RE: New Polo GTI!
Discussion
rtz62 said:
f
k me sideways!
200bho isn't enough?
Well, SWMBO says I'm stuck in the 80's, so I'll take myself back there when in 1984 my bar and new Fiesta XR2 had 96bhp and Clarkson (yes, Clarkson!) said it went 'like thunder and lightening'
To be fair it was plenty fast enough, and knew where it stood in the pecking order, under the (then) 105bhp 205 GTi, the Nova GTE, Renault 5 Gordini / Turbo (96-110 bhp), and noticeably a rung below the XR3i (105bhp?), the Astra GTE (118bhp) and the Golf GTi (110-112bhp).
And top of that little pecking order was the Escort Turbo and Golf GTi 16v.
Did I want more power? Hmmmn, possibly.
Did I need more power, even on roads that were less populated by traffic and its congestion?
No. Emphatically no
And yes, soon after he XR2 I had an XR2 Turbo Technics, XR3i, RS1600i, a couple of Escort Turbos and Golf G60s but I didn't need that extra go, I just wanted to own them (and several Cosworths) before the legislators banned them (or so I thought, not realising that rising traffic volume would begin to make them redundant)
So back to my original statement, I don't really think we can moan at a car with 200bhp, the power arms race is getting daft. And the number of Big Brother cameras is increasing.
It's been a wonderful ride, while it lasted...
The thing back then (as an ex Pug GTI and R5 Turbo owner) compared to these days is weight. 120bhp pushing 900kg is going to feel pretty rapid especially on modern rubber. This 2018 Polo GTI will weigh in at 1300kg if it's lucky. Don't get me wrong, I totally appreciate that modern crash structures are amazing and we've become more accustomed to certain features in our cars. I could be wrong but the performance will be closer to adequate rather than blistering.k me sideways!200bho isn't enough?
Well, SWMBO says I'm stuck in the 80's, so I'll take myself back there when in 1984 my bar and new Fiesta XR2 had 96bhp and Clarkson (yes, Clarkson!) said it went 'like thunder and lightening'
To be fair it was plenty fast enough, and knew where it stood in the pecking order, under the (then) 105bhp 205 GTi, the Nova GTE, Renault 5 Gordini / Turbo (96-110 bhp), and noticeably a rung below the XR3i (105bhp?), the Astra GTE (118bhp) and the Golf GTi (110-112bhp).
And top of that little pecking order was the Escort Turbo and Golf GTi 16v.
Did I want more power? Hmmmn, possibly.
Did I need more power, even on roads that were less populated by traffic and its congestion?
No. Emphatically no
And yes, soon after he XR2 I had an XR2 Turbo Technics, XR3i, RS1600i, a couple of Escort Turbos and Golf G60s but I didn't need that extra go, I just wanted to own them (and several Cosworths) before the legislators banned them (or so I thought, not realising that rising traffic volume would begin to make them redundant)
So back to my original statement, I don't really think we can moan at a car with 200bhp, the power arms race is getting daft. And the number of Big Brother cameras is increasing.
It's been a wonderful ride, while it lasted...
T1b
T1berious said:
The thing back then (as an ex Pug GTI and R5 Turbo owner) compared to these days is weight. 120bhp pushing 900kg is going to feel pretty rapid especially on modern rubber. This 2018 Polo GTI will weigh in at 1300kg if it's lucky. Don't get me wrong, I totally appreciate that modern crash structures are amazing and we've become more accustomed to certain features in our cars. I could be wrong but the performance will be closer to adequate rather than blistering.
T1b
120hp in a 900kg car is about 130hp/tonneT1b
200hp in a 1300kg car is about 150hp/tonne
So, tell us again which will be faster?
Yes, I appreciate that there is more to how fast a car feels than just numbers, but objectively a 200hp hatch from 2017 will be faster than any from 1987.
HannsG said:
Double the power of my Panda 100HP. Underpowered my arse
Well the 100HP is hardly a firecracker. Also the new GTI could be 400kg+ heavier. VW are rarely the most dynamic steer's as it is so going into battle with a power deficit relative to the competition doesn't help. That's what people are complaining about here.loudlashadjuster said:
120hp in a 900kg car is about 130hp/tonne
200hp in a 1300kg car is about 150hp/tonne
So, tell us again which will be faster?
Yes, I appreciate that there is more to how fast a car feels than just numbers, but objectively a 200hp hatch from 2017 will be faster than any from 1987.
The torque difference is even greater.200hp in a 1300kg car is about 150hp/tonne
So, tell us again which will be faster?
Yes, I appreciate that there is more to how fast a car feels than just numbers, but objectively a 200hp hatch from 2017 will be faster than any from 1987.
207 lb-ft (using Mk5 GTI numbers) in a 1300kg car is about 160 lb-ft/tonne
99 lb-ft in a 900kg car is about 110 lb-ft/tonne
I was in the VW garage booking my sisters car in, anyway I had a mooch round as you do and almost laughed out loud to see them flogging a golf GTD for £35k. My bet is the 200bhp polo will be set at a p*ss take £25k, at which point the list of alternatives new and nearly new becomes huge.
RumbleOfThunder said:
Well the 100HP is hardly a firecracker. Also the new GTI could be 400kg+ heavier. VW are rarely the most dynamic steer's as it is so going into battle with a power deficit relative to the competition doesn't help. That's what people are complaining about here.
Which competition does it have a power deficit to? I'm not aware of any other cars in this class with significantly over 200bhp? NicGTI said:
mx-tro said:
As a current Polo GTI owner I agree. Solid(ish) build, power on tap and some cornering ability. But it is all front end, rear never moves so understeer is never far away. And there is too much fore-aft movement over crappy roads; hopefully a longer wheelbase and better suspension setup can cure this.
Aren't most fwd road cars set up to understeer as it's safer? edit: not a rhetorical question btw. Genuinely asking.
Edited by NicGTI on Wednesday 21st June 12:18
This is where the Polo fails miserably - there is no adjustability, certainly not at sociable speeds. Could probably introduce some movement with stiffer rear end, but the ride is already too harsh. It's all just a bit boring.
Real shame as the car ain't bad, just disappointing. Had the ACT engine been available in non GT spec, probably would have been the pick of the range. But if you're getting GTI body kit and suspension, might as well go whole hog...
mx-tro said:
This is where the Polo fails miserably - there is no adjustability, certainly not at sociable speeds. Could probably introduce some movement with stiffer rear end, but the ride is already too harsh. It's all just a bit boring.
Great news that you've already driven the new car! Could you maybe do a full review for PH?loudlashadjuster said:
Yeah, I know, I did check 
I was trying to get at the fact that the current Polo might have as much relevance to the new one as as a MkIV Golf GTI has to a MkV.
Okay, touché! I was trying to get at the fact that the current Polo might have as much relevance to the new one as as a MkIV Golf GTI has to a MkV.
Admittedly, I had digressed with my question re: FWD and understeer, but I get your point!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff