Golf GTI or GTD? Which one would you have?
Discussion
rpla102 said:
There must be something wrong (apart from the driver) with my GTD CC, even driving it really gently on the motorway with no hold ups I struggle to get 50 MPG. Perhaps mine is broken.
It doesn't sound right. I can quite easily get 45mpg pootling around town. I've seen an average of 70.1mpg during a 60 mile motorway trip.This post isn't a direct answer, but bear with me.
Back in 2010 I bought a petrol Octavia vRS. I considered a diesel one but it just wasn't as much fun. OK, the petrol one's no Elise but if you're driving along back roads then the lesser weight near the nose makes a difference. Even when I was spending 15,000 miles a year doing M-way runs, it wasn't worth the compromise.
If I had more than one car or if I were doing 20,000-25,000 miles a year then a diesel might make more sense but when I really was doing that sort of mileage, I had a diesel Cadillac BLS. It was a Saab 9-3 in drag, and drove pretty much the same but cost less. It was a great long distance cruiser. If I were doing enough miles to make diesel worthwhile to sacrifice some handling, then I'd do it properly and have something a bit more cosseting than a GTD while I'm at it.
So, I'd pick a Golf GTi if you're driving for fun (but still need a hatchback), or decent comfy saloon like a Volvo S60 if I were doing more miles. I can see why someone would like a GTD, but for me it's neither fish nor fowl.
That said, if I had the cash for a Golf GTi Mk7, I'd have a decent poke around a Focus ST and Leon Cupra. I can see why people like the current Octavia vRS- after all, I've been espousing the merits of mine on these forums for years- but the current generation has got a lot bigger and if you don't need the extra room, the shorter stablemates are likely to be more fun. I've enjoyed my vRS but I no longer need the huge bootspace and while it doesn't weigh much more than a Golf, the extra size I no longer need is beginning to be a hinderance I could do without.
Back in 2010 I bought a petrol Octavia vRS. I considered a diesel one but it just wasn't as much fun. OK, the petrol one's no Elise but if you're driving along back roads then the lesser weight near the nose makes a difference. Even when I was spending 15,000 miles a year doing M-way runs, it wasn't worth the compromise.
If I had more than one car or if I were doing 20,000-25,000 miles a year then a diesel might make more sense but when I really was doing that sort of mileage, I had a diesel Cadillac BLS. It was a Saab 9-3 in drag, and drove pretty much the same but cost less. It was a great long distance cruiser. If I were doing enough miles to make diesel worthwhile to sacrifice some handling, then I'd do it properly and have something a bit more cosseting than a GTD while I'm at it.
So, I'd pick a Golf GTi if you're driving for fun (but still need a hatchback), or decent comfy saloon like a Volvo S60 if I were doing more miles. I can see why someone would like a GTD, but for me it's neither fish nor fowl.
That said, if I had the cash for a Golf GTi Mk7, I'd have a decent poke around a Focus ST and Leon Cupra. I can see why people like the current Octavia vRS- after all, I've been espousing the merits of mine on these forums for years- but the current generation has got a lot bigger and if you don't need the extra room, the shorter stablemates are likely to be more fun. I've enjoyed my vRS but I no longer need the huge bootspace and while it doesn't weigh much more than a Golf, the extra size I no longer need is beginning to be a hinderance I could do without.
Edited by blearyeyedboy on Friday 24th July 17:05
andrewparker said:
rpla102 said:
There must be something wrong (apart from the driver) with my GTD CC, even driving it really gently on the motorway with no hold ups I struggle to get 50 MPG. Perhaps mine is broken.
It doesn't sound right. I can quite easily get 45mpg pootling around town. I've seen an average of 70.1mpg during a 60 mile motorway trip.Take it to a dealer and moan? Speak to the fleet manager and enquire politely? Thoughts?
rpla102 said:
70 mpg?? Mine won't get anywhere near that. Haven't seen it in the 60's yet. This morning, M40, M25, M1 50 miles, no hold ups (sat at 75 for most of the journey) 46.3 mpg. It had 3000 miles on the clock when I was given it by work so someone has wrecked it at some point.
Take it to a dealer and moan? Speak to the fleet manager and enquire politely? Thoughts?
My Leon FR diesel 184 won't get near 60 let alone 70, maybe we need to slipstream lorries and do 37mph on the motorway?Take it to a dealer and moan? Speak to the fleet manager and enquire politely? Thoughts?
rpla102 said:
70 mpg?? Mine won't get anywhere near that. Haven't seen it in the 60's yet. This morning, M40, M25, M1 50 miles, no hold ups (sat at 75 for most of the journey) 46.3 mpg. It had 3000 miles on the clock when I was given it by work so someone has wrecked it at some point.
Take it to a dealer and moan? Speak to the fleet manager and enquire politely? Thoughts?
Had my GTD for a year. 32k miles and average is 51mpg tracked on Fuelly. 80 on the motorway and keeping up with traffic elsewhereTake it to a dealer and moan? Speak to the fleet manager and enquire politely? Thoughts?
Check this thread, plenty of people getting decent 60+ mpg on runs.
http://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=2576...
http://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=2576...
blearyeyedboy said:
Snip
That said, if I had the cash for a Golf GTi Mk7, I'd have a decent poke around a Focus ST and Leon Cupra.
Snip
I had back to back test drives of the Leon Cupra and Golf GTI. I was very impressed with the Leon and I can see why they are winning awards with it. Its very quick, bearing in mind I've been driving a 1.2 3 cylinder Pug 208 for the last 18 months and was well built.That said, if I had the cash for a Golf GTi Mk7, I'd have a decent poke around a Focus ST and Leon Cupra.
Snip
The reason I didn't go for it was I wanted something relatively high spec and things like keyless, heated screen and dynamic headlights aren't available on the Leon. You could tell the golf had the edge on the interior too. A small thing but it went into the mix was I wasn't much of a fan of the dials on the Leon. Seat also recommend running on super unleaded whereas VW say standard is ok in the golf. This is only an issue for me as super unleaded isn't easy to get around here. The noveltly of going quite a bit out of my way to get super would soon get annoying.
Axionknight said:
I really like the MK7 GTI and think it is a shame it seems to have fallen by the wayside for the Golf R - I drove a manual one with the performance pack and it was a really, really good car, it seriously tempted me to look in to getting one but I have serious commitment issues when it comes to buying cars, f'in hopeless I am.
GTI all day long.
I think I'm with you on that. The GTI looks better than the R IMHO and it's a Golf GTI, which still has a certain amount of cachet. Yes, it's not the fastest/most powerful FWD hot hatch but it is probably the best all-rounder and probably has the optimum amount of power for a FWD car. I don't think that it's all the car that I would ever want but possibly all the car that I would ever need. I'm sure the R is excellent (not driven one yet) but for me it lacks the excitement or sense of occasion of an older fast Impreza or Evo or even the old R32 for that matter.GTI all day long.
I'll probably test drive both and then buy a GTI but my commute may get longer in the next few months and go up to about 50 miles per day, so the GTD may start to present a more compelling case for itself.
^^ Interesting to read the comparison between the Leon and the Golf. It's amazing how small things can make a difference to ownership. I don't think such things would bother me but I can see how they would bother some people.
I've always run the vRS on Super. I don't think it makes much difference to the driving experience but I think it gets a little better economy and that means it (roughly) pays for itself. Whether that's placebo effect or a real observation I'll leave others to decide, but I think it's true.
I've had an interesting thought but I'll start a new thread to avoid derailing this one...
I've always run the vRS on Super. I don't think it makes much difference to the driving experience but I think it gets a little better economy and that means it (roughly) pays for itself. Whether that's placebo effect or a real observation I'll leave others to decide, but I think it's true.
I've had an interesting thought but I'll start a new thread to avoid derailing this one...
Edited by blearyeyedboy on Friday 24th July 18:14
Bungleaio said:
Seat also recommend running on super unleaded whereas VW say standard is ok in the golf. This is only an issue for me as super unleaded isn't easy to get around here. The noveltly of going quite a bit out of my way to get super would soon get annoying.
The dealership recommended it? Interesting to hear as vwg UK staff cars including cupra and Audi RS models are only ever run on standard 95ron as they can't get super on their fuel cards.Mr2Mike said:
It's all down to trying to save money
Really lolEdited by Mr2Mike on Friday 24th July 13:17
Hard to have a reasoned discussion when you are being a tool
For some its saving money. Ive got about £6000 sunk into my car onthe engine and transmission alone. Others may do itto save money - if they do, whats the problem with that?
I will be replacing my mk4 tdi with a GTD when it finally gives up the ghost, but only because:
a: I do over 35k per year for work (plus another 8-10k social)
b: If the old girl hangs on another 2 years my oldest lad will be driving, and he sure as hell isn't going near a GTI (and i am sure as hell not paying through the nose to insure him on one either)
a: I do over 35k per year for work (plus another 8-10k social)
b: If the old girl hangs on another 2 years my oldest lad will be driving, and he sure as hell isn't going near a GTI (and i am sure as hell not paying through the nose to insure him on one either)
Rutter said:
The dealership recommended it? Interesting to hear as vwg UK staff cars including cupra and Audi RS models are only ever run on standard 95ron as they can't get super on their fuel cards.
I asked both of the sales guys that I went out with and they said, the brochures also say 95 and 98. My old V40 T4 wanted 98 but I tried running it on 95 and it didn't like it. aquarianone said:
epom said:
Great post. Would be GTI for me too.
But Shirly...the P11d / tax etc would make it completely uneconomical ? (please no whoosh parrots!)I don't think the above is too relevant to the OP but might be of help to others. I guess a low CO2 benefits the VED band anyhow.
OK, an update. People have been recommending SEAT Cupras to me for years (although two of my best friends have owned SEATs and never again), so I popped on to the configurator on their website as I actually don't mind the look of the new Leon (the old one was nice at the back but I hated the MPV-ish front) and having expected a cut-price GTI, I was disappointed to discover that it was actually more expensive than a GTI!
Wtf? Where's the value there? I guess the argument is that you're getting an extra 50bhp for virtually the same price but then if you have to have the power, it's only a small step-up price-wise to the more powerful and AWD Golf R. I hear some of the options available on the Golf are not available on the Leon and also what a boring monochrome colour range. Being a SEAT, I was expecting the option of yellow, orange or lime green but the only bright colours were the red and the metallic blue. My favourite colours on the GTI are probably the retro colours like the red and white (always preferred these to the Lhasa/Oak Green so popular on the mk1s and 2s). Even looking at used Cupras up to 5 years old, I don't see a significant saving over the GTI like-for-like in terms of age and mileage.
The only hot hatches that seem to offer any value nowadays are the Ford STs and the Skoda Octavia vRS. The Skoda is a great car I'm sure but a bit bigger than I really want and I remain unconvinced by the Focus ST, although I applaud Ford for their 3-tier performance range (ST1, ST2, ST3 etc). The Fiesta ST seems priced about right, although isn't this how much the mk2 Focus ST cost when it was launched 10 years ago?
What I would like to see in the hot hatch market is a bit less willy waving i.e. our car has the most power and is the fastest around the Nurburgring and lower prices achieved through less power (200bhp is ample in a FWDer) and less kit. The launch price of the mk5 GTI was 20k but you had to add things like cruise, 18" alloys, heated seats etc but that was fine. When I configured my ideal spec for a mk7 GTI (Red 5 door manual with PP), I didn't need to add anything else because everything now seems to be standard. I know people will say inflation blah, blah, blah but back in 2005, I could have easily afforded a new GTI, whereas a new GTI in 2015 is right at the top end of what I can afford and I am earning significantly more than I was 10 years ago.
Wtf? Where's the value there? I guess the argument is that you're getting an extra 50bhp for virtually the same price but then if you have to have the power, it's only a small step-up price-wise to the more powerful and AWD Golf R. I hear some of the options available on the Golf are not available on the Leon and also what a boring monochrome colour range. Being a SEAT, I was expecting the option of yellow, orange or lime green but the only bright colours were the red and the metallic blue. My favourite colours on the GTI are probably the retro colours like the red and white (always preferred these to the Lhasa/Oak Green so popular on the mk1s and 2s). Even looking at used Cupras up to 5 years old, I don't see a significant saving over the GTI like-for-like in terms of age and mileage.
The only hot hatches that seem to offer any value nowadays are the Ford STs and the Skoda Octavia vRS. The Skoda is a great car I'm sure but a bit bigger than I really want and I remain unconvinced by the Focus ST, although I applaud Ford for their 3-tier performance range (ST1, ST2, ST3 etc). The Fiesta ST seems priced about right, although isn't this how much the mk2 Focus ST cost when it was launched 10 years ago?
What I would like to see in the hot hatch market is a bit less willy waving i.e. our car has the most power and is the fastest around the Nurburgring and lower prices achieved through less power (200bhp is ample in a FWDer) and less kit. The launch price of the mk5 GTI was 20k but you had to add things like cruise, 18" alloys, heated seats etc but that was fine. When I configured my ideal spec for a mk7 GTI (Red 5 door manual with PP), I didn't need to add anything else because everything now seems to be standard. I know people will say inflation blah, blah, blah but back in 2005, I could have easily afforded a new GTI, whereas a new GTI in 2015 is right at the top end of what I can afford and I am earning significantly more than I was 10 years ago.
white_goodman said:
What I would like to see in the hot hatch market is a bit less willy waving i.e. our car has the most power and is the fastest around the Nurburgring and lower prices achieved through less power (200bhp is ample in a FWDer) and less kit.
I'd prefer to see them willy waving over who had the lowest kerb weight. Bungleaio said:
The Leon effectively includes the performance pack of the golf plus the adjustable shocks. So to take them both to about the same specification you would need to spend nearly £2000 on the golf. But the Leon isn't the cheap alternative that it used to be.
For a start adding the winter pack, adaptive cruise and nav to the Leon costs over £1500... all standard on the GTI...I'd personally be looking at a manual PP GTI with no options. With the 18 inch wheels it doesn't need adaptive dampers anyway.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff