GTI Review and links.

[Gryzor]

Tests seem to show it's pretty much equal to the Focus ST in the acceleration department.

On paper it's only a bit slower, but yes, unconfirmed tests have shown it to be as fast.  Then again, then have similar tests been done on the ST that we are not bothered about looking for?  But anyway, like I said, it's all about usable power.  No point having 250+ HP if the car can only lay down 200 of it.

[Bill_the_Bear]

Not sure I agree on the GTI needing 250+ HP... 

You're right, it really doesn't need it!  Having it would stop the "on paper" comparisons but wouldn't do much else.

[CraigW]

Not sure I agree on the GTI needing 250+ HP... 

You're right, it really doesn't need it!  Having it would stop the "on paper" comparisons but wouldn't do much else.

If it's considered a hot hatch, which it is by many who associate the three letters with performance, then it should be matching if not bettering its rivals.

Truth be told, I went down the GTI route only because the S3 was out of my budget. 300bhp is far more attractive to me than 220, however 250 would have been a nice compromise.  As it is 220 is just a bit underpowered imo.

[Bill_the_Bear]

But on the other hand you only get the 220 at high revs right?  And having that power distributed to the wheels is more important.  So is it only underpowered on paper?  I do think the higher bhp of the rivals is a selling point but gives little practical benefit.

And yet, if I could make one change to the car... I would change the dash but if I could make two changes I would go 250 or 260 like you say!

[Hobojim]

Has anyone seen anything about remaps yet ? Could be all you need to get the car up to the BHP you desire.

[matchboy]

You've got 230 Craig - don't forget the PP adds more power! 

[CraigW]

You've got 230 Craig - don't forget the PP adds more power! 

True, but I wish it added even more Mark  . Remember us accountants lead a pretty dull life, we need some excitement for the journey into work in the mornings 

[matchboy]

You've got 230 Craig - don't forget the PP adds more power! 

True, but I wish it added even more Mark  . Remember us accountants lead a pretty full life, we some excitement for the journey into work in the mornings 

Ain't that the truth! 

I agree though, I would have like 250 - but I suppose that is what will make the R extremely tempting when I want to change from the GTI!

[Gryzor]

If it's considered a hot hatch, which it is by many who associate the three letters with performance, then it should be matching if not bettering its rivals.

Truth be told, I went down the GTI route only because the S3 was out of my budget. 300bhp is far more attractive to me than 220, however 250 would have been a nice compromise.  As it is 220 is just a bit underpowered imo.

In that case, maybe you made the wrong choice if power means more to you?  What matters to me is how the car performs in the real-world.  According to the Ford website, the ST has 250HP and hits 0-62 in 6.5 seconds, with higher CO2 emissions and worse fuel economy.  In VWs defence, I'd say they got the whole point of a "hot hatch" bang on the money.  Such a car isn't about raw power, it's about practicality and making best use of the power that it has.  VW made a car just as quick, with less HP, lower running costs, and a far better cabin to enjoy it all in.

[Bill_the_Bear]

If it's considered a hot hatch, which it is by many who associate the three letters with performance, then it should be matching if not bettering its rivals.

Truth be told, I went down the GTI route only because the S3 was out of my budget. 300bhp is far more attractive to me than 220, however 250 would have been a nice compromise.  As it is 220 is just a bit underpowered imo.

In that case, maybe you made the wrong choice if power means more to you?  What matters to me is how the car performs in the real-world.  According to the Ford website, the ST has 250HP and hits 0-62 in 6.5 seconds, with higher CO2 emissions and worse fuel economy.  In VWs defence, I'd say they got the whole point of a "hot hatch" bang on the money.  Such a car isn't about raw power, it's about practicality and making best use of the power that it has.  VW made a car just as quick, with less HP, lower running costs, and a far better cabin to enjoy it all in.

But originally a hot hatch would be cheaper than the current mk7 is really and would focus less on the high quality interior.  I think the Fiesta ST is a better candidate for hot hatch given your criteria above.  It offers power, performance, practicality and all that for a lot lot less money.  If you go for the GTI it has to be because you're considering other things like the image, the styling, the history, the build quality, extra space... and these things aren't exclusive or even all that common on a car described as a hot hatch.  IMO.