VR6 is slower than I thought???

[Bodhi]

conservative? never!

lol

Citroen Saxo VTS is quicker than ur VR6 ... LOL  as if

i think VW should take a leaf outta Citroen's book.

a VTR is faster than a 8v

T'isn't at all.

[Bodhi]

U wanna use quotes from magazines??

Ok

Whatcar - mk4 8v = 9.0secs (mk3 must be quicker then)
Parkers - mk3 8v = 9.8secs


I gave VW quotes earlier ...

Mk4 150Bhp = 8.5
Mk3 16v = 8.7

Heres a nice QUOTE for u

Look dip sh1t I'm not interested in getting into an argument with you about how slow your car is. That quote you make, as someone pointed out, slags the 8v off.

And yes I do like using quotes from magazines, but I prefer to ensure that the quotes I use are based on something other than a guestimate. You'll note again that IF you'd read what I wrote, the figures I noted from Evo were AS TESTED, once again for you if you're struggling to read that I said AS TESTED. This means they actually got in the car, strapped on some timing gear and found out for themselves what the 0-60 was. I normally quote Evo figures as generally they have actually TESTED the cars. You however appear to thumb through as many magazines as you can until you find the quickest time? I've seen the 8v quoted as 10 secs+ for it's 0-60 and having owned one I don't reckon that's to far off!

The point people are trying to make is that a Furio looks like a VTR. You probably raced a furio and kept up with it but thought it was a VTR!! Though I find that hard to believe as a Furio is probably quicker as well!!!!!

golfvr6, please slate this man for daring to use evo as a defence. This is clearly wrong.

Oh, and any estimate quoting the 0-60 time as 10seconds for a Mk3 is wrong. I tried a 0-60 run the other night (I know these are hardly accurate, but are great for getting a general idea), and after having the wheels spin for the first 3 seconds (it was greasy as hell), my 8v still made the 60 mark before the timer on my CD player had reached 10. I reckon properly timed 8-8.5 seconds is possible. Which, like I pointed out in my last post, is faster than a Saxo VTR.

[golfvr6]

Why would i want to that then Bodhi?
I don't need to state what everyone already knows

THE MK3 8V GTI IS SLOW

 

[Cupra Turbo]

8-8.5 is a bit optimistic for an 8v.

9.0secs.


if its a good engine, run-in with good oil etc ...  50-80,000 miles.

[VR6Chris]

This will sort all the arguments out.
www.race-technology.com
Anyone with no home for ?120 to go to should have one ! On board data logging. I've used a friends AP22 at a track day. Takes a while to set up but will give very accurate real life BHP, 0-60, 60-0, cornering and loads of other geeky numbers - with a slap top you get graphics on the day or take it home and download in private !  have a look, the grins last longer than a weekend in Amsterdam
 

[Cupra Turbo]

i think id rather get 2 new tyres lol

[VR6Chris]

U need 4 after trying to have the G meter off the scale all day  

[iball]

The point people are trying to make is that a Furio looks like a VTR. You probably raced a furio and kept up with it but thought it was a VTR!! Though I find that hard to believe as a Furio is probably quicker as well!!!!!

VTR wrote on its bump strip doesnt give it away huh?

Dont call me dipsh!t u tw@t ...  whatcar TESTED.. TESTED.. TESTED... TESTED ... TESTED... TESTED ... f**k want me to repeat it again? TESTED.. TESTED... TESTED the mk4 GTI 8v and quoted... QUOTED.. QUOTED 9.0secs ...

hang on... ill write the quote out for u ... as u find it difficult to read.

VW GOLF MK4 2.0 GTI 3dr - PERFORMANCE (WC? test figures quoted in bold)

0-60mph sec - 9.0


QUOTED IN BOLD... for the mk4.


Go buy the mag... read it ... realise. I dont care what u THINK is the 0-60 times ... thats the OFFICIAL QUOTE of WC?

and the mk4 8v is slower than the mk3 8v ...

Firstly I know of a number of Furios that the owners have changed the badging on the side to say VTR/VTS lol, it only costs about ?5 to do!

Secondly when the f**k did this argument become about the Mk4? I thought we were talking about the Mk3?!?!?!?!?!? Fine the Mk4 may get to 60 in 9.0 seconds but you still have no conclusive proof that the Mk3 is quicker? Please tell me if I'm wrong, no doubt you will.

Like I've saod before I've had both the 16v and the 8v, I cannot believe that the 8v is only a second slower to 60 than the 16v. Sorry.

Now go pick your toys up and put them back in your pram.

[iball]

golfvr6, please slate this man for daring to use evo as a defence. This is clearly wrong.

Oh, and any estimate quoting the 0-60 time as 10seconds for a Mk3 is wrong. I tried a 0-60 run the other night (I know these are hardly accurate, but are great for getting a general idea), and after having the wheels spin for the first 3 seconds (it was greasy as hell), my 8v still made the 60 mark before the timer on my CD player had reached 10. I reckon properly timed 8-8.5 seconds is possible. Which, like I pointed out in my last post, is faster than a Saxo VTR.

Please enlighten me as to what is wrong with Evo figures?

As I've said before you cannot possibly get an accurate 0-60 time by trying to judge it yourself with a stopwatch let alone a CD player lol. Plus the fact the 16v is only capable of getting to 60 in just under 8 seconds so there is no way on earth the 8v can get there in 8 (in standard form of course!)

[VeeDubGTI16v]

in conclusion 8v mk3 slow, there is no argument so figures arent needed.