VW Golf 7 R -- Chipped -- 0 to 60 in 4 Seconds...
Discussion
scherzkeks said:
The results were the same from Sport Auto. Not sure anyone takes Auto Express seriously anyways.
I haven’t heard of Auto Express before (I’m not from the UK) but Auto Bild is not my number one source for objective reviews when a VAG car is involved. 
Sport Auto is fine though.IanCress said:
After personally destroying the clutch and a few coil packs on a chipped 300bhp Cupra, I wonder how long the mechanicals will last in a 4 wheel drive Golf repeatedly doing 0-60 in 4 seconds.
'Not very', would be my guess.
It's a good point now that VAG are firmly into 'building down to a price' more than ever.'Not very', would be my guess.
However, the wet clutch DSG is plenty strong enough mechanically. The mechatronics is another matter. Coils have always been a problem on VAGs since the VR6 & 1.8T, so they should just go back to distributors & HT leads
What no car company can ever cater for is people with zero mechanical sympathy. Similarly, Specialized could sell me a nice £4000 mountain bike with carbon fibre this and unobtanium that, but I could very easily break it by being a t1t on some kerbs.
EricE said:
I haven’t heard of Auto Express before, but Auto Bild is not my number one source for objective reviews when a VAG car is involved. Sport Auto is fine though.
Nothing wrong with Autobild's tests. They are very focused on the all-round value proposition though. According to Sport Auto, the Golf R was 2 seconds faster than the GTI on Hockenheim, to give some further perspective. Sport Auto is fine though.All I ever here is my car can do 0-60mph in xxx secs.
Go to a drag strip and watch how many fall miles short of their predictions.
"My car is as fast as xxx around a track".
When they go to the track they are handed their arses by cars with a fraction of their power.
One thing more important than power and claimed figures, is ability.
Something most owners end up lacking in.
Go to a drag strip and watch how many fall miles short of their predictions.
"My car is as fast as xxx around a track".
When they go to the track they are handed their arses by cars with a fraction of their power.
One thing more important than power and claimed figures, is ability.
Something most owners end up lacking in.
Driver101 said:
All I ever here is my car can do 0-60mph in xxx secs.
Go to a drag strip and watch how many fall miles short of their predictions.
"My car is as fast as xxx around a track".
When they go to the track they are handed their arses by cars with a fraction of their power.
One thing more important than power and claimed figures, is ability.
Something most owners end up lacking in.
I agree with you completely, but I still think a VW Golf that costs £30k new that can do 0-60 in the 3's mighty impressive with just software mods Go to a drag strip and watch how many fall miles short of their predictions.
"My car is as fast as xxx around a track".
When they go to the track they are handed their arses by cars with a fraction of their power.
One thing more important than power and claimed figures, is ability.
Something most owners end up lacking in.
I have the mk6r that will do 60 in less than 4 but I've gone to great expense to upgrade suspension and brakes to make sure it'll handle and stop as well as it goes
Edited by Sustanon400 on Thursday 12th June 16:05
Driver101 said:
All I ever here is my car can do 0-60mph in xxx secs.
Go to a drag strip and watch how many fall miles short of their predictions.
"My car is as fast as xxx around a track".
When they go to the track they are handed their arses by cars with a fraction of their power.
One thing more important than power and claimed figures, is ability.
Something most owners end up lacking in.
Plenty of independent magazine and online tests saying the new Golf 7R will do 4.x seconds to 60mph.Go to a drag strip and watch how many fall miles short of their predictions.
"My car is as fast as xxx around a track".
When they go to the track they are handed their arses by cars with a fraction of their power.
One thing more important than power and claimed figures, is ability.
Something most owners end up lacking in.
And a few Nurburgringers have already gotten a stock model to a reasonable ~8min lap.
It looks like the real deal.
If a Golf can do 60 in low 4s, high 3s with ~ 400hp, does this mean the Veyrons & P1s of this world in their high 2s are severely torque limited (deliberately) off the line? How can the difference between 1000hp and 400hp only be a 1-2 secs faster to 60?
I understand the physics and momentum of getting a lot of weight moving from a stand still, but 600hp is a bloody big difference in power!
I think Evo FQ 360s were hitting high 4s out of the box, so what's special about the Golf? Is it purely down to mashing the pedal down and letting the DSG do all the work?
I understand the physics and momentum of getting a lot of weight moving from a stand still, but 600hp is a bloody big difference in power!
I think Evo FQ 360s were hitting high 4s out of the box, so what's special about the Golf? Is it purely down to mashing the pedal down and letting the DSG do all the work?
SuperchargedVR6 said:
If a Golf can do 60 in low 4s, high 3s with ~ 400hp, does this mean the Veyrons & P1s of this world in their high 2s are severely torque limited (deliberately) off the line? How can the difference between 1000hp and 400hp only be a 1-2 secs faster to 60?
I understand the physics and momentum of getting a lot of weight moving from a stand still, but 600hp is a bloody big difference in power!
I think Evo FQ 360s were hitting high 4s out of the box, so what's special about the Golf? Is it purely down to mashing the pedal down and letting the DSG do all the work?
Mostly to do with the DSG boxes as they are tuned to make the most of the power curve etc, you would be surprised how much of an impact it can have even with just 1 shift.I understand the physics and momentum of getting a lot of weight moving from a stand still, but 600hp is a bloody big difference in power!
I think Evo FQ 360s were hitting high 4s out of the box, so what's special about the Golf? Is it purely down to mashing the pedal down and letting the DSG do all the work?
SuperchargedVR6 said:
If a Golf can do 60 in low 4s, high 3s with ~ 400hp, does this mean the Veyrons & P1s of this world in their high 2s are severely torque limited (deliberately) off the line? How can the difference between 1000hp and 400hp only be a 1-2 secs faster to 60?
I understand the physics and momentum of getting a lot of weight moving from a stand still, but 600hp is a bloody big difference in power!
I think Evo FQ 360s were hitting high 4s out of the box, so what's special about the Golf? Is it purely down to mashing the pedal down and letting the DSG do all the work?
I'll just use rounded figures as it's easier I understand the physics and momentum of getting a lot of weight moving from a stand still, but 600hp is a bloody big difference in power!
I think Evo FQ 360s were hitting high 4s out of the box, so what's special about the Golf? Is it purely down to mashing the pedal down and letting the DSG do all the work?
I don't think people appreciate the magnitude of 0-60 times and how small drops are extremely significant.
The difference between a Golf R and the 1.4TSI is 'only' 4 seconds. Lets face it 4 seconds is not a long time. When you view it as a percentage, then it's a whole different matter. The R is twice as quick to 60.
Then when you view the Veyron and P1, that are 'only 2 seconds' faster, but this is twice as fast again.
The forces and therefore power required to do this very quickly become huge.
At low speeds you are severely traction limited when you have tons of power. It's why you look at an F1 car that has a colossal power to weight ratio, and their 0-60 times aren't super impressive.
DSG don't have torque interrupt to the wheels, this means whilst the clutches are handing over it's still accelerating.
SuperchargedVR6 said:
If a Golf can do 60 in low 4s, high 3s with ~ 400hp, does this mean the Veyrons & P1s of this world in their high 2s are severely torque limited (deliberately) off the line? How can the difference between 1000hp and 400hp only be a 1-2 secs faster to 60?
I understand the physics and momentum of getting a lot of weight moving from a stand still, but 600hp is a bloody big difference in power!
I think Evo FQ 360s were hitting high 4s out of the box, so what's special about the Golf? Is it purely down to mashing the pedal down and letting the DSG do all the work?
Its all about traction, give the P1 an extra 200hp and the 0-60 will be identical.I understand the physics and momentum of getting a lot of weight moving from a stand still, but 600hp is a bloody big difference in power!
I think Evo FQ 360s were hitting high 4s out of the box, so what's special about the Golf? Is it purely down to mashing the pedal down and letting the DSG do all the work?
The Evo FQ 360s hit 62 (note not 60) in 3.9secs with a manual box and no clever launch control.
I took a few screengrabs from the sport auto site because I was curious how the Golf R compares the Porsche cousins. There’s no doubt that they are on a different planet in terms of driving dynamics but take a look at the numbers:
Spyder and Golf R manual, Cayman S with PDK.
A 360 PS remap for the Golf R would drop its power to weight ratio to 4,2 kg/PS and with the DSG that should be good for around 4,3 sec to 100 kmh.
I think its kind of mind blowing how quick these things are although I would still prefer a used Cayman or Boxster over a Golf R.
Spyder and Golf R manual, Cayman S with PDK.
A 360 PS remap for the Golf R would drop its power to weight ratio to 4,2 kg/PS and with the DSG that should be good for around 4,3 sec to 100 kmh.
I think its kind of mind blowing how quick these things are although I would still prefer a used Cayman or Boxster over a Golf R.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff