 8v), this is critical to performance.
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: danhock on 22 March 2004, 15:22
Mr VR6 did you and Black Gti swallow a stats book?

Also why is Black Gti always trying to convince us that hes cars better than everyone elses?
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Cupra Turbo on 22 March 2004, 17:23
Quote
Also why is Black Gti always trying to convince us that hes cars better than everyone elses?

Im not saying my car is better than anyone elses ... all Im saying is its not as bad as all u lot make out... and its a GTI ... live with it.

Quote
Mr VR6 did you and Black Gti swallow a stats book?

We goto a great cantina...
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Veedubgt18v on 22 March 2004, 17:29
Balck if you knew that half the people were yanking your chain and laughed with us then we would get bored and shut up but until then im never gonna tire of ribbing you!  :-*
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Cupra Turbo on 22 March 2004, 17:33
yea but this banter is just getting me to learn more about cars and stuff ... so im happy to keep learning (about modern engines) and keep this banter going ... u wanna keep slagging the GTI badge off ... fire away  :D
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: VeeDubGTI16v on 22 March 2004, 17:36
what you dont understand is that the gti badge is fine, it just doesnt belong on your car. it should be replaced with a nice cl one. your car is like the driver in the mk2 range
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Cupra Turbo on 22 March 2004, 17:46
All 4 of my GTI badges are fine... and my 9.8secs 0-60 is fine ... and when my Magnex exhaust is fitted on thursday (hopefully) ... ill wait till i use up sum fuel cos im on a full tank ... and ill do the 0-60 run.
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Veedubgt18v on 22 March 2004, 17:48
I think you should get some of those smoked headlights, i was just looking at your sig and thinking!
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: VeeDubGTI16v on 22 March 2004, 17:48
mate youll be pissing on r32's before you know it. get some new ht leads and you might be able to keep up with skylines and evos.
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: vixteris on 22 March 2004, 17:49
i dont think we are slagging off the gti name mr black. you have to remember just how astonished the car world was when vw first chucked out the mark 1. it was way ahead of its time and they followed it up with the mark 2 pushing the words 'hot hatch' into the history books.  if u like researching check out peoples views and opinions at the time and maybe u will understand why enthusiasts were dissapointed with the mark 3.  i appreciate why u own the car u do and I understand that someone has to own it - but even u have to admit that vw have made a bit of a comeback , im awaiting with great anticipation what u buy next!!!  ;) :D
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Cupra Turbo on 22 March 2004, 18:25
I wasnt around in 1976 ... my brother was born then tho LOL

and if u read the what happened in the early 90's u'll read summet along the lines of

"with insurance premiums on hot hatches going thru the roof and the sales of hot hatches dropping, something need to be done, and this was VW's answer, to produce a same powered car as the previous mark but add more equipment, making it heavier and therefore slightly slower, but also reducing premiums because of airbags, immobilisers etc. ... the "hot hatch" days have now died off .. with the likes of the mk2 16v golf and XR2"

summet like that ... its not 1986 anymore.
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Veedubgt18v on 22 March 2004, 19:06
i would rather have an old mk2 than drive a thames barge. :-*
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Cupra Turbo on 22 March 2004, 21:32
I'd have the more modern mk3 8v (97/98), thats higher in value with the oppotunity to sell it and buy two 16v mk2's HAHAHAHAHA

(not that I would  :D )
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Jimbobsbig.69 on 22 March 2004, 21:57
Hey Black let it go man they only pulling your p1sser and if it makes you feel better yours is probably quicker than mine as mine has 3 ton of cows ass on the seats. :D
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Cupra Turbo on 22 March 2004, 22:16
maybe nothing wrong with the 8v tho... hopefully will be even better with the full Magnex system on thursday!  ;D
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: VeeDubGTI16v on 22 March 2004, 22:18
yes now it will sound like it is quick like it looks like it is quick but in fact is pathetically slow
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Cupra Turbo on 22 March 2004, 22:25
Tho theres no rolling roads near me, according to guru vr6 I should get an extra 10%+ with the 57i and Full system

... So thats 127Bhp.

123bhp/tonne ... better than a standard 8v mk2.

pick no sum1 else now  :D I aint 115bhp no more.
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: VeeDubGTI16v on 22 March 2004, 22:26
youre still a mouthy T W A T tho
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Cupra Turbo on 22 March 2004, 22:33
cool eh.  :D
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: vixteris on 22 March 2004, 22:38
I wasnt around in 1976 ... my brother was born then tho LOL

and if u read the what happened in the early 90's u'll read summet along the lines of

"with insurance premiums on hot hatches going thru the roof and the sales of hot hatches dropping, something need to be done, and this was VW's answer, to produce a same powered car as the previous mark but add more equipment, making it heavier and therefore slightly slower, but also reducing premiums because of airbags, immobilisers etc. ... the "hot hatch" days have now died off .. with the likes of the mk2 16v golf and XR2"

summet like that ... its not 1986 anymore.
so black are u telling me that

1)your car is slow
2) vw did it deliberately
3) its the best excuse u could find
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Cupra Turbo on 22 March 2004, 22:46
nope, actually what i wrote was summet i found awhile back ... it was a website reviewing all the old hot hatches

205 GTI 1.9
106 GTI
Clio Williams
Astra GSI 16v
Golf mk2 16v

etc ... and thats basically what they wrote... i just couldnt be assed looking for the exact quote.
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: vixteris on 22 March 2004, 23:02
well maybe im getting my wires crossed, i cant be bothered with the same old crap and so will no longer join in the 1/2 gti versus 3 gti debate.  at the end of the day the m3 gti was a dissapointment compared to the old marks and if u cant see the efforts vw made to rectify the problem with the newer models then its not worth me wasting my typing skills  ::)
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Cupra Turbo on 22 March 2004, 23:06
Vw made no effort...

1.8 none turbo GTI?

2.0 8v in the mk4 (even heavier)

150bhp V5  ... (V5 = heavier by 50kg over 1.8, which is 50kg heavier than 2.0)

. ... yep .. loadsa effort ... they released a VR6 ... and a 16v ... and the 16v didnt set the roadsa alight ... its "manufacturers book" time is 8.7secs.
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: iball on 23 March 2004, 08:19
Black GTi - will you just give up spouting all this b0ll0cks, everytime I see one of these threads I notice that you quote a different 0-60 figure for your car. Sometimes it's just over 8 seconds sometimes it's just under 10. Why bother, everyone knows that just about every other gti made by VW is quicker than the mk3 8v, in fact I think every other GTi made by anybody is quicker than the mk3 8v.

Just give up, everyone is just winding you up and you bite everytime. You're car is a decent car in it's own right, it's just not fast, live with it.

I'm going to go and get into my nice comfy barge of a mk3 now but at least it has a little bit of poke! Why don't you just go and buy some CL badges.
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Danr on 23 March 2004, 11:55
After reading all of these i wonder why Black CL says im a trouble maker  ::)
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Cupra Turbo on 23 March 2004, 13:57
Im just curious what the top speed of a mk2 8v ... cos technically the mk3 8v is "FASTER" .. IE higher top speed ...

Quote
Black GTi - will you just give up spouting all this b0ll0cks, everytime I see one of these threads I notice that you quote a different 0-60 figure for your car. Sometimes it's just over 8 seconds sometimes it's just under 10. Why bother, everyone knows that just about every other gti made by VW is quicker than the mk3 8v, in fact I think every other GTi made by anybody is quicker than the mk3 8v.

cos its quoted differently all over the web...

8.7
9.0
9.7
9.8

... and why are u here? shu shu shu ... away with u  ;D
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Omar on 23 March 2004, 17:51
.................and he still goes on spouting about differences of less than a second. Like it matters!!



Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Veedubgt18v on 23 March 2004, 18:09
besides its not just the car driver skill(and balls!) plays a big part, a mk3 8v is a decent car, yes its reliable, build quality is quite good (especially on later ones) parts are readily available, and premiums arent bad, its just not a heart stopper thats all. but then neither is the mk2 8v, or 16v, or mk3 16v, there ae loads of cars out there qhich are quicker, especially modern ones, it just so happens that a mk2 8v is the best and fastest car i can afford (or want to own) at the moment, dont get me wrong as soon as i can affors a faster car i will get one, but until then im just gonna be happy with mine as is. and you should be to black cl, so anyway i think 99% of the site, even fellow mk3 owners are bored with you so give it a rest, thank you please  :-*
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: Jimbobsbig.69 on 23 March 2004, 19:56
Here, Here.
Title: Re:GTI or CL?????
Post by: JMallows on 23 March 2004, 21:02
My car is 16 years old in a few days. Show me your car when its 16 years old, if its as good, then yeah, you can say its built better than the MK2. I dont think ANY modern car is as well built as an older car, thats the way the 80's were. The original 16 year old paint on my MK2 is better then the 2 year old paint than my MK4. But, the mark3 MAY well be better if it has more luxuries with it, i dont know, i've never driven one. Most people say the MK2 is the best and fastest, but why should that bother you? You have the car you want, we have the car we want. What more maters?