RE: VW Golf R: PH Fleet

[Patrick Bateman]

Actus Reus said:

Are you, by any chance, powerfully built?

[Driver101]

Actus Reus said:

Are you, by any chance, powerfully built?

I've no idea what the reference is in relation to. I'm not really following the reason for the smart comment.

I'm having my opinion questioned on the basis that I've never driven the car and can't afford one.

Like I've said through this thread, it's surprising if you don't agree it's an amazing car, you are wrong.

I just thought it was quite amusing that I'm being accused of not being able to afford a car that cost most of the owners around about £200 per month. I don't think the poster thought too much before posting that.

Then never having sat it one. They are available in every local VW dealer. Anyone can go see for themselves.

There is a lot of people who are very unfair to bash it with no grounds. All I've said is the car isn't in the league that owners place it.

I've read so many comments about how it is M3 fast. As the previous page it is M3 fast if you go back 20 years. Compare it to the new M3 and that's doing 0-100mph in around 8 seconds. That's not even remotely close.

I have my fair opinion of the car and there is plenty of more level headed owners who also day many thing I do.

I do think most owners are into VWs and have biased opinions. I also see many of the owners this is their first entry to the performance car market. They are drawing comparisons to there previous cars that are obviously levels well below the R.

Edited by Driver101 on Friday 17th April 19:51

Edited by Driver101 on Friday 17th April 20:06

[Selmer Mk6]

I am somewhat hooked on reading about the Golf R on this forum.

There is no doubt that from what I have read the car is competent, a good compromise and cheap to lease. If I could get one for £250 a month I would have one. However, if I was paying £35k including options, I would want something more. This could be the looks and or the sound. I cannot comment on the handling or steering feel, as I have not driven one.

Fast road and track driving appears not to be its trump card, although it certainly has the speed. I wonder if there would be such a debate if the cheapest lease deals were around £450 -£500 a month. I'm sure people would certainly say it was too expensive.

My conclusion is as a cheap lease it's worth it. However, as an outright purchase new, its not worth the money.

This has got me wondering, slightly off topic. A manufacturer produces an expensive car, which is unlikely to attract buyers on HP or PCP. Hmm, why not shift them on cheap lease deals and relax the rules on business users. Hopefully its value in 2 -3 years time might be more palatable.

[Selmer Mk6]

Driver101 said:

I've no idea what the reference is in relation to. I'm not really following the reason for the smart comment.

I'm having my opinion questioned on the basis that I've never driven the car and can't afford one.

Like I've said through this thread, it's surprising if you don't agree it's an amazing car, you are wrong.

I just thought it was quite amusing that I'm being accused of not being able to afford a car that cost most of the owners around about £200 per month. I don't think the poster thought too much before posting that.

Then never having sat it one. They are available in every local VW dealer. Anyone can go see for themselves.

There is a lot of people who are very unfair to bash it with no grounds. All I've said is the car isn't in the league that owners place it.

I've read so many comments about how it is M3 fast. As the previous page it is M3 fast if you go back 20 years. Compare it to the new M3 and that's doing 0-100mph in around 8 seconds. That's not even remotely close.

I have my fair opinion of the car and there is plenty of more level headed owners who also day many thing I do.

I do think most owners are into VWs are have biased opinions. I also see many of the owners this is their first entry to the performance car market. They are drawing comparisons to there previous cars that are obviously levels well below the R.

I agree with the last paragraph.

Edited by Driver101 on Friday 17th April 19:51

[va1o]

I've decided these are starting to get a bit common for my liking. 3 in the work car park today compared to only one 'normal' Mk7 Golf. On the road I definitely see more Rs that GTIs and probably about the same number of GTDs.

It's still an awesome car and deservedly popular, but it's definitely lost some of the exclusivity of its predecessor!

[Tony33]

Selmer Mk6 said:

I am somewhat hooked on reading about the Golf R on this forum.

There is no doubt that from what I have read the car is competent, a good compromise and cheap to lease. If I could get one for £250 a month I would have one. However, if I was paying £35k including options, I would want something more. This could be the looks and or the sound. I cannot comment on the handling or steering feel, as I have not driven one.

The motoring press couldn't care less about the lease deals, the car goes squarely against its rivals at rrp and this is where most of the hype stems from. Most would take into account the opinion of experienced motoring journalists than forum heroes.

My previous BMW 320d ED company car with some options came to £36k back in 2011. That isn't an amount of money that gets you into special car territory especially if you want something which is also a proper family car. Of course playing the second hand market gets you into what some would consider more interesting options but that is a completely different debate.

[Driver101]

Tony33 said:

he motoring press couldn't care less about the lease deals, the car goes squarely against its rivals at rrp and this is where most of the hype stems from. Most would take into account the opinion of experienced motoring journalists than forum heroes.

My previous BMW 320d ED company car with some options came to £36k back in 2011. That isn't an amount of money that gets you into special car territory especially if you want something which is also a proper family car. Of course playing the second hand market gets you into what some would consider more interesting options but that is a completely different debate.

The motoring press care more about who will line their pockets.

The initial release of the Golf R was on snow and ice with studied tyres. The journalists had to be invited and were treated really well.

On the basis of their experience of driving the car in conditions that neutered any genuine experience, they all ran back and gave 5 star reviews.

VAG have done many of their recent reviews in the same conditions. Looks a lovely location and great conditions.

So let us think, a journalist needing work has to be invited and paid to do a review. Would you bite the hand that feeds you?

That is now part of the problem. Nobody is impartial and the people who pay your wages are always the people you look out for.

I keep reading how devasting the pace of the car is, how amazing the car handles, yet factually it can't beat a few of the cars in the class below. It's miles behind the cars that owners compare themselves too.

You are comparing a car in completely different classes. The Golf doesn't match up to a 3 series, it's a 1 series car equivalent.

Again why say the 320ED is a £36k car(with options) when £36k is 335i money really in basic spec in 2011?

The Golf R by the time you make it 5 door, paint it metallic, give it DSG as people want, add sat nav which is a common feature, nice wheels and better seats you are heading well into the mid or higher £30s.

Again through, why even start comparing an efficency dynamics diesel car against a hot hatch on the basis of performance? What makes you go from one extreme to another?

Do you compare how good looking your wife is in comparison to George Michael?

[Patrick Bateman]

'Nobody is impartial'

Yes, it's all a conspiracy.

[DukeDickson]

Driver101 said:

Tony33 said:

he motoring press couldn't care less about the lease deals, the car goes squarely against its rivals at rrp and this is where most of the hype stems from. Most would take into account the opinion of experienced motoring journalists than forum heroes.

My previous BMW 320d ED company car with some options came to £36k back in 2011. That isn't an amount of money that gets you into special car territory especially if you want something which is also a proper family car. Of course playing the second hand market gets you into what some would consider more interesting options but that is a completely different debate.

The motoring press care more about who will line their pockets.

The initial release of the Golf R was on snow and ice with studied tyres. The journalists had to be invited and were treated really well.

On the basis of their experience of driving the car in conditions that neutered any genuine experience, they all ran back and gave 5 star reviews.

VAG have done many of their recent reviews in the same conditions. Looks a lovely location and great conditions.

So let us think, a journalist needing work has to be invited and paid to do a review. Would you bite the hand that feeds you?

That is now part of the problem. Nobody is impartial and the people who pay your wages are always the people you look out for.

I keep reading how devasting the pace of the car is, how amazing the car handles, yet factually it can't beat a few of the cars in the class below. It's miles behind the cars that owners compare themselves too.

You are comparing a car in completely different classes. The Golf doesn't match up to a 3 series, it's a 1 series car equivalent.

Again why say the 320ED is a £36k car(with options) when £36k is 335i money really in basic spec in 2011?

The Golf R by the time you make it 5 door, paint it metallic, give it DSG as people want, add sat nav which is a common feature, nice wheels and better seats you are heading well into the mid or higher £30s.

Again through, why even start comparing an efficency dynamics diesel car against a hot hatch on the basis of performance? What makes you go from one extreme to another?

Do you compare how good looking your wife is in comparison to George Michael?

In English/sense????


Pretty much all car manufacturers schmooze journos, make sure they have 'healthy' examples of the car in question and so on. Just look at the crap that surrounds the latest, greatest donkey.

It is a bit bland & I guess a touch common as a result of blinding lease deals, but even as someone who's not a VAG lover, as an all-round single car, a daily to back up something interesting, or an unexpected company car choice, it is a damn good effort. Better still if it wasn't a bit (now German) flakey, reliability wise & disappearing wise.


BTW, what cars in the class below give it a hiding?

[Tony33]

Driver101 said:

Again why say the 320ED is a £36k car(with options) when £36k is 335i money really in basic spec in 2011?

If you read the post I quoted it referred to a Golf R being a £35k car with options - not base spec. The point is that £35k doesn't get you into special territory. It isn't a direct comparison with a 3 series low end diesel and it would be daft to interpret it as being anything such.

[Matthew Clarke]

As an owner you have to laugh at all the Golf bashing going on, just because it is a Golf! Don't give a good looking German girl with all the moves a hard time because she isnt Latin American and likes doing the dishes

If it had the 5cyl Audi engine out of the RS3, deep bucket Recaros and slightly flared arches then it would be my perfect everyday car. However it would also be another £10-15k..

The facts are that there isnt a bad word said about the R in the motoring press and most owners are made up also. There are a few people that find it bland and a bit boring, but that is because its just so competent. If you really push on its a really engaging and adjustable car. However the push to get it there isnt always wise on the public highway! You wont get the best out of this car on a VW test drive, unless the Salesman doesnt like his job anymore and fancies being moved on

Anyway I quite like it and am off out for a spin now :P

[anonymous-user]

Definitely a touch of the green eyed monster with some of the posters on here.

[Krupp Stahl]

Tuvra said:

.....You can also drive it places without having a Subaru Impreza nailed to your back bumper the whole time like the Focus RS

Was the Subaru Impreza sporting snazzy blue flashing lights by any chance?

[RoverP6B]

Tony33 said:

and in next weeks instalment of "Not Driven" we pit our memories of 40 year old saloons against what we might imagine the very latest from BMW could be like to drive. Without giving too much away we were rather surprised by the verdict!

I've got a decent idea what current BMWs drive like, as well as my own 90s-designed examples. One can also learn a reasonable amount from reviews. The M135i has more power than the Golf R, and a better chassis. It's also astonishingly cheap for what it is. Mention of 40-year-old saloons is a complete irrelevance. It simply came up because someone picked up on my nom-de-clavier and stated that all Rovers were dull, which is not true at all.

Patrick Bateman said:

I'd argue 4th in Evo Car of the Year isn't to be sniffed at for this sort of car.

I generally find *-mag COTY comparisons pretty useless and highly subjective. The actual road tests when the car first comes out are far more revealing. Too much credence is given with cars like these to claimed MPG, lease/hire purchase costs, image and so on. Driver101 also speaks a great deal of sense about the motoring press and how easily they're bought off!

[Husaberk]

RoverP6B said:

Tony33 said:

and in next weeks instalment of "Not Driven" we pit our memories of 40 year old saloons against what we might imagine the very latest from BMW could be like to drive. Without giving too much away we were rather surprised by the verdict!

I've got a decent idea what current BMWs drive like, as well as my own 90s-designed examples. One can also learn a reasonable amount from reviews. The M135i has more power than the Golf R, and a better chassis. It's also astonishingly cheap for what it is. Mention of 40-year-old saloons is a complete irrelevance. It simply came up because someone picked up on my nom-de-clavier and stated that all Rovers were dull, which is not true at all.

Patrick Bateman said:

I'd argue 4th in Evo Car of the Year isn't to be sniffed at for this sort of car.

I generally find *-mag COTY comparisons pretty useless and highly subjective. The actual road tests when the car first comes out are far more revealing. Too much credence is given with cars like these to claimed MPG, lease/hire purchase costs, image and so on. Driver101 also speaks a great deal of sense about the motoring press and how easily they're bought off!

2 facts:

"Pretty much every" and "all" have different meanings.

You state you're able to learn a reasonable amount from reviews apart from certain ones.

I know the press have got the hots for German cars but I doubt VAG have managed to corner the market for that. For the record I'd happily enjoy a M135i, M235i, Focus RS, Mustang, Civic Type R, RS3, S3, WRX STI et all because I like to think I've got an open mind. Try it sometime and maybe try driving some cars first before making your mind up.

[ORD]

Comparing my own experiences to what I read in reviews, I think a clear pattern emerges:-

(1) Nasty nasty Diesel engines get brushed aside as 'slightly unrefined'.

(2) Audis get absurdly little stick for being awful to drive. A couple of sentences re there being not much (read: no) steering feel in an otherwise positive review, when the review should read 'Nice interior. Terrible to drive.'

(3) BMWs get overly positive reviews. For example, only a few reviewers noticed that the boggo suspension on the 3 series is truly awful.

(4) Less 'premium' marques don't get enough credit. For example, the Mazda 3 is excellent to drive and much better than the Golf or Focus or 1 series, but you wouldn't get any feel for that from the reviews.

Overall, I think German and English cars get an easy ride (how Aston Martin gets away with its cars I have no idea, and the F-Type is absurdly over-hyped). A diesel Audi or BMW will almost always get a good review, no matter how overpriced and insipid it is!

BUT, none of this is terribly relevant to the R: it is objectively very impressive and absurdly cheap. It is right that journos obsess about AWD, etc, but that isn't specific to the reaction to this car.

[Tony33]

Husaberk said:

For the record I'd happily enjoy a M135i, M235i, Focus RS, Mustang, Civic Type R, RS3, S3, WRX STI et all because I like to think I've got an open mind.

Me too! Some times real life gets in the way and some of those cars drop off the list because they aren't quite so practical or the wife thinks you are having a boy racer mid life crisis! Hardly a reason to get depressed about it though as there are still great options.

[XAF]

This thread is so funny. World wise factual opinions from people who have never even driven one.

For the record, I've had plenty of fast or fairly fast cars, FN2 Type R, Boxtster S, S3 etc and I actually like my Golf R. It does everything I need it to and nothing I dont. It looks good, gets loads of positive comments from random people and is quick if you want to play. Does it have the engine or the Honda, or the appeal of the Boxster? No.

Is it a bloody good car for £300 a month for five doors, leather, nav and DSG? Hell yeah!

[ORD]

XAF said:

This thread is so funny. World wise factual opinions from people who have never even driven one.

For the record, I've had plenty of fast or fairly fast cars, FN2 Type R, Boxtster S, S3 etc and I actually like my Golf R. It does everything I need it to and nothing I dont. It looks good, gets loads of positive comments from random people and is quick if you want to play. Does it have the engine or the Honda, or the appeal of the Boxster? No.

Is it a bloody good car for £300 a month for five doors, leather, nav and DSG? Hell yeah!

Last point nails it. A bloody boggo A-class is £259 per month to lease for 3 years, according to a TV advert just now. I think it said that's £22k to rent a shopping car for 3 years!

When I see things like that, I think (1) bloody hell the R lease deals were cheap and (2) why in the name of fk don't those people just buy a car, and something much better than an A-Class! (but that point is for a different topic...and one that has been done to death)

[Patrick Bateman]

RoverP6B said:

I generally find *-mag COTY comparisons pretty useless and highly subjective. The actual road tests when the car first comes out are far more revealing. Too much credence is given with cars like these to claimed MPG, lease/hire purchase costs, image and so on. Driver101 also speaks a great deal of sense about the motoring press and how easily they're bought off!

How would you know if the motoring press are bought off? Just as an example, Evo lambasted the M3 in car of the year yet are usually very fond of BMW's, M3's in particular. It wasn't rated higher than 9th by any of the 7 that took part.

So which members of the motoring press are easily bought off?