Whats faster?

[gixer1400]

noticed on reading through your posts you said ital 

maybe THIS is what you really want 



a nice 1.3 4 speed 

[weazgti]

So anyway back to the original question.

Golf 2 16v  0 60 = 7.6
Golf 3 16v 0 60 = 8.4

Taken from a book i have not just made up. Although in the real world probably never gonna acheive those times. Probably best to drive both and make your own mind up.
Also have you driven a mk3 to see if you actually like the car?
Might not matter which one is fastest.

[Ant1981]

To be honest, doesn't always matter which one is fastest, as are you going to drive it at it's fastest all the time? Probably not. Something with a bit of poke is nice enough.

[AudiA8Quattro]

So anyway back to the original question.

Golf 2 16v  0 60 = 7.6
Golf 3 16v 0 60 = 8.4

Taken from a book i have not just made up. Although in the real world probably never gonna acheive those times. Probably best to drive both and make your own mind up.
Also have you driven a mk3 to see if you actually like the car?
Might not matter which one is fastest.

Where did you get those figures from?
VW quoted figures are much closer. There is no way that a mk2 is nearly a second quicker than a mk3.

[weazgti]

A book about the history of gtis.
Have seen some people state that the mk2 does it in 7.2. Not that anyones gonna notice that difference.

[Wayne]

So anyway back to the original question.

Golf 2 16v  0 60 = 7.6
Golf 3 16v 0 60 = 8.4

Taken from a book i have not just made up. Although in the real world probably never gonna acheive those times. Probably best to drive both and make your own mind up.
Also have you driven a mk3 to see if you actually like the car?
Might not matter which one is fastest.

Where did you get those figures from?
VW quoted figures are much closer. There is no way that a mk2 is nearly a second quicker than a mk3.

Autocar tested a mk2 16v = 7.1 but a mk3 was 8.4 so it shows what difference the extra weight is costing

[VW BUSH]

Having had a few, golfs that is...

Mk2 16v wins hands down over Mk3 16v for fun factor
ABF, 1.8T, and VR are all possible engine conversions.

My last three golfs have been 8v and i dont miss the extra 8v at all.
The VR is a different story, whatever people say about heavy lump too far forward etc etc, it just sounds awsome and has a grin factor of 8.6 whether its in a Mk2 or 3

[AudiA8Quattro]

I've owned a mk2 16v, mk3 VR6, passat GT 16v, Audi 100 quattro and now Audi A8.
I've also had regular use of a mk3 16v and an Audi 90 Quattro 20v( I think i've remembered everything  )
I find some of the times quoted on the mk2 16v interesting, it was a quick car, but not that quick. I don't think it was any quicker than the mk3 16v.
If a 16v could do 0-60 in close to 7 seconds, then that on paper, is nearly as quick as my A8, and that frankly is laughable.
Just to add the mk3 VR6 was a fair bit quicker than the mk2 16v, its a shame the handling didn't match.
Oh course this is only based on my own experiences of the last 15 years.

[richw911]

This still going   

[AudiA8Quattro]

This still going   

I'm faster than you