Going from an XR3i to a mkII golf gti... Step up or not?
Discussion
Mike Oxbig said:
I've got an immaculate XR3i but feel like its time to change the old girl... I've seen a very tidy mk2 golf gti for sale near by, would this be a step up? Or just another car on the same level?
It's the 16v gti if that makes any difference?
Many moons ago in 'CAR' magazine, a journo ran both a Mk3 XR3i and a Mk2 Gti 8v alongside each other. It was in the mid 80s so both cars were still available new at the time.It's the 16v gti if that makes any difference?
I can link the article if you are interested?
Mike Oxbig said:
I've got an immaculate XR3i but feel like its time to change the old girl... I've seen a very tidy mk2 golf gti for sale near by, would this be a step up? Or just another car on the same level?
It's the 16v gti if that makes any difference?
Similar cas pitched at the same market. Would seem a 100% side step to me, although in its day I think the Golf was slightly more £££, faster and more desirable. So you could see it as a tiny tiny step up with in that market segment of that era.It's the 16v gti if that makes any difference?
The Golf will feel a lot more solid, and better engineered of course, even today.
The cvh in the XR3i was a weazy old thing, and didn't exactly like being worked hard. The Golf would definitely be a step up IMO (Many moons ago, I owned two mk3 XR3i's and mk1 and mk2 Golf Gti's, but never a 16v).
The cvh in the XR3i was a weazy old thing, and didn't exactly like being worked hard. The Golf would definitely be a step up IMO (Many moons ago, I owned two mk3 XR3i's and mk1 and mk2 Golf Gti's, but never a 16v).
Fast Bug said:
The Golf will be faster, better handling and way better built. I prefer the 8 valve version though, it's a lot more flexible to drive and not much slower than the 16 valve. I miss my old MK2 GTI!
Doesn't the 16v make the same torque as the 8v for the same given revs though? Are they geared differently?Fast Bug said:
The Golf will be faster, better handling and way better built. I prefer the 8 valve version though, it's a lot more flexible to drive and not much slower than the 16 valve. I miss my old MK2 GTI!
Same here. My mk2 is possibly my all-time favourite car. I had it for 3 years and that's going some for me!Strangely, I don't look back with anywhere near as much affection for my XR3i's
The Golf is better in pretty much every way, however at close to 30 years old they can be "variable", your Escort, being a nice example will be a lot better than most of the Golf's that are left, a lot are rusty, badly modified, damp inside and on their last legs, find a timewarp standard car and it will be enjoyable, they felt way better than the XR3i.
300bhp/ton said:
Fast Bug said:
The Golf will be faster, better handling and way better built. I prefer the 8 valve version though, it's a lot more flexible to drive and not much slower than the 16 valve. I miss my old MK2 GTI!
Doesn't the 16v make the same torque as the 8v for the same given revs though? Are they geared differently?More importantly GTI 8 an 16v have exactly the same 1st -4th gears so all this talk of 8v being faster around town, easier to drive comes largely from 8v owners who haven't tried a 16v.
How people can argue that any engine with 112hp is better than one with 139 or how one which can hit 60 in under 8 seconds is slower than one that takes over 8 seconds is beyond me.
OP- having owned various CVH Fords the mk2 golf especially with a KR 16v is far more fun - remember a 16v is more comparable with CVH Turbo engines in stock form.
aka_kerrly said:
More importantly GTI 8 an 16v have exactly the same 1st -4th gears so all this talk of 8v being faster around town, easier to drive comes largely from 8v owners who haven't tried a 16v.
Not so coco, my friend had a 16 valve and we used to swap cars a lot and we both liked the 8 valve more. The 16 valve is a quicker car don't get me wrong, but I'd go for another 8 valve every time as they're not as 'peaky' to drive 
Oh and if I had the money, this would be sat next to my Beetle right now. It's lovely!
www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C318618
www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C318618
Fast Bug said:
aka_kerrly said:
More importantly GTI 8 an 16v have exactly the same 1st -4th gears so all this talk of 8v being faster around town, easier to drive comes largely from 8v owners who haven't tried a 16v.
Not so coco, my friend had a 16 valve and we used to swap cars a lot and we both liked the 8 valve more. The 16 valve is a quicker car don't get me wrong, but I'd go for another 8 valve every time as they're not as 'peaky' to drive 
So you both prefer a worse engine that makes less torque and power at every point?Have had six Golf GTI's on MK1 and Mk2 flavours, I personally prefer the eight valve, the sixteen valve is quicker for sure but I just perfer the 8 valve delivery, I had a GTI Engineering MK1 with 130 bhp which was nice, so many around with 2.0 conversions and whatever so you need to drive a specific example.
I remember driving a sixteen valve and it was as flat as anything, seemed no quicker than an 8 valve and was dissapointed, drive another one and it was much much better, same witht he 8 valves, had a green one briefly and it was limp, think the key thing is that the fuel injection system is in good order, especially on the K-Jet models, they wear and performance drops off, the Digifant (Electronic, versus K-Jet being mechanical, they went to this in about 1988) didnt seem to lose power as it got older, think all the 16 valves were K-Jet.
the 8 valve versus 16 valve argument is long gone really, 20 valve turbo, even as a standard engine is faster than any GTI and Rallye produced.
I remember driving a sixteen valve and it was as flat as anything, seemed no quicker than an 8 valve and was dissapointed, drive another one and it was much much better, same witht he 8 valves, had a green one briefly and it was limp, think the key thing is that the fuel injection system is in good order, especially on the K-Jet models, they wear and performance drops off, the Digifant (Electronic, versus K-Jet being mechanical, they went to this in about 1988) didnt seem to lose power as it got older, think all the 16 valves were K-Jet.
the 8 valve versus 16 valve argument is long gone really, 20 valve turbo, even as a standard engine is faster than any GTI and Rallye produced.
RobCrezz said:
Fast Bug said:
aka_kerrly said:
More importantly GTI 8 an 16v have exactly the same 1st -4th gears so all this talk of 8v being faster around town, easier to drive comes largely from 8v owners who haven't tried a 16v.
Not so coco, my friend had a 16 valve and we used to swap cars a lot and we both liked the 8 valve more. The 16 valve is a quicker car don't get me wrong, but I'd go for another 8 valve every time as they're not as 'peaky' to drive So you both prefer a worse engine that makes less torque and power at every point?I've had several 16v mk2s with 1.8/2.0 capacities and 8v on K jet + Digi so I think I'm in a fair position to say the 16v is far more of a drivers car for a few factors (in my opinion of course) the rev range, the 4000>7300rpm acceleration is fantastic for attacking A/B roads, the fact the 16v makes a level of power that 8v owners can only dream of in standard form but with a few tweeks 150-160hp is very realistic and with the exception of a head gasket kit is no more complicated/more expensive than a 8v.
The only reason I'd end up with 8v digi these days is if I was going to do a 2.0 16v ABF on Digi3 management conversion - those are very good!!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff