GolfGTIforum.co.uk
Model specific boards => Golf mk3 => Topic started by: golf3 20lt 8v on 12 April 2004, 13:07
-
theres so many different times quoted for mrk3 8v from 8.7 to 11 secs decided to try it out. passanger timed me calling start and sixty. achieved 8.5 sec consistantly. ok these are not scientific test conditions so you can allow for a couple of tenths of a sec, however this time was achieved without breaking a sweat. this figure is inline with some documentation ie parkers guide and www.golfinger.co.uk but not with vw own figures which is wierd. tested on flat ground/totally standard 8v is that about right? 8valvers?
-
Why do i get a funny feeling that black_gti gonna cum on here, followed by golfvr6 and its gonna kick off again! ::)
-
exactly! resist the temptation!
thought this from Veedub8vgti was superb:
http://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/gallery/displayimage.php?album=104&pos=3
-
oh ... oh .... oh ooooohhhhhhhhhhhhh
Where the Kleenex? :D ;D
-
exactly! resist the temptation!
thought this from Veedub8vgti was superb:
http://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/gallery/displayimage.php?album=104&pos=3
whats that old thing? lol
-
it evolved into urs ... if it wasnt for us 8v'ers u'd never have a car lol :P
-
lol :P
-
erm plz pray that golfvr6 doesnt see this :o
-
Seen it :D
I was wrong after all, the 8v gti is very very fast :-*
-
well thats final then 8.7secs = 0-60 for the mk3 GTI 8v
sum1 wanna lock this now? ;D
-
Wanna race? ;)
-
jv meant this!
http://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/gallery/displayimage.php?album=lastup&cat=0&pos=5
-
then there is this gem to contemplate
http://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/gallery/displayimage.php?album=lastup&cat=0&pos=4
-
ok these are not scientific test conditions so you can allow for a couple of tenths of a sec,
Try more like a couple of seconds, not tenths! Then allow for speedo over reading by say 10% so you probably got to 54mph in about 9.5 seconds!! ;D :P
-
the best way is by GPS
-
i'm with iball on this one. allow for the speedo misread.
i have a 97/r 8v with 74k miles - and serviced regularly. i can get to about 9.5 now but no quicker. i used to have a 306 xsi 16v - 135bhp model and i could get a max 8.0 0-60 and that was a load quicker than the 8v.
maybe its not standard and you dont realise it, or maybe your mate is eager with a stop watch! ;)
-
or maybe hes allowed for the 7% misread and hes actually hit 64mph not 62 (yes 62 not 60 get with the times lol)
maybe his mate was slow with the stop watch?
Wanna race?
I'll have my bro-in-laws Subaru yes ... not fair to race a person whos 11 yrs younger than u and obviously cant get high insurance premiums... and the Impreza is the same IG as ur VR6 .. so, yep I'm all for it boy ;D eat my AWD
-
or maybe hes allowed for the 7% misread and hes actually hit 64mph not 62 (yes 62 not 60 get with the times lol)
maybe his mate was slow with the stop watch?
My bad, there was me thinking if you were timing the 0-60 of a car (as previoulsy stated) you actually timed 0-60, not 0-62. His mate could have been slow stopping it, could also have been slow starting it.
Hence the reason you CANNOT get an accurate 0-60mph (or if you want to be a picky tw@t 0-100Km/h) using a mate and a stop watch, as noted above, GPS/proper timing gear is the only way.
Plus everyone knows the 8v can't get there in less than 10 secs unless heavily modded! ;D
-
Oh hang on, just noticed the thread title is 0-60 and the 8v got there in 8.5 secs. Obvioulsy this is correct as the chap who started the thread missed the km/h off the 0-60 bit.
I can believe it would get to 60km/h in about 8.5 secs!!! :D
-
Hence the reason you CANNOT get an accurate 0-60mph (or if you want to be a picky tw@t 0-100Km/h) using a mate and a stop watch, as noted above, GPS/proper timing gear is the only way.
Plus everyone knows the 8v can't get there in less than 10 secs unless heavily modded
ur such a p?n!s
;D
-
erm i hate to piss in all your cornflakes, but we dont need to work out where its innacurate, cos theres no way it does it in under 9.5 secs without a 100bhp shot od nos ;D
-
My cars the slowest on the site. But at least it doesnt look like a barge! I dont argue all day thats its fast because its not. Why u all so eager to shave tenths of seconds of the 0-62. The MK3 8v is slow. Face the facts.
Yes Black_GTi i am a P?n!$ before you start shouting your mouth off. But go and buy a faster car if u want to go to 62 in under 9
-
Yes Black_GTi i am a P?n!$ before you start shouting your mouth off. But go and buy a faster car if u want to go to 62 in under 9
He's only 19 blah blah blah
Can't get insurance blah blah blah
;)
-
He's only 19 blah blah blah
Can't get insurance blah blah blah
WTF is that supposed to mean??? U think I USE that as an EXCUSE??? U REALLY THINK THAT?
HOW OLD R U?.... *EDIT* 21 .. 21!! I bought my car when I was 18 FFS I wanted a GTI, I wanted another VW I wanted quality .. I paid what my car was worth, I paid my extorsionate insurance premium ... u come here acting all big and bad with ya VR6 woooo Ive got a VR6 cos its engine size makes up for my p?n!s size... :-* k!ss my a$$
What did u drive when u were 18? ...
But at least it doesnt look like a barge
Now ur just dissing EVERYONES mk3 .. cos they all look very similar.. different alloys and thats about it.
I dont argue all day
And the last time i argued was ... hmmmm .... hmmmm ...hmmmm
... thing is ... u slag my and others' mk3 off just then... yet your registered to a GTI forum ... and u dont drive one?
U shouldnt be slagging anything off...
-
8.7 sounds about right if you nail the getaway and change up at the right time, and whatever you do DON'T CHANGE INTO THIRD - I managed 9-10 on a personal 0-60 run (time is very vague as I was using the play counter on my CD player), however this was in the wet and the front wheels didn't get traction til about 20-30mph. I'd say my time was a tad higher than normal - I'm pretty sure I didn't start the car at the exact time I skipped to the next track (slightly after in all honesty), and as I said, the amount of wheelspin I had was less than ideal. I know for a fact the speedo in my car is accurate - it was reading 124 the other day on the M74 when the acceleration stopped - so there's no question of it not being 60mph I hit. The 8v will easily do it in less than 10 seconds standard, and with a decent driver can probably break 9. It'll do it without falling apart aswell, unlike those oh so new Mk2's you see knocking about (surely if Mk2 owners invade the mk 3 forum to give abuse, we can give abuse back yeah?).
Which honestly makes me wonder where the hell this notion that the 8v is a slow car came from. Anything under 9 seconds is pretty fast (sub 7 is really fast imo), and keep the motor spinning between 3000 and 6000 and you can really make some progress. It's only slow if you try and floor it when you're in completely the wrong gear for the situation (like trying to go uphill from 45mph in 5th), knock it down a gear or two and you're presented with some pretty solid urge. On a country road it's a veritable overtaking machine, which can never ever be said of a slow car (and I know I spent 4 years trying to overtake everything in sight in one - I like the fact that the 8v doesn't need a 4 car length run up to slingshot past, just drop it to 3rd or even 2nd and blast past.
edit// By the way can we be clear about one thing? It's a 0-60 time, not a bloody 0-62. That's for Europeans. And last time I looked we weren't in a European super-state just yet.
-
arthur ucksake, give it a rest ::)
-
Oh yeah I forgot, standing up for a Golf GTI at www.golfgti.co.uk is bang out of order!
-
if you'll look back you'll see it started off being nothing to do with gti's...
look back and see who threw the first personal insult... ** as per usual **
-
the 8.5 was achieved but driven properly. when i pushed to the higher revs in each gear the times are around 10 sec. changing up at around 4000 revs in each gear, allows the car to pull in each gear. you then should get around 8.5. if you push it in every gear youll take ages to get to sixty because youll the 8 valve engine has a torque range lower down the rev range essentially youll change gear and miss the 8v power. the faster you try too drive it ie revving the f*&k out of it the the slower youll go because you miss the power band. this is the main difference between the two engines (16v) the 16 needs to be driven like a b!tch whereas the 8v is smooth power and pretty quick. nobody claiming its the fastest car in the world! and let me tell you something nobodys car here is the that fast. theres only a 9th of a sec between the golf 3 range thats a good gear change and knowing how to get the most out of your particular vehicle. and by the way the golf is not a sports car its still cool as f*7k and very special but its not an out and out racing car its a quick grand tourer yeah you can modify but is the same car in the end? in perf vw they have golfs that can hit sixty in 3.14secs wich is cool but is that the point of owning a gti, probably not. buy the way it is safe to assume that my speedo is correct otherwise id have a few more speed camera fines than i have. as i said originally this wasnt a scientific test but it is safe to assume that the results are true give or take a small amount, dont give me 10% speedo bollx, yes there will be a small descarepancy but keep it real my friends its going to be marginal. also definatley no mods in car.
-
.........me thinks we need a seperate 8v sub-section within this mk3 section.
Children throwing their toys out of the pram every time they get a wif on an insult, gets very tiresome indeed.
O
-
the same child throwing toys also threw the first insult that fired everyone in the first place.
-
Give it a rest, if everyone is happy with their cars then thats all that matters.
Even I am getting bored of this argument now :o
-
^^^ the man speak sense 8)
-
the same child throwing toys also threw the first insult that fired everyone in the first place.
Well maybe "iball" should stop provoking me :P
... u know I hate my car being insulted... (in any way, shape, or form)
Do I insult ur car?
-
Walk away Black, whats the point of carrying this on?
Its got worse than boring now.
You are obviously happy with your car so what does it matter what anyone else says?
As much as i love my car, it is just a car and there are far more important things to be protective of.
-
yes ur right, spot on .. i "love" my car.
But when I come to a "GTI" forum and my car is harrassed like this cos its not quite upto sum peoples expectations of "fast" ... its like WTF? U DONT DRIVE IT.. WHY DO U CARE?
see what I mean?
I aint had one bad word against my car on clubGTI ... ::)
-
Most people are just having a laugh, making a joke out of it.
Blackgti, you need to learn to take things a bit less seriously :)
Infact a few members on here need to loosen up. Its started to get a bit stuffy on here recently.
;)
-
/me adds new text below signature pic.... NOT STANDARD. :-*
-
lol :D :-*
-
peace at last 8) for today at least ;)
-
told ya lads.......... told ya.......... ::) ::) ::)
-
He's only 19 blah blah blah
Can't get insurance blah blah blah
WTF is that supposed to mean??? U think I USE that as an EXCUSE??? U REALLY THINK THAT?
HOW OLD R U?.... *EDIT* 21 .. 21!! I bought my car when I was 18 FFS I wanted a GTI, I wanted another VW I wanted quality .. I paid what my car was worth, I paid my extorsionate insurance premium ... u come here acting all big and bad with ya VR6 woooo Ive got a VR6 cos its engine size makes up for my p?n!s size... :-* k!ss my a$$
What did u drive when u were 18? ...
Woah, easy tiger. You missed the wink!
I respect you for getting a decent car so young, i had a sh!t car till i was 20. (Renault 19)
I did't get a VR6 to make up for my thingy size, i got one because the 16v was SO SLOW! :o :P ;D
-
Soz man .. I was on my period or summet that day ???
-
Hey, dont nobody stop!!!!
This is far better than stalling cars and broken electric windows. ;D
The 8v is slow. the 16v is pokey and the VR6 is fast.
How can we call a car that has trouble getting rid of Saxo VTR's, Fiesta 1.4's, Peugeot 106 xsi and Focus 1.6 call itself fast?!
END.OF.STORY.
-
Focus 1.6 = 11secs
Saxo VTR = Made of tin foil & selotape
Fiesta 1.4 = What u on?
106 XSI = 105bhp, lightweight, tin foil ... what d'ya expect?
16v cant beat these to 60...
106 GTI, Saxo VTS, Astra 1.8 SRI, Citroen AX GT,
VR6 cant beat these
Clio 172, Clio 182, 206 GTI 180, Civic Type R,
... jeez ... (except the AX) ive listed new cars ... the GTI mk3 was created in 1991 and probably designed in 1989 ... ITS OLD ... of course newer cars that are made of plastercine are faster ... theres f*ck all to them
Theres many new cars faster than the 16v ... is that SLOW?
What about the VR6? get beat by Clios and 206's!! ...
But u all forget ... the GOLF isnt all about SPEED ... its about COMFORT, BUILD and STYLE.
Does a Fiesta look nice (sory Vix) .. NO ... does a AX GT? NO ... nuff said.
jeez...
-
Whats the 0-60 of the clio 172 and 206 gti 180?
I doubt they are alot better than 7 sec.
-
Clio 172 - 7.0
Clio 172 Cup - 6.7
Clio 182 - 6.9
Peugeot 206 GTI 180 - 7.2
.. now yes, not alot faster than the VR6 (7.4secs) ... and thats the same as a VTR compared to a mk3 8v.
All depends on the driver when ya talking a few tenths of seconds!
right 6?
-
I have seen the vr6 quoted as low as 7 seconds, so i doubt there is any difference between any of them.
As you say not bad for a car that was first released in 1992.
How would those same cars compare with the latest vr6 engine in the mk4 cars? very little in it.
-
Golf mk4 V6 4Motion 204bhp - 6.9secs
and thats a HEAVY car... 1350kg est.
.. but yes... people are comparing old to new.
the mk3 is an OLD car ... 1992 ffs... and the engine wasnt "too" bad ... 10secs.. not bad for those who couldnt afford the higher premiums.
now tho engines are more efficient etc ... just look at the new FSI engines
1.6 FSI Golf = 115bhp
2.0 mk3 GTI = 115bhp
... now your gonna say.. hahaha my 16v has 150bhp.
mk3 gti 16v = 150bhp
Clio 182 = 182bhp
Peugeot GTI = 180bhp
Civic Type R = 197bhp
.. all 2.0 16v engines.
VR6 mk3 = 174bhp
V6 mk4 = 204bhp
things move on ... just the mk3 gained weight over the mk2 just like the mk2 gained weight over the mk1
mk1 1.8 112bhp - 8.9secs
mk2 1.8 112bhp - 9.7secs
mk3 2.0 115bhp - 10.2secs
mk4 2.0 115bhp - 10.5secs
... all roughly the same power, but just gained weight.... but what DID they all have at the time they were released?
better reliability, style, comfort etc than the other cars of their genre (size etc)
mk4 Golf Vs Focus ..
mk3 Golf Vs Xsara
mk2 Golf Vs Astra mk2
mk1 Golf Vs ... dunno... sorry... Capri?
Golf wins cos its a BETTER car... nevermind speed... its a BETTER car
-
oh i just love the wind up! - glad you picked the old fiesta out Black!!!
My point is that theres no point saying 'oh yeah this 0-60 is fast' whether its 9 or 10 secs, because anything over 9 secs is pretty average to below average. In fact everyone agrees VW lost the plot with the MK3 GTI in 8v form. I like it cost it costs me bugger all to run and doesnt depreciate that much. I certainly dont like its performance, or lack of.
You point out new cars that could beat it but there were plenty of rivals from 1991 that could beat an 8v golf gti - escort xr3i, fiesta xr2i, AX GT (i had one - it was sh!te - and yes a 16v could beat it to 60), Peugeot 205gti, Peugeot 205 xs...
And for info Black - most new cars are heavier than the ones from 10 years ago - hence the average hot hatch requiring 170bhp+ to be called hot....
comfort - yeah
build - yeah (kinda when they arent stalling...)
style - depends on the times - it is old after all.
REPEAT AFTER ME - IT IS NOT FAST, IT IS NOT FAST, IT IS NOTTTTzzzzzz
-
p.s erm, didnt the focus beat the mk4 in all the tests?
p.p.s - and now you're changing you're arguement from about how quick it is to how good it is. nicely dodged. yes we'll agree it is a good car.
-
because anything over 9 secs is pretty average to below average
bollox
ya just saying that so the 8.7secs 16v can be classed as more than average!
-----
7secs or under is fast... and thats a proper HOT HATCH.
11.5secs and over is. ... town car
Anything in between is normal.
That includes: -
Focus ST170
Golf (except VR6/V6/R32)
1.8T 150/180
Astra SRI 1.8/2.0/2.2 (none turbo)
Pug 106 GTI
VTS/VTR
etc .. those are normal, everyday cars... not FAST cars....
-
So we seem to have agreed that the 8v is slower than faster cars and faster than slower cars. That's how I'd sum up how the argument seems to be going. Doesn't make much sense.
It does seem that an awful lot of people here weren't around when VW launched the Mk3 GTi. I remember the roadtest (can't remember if it was Performance Car or Car magazine), pitting the Mk3 against it's ancestors. The result? The Mk3 won (and I remember this, cos at the tme I was rooting for the Mk2 - I was 11 years old. The magazine claimed it had all the performance of the Mk2 8v (remember people there is more to performance than a straight line - what a Mk3 loses on the straights it gets back in the corners), but with oodles more equipment, safety and refinement. It wasn't until the Mk4 came along that VW tried its best to kill the GTi, with a soggy chassis,a breathless 1.8 litre engine and more rubber in the suspension than a tyre factory. Unfortunately it seems to have tainted people's memories of the Mk3, which was actually a well sorted, punchy car.
The Mk3 can easily be prodded to very fast road speeds, and it can maintain them once it gets up there. I'd call that a pretty fast car.
-
Another great comment there Bodhi,
The magazine claimed it had all the performance of the Mk2 8v (remember people there is more to performance than a straight line - what a Mk3 loses on the straights it gets in the corners)
So do you agree with that? a mk3 handles better than a mk2?
You really are full of knowledge.
:D
-
sounds like we all in agreement then mrk 3 gti 8v does 0-60 in under 9 seconds, the question has now changed slightly into what is fast?
-
Id be realistic..
Standard 115bhp GTI 8v - 9.0secs to 60.
Modded 130bhp GTI 8v - 8.6secs to 60
Standard 150bhp GTI 16v - 8.0secs to 60
...
Thats me sorted then LOL
.. tho the real VW figures are
10.2 and 8.7 respectively.. but everyone claims the 16v figures are wrong and its quicker and the 8v figures are right ... basically cos they hate VW for giving the 8v the GTI badge... and wanna make it look "even" slower compared to the 16v ... when according to VW theres only 1.5secs difference... ::)
-
I think its fair to say the mk3 8v could do with modding to make it a hot hatch.
This isn't that expensive or hard to do.
Cam next black?
-
Well I have modded mine ... ;D
Headlights next though... cant see in the dark with these things.
... dunno about the cam... getting rid of it next summer hopefully... if i've got a nice secure job.
1.8T 150bhp I think ... chipped to 180.
Looked at the V5 170... sounds nice... with it being a V engine, but cant be chipped as well as a Turbo engine ;)
-
Probably get the v5 up to 200bhp with filter/exhaust/chip.
It is in effect a vr5, same configuration as my car but only 5 cylinders done at a 15 degree angle.
-
yea well its one of those decisions but ive got 15month to make it LOL
Turbo charged.... just... saying those words ... summet about it
or a nice sounding "V" engine...
thing is, the early V5's were only 150bhp and they weigh more than the 1.8T's by about 70kg... and I cant afford a newer V5 (170bhp), unless my wage doubles in the next year or so!
-
The problem is, with people chipping the 1.8T to over 200bhp, will they last?
There is no doubt a turbo engine is desirable, but a nice big V engine will more than likely out last it.
Depends how long you want to keep the car.
-
well i'll only chip it to 180.
and i'll keep it a max of 2yrs.
-
yea well its one of those decisions but ive got 15month to make it LOL
or a nice sounding "V" engine...
thing is, the early V5's were only 150bhp and they weigh more than the 1.8T's by about 70kg... and I cant afford a newer V5 (170bhp), unless my wage doubles in the next year or so!
if you want a nice sounding v engine dont get the v5, even the 170 sounds like a hairdryer :P
-
Get something with a V6, makes you feel all grown up.
-
care to lend me ?11,000+ and pay for the nice IG17 insurance?
-
Yawn Yawn ::)
-
Another great comment there Bodhi,
The magazine claimed it had all the performance of the Mk2 8v (remember people there is more to performance than a straight line - what a Mk3 loses on the straights it gets in the corners)
So do you agree with that? a mk3 handles better than a mk2?
You really are full of knowledge.
:D
That isn't what I said tho. Better handling, possibly not (altho I honestly doubt there's much in it). Better grip, definitely. Which is what allows you to go round corners faster and make up the time on a Mk2.
Remember handling is what comes into play when the grip runs out. This simply means a Mk2 will be a nicer car over the limit than a Mk3, which tbh must make it the best hot hatch ever, as any time I've overstepped the mark in my Mk3 a little lift of the throttle has pinned the nose to the apex and brought the back end round a touch to help it round, and what's more you can actually use this technique, unlike in a Saxo, in which similar behaviour will find you in a hedge. Can't really ask for much more than that.
Oh and Black_GTI, I would honestly avoid any performance version of the Mk4 Golf except the R32. Not a single one achieved 4 stars in evo (except possibly the V5 with Sports Suspension - might be worth looking into) and have been universally criticised for their flaccid and spongy chassis. Just get a faster Mk3 tbh (and I'd go for the 16v, all that weight in the nose of the VR6 makes the handling a little bit on the heavy side). Like the twin engine VR6 I saw in Top Gear which was as fast to 60 as a Macca F1 :D
-
I dont want another mk3 ... their old now ... there dated.. the interior is minging compared to the mk4/5
... gotta move with the times.
-
The Mk4 interior isn't really that much of a step up, the only parts of it I'd want in mine are the blue dials and the mileage counter that can display total and trip info at the same time. The seats are less comfortable, and all that added build quality adds muchos weightos. There certainly isn't anything which could help me put up with the degradation of the chassis from mk3 to mk4 tbh.
-
Bodhi, all mk3 stock suspensions are crap. There is no way that a mk3 will be anywhere near a mk2 if raced on bendy roads.
Instead of reading 'evo' go out and try a mk2, you will see what i mean :)
-
Another great comment there Bodhi,
The magazine claimed it had all the performance of the Mk2 8v (remember people there is more to performance than a straight line - what a Mk3 loses on the straights it gets in the corners)
So do you agree with that? a mk3 handles better than a mk2?
You really are full of knowledge.
:D
That isn't what I said tho. Better handling, possibly not (altho I honestly doubt there's much in it). Better grip, definitely. Which is what allows you to go round corners faster and make up the time on a Mk2.
Remember handling is what comes into play when the grip runs out. This simply means a Mk2 will be a nicer car over the limit than a Mk3.
Er No, the better your car handles the longer you will actually keep grip. This simply means you can push a mk2 more than a mk3 around corners. Once the grip goes, so do you, into a hedge.
Handling is what makes a car good at going round corners, simply because you can keep grip longer.
The mk3 handles better in a straight line because it is bigger. It is not very good at going round corners, at least not in stock form.
Since you are a man of knowledge Bodhi, here is a question for you :-
What actually makes the tyres grip?
Answer :- The suspension
The better your suspension, the better the car will grip, especially around corners.
-
Oh by the way, Bodhi, did you look up in 'EVO' magazine how to empty your ashtray?
:D
-
For once i have to agree with Black!! the Mk3 is getting long in the tooth and so i think it is time to move up and beyond.
The interior of the MK4 is a lot nicer than the MK3 and i remember when the MK4 1.8T came out it won all its group tests, but over time it just became average- bit like the MK3.
But i'd rather have an A3 than a MK4 tho. hold value better....
-
What actually makes the tyres grip?
Answer :- The suspension
friction???
-
gravity? :P
-
fat chicks :D
-
For once i have to agree with Black!! the Mk3 is getting long in the tooth and so i think it is time to move up and beyond.
A day to be remembered! 8)
What actually makes the tyres grip?
The road surface...
-
Yes indeed, but what keeps the wheels in contact with the road? the suspension.
If you have a crap suspension then you will have crap grip :D
-
The Mk3 8v doesn't have crap suspension tho, VW saved that for the stock VR6. Pitching under braking = teh win!!!!!!
Anyway, van der Waals forces make the tyres grip, that's why you have less grip in the wet than the dry because of the thin layer of water between the treadblock and the road. Suspension has a part to play yes, however notice any good drivers car under hard cornering - they normally have one wheel suspended in mid air (there was a great picture in evo of a Clio 182 heading into a 90 degree bend with its inside rear in mid air), so it's less important than you think.
And for the last time, handling doesn't help you go quickly, it determines what heppens when you go too quickly - how the car slides, how easy it is to recover. This is why you can annihalate a backroad in an Audi S4, even tho if you take it past its limit it revels itself to be a horrible understeering mess. Up until the limit it's the grip it gets from its 4wd system keeping it stuck to the road.
Oh, and "handles in a straight line". Oxymorons in action lad, tis unbecoming of an obviously educated car nut such as yourself. Maybe you should stick to fixing ashtrays and leave the driving to those of us who know what we're doing eh?
-
whats a van der walls force then?? fancy way of saying friction to make you look clever i say.
and its because of the suspensions characteristics that the rear inside wheel comes off the ground, so it has everything to do with it.
handling doesnt help you go quickly?? haha you are full of facts bodhi
handling charactreistics are different in every case and what they do when the limit is overstepped is different too, in every case. i think you will find the better the suspension set up, the less likely you will be able to correct it if you overstep it, because the grip will just 'snap' and you will under/oversteer and crash, but the limit is far above that of a standard suspension setup so you can go a lot quicker.
-
whats a van der walls force then?? fancy way of saying friction to make you look clever i say.
and its because of the suspensions characteristics that the rear inside wheel comes off the ground, so it has everything to do with it.
handling doesnt help you go quickly?? haha you are full of facts bodhi
handling charactreistics are different in every case and what they do when the limit is overstepped is different too, in every case. i think you will find the better the suspension set up, the less likely you will be able to correct it if you overstep it, because the grip will just 'snap' and you will under/oversteer and crash, but the limit is far above that of a standard suspension setup so you can go a lot quicker.
Like I said, handling decides what happens if you go too quickly, whether you can survive over the limit or not. A Saxo, with it's trailing arm rear supension (known to be pretty crap), will snap oversteer you into a hedge if you so much as waiver on the throttle close to the limit. A Clio 182 or Mk 3 Gti, with their more advanced and by all acounts better rear set ups will give you a much more controllable rear end drift, allowing you to play with the throttle, changing the car's attitude through the corner (please, try this on a roundabout or other clear sighted corner, the conseqeunces of round a blind corner sideways don't bear thinking about.) so you can exit the corner faster - helping you travel faster. If a car has crap suspension like the Saxo (and to a lesser degree it's sister car, the 106 GTi), this tactic will simply leave you facing the wrong way. However, until the grip has been breached, that's what dictates cornering speed, not the car's handling.
P.S. van der Waals forces are the forces which produce friction. Friction is the byproduct of these things doing their bit.
-
So which magazine did you copy that out of Bodhi?
You clearly NO NOTHING about cars as anyone that does wouldn't ask how to get an ashtray out.
DUMBASS.
By the way ALL mk3 stock suspensions are crap, everyone should know that. The 8v gti is probably the worst of the lot.
Easy to change that, fit an aftermarket suspension, get better handling and better grip.
But you wouldn't know how to do that because all your technical knowledge is copied out of magazines.
Go back to reading evo and pretending you know what you are on about.
:D
-
...
-
Im pretty sure the 8v and 16v has the same part numbers for the suspension setup.
you keep doing this.. you dont know.. so why even go there?
you open yourself up to sh!t..
ps... "i'm pretty sure you're wrong" ;)
-
I will venture the vague assumption that the 16v had different suspension to the 8v ;)
-
well look at it this way... if the 16v engine is a heavier.. using the same suspension would be pretty dumb wouldn't it...
-
Not much heavier
8v - 1032kg
16v - 1110kg
... plus the 16v had traction control system and a few other gizmo's...
Air Con? ...
-
yeah but its still gonna be different. overseer is right
stop quoting bullsh!tty figures that mean nothing relevant black_gti >:(
-
Bullsh!t figures?? thats the f*cking weight of the car u prick.
how is that defined as a bullsh!t figure?
knobhead
-
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
black_gti you absolutely kill me! you gonna come to the amd day and prove you 130brake?
-
...
-
no thats how you like it! you little b!tch! ;D
-
full of sh!t you are matey
-
Thats cos it gets pushed in so far! ;D
-
it just spews out onto the forum constantly
-
...
-
yeah innit i just read your other thread. oh yeah mark i think i broke my toe at work today, its all black and swollen
-
nasty. :o
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=9889&item=2473964273&ssPageName=STRK:MEBWA:IT
buy it so you can be cool like me and have a rare smoked interior light ;D
-
ok i watching it!
-
Blackgti, my point was ALL mk3 stock suspension are crap. The front springs are far too soft. That is why there is NO WAY a mk3 will go round corners quicker than a mk2, at least not in stock form.
One of the first things i done on my car was to change the suspension.
-
You clearly NO NOTHING about cars as anyone that does wouldn't ask how to get an ashtray out.
u like to keep dragging stuff up dont u ... just to make others look bad.
Ur not exactly perfect urself u know.
I drag some things up when people try to make others look stupid.
You can't talk to people like idiots if can't do it yourself.
Its called talking a good shop but not running one :)
-
id like to say, having driven Mk1, Mk2 and Mk3 GTIs, it really dont care for the suspension on the Mk3. It feels sloppy and you wallow around (relatively). Handling is a not an exact science like some would have it, but alot to do with the feel of the car. A good handling car allows you to faster in a corner partly because you feel more confident about doing so, it does what you say when you say it.
The best handling car of the bunch IMO is actually the Mk1 Scirocco, which i attribute to the driver being slightly further back and lower.
and as for the original 8v timings, i dont believe ANY so called timing that havnt been done on proper kit. Its easy to settle, get yourself upto Santa Pod and get some proof ;D
-
:-[ Just another boring thread thats been flogged to death and deserves to die!
Let it go guys- kiss make up get laid and talk about something else!
How about......
Who's gonna go to and buy what at inters? ;D
And no funny bollox about performance bits to make 8valves quicker!!!! ::) OR...
Who's seen those bmw ads on the net yet?? Well cool!!!! 8)
-
MK3 stock handling is sh!t.
nuff said.
-
Still better than a Corsa... 8)
-
Stock Mk3's handle pretty well, aslong as they don't have a massive lump of pig-iron up front. Or haven't been tuned to be executive expresses. Or don't have a VR6 badge on the front, basically.
I've heard if you buy one you do get a crash course in Ashtray cleaning tho. Which is fair enough. If my car understeered like a VR6 I'd probably park it on the drive and play with the ashtrays aswell.
-
lol ... I bet people think bodhi is me under a different name! 8)
Bodhi ... u da man! :)
keep up the good work!
-
Stock Mk3's handle pretty well, aslong as they don't have a massive lump of pig-iron up front. Or haven't been tuned to be executive expresses. Or don't have a VR6 badge on the front, basically.
I've heard if you buy one you do get a crash course in Ashtray cleaning tho. Which is fair enough. If my car understeered like a VR6 I'd probably park it on the drive and play with the ashtrays aswell.
No they don't. I can't be bothered to argue Bodhi.
Go and drive a mk1 or mk2 golf gti, you will feel the difference straight away. :)
-
I don't want to tho. That's why I bought a Mk3 instead of a mint Mk2.
-
I know golfvr6 comes out with some contraversial stuff sometimes, but I'm afraid I'm gonna have to side with him here - VR6s are verrry nice cars... yes, they're a bit heavy at the front which does cause the car to plough on forward sometimes at corners, but sort out the slightly sloppy stock suspension and all you're really left with is some extra wear on your front tyres from the weight of the V6 lump ;). Besides, they go like the clappers.
Mk1s and 2s are wonderful-handling cars, but the VR6 is a different style of car. You shouldn't try to compare them like that. Earlier (lighter) golfs are more "chuckable", but you don't buy a VR6 if you want an extremely nimble car. What they lack in light-footedness, they make up for in sheer up-front grunt. 8)
-
My vr goes round corners very well since i put an aftermarket suspension on it ;)