RE: VW Golf R: PH Fleet
Discussion
Patrick Bateman said:
So which members of the motoring press are easily bought off?
You'd be surprised how many. My father worked for Glasgow's Evening Times and his friend for the Daily Record, Sunday Times and, occasionally, Auto Express. The amount of freebies they accumulated was most impressive and the tales of how PR departments can make your life easy or hard based on your last review was eye opening.Driver101 said:
daveky said:
Pixelpeep7r said:
It is, you're quite right and if someone says 'it ticks all the boxes' then, for them, IT TICKS ALL THE BOXES.
'people' need to stop giving it a hard time, stop comparing it to every other car under the sun and actually live with one before saying how crap they've 'heard' they are.
Jokers like Driver101 tend to drive things like a 10 year old 406 diesel but enjoy pontificating on cars they will never be able to own as a bit of escapism.'people' need to stop giving it a hard time, stop comparing it to every other car under the sun and actually live with one before saying how crap they've 'heard' they are.
Half of this thread is pointing out just how affordable the R is. Most people could afford them when they were so cheap.
So keep kidding yourself on joker.
Pixel, I have driven the R a couple of times but didn't want it.
I did join the R forum and many member agrees about the cheap seats and horrible standard wheels.
For the cars going 0-100mph, some of them are over 20 years old, or very heavy.
How many have 4wd, DSG boxes and launch control to achieve impressive initial acceleration?
Edited by Driver101 on Friday 17th April 18:44
Ali_T said:
You'd be surprised how many. My father worked for Glasgow's Evening Times and his friend for the Daily Record, Sunday Times and, occasionally, Auto Express. The amount of freebies they accumulated was most impressive and the tales of how PR departments can make your life easy or hard based on your last review was eye opening.
A small example of how cosy it is - a friend of mine, who is a car journo, had 5 or 6 luxury cars for his wedding...all provided free of charge for the day by a major manufacturer. It would seem a bit rude to then review their next pile of crap as being a pile of crap.Ali_T said:
Can you really lose an argument that's based on personal opinion? You can disagree, sure, but lose?
Well I guess if I say you are talking complete rubbish and we get a zillion responses agreeing with you and one agreeing with me, I may still feel entitled to my opinion but I have pretty much lost the debate 
ORD said:
A small example of how cosy it is - a friend of mine, who is a car journo, had 5 or 6 luxury cars for his wedding...all provided free of charge for the day by a major manufacturer. It would seem a bit rude to then review their next pile of crap as being a pile of crap.
Ever wondered who those corporate boxes are filled with at the big football and rugby matches? This stuff goes on everywhere, oiling the wheels and all that... Driver101 said:
Keep guessing my friend. My cars cost a lot more than a Golf R.
in my eyes, you've lost a lot of credibility with that statement. What difference does it make what your cars cost? also, seen as you have no details about what you drive on your profile i had to do a little digging and it turned up some surprising results.
Driver101 in March said:
Currently got a 335i which I'm looking to change for something new.
After some thought, I've come down to an Audi S3 saloon, BMW M235i or the A45 AMG.
Why would you even consider an S3, it's the same car as an R but if you are to believe the same group of people that made you an 'R-Hater' then you should also be wondering if you could cope with the poor steering of the Audi ?After some thought, I've come down to an Audi S3 saloon, BMW M235i or the A45 AMG.
St John Smythe said:
Nah, he lost.
I'm still trying to figure out what he lost, and who won, and what opinion is the correct one for the PH massif regarding the Golf R? Though I'm still sticking with my "very nice but didn't find it much fun and very silly price for a car that's not as quick as the journos, who get a lot advertising revenue from VAG, purely coincidentally, seem to think" onePixelpeep7r said:
Driver101 said:
Keep guessing my friend. My cars cost a lot more than a Golf R.
in my eyes, you've lost a lot of credibility with that statement. What difference does it make what your cars cost? also, seen as you have no details about what you drive on your profile i had to do a little digging and it turned up some surprising results.
Driver101 in March said:
Currently got a 335i which I'm looking to change for something new.
After some thought, I've come down to an Audi S3 saloon, BMW M235i or the A45 AMG.
Why would you even consider an S3, it's the same car as an R but if you are to believe the same group of people that made you a'R-Hater' then you should also be wondering if you could cope with the poor steering of the Audi ?After some thought, I've come down to an Audi S3 saloon, BMW M235i or the A45 AMG.
Then you questioned me that I had never even sat in one as if it is some rare, exotic car that normal people can't view. It's a typical car you find at a local VW dealer.
I just thought it was rather ironic to be hit with such an accusation because 1) the car was been pushed through for the price of very average priced cars 2) many of the owners lease them cheaply and can't afford £30,000 themselves.
However I see no point in a car thread to get personal and take the discussion off what was around a car. You've no idea who you're speaking to on the internet, or what their circumstances are.
When driving the S3 and the Golf R at acceptable road speeds, I didn't notice much difference. Maybe on track the differences are there to be seen, but we've already discounted how cars behave on the track as irrelevant. I did feel the S3 had a better feel to it, just a better quality product and better seats to begin with that I don't like in the Golf.
I'd probably say with the 19" wheels the Golf looks better than the S3 hatch, but inside of the S3 is much better. I guess if you use it on the track, go for the Golf, the rest of the time the Audi is the nicer place to sit for day to day use. There isn't too much between purchase price, so buying makes it a decision. Get a Golf on a cheap lease then the decision is easier.
The S3 saloon is significantly better looking than both cars. It just didn't feel too good to drive. Not sure how much changes they made over the hatch, but it did feel different from what I remembered.I did read the Autocar road test and they didn't rate it too highly either. They also tested the car as 0-100mph in 13.4 seconds. It has lost a bit of performance somewhere.
If you would like to point out where I've displayed "hate", that would be good?
All I've ever said was it was a good car that too many people blow out of proportion. Responding to that point, you've compared the performance of prestige cars quite a few generations ago. Some of them are very old and some are wrong if they are modern models.
Previously when someone mentioned the Golf had become too heavy, they were dismissed and told to get with modern times. Now it seems fair to do the opposite and use very old cars of a prestige level to justify the performance.
The bar of performance has moved on greatly in recent years. All these additions of 4wd, double clutch boxes and launch control all assist giving great acceleration times, especially starting from a standing start.
Some of these launch control systems take that long to enable pressing multiple buttons, making sure you are in the right mode and conditions, if anyone picks a race at the traffic lights, you've lost before you are ready.
300bhp is a good amount of power. It gives good performance and I'm not arguing against that at all. I've pointed out that the Golf isn't as fast as people say and you can refer to many group tests where it has been beaten by less powerful, cheaper hatch backs.That was muted because people don't drive them on the track. However most of the tests that have magazines raving about the R is for the handling and speed on the track.
So it means something that these magazines say how good the car handles at the limit on the track, introduce the fact that this doesn't actually equate to the fastest times, then suddenly it no longer matters.
There is far too much chopping an changing here to suit an argument.
The Golf is a very good hot hatch. Owners are placing it at a level it just isn't in anyway shape or form. An alternative for an S3, M135i, Curpa R, Astra VXR, Focus RS and all that group, it most certainly is.
A rival performer to many of the prestige names that continously are used as a gauge, it most certainly isn't. It also doesn't give you the classy status at business meetings that people keep saying too.
All I've ever said is the owners have lost perspective of what their car is. That keeps showing up time and time again with the responses that come.
There is some really odd defences and attacks going on here.
Edited by Driver101 on Monday 20th April 13:49
Driver101 said:
When driving the S3 and the Golf R at acceptable road speeds, I didn't notice much difference.
Couldn't agree more. So much so that my main reason for discounting the Audi was that the salesman was a smug, know it all knob end that spent the entire test drive slagging off the other cars I was considering when he asked. Certainly wouldn't go back to Audi based on that experience alone. Driver101 said:
If you would like to point out where I've displayed "hate", that would be good?
I wouldn't say you've displayed hate for the R in this and other threads. What you have displayed is a subtly sneering air of superiority towards people who like their Golf R, which is probably why you have got peoples' backs up.I'm sure you're a decent bloke IRL, but you seem to have a real issue with the R and its owners/leasers.
Ali_T said:
St John Smythe said:
Nah, he lost.
I'm still trying to figure out what he lost, and who won, and what opinion is the correct one for the PH massif regarding the Golf R? Though I'm still sticking with my "very nice but didn't find it much fun and very silly price for a car that's not as quick as the journos, who get a lot advertising revenue from VAG, purely coincidentally, seem to think" one
Driver101 said:
When someone questions your "hate" is based on the fact you can't afford the car, I think the fact that my budget is beyond what an R costs is relevant. A rather obvious counter argument don't you think?
If your original point as to the reasons you don't like the Golf R were not strong enough then yeh, a very obvious counter argument that neatly sidestepped any counters i/others made to your points.i put R-hater in quotes because it was easier to use the term with an element of tongue-in-cheek than to drill down into what specifically you are against.
However I didn't say you were against the R because you couldn't afford one, you are confusing me with another poster.
Driver101 said:
Then you questioned me that I had never even sat in one as if it is some rare, exotic car that normal people can't view. It's a typical car you find at a local VW dealer.
No, i questioned you because some of the things you were saying like how naff the standard seats are didn't ring true for me, i.e. someone that drives one daily.I also questioned if you had sat in one because most people seem to confuse their own opinion with the opinion of someone else that's written something about a golf R once. (and also probably never driven one..) - i just wanted to clarify what your specific experiences were with the car you were slating - a rather obvious counter question don't you think?
Driver101 said:
I just thought it was rather ironic to be hit with such an accusation because 1) the car was been pushed through for the price of very average priced cars 2) many of the owners lease them cheaply and can't afford £30,000 themselves.
I agree - perhaps take it up with the poster who suggested you couldn't afford one.Driver101 said:
I'd probably say with the 19" wheels the Golf looks better than the S3 hatch, but inside of the S3 is much better. I guess if you use it on the track, go for the Golf, the rest of the time the Audi is the nicer place to sit for day to day use. There isn't too much between purchase price, so buying makes it a decision. Get a Golf on a cheap lease then the decision is easier.
I prefer the audi inside and out. However i didn't think it was £150 a month better so i went for the golf. I don't agree with you on the wheels but thats a minor pointDriver101 said:
All I've ever said was it was a good car that too many people blow out of proportion. Responding to that point, you've compared the performance of prestige cars quite a few generations ago. Some of them are very old and some are wrong if they are modern models.
I used a mixed back of results to try and show what level of performance the golf is capable of. quicker to 100 than an Evo 10? Surely thats impressive? yes the evo is a car thats 5/6 years old now but think about all the compromises you'd have to make to have an EVO that are simply not the case with the Golf. To bring it into modern terms its 0.3 secs slower to 100mph than an M135i - haven't heard anyone say 'isn't anything amazing, we've seen figures like this for ages now' about the little beemer.
Its when you look at how much of everything the R does well and how few compromises the average one car owner has to make you start to understand why owners feel they are a fantastic car.
Driver101 said:
The bar of performance has moved on greatly in recent years. All these additions of 4wd, double clutch boxes and launch control all assist giving great acceleration times, especially starting from a standing start.
Some of these launch control systems take that long to enable pressing multiple buttons, making sure you are in the right mode and conditions, if anyone picks a race at the traffic lights, you've lost before you are ready.
The manual can do it in 5.1seconds with no launch control - theres not going to be much you will lose against if you don't use launch control.Some of these launch control systems take that long to enable pressing multiple buttons, making sure you are in the right mode and conditions, if anyone picks a race at the traffic lights, you've lost before you are ready.
With regard to the procedure to enable launch
Car in race
traction control off
Left foot hard on brake
Right foot on Accelerator
Release brake when ready.
Less steps than trying to do a controlled launch in a manual. and 100% effective and error free
Driver101 said:
300bhp is a good amount of power. It gives good performance and I'm not arguing against that at all. I've pointed out that the Golf isn't as fast as people say and you can refer to many group tests where it has been beaten by less powerful, cheaper hatch backs.That was muted because people don't drive them on the track. However most of the tests that have magazines raving about the R is for the handling and speed on the track.
So it means something that these magazines say how good the car handles at the limit on the track, introduce the fact that this doesn't actually equate to the fastest times, then suddenly it no longer matters.
There is far too much chopping an changing here to suit an argument.
The Golf is a very good hot hatch. Owners are placing it at a level it just isn't in anyway shape or form. An alternative for an S3, M135i, Curpa R, Astra VXR, Focus RS and all that group, it most certainly is.
A rival performer to many of the prestige names that continously are used as a gauge, it most certainly isn't. It also doesn't give you the classy status at business meetings that people keep saying too.
You are disagreeing with nothing more than someones opinion, with your OWN opinion. It makes you as bad as the people YOU think have got it wrong!So it means something that these magazines say how good the car handles at the limit on the track, introduce the fact that this doesn't actually equate to the fastest times, then suddenly it no longer matters.
There is far too much chopping an changing here to suit an argument.
The Golf is a very good hot hatch. Owners are placing it at a level it just isn't in anyway shape or form. An alternative for an S3, M135i, Curpa R, Astra VXR, Focus RS and all that group, it most certainly is.
A rival performer to many of the prestige names that continously are used as a gauge, it most certainly isn't. It also doesn't give you the classy status at business meetings that people keep saying too.
There is not one ounce of FACT in your statement
if someone says 'it makes me feel a million dollars when i pull up in it' then THAT'S HOW IT MAKES THEM FEEL. Just because YOU wouldn't feel that way doesn't change or dilute the fact that somebody else DOES !
Driver101 said:
All I've ever said is the owners have lost perspective of what their car is. That keeps showing up time and time again with the responses that come.
Who are you to say what perspective OTHER people should have on something THEY chose?I have exactly the right amount of perspective on how fantastically fast, classy and inexpensive my Golf R is
Just to illustrate how capable the R is..
with a quick trip to revo and nothing more than a software update the Golf will do 3.7 seconds to 60 and a 0-100MPH time of 9 seconds.
thats faster 0-100 than a 2012 Ferrari California 30 F1 4.3l V8 and AS quick as a Porsche Panamera Turbo 4.8 V8
thats also a second quicker than the A45 AMG, along with a £7000 saving and better ride.
thats the facts I'm bringing to the table to support my opinion that the golf is quite amazing considering the price, comfort and practicality
with a quick trip to revo and nothing more than a software update the Golf will do 3.7 seconds to 60 and a 0-100MPH time of 9 seconds.
thats faster 0-100 than a 2012 Ferrari California 30 F1 4.3l V8 and AS quick as a Porsche Panamera Turbo 4.8 V8
thats also a second quicker than the A45 AMG, along with a £7000 saving and better ride.
thats the facts I'm bringing to the table to support my opinion that the golf is quite amazing considering the price, comfort and practicality
The most confusing thing I find about all this, is that someone signed up to the R Forum, when clearly they're not keen on the car, at all. Ordinarily it would be called trolling. I don't particularly like certain cars, but I don't go out of my way to join a forum that's specifically for that make and model, and then post away about how all the owners are deluded, wrong and over hyping a car.
Anyway, life got far more busy earlier today, as the estate will soon get a bashing on t'internet web now...
In other news, I'd vote for Pixelpeep in an election, good stuff Sir
Anyway, life got far more busy earlier today, as the estate will soon get a bashing on t'internet web now...
In other news, I'd vote for Pixelpeep in an election, good stuff Sir
Pixelpeep7r said:
Just to illustrate how capable the R is..
with a quick trip to revo and nothing more than a software update the Golf will do 3.7 seconds to 60 and a 0-100MPH time of 9 seconds.
thats faster 0-100 than a 2012 Ferrari California 30 F1 4.3l V8 and AS quick as a Porsche Panamera Turbo 4.8 V8
thats also a second quicker than the A45 AMG, along with a £7000 saving and better ride.
thats the facts I'm bringing to the table to support my opinion that the golf is quite amazing considering the price, comfort and practicality
You're still picking out this trump card of getting great launches. How many times are you going to do full on launches? Given that they've been overheating and exploding at Crail, is it really a reliable option to be considering? with a quick trip to revo and nothing more than a software update the Golf will do 3.7 seconds to 60 and a 0-100MPH time of 9 seconds.
thats faster 0-100 than a 2012 Ferrari California 30 F1 4.3l V8 and AS quick as a Porsche Panamera Turbo 4.8 V8
thats also a second quicker than the A45 AMG, along with a £7000 saving and better ride.
thats the facts I'm bringing to the table to support my opinion that the golf is quite amazing considering the price, comfort and practicality
I've no idea how fast a Ferrari California or a Panamera is as I've never seen one having a race at a drag strip before. If you are wanting blistering acceleration it is best not to start with hugely heavy cars. I doubt the Panamera has a much better power to weight ratio than a remapped Golf, so it wouldn't be surprising if they had similar performance before the extra power of the Porsche made a difference on the move. It's not really what I would have termed a performance car.
Why compare a remapped Golf R against a stock A45AMG? Apples and Oranges. Standard the A45AMG is a 10 second 100mph car. They get huge increases in performance too after mapping.
As previously mentioned in this and the RS3 thread, As soon as you start adding options to the Golf to match the spec of the A45AMG or the RS3, that's 5 doors, DSG, sat nav, upgraded seats, suddenly the price gap isn't there. If you keep the options list down on the Golf there is a gap. However you are a long way back on performance and spec. The Golf doesn't have brakes to match either so that's where more cost goes.
To your previous post..
What happens when you don't use launch control on a DSG box? I never did a launch, but other double clutch cars you can't start well without using the launch systems. The car has to pick up from tick over speed. One or two allowed soft launches where you press both the brake and accelerator to build up the revs to a lower set amount. Both techniques make the 0-60mph time a good bit slower.
I'm not telling anyone what they think, I've giving my opinion and each time I log back in a keep having to answer more direct responses to me.
The M135i/M235i has clocked just into the 10s on a few tests. Also put against the previous RS3 is was faster once it overturned the time lost from a standing start. The 335i eases on a Golf R on the move. The M135i is a bit faster.
I've yet to start a thread that my 335i is faster than various supercars.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff