1.4 Rover Vs 2.0 Golf GTi

[Skii]

Originally posted by [GSV]Trig
Just admit that the Golf no longer deserves the GTi badge as it is now under powered (Damned EU regs) for its weight (Too many toys) and the whole Golf GTi thing is now for sensible people that want to think they drive a sports car....

Or you can chip it and blow any Mk1/Mk2 off the road

[3Dfx]

you're quite sensitive about your golf aren't you 3dfx?

not about my Golf no, I can piss on most cars on the road.

but I hate people dissing VW Golf's cos they are one of the best built "normal" cars on the road ... by normal I am excluding BMW, Mercedes etc... expensive cars.

yes. if you nearly double the power of a car, its likely to go nearly twice as quick.

???? dont talk such bollox... so ur taking into consideration the gearbox, aerodynamics etc etc??? ...

So if we double the power of a McLaren F1 it'll do 0-60 in .. say 1.5secs??

... HAHA

the old r5 gtt had a 1.4 block and they were bloody nippy

1: It was turbo charged
2: It weighed 750kg
3: It often blew up.

The Rover weighs in over 1000Kg, it ISNT turbo charged and the cylinder head gaskets blow up.

[3Dfx]

Yup thats the engine, the C20XE and yes they did have porous head problems, until Vaux got a bad name from it and went to some cos something or other company, they redesigned the head for use with turbos initially but they were used on the XE's without....
And it doesnt totally f*ck the engines as you put it, the fault was the oil/water ways, one of them was only about 5mm from the other and oil would seep thru over time and you;d end up with oil in your water, a fault easily rectified mite I add...

Sorry I was a bit young when those engines were out... I just know it can do damag... and when taken to a Vaux dealer they break it more ... LOL j/k

Just admit that the Golf no longer deserves the GTi badge as it is now under powered

180Bhp ... easily chipped to 230Bhp. ... plenty Bhp there me thinks.

and 7.9 to 60mph is rather quick.

Oh... and read my other thread (which I'll make in 2 secs) regarding the 'R' series.

[sparky191]

I test drove one Mrk1 1.6 and a load of Mrk2 8v/16v before I bought my own mk2 8v a few years back and they varied an awful lot performance wise. Some were very slow and some were very rapid. In general the earlier 8v were quicker. They had mechanical injection, which was replaced by an electronic system in the later one, which generally doesn't feel as fast. I didn't find the 16v's that quick, and the 1.6 Mrk one felt as fast as any of them. The 8v had lots of torque and that made them feel quicker.

I've also driven a few Mrk3 8v and to be honest while they had lots of torque none of them felt that fast, even off the line. Certainly none of those Golfs felt nowhere as fast as my next car a Mrk2 CRX 1.6 -16vCRX or even my mates Mrk MR2. The 16v Mrk3 Golf is meant to be a lot better, but I never got to drive one.

But to be honest all of these cars are about 8.0 sec 0-60 and are more nippy than really fast. Theres not much between then and the driver will make as much difference as an extra few bhp here or there. The Golfs are more Tourers than anything else. A really fast car is something like a Mrk2 MR2 Turbo. Those things are just missles. Assuming you can keep them facing the right way!

I have driven a current 1.7 TD Astra and that has a nippy engine in it. But whats most surprising is the chassis. It really corners and handles really well. I guess thats the Lotus infuence showing. But it really was as good as the Mr2 Golf and easily better than the Mr3 golf. Still a long way from the MR2 or the CRX. But very respectable.

The Mrk4 Golf I avoid getting lifts in. It makes me sea sick.

[[GSV]Trig]

Originally posted by 3Dfx
and when taken to a Vaux dealer they break it more ... LOL j/k
180Bhp ... easily chipped to 230Bhp. ... plenty Bhp there me thinks.
and 7.9 to 60mph is rather quick.

Yeah Vaux dealers are shyyyte, the XE's as sound as a pound tho and can be found in anything from Escorts to Caterams..

Ok so 180Bhp sound good compaired to my 150Bhp (book) but do you have to look at the weight, GTi's should be drivers cars IMO where they have less weight and toys that your top of the line model, Pug did a good demonstration of this with there Rallye's, weighed bugger all and ok there power wasnt massive but the lack of weight makes up for it...

And yes we can sit here all night and rant about chips and the likes but were on about factory cars here, you shouldnt have to chip a car to make it what it should of been before it came out of the factory...

And as for your comments about the GTT's, yes they do have a rep for blowing up, but thats cos most ppl just whack the boost up and wonder why it goes pop, same with your XE porous thing, same could be said about the Cav/Cally Turbo's and there transfer boxes, could go on all nite, at the end of the day if u treat the car how that car should be treated then you dont get these problems, cars are like women, there all different, they all have there faults and if you look after them then you'll get out what you put in, as for cars....

[Russ]

heres a link to VW's official list.

http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/fleet/range/engine/golfh

Look at that GT TDi < sub 10 second deisel :O

[sparky191]

Originally posted by Russ
heres a link to VW's official list.

http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/fleet/range/engine/golfh

Look at that GT TDi < sub 10 second deisel :O

Nice but very expensive here.

[Russ]

Originally posted by sparky191
Nice but very expensive here.

not really, a second hand one are easily available for 5k, and cos there such fin e engines theyll go on forever

[schrickvr6]

everyone is knocking on about vw's being expensive to buy but you have to consider resale values,sure the skoda and seat are just as good cars but give it a few years and the vw will be worth twice as much

[3Dfx]

The Golfs are more Tourers than anything else

GTI = Grand Tourer Injection

Or as I call it for people who dont know.. Gran Turismo Injection

And yes we can sit here all night and rant about chips and the likes but were on about factory cars here, you shouldnt have to chip a car to make it what it should of been before it came out of the factory...

true, but its nice to have it as a possibility...for customisations etc

but do you have to look at the weight, GTi's should be drivers cars IMO

Yes, they weigh alot... but thats why they put bigger engines in. To be honest I wouldnt want to drive a light ass car, not good in crashes etc, you just gotta look at the cars today, they all weigh quite abit

Focus RS
Subaru Impreza
Golf R32
Type R

All weigh over 1200kg

But all over over 200Bhp to make up for it. Yes the Golf has many toys, but u gotta remember they sell these cars to company reps, family men/women and regular drivers not just car fanatics. So the majority want Air Con, Traction, Elec windows etc etc if they left these off, the car wouldnt be the #1 European seller.

They "COULD" make a light weight job, but to be honest, I think the R32 is fast enough, 0-60 in 6.6secs and over 150mph top end.

And also you mentioned price earlier...

Clio V6 = £27000
Golf R32 = £22000

What'd you rather have?

[3Dfx]

but you have to consider resale values,sure the skoda and seat are just as good cars but give it a few years and the vw will be worth twice as much

Give this man a medal...

Yes VW's resale value is unbeilevable.... my car has lost £10,000 in 7 years!!! thats hella good

Oh and the new TDI's just DONT lose value... they are unreal... the resale is like 75% or summet...

I also saw a 1yr old Anniversary 150Bhp TDI PD with 20,000 miles and it was selling....

£250 less than it was BRAND NEW!!!! ... £250 LESS ONE YEAR ON!!!!!


classic... and the standard TDI PD's aint much worse... they would be about £750 loss

[Richie]

Tis true... The Vauxhall 20XE (2.0 16v engines) and some of the C20LET's (2.0 16v Turbo engines) suffered from porous heads allowing water and oil to mix in some instances.

As Trig hinted at - the 20XE engine was a fantastic engine for 2 main reasons -

A) - The engine was designed by Cosworth
B) - It was designed to be a turbo charged engine but GM thought they knew better and didnt put turbos on it till later.

These 2 facts (mostly B) gave the engine immense airflow properties allowing for near perfect combustion as well as having a bulletproof block and the design (IMHO) hasnt been bettered since.


Regarding the GTi - Volkswagen HAVE screwed up with it. The car is too lardy and slow compared to before. The only cars in that range you mention above that are "proper" quick are the R32 and 4-Motion.

[3Dfx]

The car is too lardy and slow compared to before

So you'd rather drive a mk1 esque car

minimal safety and protection
no security
no driving aids
VERY flimsy and light chassis

??? time moves on... cars move on.... they become safer...they become heavier.... they become more powerful.... the ozone deteriorates... (but hey! ill be dead by then)

[5lab]

yes i'd rather be driving a car like that. and in fact i do. far more fun than something that pampers you so much you cant get into a powerslide

[3Dfx]

So you'd rather powerslide... hit a tree and die?

nice outlook... if I hit a tree I wanna live.

[Russ]

3dfx, i like driving in a GT TDI, its nice comfortable, but my sister r5 is moe fun by miles. not as nippy ofc, but u just feel more in control. and stop with the scinarios, theres many taht can be used on ur car or old 1's