thinking about a corrado

[Robdub]

Hi all went out in my mates G60 rado the other day must say was very impressed
always loved the look of the rado, just wondered if anyone here has got experience
of them not sure what to do still loving my golf but a VR6 will only cost me about £340
in ins benefit of getting older i  suppose looking at a black one this week 

[dubsport]

DO IT

[OakeyDoak16v]

Go for it man. Don't mess about though only buy a VR6. Don't know why they are so expensive to buy though? Last time i looked for one they were £3.5K and upwards, too much

[Dragon6]

I had a Rado G60 sold it earlier this year must admit wasn`t overly impressed with the Rado`s really ,I just couldnt take to the coupe kind of thing really I just didnt like the driving position clambering in and out got on my t!ts after a while.The quality of the interior wasnt as good as the golfs and the boot weighed half a ton,lights as standard are terrible and they used water based paints on them so chips easliy.if practicality isnt top of the list go for it otherwise stick with the golf.Sold ours to get a mk2 16v golf and never looked back.Also have a mk3 VR6 and I find the Vr engine better allround more flexible and power throughout the rev range found the G60 more peaky due to boost coming off and on although my G60 was standard no chips pulleys but if you wanted a balls out blast the G60 was great fun mind keeping it on boost   but that`s just my opinion of the two engines.Have a look round the Rado prices are rock bottom even a good Vr6.I held out for reasonable price for mine and luckily only got the 1 call who was willing to pay the price otherwise she would have been broken it up.The Rados handle amazing and had awesome grip but for daily/practical cars I prefer the Golf.

[Godzilla]

Agreed with Dragon. Ive owned 2. The only one to go for is a VR6 and that drinks petrol, but its a 150mph car getting to 60 in the mid 6's. The G60 was slated for its performance when new, although they can have different pulleys etc to up there standard 160bhp.  A must is to forget the 1.8 16v & 2.0 16v, both of these are huge pants. Headlights are terrible but can be uprated via a DIY loom. I have 2 German Shepherds, they did not enjoy the boot space! Also, both of my Rado's were constantly going wrong, silly little things but all the time. Sorry if i have put you off a bit mate but give me a decent MK2 Golf anyday.

[Village Idiots]

Top car. Ignore anything but the VR6.

[Diamond Hell]

Don't know why they are so expensive to buy though?

Supply and demand - they didn't sell well when new (they were pretty damned pricey), but people want them now they're cheap, so the short supply keeps the price up.

Surely a fettled 16V motor would be a fair bet? What was the code and bhp on the 2.0 one that was fitted?

[Godzilla]

Don't know why they are so expensive to buy though?

What was the code and bhp on the 2.0 one that was fitted?

  Cant remember engine code but the 2.0 16v Raddo is 136bhp. Always thought this was strange as the MK3 Golf GTI 16v is 150bhp? The 1.8 16v Raddo is a second quicker than the 2.0 16v Raddo?!!

[Jay]

Don't know why they are so expensive to buy though?

What was the code and bhp on the 2.0 one that was fitted?

  Cant remember engine code but the 2.0 16v Raddo is 136bhp. Always thought this was strange as the MK3 Golf GTI 16v is 150bhp? The 1.8 16v Raddo is a second quicker than the 2.0 16v Raddo?!!

Im guessing it's the weight of the car/engine that brings down the BHP?

[cняis]

Don't know why they are so expensive to buy though?

What was the code and bhp on the 2.0 one that was fitted?

  Cant remember engine code but the 2.0 16v Raddo is 136bhp. Always thought this was strange as the MK3 Golf GTI 16v is 150bhp? The 1.8 16v Raddo is a second quicker than the 2.0 16v Raddo?!!

Im guessing it's the weight of the car/engine that brings down the BHP?

weight wont affect bhp. it will affect the accelleration and handling though