golf r

[Booski]

But whats so special about 0-60 times? There meeningless imo unless you do proper drag race (should get a better car to start with) or do traffic light races (numty) or just have a small member so need to brag about such things.
Only numbers that make any sense in the real world are things like 30-70 through gears for overtaking trucks etc. I bet the scirocco R and Golf R are very close after they start rolling.
If you must know the sort of bragging numbers to expect just go buy a back issue of autoexpress and autocar when they tested the S3.

You're missing the point of the R!
IMO it's the AWD that is important to me for the all weather performance...
( if 0-60 is not important to you why did you buy a hot hatch? In your own words "small member"?)

[Snoopy]

...

IMO it's the AWD that is important to me for the all weather performance...

I guess it depends what you class as all weather. Its no good in decent snow. You would be better off buying a secondcar for the bad times in winter. The amount of R32s, WRXs etc i noticed stranded or struggling for a few days last year i found funny as i past them all in an original mini simply because they have lots of power, weight and very wide tyres.

if 0-60 is not important to you why did you buy a hot hatch? In your own words "small member"?)

I said why in reply #19 above, overtaking of trucks, spending a small amount of time on the dangerous side of the road.

[Booski]

Agreed most performance cars a fuc£ed in heavy snow but you stand a better chance than an equivelant 2 wheel drive car...
All weather performance  = safer / quicker progress most days of the year (very wet country we live in).... On the heavy snow days I'll have a lie in 

[Hurdy]

For me a Golf R would still only be a starting point. 0-62 in 5.5seconds would easily drop below 5 seconds with just a remap. T88OMM has an S3 S-tronic (posh word for DSG!) and had REVO installed at GTI international and did a 4.8 dash to 60mph and the QTR in 13.2 at over 100mph. So, the Golf R is slightly lighter and has the bang same engine. Give it the full Stage 2+ treatment (approx £2,800 from stock)and a DSG remap and you are looking in the face of a 340-360bhp car, 0-60mph in sub 4.4 seconds and a 0-100mph dash around 10 seconds, which equates to a similar performance as.........

Ferrari 612 Scaglietti F1
Aston Martin Vanquish

and faster than........

New Porsche 997.2 Carrera C4S
E46 BMW M3 CSL
Bentley Continental GT
Mitsubishi EVO IX FQ-360

Not bad in my book

[Snoopy]

All weather performance  = safer / quicker progress most days of the year (very wet country we live in).... On the heavy snow days I'll have a lie in 

We have had 4wd cars in the past (family use to run a chain of subaru dealerships) and once your rolling theres was no benefit i felt, only lots of weight and tyres/service costs it brought with it.  Each to there own though.

[mac7]

and once your rolling theres was no benefit

Getting rolling is the trick though. Front wheel drive is the worst possible drive layout in a higher powered car. When I need to go quickly I want to be able to tramp on the throttle and use all the torque right away. I'm not talking about standing start 5.5 second blasts to 60, I'm talking about greasy, wet, uneven British roads on a Monday morning going to work when I'm still half asleep need to pull out into moving traffic. Front wheel drive can let you down here, regardless of fancy electronic traction aids, driver skill etc. The simple fact is 4WD transfers 99% of the torque to the road successfully every time, regardless of how indelicate with the throttle you are.

[keelaw]

he he he no intention of starting that argument again. Just that the price is so steep, I would really want the price I paid for to show on the car that I paid the price for. I know that the Golfs are meant to be discrete and subdued. But then why would anyone pay so much to get a R when the GTI is meant to be just that? A GTI is likely not to evolve into a 4WD, so I wonder why create a R when demand for it will be much less so soon and with the older engines? Less also means more expensive due to the economics of it... Is it because it wants to compete with the Ford RS and the likes? 

Golf R is a replacement for the R32.  a model that has been around since MkIV days and a very popular model amongst enthusiasts.  ETTO and all that, why deny them the Golf R?

[keelaw]

If you must know the sort of bragging numbers to expect just go buy a back issue of autoexpress and autocar when they tested the S3.

they have this wonderful invention nowadays called the information super-highway which has all this info available....   

[jdjd]

(approx £2,800 from stock)
Mitsubishi EVO IX FQ-360

Not bad in my book

Agreed. However ide much rather start with a Stock FQ300 and give that the stage 2 treatment. Look the f**k out because you wouldn't even see the evo coming in the r.

 Couple of Kids I know, One has a Stage 3.5 Corsa B, 2litre Turbo Calibre engine install, T40 turbo or something along those lines. Ive never been in something so scary. About 400bhp front wheel drive.
 The other is a Twin Engine Nova each engine powering an axle. Think that has the same treatment as the above both Stage 3.5 2.0 Turbo calibre engines. And that is quite possibly the fastest thing ive laid eyes on. Cept maybe that Norris Design evo

[Booski]

I agree an evo modified or not would be quicker than the R
BUT at least you won't have to hide your face in shame driving the R