Golf R -v- Golf GTI

**brad** · 26-11-2010, 11:57 AM

I looked at the old Polo GTI for all of 5 minutes - it could have been the fastest VW in the world but it was still too small for my needs. I doubt the new one is half a size bigger, so it would still be off the shopping list.

**AdamD** · 26-11-2010, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by triode12

With those sort of prices, I really don't see how VW can sell the Golf GTI's now. Competition from above and below the model range.

If there's one thing this thread does demonstrate, it's that value is a very personal thing that everyone perceives differently depending on a combination of price, wants and needs.

I reckon the new Polo GTI is an awesome little car, that represents fantastic buying for many people (I'm going to suggest a few mates have a close look). I wouldn't consider one for a moment, however, as it satisfies neither my wants nor my needs.

**Maverick** · 26-11-2010, 03:23 PM

Originally Posted by Corey_R

Both cars have similar power to weights which means that the Polo GTI is capable of the same 0 to 100 in 6.9 seconds that the Golf GTI (with DSG) can do.

But the Polo GTI 3 door DSG is $27,790 vs the Golf GTI 3 door DSG at $41,490.
In fact, a fully optioned 5 door Polo GTI drive away will end up still being less than $40k - and that's before negotiation of discount etc.

So yeah. For all those who are saying that the Golf GTI is better "value" than the Golf R - I think that the Polo GTI has just knocked the Golf GTI out of the equation!

Maybe we should rename this thread "Polo GTI vs Golf R".

It's not all about 0-100 times, what about the agricultural suspension used on the Polo?

The lack of room, the lack of storage, the lack of options and so on. I fail to see how the Polo is competition for the Golf when it's aimed at a different market and is low spec.

**brad** · 26-11-2010, 03:41 PM

Originally Posted by Maverick

It's not all about 0-100 times, what about the agricultural suspension used on the Polo?

The lack of room, the lack of storage, the lack of options and so on. I fail to see how the Polo is competition for the Golf when it's aimed at a different market and is low spec.

mav, have you driven the new one? I haven't but the guys that i know that have driven the Polo have raved about the handling/ride. So, I'm not sure what's changed.

Fully agree, car choice is more than numbers on paper.

**Whistler** · 26-11-2010, 04:30 PM

C'mon! Polos are bought by girls! Real ones and figurative ones!
Harden up gents a get a real car. It's a Golf thread!
(gulp...)

**Corey_R** · 26-11-2010, 04:50 PM

Wait... isn't the Golf a girls car too? It was according to that gawd awful thread from a few months back....

**SilvrFoxX** · 26-11-2010, 04:51 PM

Originally Posted by Whistler

C'mon! Polos are bought by girls! Real ones and figurative ones!
Harden up gents a get a real car. It's a Golf thread!
(gulp...)

given the Golf has it's masculinity challenged on a regular basis your statement made me chuckle..

**DAL344** · 26-11-2010, 05:54 PM

A girls car is what I am currently driving

...... Prodigy has seen photo's of the 'beast'!

I refuse to admit outright what it is .... but what I will say is its colour is listed as 'Cha-cha-cha Azure'!!

Anything after this will be more masculine!!

**Corey_R** · 26-11-2010, 06:02 PM

Originally Posted by DAL344

A girls car is what I am currently driving

...... Prodigy has seen photo's of the 'beast'!

I refuse to admit outright what it is .... but what I will say is its colour is listed as 'Cha-cha-cha Azure'!!

Anything after this will be more masculine!!

The Fiat 500 is a cool little car though