RE: PH Heroes: VW Golf GTI
Discussion
joz8968 said:
Dantxd said:
GiorgioGT said:
Mk4 Golf GTi is the biggest joke ever to leave a VW dealership. 100bhp/tonne. Thats embarasing for a GTi. Concidering the Mk1 was about 140bhp/tonne.
Didn't the first incarnation of the Mk4 with the 2.0 only have like 115bhp in total? And a 0-60 of 11 seconds or something mad?Dan
uremaw said:
I pick up my new-old '88 Mk2 GTI 8v on the 20th Dec, having never driven it but always fancied one. Wanted a Pug 205 as well (bid unsuccesfully on the Pistonheads one). I'll let you know if it's as good as i hope it is.
if it has quarter-lights in the front windows, it'll go like a train - if the front windows are one-piece of glass, it won't 
But you'll love it whichever fuel injection system it has
Orangecurry said:
So how many of you dissenters have owned one?
I've owned six, and still own my mk1.
Looks? It was designed by Giorgetto Giugiaro (Car designer of the Century) - the Pug was designed by... a frenchman. (OK that's a lie obviously)
dear oh dear - EVO magazine doesn't give out too many 5* ratings - Mk2 16v gets one.
Mk3 being stodgy and boring is a myth - the mk3 16v has a better power to weight over the mk2 16v, and I drove one for 20k miles and loved every second; it's just a bit too refined and you don't realise how fast/quick it is.
We had our mk2 16v for years and years, and loved it; a friend had a 1.9 Pug at the same time - sure the pug was a bit quicker, but you were on a knife-edge of handling, and where it span, the mk2 did not.
The only ones which let down the mk2 are the post 1988 8v, which had a revised fuel injection system which just didn't perform for some reason. We had an mk2 8v 1986 which went like a train.
As to fun - well I've got a lairy RWD BMW from the age of trailing-arm rear-suspension, which (in the wet) will tip you into the scenery if you don't watch it constantly, a Prodrive Impreza, which is devastating in all weathers, and an unmodified mk1 GTI, on Pirelli wheels with 185 tyres.
They are all GREAT fun (otherwise I wouldn't have them), but the GTI is by far the most fun, because you can explore the limits of physics in it AT MUCH LOWER SPEEDS than the other two, because it weighs as much as a packet of biscuits and handles like a housefly.
A constant grin factor vs tiny running costs and over 30mpg if driven hard;
Bigger on the inside and smaller on the outside than a BMW MINI;
heap that on top of the fact the pug/clios are made of tin-foil and most have rusted-away or are crumpled in a field somewhere leaves you with the definate GTI HERO
You are totally wrong and obviously can't pull your head of VWs backend. You are in it for cult/image rather than drivingI've owned six, and still own my mk1.
Looks? It was designed by Giorgetto Giugiaro (Car designer of the Century) - the Pug was designed by... a frenchman. (OK that's a lie obviously)
dear oh dear - EVO magazine doesn't give out too many 5* ratings - Mk2 16v gets one.
Mk3 being stodgy and boring is a myth - the mk3 16v has a better power to weight over the mk2 16v, and I drove one for 20k miles and loved every second; it's just a bit too refined and you don't realise how fast/quick it is.
We had our mk2 16v for years and years, and loved it; a friend had a 1.9 Pug at the same time - sure the pug was a bit quicker, but you were on a knife-edge of handling, and where it span, the mk2 did not.
The only ones which let down the mk2 are the post 1988 8v, which had a revised fuel injection system which just didn't perform for some reason. We had an mk2 8v 1986 which went like a train.
As to fun - well I've got a lairy RWD BMW from the age of trailing-arm rear-suspension, which (in the wet) will tip you into the scenery if you don't watch it constantly, a Prodrive Impreza, which is devastating in all weathers, and an unmodified mk1 GTI, on Pirelli wheels with 185 tyres.
They are all GREAT fun (otherwise I wouldn't have them), but the GTI is by far the most fun, because you can explore the limits of physics in it AT MUCH LOWER SPEEDS than the other two, because it weighs as much as a packet of biscuits and handles like a housefly.
A constant grin factor vs tiny running costs and over 30mpg if driven hard;
Bigger on the inside and smaller on the outside than a BMW MINI;
heap that on top of the fact the pug/clios are made of tin-foil and most have rusted-away or are crumpled in a field somewhere leaves you with the definate GTI HERO
I too belonged to this 'club', owned a number of normal Mk2s, Mk2 GTI and Mk3 VR6. Then all of a sudden I realised they are all pretty lame cars, slow, can't handle and fall apart.
The interiors look like a polished wheeliebin, nasty seats, switches, dials and have a list of problems associated with them yet we were told they are bullet proof!!!
Rusty filler caps
Rear bushes
Seized rear calipers
Rusty vents
Leaking sunroofs
Leaking in the boot
Weak bottom end (8v)
Thin spacing between cyclinders (16v)
I thought the missus Ford Ka was more fun
900T-R said:
cg360 said:
People knock these cars when they drive 15-20 year old versions which have barely been maintained.
Exactly. Of course your shiny, factory fresh new motor is always going to feel better than the one with 20 year old suspension bushes and aged rubber that you just left behind at the dealer lot. That does say nothing about the relative qualities of the car models.The problem with '80s and '90s cars is their low market value - few will invest more than what's strictly needed to keep the car going from MOT to MOT on a car that may be worth £2K on a good day.
I have a 16v, fully rebuilt from ground up with all new VAG parts. You name it, and it was replaced, even if it didn't need replacing. The car behaves as new, and I should know because i bought it when it was a young kitten.
Having said that, its age does show. Modern cars are so much better than these old kings of the road, so making a comparison imho is quite pointless i'm afraid.
disco1 said:
You are totally wrong and obviously can't pull your head of VWs backend. You are in it for cult/image rather than driving
I too belonged to this 'club', owned a number of normal Mk2s, Mk2 GTI and Mk3 VR6. Then all of a sudden I realised they are all pretty lame cars, slow, can't handle and fall apart.
The interiors look like a polished wheeliebin, nasty seats, switches, dials and have a list of problems associated with them yet we were told they are bullet proof!!!
Rusty filler caps
Rear bushes
Seized rear calipers
Rusty vents
Leaking sunroofs
Leaking in the boot
Weak bottom end (8v)
Thin spacing between cyclinders (16v)
I thought the missus Ford Ka was more fun
I'm in it for the cult/image am I?I too belonged to this 'club', owned a number of normal Mk2s, Mk2 GTI and Mk3 VR6. Then all of a sudden I realised they are all pretty lame cars, slow, can't handle and fall apart.
The interiors look like a polished wheeliebin, nasty seats, switches, dials and have a list of problems associated with them yet we were told they are bullet proof!!!
Rusty filler caps
Rear bushes
Seized rear calipers
Rusty vents
Leaking sunroofs
Leaking in the boot
Weak bottom end (8v)
Thin spacing between cyclinders (16v)
I thought the missus Ford Ka was more fun
Odd that - my friends all take the mick out of my 24 year old mars-red (orange!) car, but more importantly I'm very old too, so I'm someone who thinks fashion is a disease.
But hey here we are arguing about a car that was in EVERYONES top ten in the EVO car of the century for instance, is one of Clarksons favorite cars, is a PH Hero today and has a huge global following... so it's ME that's wrong is it?
tinman0 said:
There is also the issue that the car is 15-20 years old. Technology and design have moved on a great deal since these cars were developed.
I have a 16v, fully rebuilt from ground up with all new VAG parts. You name it, and it was replaced, even if it didn't need replacing. The car behaves as new, and I should know because i bought it when it was a young kitten.
Having said that, its age does show. Modern cars are so much better than these old kings of the road, so making a comparison imho is quite pointless i'm afraid.
Depends on how you look at it. The 2007 equivalent weighs nigh-on 1,400 kgs. Sure, it has 197 bhp to pull it along instead of 139, but it'll never feel as agile and intimate as the lighter car, and you'll need big speeds to make them feel alive - only problem is that the scope for driving those speeds has diminished dramatically in the past 15-20 years. I have a 16v, fully rebuilt from ground up with all new VAG parts. You name it, and it was replaced, even if it didn't need replacing. The car behaves as new, and I should know because i bought it when it was a young kitten.
Having said that, its age does show. Modern cars are so much better than these old kings of the road, so making a comparison imho is quite pointless i'm afraid.
900T-R said:
tinman0 said:
There is also the issue that the car is 15-20 years old. Technology and design have moved on a great deal since these cars were developed.
I have a 16v, fully rebuilt from ground up with all new VAG parts. You name it, and it was replaced, even if it didn't need replacing. The car behaves as new, and I should know because i bought it when it was a young kitten.
Having said that, its age does show. Modern cars are so much better than these old kings of the road, so making a comparison imho is quite pointless i'm afraid.
Depends on how you look at it. The 2007 equivalent weighs nigh-on 1,400 kgs. Sure, it has 197 bhp to pull it along instead of 139, but it'll never feel as agile and intimate as the lighter car, and you'll need big speeds to make them feel alive - only problem is that the scope for driving those speeds has diminished dramatically in the past 15-20 years. I have a 16v, fully rebuilt from ground up with all new VAG parts. You name it, and it was replaced, even if it didn't need replacing. The car behaves as new, and I should know because i bought it when it was a young kitten.
Having said that, its age does show. Modern cars are so much better than these old kings of the road, so making a comparison imho is quite pointless i'm afraid.
I do compare a MY83 GTI with a MY00 Impreza, back to back. I can drive at the limit of the golf in safety; if I went anywhere near the limit of the Impreza on the public road I would become a statistic. I drive for fun - the GTI delivers.
Orangecurry said:
But hey here we are arguing about a car that was in EVERYONES top ten in the EVO car of the century for instance, is one of Clarksons favorite cars, is a PH Hero today and has a huge global following... so it's ME that's wrong is it?
Wasn't in mine, besides I don't remember a Golf GTi in that EVO test, thought the list was:McLaren F1
Ferrari F40
Pagani Zonda
Lancia Delta Integrale
Bugatti Veyron
Honda NSX
Porsche GT-3
Porsche 2.7 RS
Honda Integra-R
Nissan Skyline GTR-34
disco1 said:
You are totally wrong and obviously can't pull your head of VWs backend. You are in it for cult/image rather than driving
I too belonged to this 'club', owned a number of normal Mk2s, Mk2 GTI and Mk3 VR6. Then all of a sudden I realised they are all pretty lame cars, slow, can't handle and fall apart.
The interiors look like a polished wheeliebin, nasty seats, switches, dials and have a list of problems associated with them yet we were told they are bullet proof!!!
Rusty filler caps
Rear bushes
Seized rear calipers
Rusty vents
Leaking sunroofs
Leaking in the boot
Weak bottom end (8v)
Thin spacing between cyclinders (16v)
I thought the missus Ford Ka was more fun
Let me see:I too belonged to this 'club', owned a number of normal Mk2s, Mk2 GTI and Mk3 VR6. Then all of a sudden I realised they are all pretty lame cars, slow, can't handle and fall apart.
The interiors look like a polished wheeliebin, nasty seats, switches, dials and have a list of problems associated with them yet we were told they are bullet proof!!!
Rusty filler caps
Rear bushes
Seized rear calipers
Rusty vents
Leaking sunroofs
Leaking in the boot
Weak bottom end (8v)
Thin spacing between cyclinders (16v)
I thought the missus Ford Ka was more fun
Rusty filler caps - only on the B-reg one, but after 286k miles I felt this was excusable.
Rear bushes - never needed any (unlike subsequent modern Alfas and Audis).
Seized rear calipers - nope, never.
Rusty vents - the B-reg Mk2 was the only one with any rust anywhere.
Leaking sunroofs - the sunroof on my Saab leaked but not on any of the Mk2s
Leaking in the boot - no, never noticed this.
Weak bottom end (8v) - oddly it's usually the 16v that is accused of needing revs, not the 8v....
Thin spacing between cyclinders (16v) - you what? I had three of these and can honestly say I have no idea what you are talking about.
What problems really were there? Hmm let me see....heater matrix went on one, and another had a leaky doorseal after repairs to a snapped window-winder cable. Don't recall much else.
HeavyRightFoot said:
r5gttgaz said:
Can't understand the fuss, its one of the slowest "hot hatches" evah!
The fuss is because the Golf GTi created the hot hatch sector.
Without the GTi the concept of 'hot hatch' probably wouldn't exist!
Renault would still have brought out their hot hatches regardless of what VW were doing.
More like luke warm hatches.I had a 5Gt and it was complete cack. Slow, unreliable and everything fell off typical French rubbish. I have had about 10 MK2's and despite their age they can still make a lot of newer cars look silly when it comes to the swisty stuff. Oo=v=oO forever
w
r5gttgaz said:
Can't understand the fuss, its one of the slowest "hot hatches" evah!
The fuss is because the Golf GTi created the hot hatch sector.
Without the GTi the concept of 'hot hatch' probably wouldn't exist!
Renault would still have brought out their hot hatches regardless of what VW were doing.
More like luke warm hatches.I had a 5Gt and it was complete cack. Slow, unreliable and everything fell off typical French rubbish. I have had about 10 MK2's and despite their age they can still make a lot of newer cars look silly when it comes to the swisty stuff. Oo=v=oO forever
w
joz8968 said:
Plus, one of the fastest hot hatches of its day (in a straight line, at least), the slightly unhinged Fiat Strada 130TC Abarth (and it's little brother 105TC)...
here we go again - I owned one of the 130TCs for 3 years (reg B755AYD) - It had superb handling, not as predictable as the Golfs, but better than the Pugs. However it was going rusty at 3 years old, and after a trans-Europe dash the oil-pressure was never the same. GTI wins again!
Edited by Orangecurry on Wednesday 12th December 16:19
mattiselvis said:
Orangecurry said:
But hey here we are arguing about a car that was in EVERYONES top ten in the EVO car of the century for instance, is one of Clarksons favorite cars, is a PH Hero today and has a huge global following... so it's ME that's wrong is it?
Wasn't in mine, besides I don't remember a Golf GTi in that EVO test, thought the list was:McLaren F1
Ferrari F40
Pagani Zonda
Lancia Delta Integrale
Bugatti Veyron
Honda NSX
Porsche GT-3
Porsche 2.7 RS
Honda Integra-R
Nissan Skyline GTR-34
gti-ted said:
More like luke warm hatches.I had a 5Gt and it was complete cack. Slow, unreliable and everything fell off typical French rubbish. I have had about 10 MK2's and despite their age they can still make a lot of newer cars look silly when it comes to the swisty stuff. Oo=v=oO forever
Well, yours must've had a leaking boost hose or something, because, in accelerative terms at least, the GTt would pull the Mk.2 8v pants down. GTt 'feels' so much more exciting and go-kart like than the Golf - although the little 1.4 does (or should that be doesn't?) make itself felt past 80mph...Edited by joz8968 on Wednesday 12th December 16:26
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff