Are 1990s "performance" cars still quick?
Discussion
Barronmr said:
Can't a Rev3 Ct20b do over 300hp? 
Yup, as I said on a previous post, mine certainly did 
ikarl said:
To add something to this, my old rev3 turbo had an exhaust/filter/bigger intercooler and Dastek unichip. Dastek, not renowned as the best dyno for accuracy but apparently had 313bhp. It was certainly very very quick! My best 1/4 mile time at Crail was 13.1 sec
Bit of a difference achieving 300hp between rev2-rev3
Bit of a difference achieving 300hp between rev2-rev3
B'stard Child said:
s m said:
B'stard Child said:
Mine at Shelsley Walsh a few weeks back
Lovely car - that is still extremely rapid today
s m said:
neil1jnr said:
I think in short the answer is yes. Of course there are 90's cars you could drive today and are quick. Are 90's cars as quick as modern ones? That is a tough one to answer and it isn't going to be yes or no.
Take the Golf R and an Evo VI for example, both very similar on paper. I have driven the Golf and I have recently acquired the Evo. My money would go on the Evo but I don't think the Golf would be far behind. With that in mind I'd say that yes 90's cars are still quick but I think the modern cars are much more confidence inspiring and allow the average driver to push them harder than they would an older car.
Regardless of what is quicker, I know which one I'd chose to go for a blast in and it isn't the German one!
That's the comparison I was thinking of as well Neil, a few posts above yours.Take the Golf R and an Evo VI for example, both very similar on paper. I have driven the Golf and I have recently acquired the Evo. My money would go on the Evo but I don't think the Golf would be far behind. With that in mind I'd say that yes 90's cars are still quick but I think the modern cars are much more confidence inspiring and allow the average driver to push them harder than they would an older car.
Regardless of what is quicker, I know which one I'd chose to go for a blast in and it isn't the German one!
I wondered if the sedate looking Golf could match or beat the old EVO 6 from the late 90s.
It weighed in at 1365kg and had around 280bhp whereas the 3-door Golf R with DSG tipped the scales 35kg heavier as specced below
The Golf was figured on a wet day but even with the DSG shifting it couldn't quite match the in-gear times - the Golf has a 6 speeder but even so, the first 4 gears in both are close enough in max speed to make a comparison
Interior noise at full acceleration and average fuel economy are the big gains for the Golf though ( the touring route mpg wasn't as marked although not sure if it has remained the same )
Putting refinement, interior and economy aside... "Are 1990's performance cars still quick?" Yes! Because the mighty, infamous, supercar slaying Golf R, on paper, has the equivilant performance to the 15+ year old Evo VI.
Leins said:
B'stard Child said:
s m said:
B'stard Child said:
Mine at Shelsley Walsh a few weeks back
Lovely car - that is still extremely rapid todayB'stard Child said:
Leins said:
B'stard Child said:
s m said:
B'stard Child said:
Mine at Shelsley Walsh a few weeks back
Lovely car - that is still extremely rapid today
B'stard Child said:
worth 50p at best
I wish they were 50p then I would have two! I have loved these ever since launch and I knew a guy who ran a performance car dealership and he had one in and took his son out for a blast in it and he said to me he couldn't believe how quick and capable it was...they are awesome cars!
neil1jnr said:
Very interesting to read, thanks for posting that. They are more equally matched on paper than I first thought. The Golf will get those 0-60 times consistantly and the Evo probably won't. Put the same tyres on them both and it would be very very close around a track I think. I still think the Evo would beat the R though. Fuel economy has been a huge improvement, the Evo is horendous, I get around the 15/16mpg mark.
Putting refinement, interior and economy aside... "Are 1990's performance cars still quick?" Yes! Because the mighty, infamous, supercar slaying Golf R, on paper, has the equivilant performance to the 15+ year old Evo VI.
Would have been more interesting I think if the Golf had been a manual and it had been dry as wellPutting refinement, interior and economy aside... "Are 1990's performance cars still quick?" Yes! Because the mighty, infamous, supercar slaying Golf R, on paper, has the equivilant performance to the 15+ year old Evo VI.
cerb4.5lee said:
B'stard Child said:
worth 50p at best
I wish they were 50p then I would have two! I have loved these ever since launch and I knew a guy who ran a performance car dealership and he had one in and took his son out for a blast in it and he said to me he couldn't believe how quick and capable it was...they are awesome cars!
Only car I have ever owned that has appreciated rather than depreciated
My neighbour asked me what I'd expect to get when I sell it - nearly had to help him up when I said close to £25K - he had no idea an old minicab could still be worth that much.......
He also couldn't believe that anyone would have paid £50K for one in 1991 "that's crazy money for a Vauxhall"
Ahhh bless him
Why do people STILL keep bleating on about the Golf R as if its some huge leap in evolution over everything else that has come before it.
It is 'just' 2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults and gets to 60 in under 5 seconds.
That really IS NOT something new/amazing and (as a few pointed out) production cars 15 years ago (2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults) were doing the same figures for same demographic of owner (Family man who wanted a sporty family car).
For it to truly be 'Evolutionary' for the times it would need to be doing 2 or 3 sec 60's - which is totally in line with how the mundane/mainstream cars like Diesel Rep mobiles have evolved in that time period (12sec to 8sec 0-60 or less).
Its not a Veyron FFS.
It is 'just' 2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults and gets to 60 in under 5 seconds.
That really IS NOT something new/amazing and (as a few pointed out) production cars 15 years ago (2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults) were doing the same figures for same demographic of owner (Family man who wanted a sporty family car).
For it to truly be 'Evolutionary' for the times it would need to be doing 2 or 3 sec 60's - which is totally in line with how the mundane/mainstream cars like Diesel Rep mobiles have evolved in that time period (12sec to 8sec 0-60 or less).
Its not a Veyron FFS.
Hol said:
Why do people STILL keep bleating on about the Golf R as if its some huge leap in evolution over everything else that has come before it.
It is 'just' 2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults and gets to 60 in under 5 seconds.
That really IS NOT something new/amazing and (as a few pointed out) production cars 15 years ago (2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults) were doing the same figures for same demographic of owner (Family man who wanted a sporty family car).
For it to truly be 'Evolutionary' for the times it would need to be doing 2 or 3 sec 60's - which is totally in line with how the mundane/mainstream cars like Diesel Rep mobiles have evolved in that time period (12sec to 8sec 0-60 or less).
Its not a Veyron FFS.
They are not really what I want, but modern things like the Golf R are very civilised, comfy (well, apart from harsh ride), luxuriously-appointed, easy-to-live-with and don't require the wearing of a rallying jacket.It is 'just' 2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults and gets to 60 in under 5 seconds.
That really IS NOT something new/amazing and (as a few pointed out) production cars 15 years ago (2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults) were doing the same figures for same demographic of owner (Family man who wanted a sporty family car).
For it to truly be 'Evolutionary' for the times it would need to be doing 2 or 3 sec 60's - which is totally in line with how the mundane/mainstream cars like Diesel Rep mobiles have evolved in that time period (12sec to 8sec 0-60 or less).
Its not a Veyron FFS.
Hol said:
Why do people STILL keep bleating on about the Golf R as if its some huge leap in evolution over everything else that has come before it.
It is 'just' 2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults and gets to 60 in under 5 seconds.
That really IS NOT something new/amazing and (as a few pointed out) production cars 15 years ago (2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults) were doing the same figures for same demographic of owner (Family man who wanted a sporty family car).
For it to truly be 'Evolutionary' for the times it would need to be doing 2 or 3 sec 60's - which is totally in line with how the mundane/mainstream cars like Diesel Rep mobiles have evolved in that time period (12sec to 8sec 0-60 or less).
Its not a Veyron FFS.
I thought I was the only one who doesn't like Golfs and cant understand what all the fuss is about...at least with a Subaru or Evo you would notice them out on the road, the Golf R is just so bland to look at that nobody would notice it anyway(to some that's a bonus though I suppose). It is 'just' 2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults and gets to 60 in under 5 seconds.
That really IS NOT something new/amazing and (as a few pointed out) production cars 15 years ago (2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults) were doing the same figures for same demographic of owner (Family man who wanted a sporty family car).
For it to truly be 'Evolutionary' for the times it would need to be doing 2 or 3 sec 60's - which is totally in line with how the mundane/mainstream cars like Diesel Rep mobiles have evolved in that time period (12sec to 8sec 0-60 or less).
Its not a Veyron FFS.
MC Bodge said:
Hol said:
Why do people STILL keep bleating on about the Golf R as if its some huge leap in evolution over everything else that has come before it.
It is 'just' 2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults and gets to 60 in under 5 seconds.
That really IS NOT something new/amazing and (as a few pointed out) production cars 15 years ago (2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults) were doing the same figures for same demographic of owner (Family man who wanted a sporty family car).
For it to truly be 'Evolutionary' for the times it would need to be doing 2 or 3 sec 60's - which is totally in line with how the mundane/mainstream cars like Diesel Rep mobiles have evolved in that time period (12sec to 8sec 0-60 or less).
Its not a Veyron FFS.
They are not really what I want, but modern things like the Golf R are very civilised, comfy (well, apart from harsh ride), luxuriously-appointed, easy-to-live-with and don't require the wearing of a rallying jacket.It is 'just' 2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults and gets to 60 in under 5 seconds.
That really IS NOT something new/amazing and (as a few pointed out) production cars 15 years ago (2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults) were doing the same figures for same demographic of owner (Family man who wanted a sporty family car).
For it to truly be 'Evolutionary' for the times it would need to be doing 2 or 3 sec 60's - which is totally in line with how the mundane/mainstream cars like Diesel Rep mobiles have evolved in that time period (12sec to 8sec 0-60 or less).
Its not a Veyron FFS.
Whether they have the same driver involvement and/or are as fun is another matter - but performance wise, I wouldn't even try and keep up in my Tamora - my (very modest) driving skills would make me look a fool, compared to a car sorting everything out for the other driver...
Edited by chris watton on Friday 18th September 16:59
MC Bodge said:
Hol said:
Why do people STILL keep bleating on about the Golf R as if its some huge leap in evolution over everything else that has come before it.
It is 'just' 2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults and gets to 60 in under 5 seconds.
That really IS NOT something new/amazing and (as a few pointed out) production cars 15 years ago (2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults) were doing the same figures for same demographic of owner (Family man who wanted a sporty family car).
For it to truly be 'Evolutionary' for the times it would need to be doing 2 or 3 sec 60's - which is totally in line with how the mundane/mainstream cars like Diesel Rep mobiles have evolved in that time period (12sec to 8sec 0-60 or less).
Its not a Veyron FFS.
They are not really what I want, but modern things like the Golf R are very civilised, comfy (well, apart from harsh ride), luxuriously-appointed, easy-to-live-with and don't require the wearing of a rallying jacket.It is 'just' 2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults and gets to 60 in under 5 seconds.
That really IS NOT something new/amazing and (as a few pointed out) production cars 15 years ago (2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults) were doing the same figures for same demographic of owner (Family man who wanted a sporty family car).
For it to truly be 'Evolutionary' for the times it would need to be doing 2 or 3 sec 60's - which is totally in line with how the mundane/mainstream cars like Diesel Rep mobiles have evolved in that time period (12sec to 8sec 0-60 or less).
Its not a Veyron FFS.
People bought them because they were a comfy & quick 4 door family car totally without the badge snobbery of BMW or Mercedes.
Im not sure why you want to buy a 15year old car over a brand new one (and that is totally NOT the point made in my post)?
Edited by Hol on Friday 18th September 15:21
cerb4.5lee said:
Hol said:
Why do people STILL keep bleating on about the Golf R as if its some huge leap in evolution over everything else that has come before it.
It is 'just' 2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults and gets to 60 in under 5 seconds.
That really IS NOT something new/amazing and (as a few pointed out) production cars 15 years ago (2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults) were doing the same figures for same demographic of owner (Family man who wanted a sporty family car).
For it to truly be 'Evolutionary' for the times it would need to be doing 2 or 3 sec 60's - which is totally in line with how the mundane/mainstream cars like Diesel Rep mobiles have evolved in that time period (12sec to 8sec 0-60 or less).
Its not a Veyron FFS.
I thought I was the only one who doesn't like Golfs and cant understand what all the fuss is about...at least with a Subaru or Evo you would notice them out on the road, the Golf R is just so bland to look at that nobody would notice it anyway(to some that's a bonus though I suppose). It is 'just' 2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults and gets to 60 in under 5 seconds.
That really IS NOT something new/amazing and (as a few pointed out) production cars 15 years ago (2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults) were doing the same figures for same demographic of owner (Family man who wanted a sporty family car).
For it to truly be 'Evolutionary' for the times it would need to be doing 2 or 3 sec 60's - which is totally in line with how the mundane/mainstream cars like Diesel Rep mobiles have evolved in that time period (12sec to 8sec 0-60 or less).
Its not a Veyron FFS.
But if VW HAD bought a 4wd 2.0 Turbo car out in 1999, to compete against those Ford/Subaru/Mitsi/Lancia rally reps (a performance limit that was 'easily' attainable from a 2.0 back then) - then we would all be saying how similar the Golf R performance is to the VW 'XYZ' car from 15 years ago.
The only variable in the concept of it being nothing spectatcualr, is that its a Golf bodyshell and not a Ford/Subaru/Mitsi/Lancia.
Edited by Hol on Friday 18th September 15:32
JockySteer said:
Are we not talking about a bone stock MR2 vs an SLK, or am I missing something now?
Nope, we were originally talking about japaneseskoda's car, which has a few mod's. Although it appears no boost controller I'll concede.So yes if you were to roll up on against Stock mr2 turbo, your SLK would be faster. However I'd guess on today's roads it's far more likely you'd be facing one with a boost controller and thus more than stock power.
Barronmr said:
JockySteer said:
Are we not talking about a bone stock MR2 vs an SLK, or am I missing something now?
Nope, we were originally talking about japaneseskoda's car, which has a few mod's. Although it appears no boost controller I'll concede.So yes if you were to roll up on against Stock mr2 turbo, your SLK would be faster. However I'd guess on today's roads it's far more likely you'd be facing one with a boost controller and thus more than stock power.
Hol said:
cerb4.5lee said:
Hol said:
Why do people STILL keep bleating on about the Golf R as if its some huge leap in evolution over everything else that has come before it.
It is 'just' 2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults and gets to 60 in under 5 seconds.
That really IS NOT something new/amazing and (as a few pointed out) production cars 15 years ago (2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults) were doing the same figures for same demographic of owner (Family man who wanted a sporty family car).
For it to truly be 'Evolutionary' for the times it would need to be doing 2 or 3 sec 60's - which is totally in line with how the mundane/mainstream cars like Diesel Rep mobiles have evolved in that time period (12sec to 8sec 0-60 or less).
Its not a Veyron FFS.
I thought I was the only one who doesn't like Golfs and cant understand what all the fuss is about...at least with a Subaru or Evo you would notice them out on the road, the Golf R is just so bland to look at that nobody would notice it anyway(to some that's a bonus though I suppose). It is 'just' 2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults and gets to 60 in under 5 seconds.
That really IS NOT something new/amazing and (as a few pointed out) production cars 15 years ago (2.0 AWD Turbocharged car that takes 4 adults) were doing the same figures for same demographic of owner (Family man who wanted a sporty family car).
For it to truly be 'Evolutionary' for the times it would need to be doing 2 or 3 sec 60's - which is totally in line with how the mundane/mainstream cars like Diesel Rep mobiles have evolved in that time period (12sec to 8sec 0-60 or less).
Its not a Veyron FFS.
But if VW HAD bought a 4wd 2.0 Turbo car out in 1999, to compete against those Ford/Subaru/Mitsi/Lancia rally reps (a performance limit that was 'easily' attainable from a 2.0 back then) - then we would all be saying how similar the Golf R performance is to the VW 'XYZ' car from 15 years ago.
The only variable in the concept of it being nothing spectatcualr, is that its a Golf bodyshell and not a Ford/Subaru/Mitsi/Lancia.
Edited by Hol on Friday 18th September 15:32
The R version has only highlighted this love for them even more it seems.
cerb4.5lee said:
I do like Audi`s to be fair but I haven't ever liked Golf`s for a reason I have never been able to put my finger on, although I appreciate they have a massive following hence why everyone and his brother seems to love them.
The R version has only highlighted this love for them even more it seems.
I'm not sure people buy them because its a Golf (or an A45 AMG for that matter).The R version has only highlighted this love for them even more it seems.
I truly think its because its a capable fast car in a family car bodyshell.
The demographic of people buying the Golf and the AMG today is almost identical to the demographic that bought Impreza's in 1999 (before they became commonplace).
Hardly anyone was a hard-core rally fan who wanted a rally rep. They were IT peeps, middle managers and tradesmen, who just wanted a fast family car.
Hol said:
cerb4.5lee said:
I do like Audi`s to be fair but I haven't ever liked Golf`s for a reason I have never been able to put my finger on, although I appreciate they have a massive following hence why everyone and his brother seems to love them.
The R version has only highlighted this love for them even more it seems.
I'm not sure people buy them because its a Golf (or an A45 AMG for that matter).The R version has only highlighted this love for them even more it seems.
I truly think its because its a capable fast car in a family car bodyshell.
The demographic of people buying the Golf and the AMG today is almost identical to the demographic that bought Impreza's in 1999 (before they became commonplace).
Hardly anyone was a hard-core rally fan who wanted a rally rep. They were IT peeps, middle managers and tradesmen, who just wanted a fast family car.
A friend of mine had a brand new Scooby back in 1999 and I remember the first time I went out in it and then had a go...I thought it was mega fast! I only had a sierra xr4x4 at the time so I was very impressed with the Scooby in comparison.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff