Discussion
ive had a couple over the years 1 normal 1 highline
have a look at www.edition38.com
lots of vw people on there
J
have a look at www.edition38.com
lots of vw people on there
J
Yep, I've had one for the last couple of years.
Good:
Noise, throttle response, grunt, quick in-gear (30-70 through gears is 6.4 secs, faster than a lot of proper hot-hatches today), build-quality, loads of space inside.
Bad:
Although it has a decent amount of mechanical grip, the steering feedback is average, and standard cars are underdamped. Mine is lowered on Koni adjustables, so can't really comment. I haven't driven one on standard suspension. It isn't as 'chuckable' or nimble as a 'proper' old-school hot-hatch. VR6 timing chains get rattly at 100k+ and eventually need replacing, quite a costly job. Mine eats front tyres.
I might as well mention the Corrado VR6 before everyone else does. I've got one of those as well. No comparison, everything about the Corrado is better.
Highline is all cosmetic, mechanically the same. Some people will claim the Highline has more power, but shares the OBD2 version of the VR6 fitted to all later Golf VRs which has bigger throttle-body and different ECU. These OBD2 cars generally dyno 5 bhp or so more than VWs claimed 174 horses.
Average fuel-consumption on mine is 27 mpg.
Good:
Noise, throttle response, grunt, quick in-gear (30-70 through gears is 6.4 secs, faster than a lot of proper hot-hatches today), build-quality, loads of space inside.
Bad:
Although it has a decent amount of mechanical grip, the steering feedback is average, and standard cars are underdamped. Mine is lowered on Koni adjustables, so can't really comment. I haven't driven one on standard suspension. It isn't as 'chuckable' or nimble as a 'proper' old-school hot-hatch. VR6 timing chains get rattly at 100k+ and eventually need replacing, quite a costly job. Mine eats front tyres.
I might as well mention the Corrado VR6 before everyone else does. I've got one of those as well. No comparison, everything about the Corrado is better.
Highline is all cosmetic, mechanically the same. Some people will claim the Highline has more power, but shares the OBD2 version of the VR6 fitted to all later Golf VRs which has bigger throttle-body and different ECU. These OBD2 cars generally dyno 5 bhp or so more than VWs claimed 174 horses.
Average fuel-consumption on mine is 27 mpg.
Edited by speedtwelve on Wednesday 5th September 21:41
Adz
Just looked at your profile, reckon you might find the VR6 a handling disappointment after having had a 106 GTi. The Golf VRs are cheap now, though. My old MK2 Golf GTi, Pug 309 GTi and Lancia Delta Turbo were much more fun through the twisties than my Golf VR. Those cars are all very old school I realise, but there are contemporary equivalents out there nowadays.
Just looked at your profile, reckon you might find the VR6 a handling disappointment after having had a 106 GTi. The Golf VRs are cheap now, though. My old MK2 Golf GTi, Pug 309 GTi and Lancia Delta Turbo were much more fun through the twisties than my Golf VR. Those cars are all very old school I realise, but there are contemporary equivalents out there nowadays.
Yea I suppose it wont handle like a 106 but then not many cars will be able to chucked about like that.
I might even look at those again once Ive sold the Ibiza and see whats avaliable.
Have been looking at some VR6's on the net and also at shows and they can look very very nice. Also the noise of them is just amazing!!!
The only VR6 I've ever driven was a mate's Corrado and that was a beauty to drive, not as fast as I expected but the sound was ace and so smooth. Didnt get a chance to take it down any B roads.
Thanx for taking time to reply guys!
I might even look at those again once Ive sold the Ibiza and see whats avaliable.
Have been looking at some VR6's on the net and also at shows and they can look very very nice. Also the noise of them is just amazing!!!
The only VR6 I've ever driven was a mate's Corrado and that was a beauty to drive, not as fast as I expected but the sound was ace and so smooth. Didnt get a chance to take it down any B roads.
Thanx for taking time to reply guys!
To get the most out of the VR6 you need to drive it like you stole it!
Dont know about the golfs but the corrado has tall gearing so if you want to drive quickly you gotta be well prepared in advance.
I bought mine for the noise. Mine has a magnex ss exhaust and k&n cone filter.
Sounds lovely.
Dont know about the golfs but the corrado has tall gearing so if you want to drive quickly you gotta be well prepared in advance.
I bought mine for the noise. Mine has a magnex ss exhaust and k&n cone filter.
Sounds lovely.
VR6's are good cars mechanically bullet proof. I had one for nearly two years and it definatey got some stick! LOL
Mine was on 44K on a P-Plate when I got it, it was a highline with koni adjustables.
Things I liked: Noise, effortless drive, well built, took a serious beating, 100+ pace.
Things I disliked: Handling was, well, pretty dangerous to be fair! Heavy front end can hardly be chucked around, as has been said, plus does not help with breaking either having all that weight over the front wheels. In the wet it was quite poor to be honest.
The de-misters where possibly some of the worst I have ever came across, and they go through wheel bearings pretty quick too (same wheel bearing as a 1.4 Polo)
Overall, quite low running costs for such a big engine! Mainly because nothing ever broke. Fuel cosumption not too bad at all.
I brought mine when I was 19, LOL, but wish I would have brought a clio 172 or a 106 GTI, and THEN the vr6, think I missed out on some fun somwehere along the line
Good luck wit it!
Matt
Mine was on 44K on a P-Plate when I got it, it was a highline with koni adjustables.
Things I liked: Noise, effortless drive, well built, took a serious beating, 100+ pace.
Things I disliked: Handling was, well, pretty dangerous to be fair! Heavy front end can hardly be chucked around, as has been said, plus does not help with breaking either having all that weight over the front wheels. In the wet it was quite poor to be honest.
The de-misters where possibly some of the worst I have ever came across, and they go through wheel bearings pretty quick too (same wheel bearing as a 1.4 Polo)
Overall, quite low running costs for such a big engine! Mainly because nothing ever broke. Fuel cosumption not too bad at all.
I brought mine when I was 19, LOL, but wish I would have brought a clio 172 or a 106 GTI, and THEN the vr6, think I missed out on some fun somwehere along the line
Good luck wit it!
Matt
Not going to help, but I had a Mk3 GTi, which was the worst car I ever owned.
Unless the VR6 is better by a country mile on ALL points (particularly chassis and handling) then I'd avoid it like the plague.
Trouble is, I don't think it is better, and there are other cars out there that would me much more fun for the money.
Oli.
Unless the VR6 is better by a country mile on ALL points (particularly chassis and handling) then I'd avoid it like the plague.
Trouble is, I don't think it is better, and there are other cars out there that would me much more fun for the money.
Oli.
Apart from the engine I don't think there’s any difference between a normal VR6 and the MK3 GTI which I have previously owned. There built like tanks but unfortunately handle like tanks and are no fun to drive. There’s much better out there for that sort of money, 328 is a good call.
zcacogp said:
Not going to help, but I had a Mk3 GTi, which was the worst car I ever owned.
Unless the VR6 is better by a country mile on ALL points (particularly chassis and handling) then I'd avoid it like the plague.
Trouble is, I don't think it is better, and there are other cars out there that would me much more fun for the money.
Oli.
Erm, you don't think a VR6 is better than a GTi, but you've never driven one? How can you comment?Unless the VR6 is better by a country mile on ALL points (particularly chassis and handling) then I'd avoid it like the plague.
Trouble is, I don't think it is better, and there are other cars out there that would me much more fun for the money.
Oli.
FWIW, prior to buying mine I had not even considered the VR6, I was going to buy a 16v. I drove two and they were the most gutless and uninspiring "performance" car I have probably ever driven.
I decided to try a VR6 and it was a different car. Its all about the slab of torque and the howl over 4k, it really is a great engine.
Granted the chassis is never going to win any awards, but when you consider you can pick one up for £1500... there will always be compromises.
I've had my Golf for 6 years now as a daily driver and I still love it. It's still totally original but as it rarely sees any twisties on the motorway slog the suspension doesn't bother me too much.
I've filled out all the bills since I bought it if you want to have a look in my profile. Most are fairly routine (except 2 coilpacks) and you can save the tyres a bit by setting off in third if its wet
I've filled out all the bills since I bought it if you want to have a look in my profile. Most are fairly routine (except 2 coilpacks) and you can save the tyres a bit by setting off in third if its wet
hornetrider said:
Erm, you don't think a VR6 is better than a GTi, but you've never driven one? How can you comment?
Fair point, but I was trying to say that the Mk3 Golf is NOT a good starting point for a performance car, and the GTi was a complete woof-woof. Also, I'm not given to believe that the VR6 was significantly different in the chassis department to the GTi, so don't expect it to be any much better. I may be completely wrong, and the VR6 engine is better than the 2.0 4-pot in the GTi, but it is still not considered to be a peach. (The 2.9 VR6 in the Corrado is a much, much better unit.)
Look elsewhere, and try alternatives. I think there are better cars in that price bracket for what you want it to do.
Oli.
zcacogp said:
Also, I'm not given to believe that the VR6 was significantly different in the chassis department to the GTi, so don't expect it to be any much better.
This is a given and I agree zcacogp said:
I may be completely wrong, and the VR6 engine is better than the 2.0 4-pot in the GTi
I agree, you are completely wrong. The two engines could not be more different if they had a "Different" badge on the rocker cover and were made in Differentshire by Different people.zcacogp said:
but it is still not considered to be a peach.
By whom?zcacogp said:
(The 2.9 VR6 in the Corrado is a much, much better unit.)
Is it really, how do you know? My understanding is that the Corrado VR6 unit is exactly the same engine with a slightly reworked head giving a longer stroke - which accounts for the extra 100cc and 16bhp (174 against 190bhp). Does 16bhp really turn a dud into a peach?I don't mean to hound you, but it appears you are writing off a car you have never driven, based on driving a vastly underpowered dull equivalent.
Whilst the Mk3 chassis could never be considered dynamic, the dreadfully dull engines in the GTi really did let the car down. The VR6 unit transforms it in my view, why not pop to a garage and find out first hand?
hornetrider said:
stuff
Fair enough. You clearly know more than me, and I bow to your better judgement. I'm offering my experience of the VW mark in general, experience which covered running a local branch of CGTi many years ago, when the VR6 was all the rage, and having driven 3 Corrado VR6's on different occasions. Oh, and also having written regularly for the CGTi magazine, and reading just about every road test every written for Golfs of that period.
Oh, and having passengered in more Golf VR6's than I can remember, as well as circuit-racing against them in the Slick 50 championship.
But, as I said, you clearly know more than me, so I bow to your better judgement.
Oli.
Fair enough mate and kudos to you, why not mention all of that before? Your previous posts came across as relatively ill-informed, ie:
"Unless the VR6 is better by a country mile on ALL points (particularly chassis and handling) then I'd avoid it like the plague. "
...certainly doesn't give the impression you've been passengered in many a VR6.
Given all the above I still find it strange you've never driven one, and are still under the impression that the engine in the Corrado is an entirely different beast.
I'm no Corrado expert - are there chassis differences between Golf and Corrado which may have contributed to your impression that the Corrado is a vastly superior car? I always thought the Corrado was essentially a Golf in a fancy suit, however I could be way off the mark with that as I don't know.
All the best.
"Unless the VR6 is better by a country mile on ALL points (particularly chassis and handling) then I'd avoid it like the plague. "
...certainly doesn't give the impression you've been passengered in many a VR6.
Given all the above I still find it strange you've never driven one, and are still under the impression that the engine in the Corrado is an entirely different beast.
I'm no Corrado expert - are there chassis differences between Golf and Corrado which may have contributed to your impression that the Corrado is a vastly superior car? I always thought the Corrado was essentially a Golf in a fancy suit, however I could be way off the mark with that as I don't know.
All the best.
Edited by hornetrider on Thursday 6th September 15:44
Fair enough - I was a bit vague. I was trying not to come over too heavy-handed and know-it-all (which is a weakness of mine!)
You are however right - I have never piloted a VR6, simply put I was never in the right place at the right time. I did (and still do) make a point of NOT driving mates' cars because of the risk of stuffing them. I drove the Corrados because I was loaned one by a dealership once to write about them, and contemplated buying one on another occasion. (In the end I didn't.)
The Corrado is based on the Golf Mk2 chassis. The Mk3 Golf is ... well ... the Mk3 chassis. And therein lies the difference. And yes, it really is that much difference, VW went backwards fast. The Mk3 chassis can be improved considerably (so I am told) by aftermarket shocks, springs and ARB's, but it is certainly wallowy-as-you-like in every standard example I drove.
I'm not that up on the difference between the 2.8 and 2.9 VR6 engines, but do know that they were quite different. More than just another 100cc. I also know that only certain markets got the 2.8 VR6 engine - if you go to the states, all Golf GLX-VR6's (as they are badged there) have what we know as the 2.9 Corrado engine.
I also know, from bitter experience, that the Mk3 GTi was a truly ghastly car. And that the VR6 suspension will need to be light years ahead of the GTi suspension to make it anything like even slightly acceptable. And, from all accounts, it isn't. (And they rusted like buggery as well.)
I'd suggest that the OP thinks hard about alternatives. There are better cars at that price point in that category.
Oli.
You are however right - I have never piloted a VR6, simply put I was never in the right place at the right time. I did (and still do) make a point of NOT driving mates' cars because of the risk of stuffing them. I drove the Corrados because I was loaned one by a dealership once to write about them, and contemplated buying one on another occasion. (In the end I didn't.)
The Corrado is based on the Golf Mk2 chassis. The Mk3 Golf is ... well ... the Mk3 chassis. And therein lies the difference. And yes, it really is that much difference, VW went backwards fast. The Mk3 chassis can be improved considerably (so I am told) by aftermarket shocks, springs and ARB's, but it is certainly wallowy-as-you-like in every standard example I drove.
I'm not that up on the difference between the 2.8 and 2.9 VR6 engines, but do know that they were quite different. More than just another 100cc. I also know that only certain markets got the 2.8 VR6 engine - if you go to the states, all Golf GLX-VR6's (as they are badged there) have what we know as the 2.9 Corrado engine.
I also know, from bitter experience, that the Mk3 GTi was a truly ghastly car. And that the VR6 suspension will need to be light years ahead of the GTi suspension to make it anything like even slightly acceptable. And, from all accounts, it isn't. (And they rusted like buggery as well.)
I'd suggest that the OP thinks hard about alternatives. There are better cars at that price point in that category.
Oli.
Gassing Station | Audi, Seat, Skoda & VW | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff