GTD Performance Pack

[Sootchucker]

TBH, if the GTD can get anywhere near the published MPG figures that VW have issued, then I'll be delighted - performance pack or not, I'll be happy with 184ps.

Thing that's worrying me a little (just a little mind), is the reported issues a number of people are having with the economy of the 2.0 150PS engine in the SE and GT spec's, which according to some forums, despite all the weight saving and bluemotion technologies these cars have, seems give worse figures than the outgoing MK6 models with none of the tech.

Secondly, it seems the non PP Gti's brakes are coming in for universal praise as being quite powerful (which will be a VW first on an non R model  ), so the only thing I think I might of got some use from would have been the LSD. With the GTD probably being slightly more nose heavy than the GTI, it might actually have had a more positive effect on this model than the GTI, and perhaps would have prevented the small additional understeer that no doubt the GTD models will have compared to the GTI ?

In any case, so long as the car does as advertised, I'm glad there's no performance pack, as knowing me I'll have added it anyway, and I'm still incurring the wrath of the wife for littering the car with so many options in the first place 

[ROO1]

TBH, if the GTD can get anywhere near the published MPG figures that VW have issued, then I'll be delighted - performance pack or not, I'll be happy with 184ps.

Thing that's worrying me a little (just a little mind), is the reported issues a number of people are having with the economy of the 2.0 150PS engine in the SE and GT spec's, which according to some forums, despite all the weight saving and bluemotion technologies these cars have, seems give worse figures than the outgoing MK6 models with none of the tech.

Secondly, it seems the non PP Gti's brakes are coming in for universal praise as being quite powerful (which will be a VW first on an non R model  ), so the only thing I think I might of got some use from would have been the LSD. With the GTD probably being slightly more nose heavy than the GTI, it might actually have had a more positive effect on this model than the GTI, and perhaps would have prevented the small additional understeer that no doubt the GTD models will have compared to the GTI ?

In any case, so long as the car does as advertised, I'm glad there's no performance pack, as knowing me I'll have added it anyway, and I'm still incurring the wrath of the wife for littering the car with so many options in the first place 

The mpg doesn't worry me. I had a new a3 for 2 weeks with the 150 Diesel engine and it always did over 50mpg being driven hard everywhere. That was with 2k miles on the clock.

[monkeyhanger]

I'm currently getting about 51mpg on my 170TDI scirocco around the doors (on a 12 mile commute on mixed roads and not sparing the horses) and I expect to get at least 57mpg when I go down the A19 tomorrow (vs 53.3mpg published combined figures). With that in mind i'm expecting to routinely crack 60mpg in the GTD on my commute and 65-70mpg on a motorway journey. I do wonder whether the ADC is braking a lot for these 150TDI cars with the poor mpg.

[p3asa]

I do wonder whether the ADC is braking a lot for these 150TDI cars with the poor mpg.

That is probably very true. I know I can get much more MPG without cruise control than with it.
Reading the road ahead is much more advantageous than going at the exact same speed.

[Sootchucker]

Good point about the ADC chaps. Look, if I average 45-50mpg in a 184ps hatch I'll be like a pig in muck, 60mpg, well - that would be incredible.

[Hawaii-Five-O]

My old Mk5 TDI 140PS used to regularly do 50mpg (well it was actually 49 but 50 sounds better). So, I'll be well chuffed if the new GTD does 60 mpg which I think it will once run in (and on a motorway run).

Gotta get my bloody hands on one first

[dubber36]

I think they'd have a lot of buyers if it didn't add more than a grand onto GTDs list price. How much would that trample on GTIs sales? Quite a bit I would imagine, only the ardent diesel hater wouldn't consider it over a GTI still at 220PS.

Why would that be a bad thing? As long as people are buying their products it doesn't matter to VW if they are buying up!s or Phaetons, let alone GTI/Ds.

If a more powerfull GTD did take new sales away from GTI's, surely that would reinforce used values of the petrol cars as there would be less to choose from?

[monkeyhanger]

dubber36:Less to choose from would only reinforce prices if desirability was still there. If you cut desirability then you also cut demand. If you had a 220PS GTD next to a 220PS GTI at about the same pricepoint there'd be far less demand for the GTI when you can have all of the power and 23% better economy. There are far less BMW 320i on the road than 320d, but a BMW dealership is still hard pushed to sell a nearly new example of a 320i for 90% of what he can sell a 320d for.

[mike.]

The thing is though that the arguments for going for diesel are getting less and less.

Modern turbo petrols have similar torque levels as their diesel equivalents and the MPG of petrols has improved as well.

Doing 12000 miles a year with a petrol doing 35mpg and a diesel doing 45mpg you would save about £30 a month but with the petrol doing 45mpg and the diesel doing 55mpg you are only saving £15.

So unless you really are struggling for cash each month it is hard to understand why anyone would buy a GTD.

[monkeyhanger]

Mike: It's not just the fuel - residuals are higher too, tiny tax disc to pay for etc. I'll save a grand a year with a GTD over a GTI. That car will cost me £6500 to own, tax and fuel vs £7500 for the GTI. Not massive in percentage terms, but that's a couple of nice city breaks in Europe a year I can do for a car that is nigh on the same to drive (legally on public roads). Diesels have better residuals mainly due to engines having greater longevity and better economy and with a GTD coming in cheaper than a GTI in the first place for the same equipment.