Golf R -v- Golf GTI

[WhiteJames]

Golf R –v- Golf GTI


I stopped by Gerald Slaven Volkswagen, Belconnen, ACT and Sales Manager Phil Fairhall was kind enough to allow me to take the new Mark 6 Golf R for a test drive on a whim. I set a few conditions on Manager Phil Fairhall – the Golf R had to be test driven along a challenging B’grade roadway with some ascents, descents, and a few tight twisties, in addition to the odd National Capitol roundabout. This is not Manager Phil’s usual 10km test drive route and I wanted to see if the Golf R would cope with some rural type B’grade roadways. The new Volkswagen Golf R had @ 150kms on the odometer and had been test driven several times over during this day. I predominately used the DSG shift paddles on the otherwise un-optioned 5 door Blue Golf R with 18’ wheels (see pics in WJ Suspension & Wheel Thread for pics).


In contrast, immediately after the test drive of the Golf R, I drove the same route in my own Mark 6 Golf GTI DSG with DCC on ‘Normal’ mode & riding on 18” Detroit Wheels. The Golf GTI was not revved past 4500rpm as it’s in the process of a particular type of break-in atm and has @ 2500km on the odometer.


One passenger was on board for both test runs in the Golf R and GTI.


Golf R:


First thing I noticed about the Golf R is that it felt as tight as a drum – very secure on its 20% stiffer than GTI springs. Taking off in Drive/Auto, it was immediately obvious that the power band of the Golf R’s EA113 KO4 motor exhibited low down lag compared to the EA888 motor in the MK6 GTI. The turbo lag in the Golf R was not excessive, but did involve a muted response to the throttle application and loss of feel. I’d attribute this to the less instant torque down low coupled with the added weight of the Golf R (@ 120kgs extra on GTI). When spooled up, the older belt cam driven EA113 KO4 motor of the Golf R did feel more refined & was quieter than the newer chain driven cam EA888 motor in the MK6 GTI. The fuel delivery of the Golf R didn’t feel as well metered as that in the MK6 GTI, but this was expected.


Driving out of Belconnen just behind Black Mountain Tower on suburban roadway with predominately 80kph posted limits, the 20% stiffer Golf R springs was riding in a similar manner as the Golf GTI, only with a touch more rebound in the spring rate and a greater tied down feeling. The Golf R felt that bit more Grand Tourer in ride.


Leaning on the Golf R between 20kph to 80kph showed a mix of linear surge forward, mated with a laggy feel lower in the rev range. It’s obvious that the max torque comes on song later in the rev range with the Golf R. Between 1000rpm and 3500rpm - 4000rpm, the Golf R motor is uninspiring. You’re moving forward, but without any sense of feeling, rather building up to a higher crescendo.


Once you straddle the 4000rpm to 6000rpm, the Golf R comes alive with some real strong thrust. The rpm gauge moves fast in this band of rpm, requiring some fast work on the DSG paddles. The final 4,000rpm from 6,000rpm onwards makes up for the lack-lusted feel below 4,000rpm. The power delivery of the Golf R does notably pin you into the seat back harder and for longer than in the MK6 GTI, but by no means is this thrust overwhelming.


Heading out to a rural mild B-grade roadway that borders Canberra had the Golf R riding the bumps surprisingly well for a vehicle that has 20% stiffer springs than the GTI. The extra weight helps the Golf R soak into the undulations, rather than riding or bouncing over them as in the case of the GTI.


Overall - I wouldn’t say that the Golf R riding on 18” wheels is superior or interior to the GTI in ride – but it does ride better over the smaller low speed compression bumps and has sufficient rebound rate in the springs & dampers to keep the chassis well contained. The suspension tune also offers enough compliance for mild to good B-grade roadways on this short B’grade roadway portion of the drive. Please note that this was a short test drive.



It was time to chuck the Golf R around a few tight twisting B’grade coarse bitumen corners in addition to dropping into and out of valleys to see how she handled.


The Haldex system on the new Mark 6 Golf R is superior to the Haldex system on the MKV R32 Golf. It is also superior to the aftermarket Generation III Haldex Controller that some owners fit to their R32 to improve the time it takes for the vehicle to apportion drive to the rear wheels. The shift from front wheel drive to rear wheel is almost imperceptible and the grip levels are very high. Mid corner grip levels do not feel to be as high as the Mark GTI, and it is debatable how much an advantage the Haldex AWD gives the Golf R over the electronic EDL/XDS differential of the Golf GTI. When applying the gas, the feeling of the Haldex AWD in the Golf R is certainly better than the FWD GTI.


To drive, the Golf R feels like a 50/50 AWD than a FWD shifting power to the rear wheel slip is detected as in the case of the earlier MKV R32 Golf. The drive experience of the Haldex Generation IV in the Golf R was certainly one of the highlights of my drive experience when pressing on in this portion of the B-grade roadway drive. It’s all very seem-less and fuss free.


Another highlight of driving the Golf R was the chassis balance.


The Golf R is definitely an improvement over the front heavy Golf R32, which exhibited much more understeer, swaying under heavy braking and with the occasional rub of the front top inner fender screw due carrying the heavy V6 motor up front. With 35kg less over the front axle than the MKV R32, the Golf R is beginning to feel more BMW 50/50 like in weight distribution. With the front to rear balance much improved over the previous model, the Golf R adds reassurance and ease of effort when hustling via a series of bends. The reduction in weight and improved weight distribution front to rear certainly improves grip levels over the outgoing R32 MKV Golf.


The larger diameter brakes on the Golf R (330mm/310mm) did not feel as sensitive as those on the new Mark 6 GTI. I had not a great deal of cause to lean on them, but for street driving, the retardation of the Golf R brakes –v- the GTI has the GTI feeling to have greater initial bite. The extra weight of the Golf R may have something to do with this, and for repeated stops, I’d be putting my money on the Golf R for consistency. The tyres on the Golf R and GTI seem to be about the same standard now, whereas the MKV GTI had tyres one step down in terms of performance in comparison with the R32 (i.e. Conti CS2 –v- Conti CS3; Dunlop Sport –v- Dunlop Sport Maxx, etc).


I conducted a test of tractability between the Golf R and Golf GTI. This involved dropping the speed to 20kph under the speed limit in top gear (6th) on approach to a long & steep hill. About half throttle would be applied to see if the vehicle would increase speed in ascending up this protracted climb. The Golf R failed to accelerate up the hill leading up to half throttle, maintaining a constant speed until a down change to 5th gear was required nearing the peak of the climb. This showed that the bigger turbo could not overcome its turbo lag to spool up enough towards maximum torque for the hill climb. This detracted from the driveability of the Golf R and is clear evidence that the Golf R requires revs to extract the best from it under pressing conditions. You wouldn’t want to be caught in the incorrect gear under load in the Golf R.

[WhiteJames]

Golf GTI:


The GTI has a tendency to skip, jump and bounce over a series of roadway irregularities due to the less kerb mass. The added weight of the Golf R is a welcomed addition in this respect, with a trade off in mid-corner grip levels & agility. The ride on the GTI is about the same as the Golf R on 18” wheels in some respects. Cross winds also has an adverse effect on the stability of the Golf GTI as higher speeds, due to its less kerb mass.


The Golf R doesn’t look any better than the Golf GTI, probably worse in my opinion, especially with the 18” wheels that look smaller than the 18” GTI Detroit Wheels. The 19” Golf R wheels on a 235 series tyre is guaranteed to rub against the top inner fender screw.


The new Audi developed EA888 TSI motor with more measured fuelling from the 4 lobe camshaft actuator and chain drive camshaft is noisier than the Golf R and MKV GTI EA113 motor. Timing chains will do this to a motor – in contrast, cam belts are quiet.


The Mark 6 GTI motor develops more torque early in its rev range, making for instant power, punch & crispness to throttle inputs & forward thrust as opposed to the Golf R, which feels devoid of feel and builds speed up in a strong linear fashion – a typical trait of the older EA113 motor.


The greater thrust in the lower rev band makes the GTI more user friendly around town and when tackling the tight twisties - the driver is not required to rev the motor as hard or to have the MK6 GTI in the correct gear to extract the maximum performance from the EA888 Audi developed motor. In contrast, being caught in the incorrect gear in the Golf R would have the Golf GTI jumping ahead, especially up inclines. Easily done in day to day traffic.


Driving the same route and conducting the same tractability test up the same hill, the GTI in top gear (6th) pulled cleanly and easily with increased speed on ascent with half or less than half throttle - whereas the Golf R was struggling to get into the meat of its torque band . Part of the Golf R’s problem is the added weight; the other issue is that the EA113 KO4 big turbo motor requires revs to perform; whereas the GTI motor does not require revs, as max torque starts at 1700rpm. The GTI was the clear winner on the protracted incline tractability test.


After driving the Golf R and Golf GTI back to back along the same route, I’m adamant that the torque figures stated for the Golf GTI are understated. I’d go out on the limb and say that the torque figure is more like 300Nm to 320Nm (in higher gears 3-6) of torque for the Mark 6 Golf GTI (Audi A4/A5 has 155kW/350Nm).


The Mark 6 Golf GTI felt so much stronger in the lower & mid range power delivery than the Golf R. Downside of the Golf GTI is that power tapers off @ 5500rpm, where the Golf R is hitting its stride up to 6500rpm. More revs does equate to higher fuel consumption.


It’s disappointing that Volkswagen have detuned the Golf GTI EA888 motor, making it feel less alive & linear than the previous MKV GTI (and Golf R) – 95 RON may have something to do with this. The new Golf GTI EA888 motor appears to be a motor than has the ability to be seriously tuned for large gains in power, judging by its mid-range punch on the Mark 6 GTI. The older EA113 VW developed motor in the Golf R feels like it’s at the end of its development cycle (which it is). Expect big gains in the forthcoming Mark 7 Golf R if it receives the new Mark 6 GTI EA888 motor.


The Golf GTI’s greatest asset is also its greatest liability – that is front wheel drive (FWD). FWD reduces weight, improving mid speed corner grip levels, agility, braking and responsiveness. On the hand, the GTI cannot shake that FWD feeling with a tad of torque steer on higher throttle applications, which appears to be more pronounced over the previous MK5 GTI, due to the greater mid range power thrust of the stronger EA888 motor.


After driving the Golf R, the GTI feels front heavy, with all the weight of the mechanicals up front. This can blunt the driving experience to a degree & sometimes can be downright annoying when powering on uphills – a constant reminder that you’ve purchased a FWD motor vehicle. A slow-in/fast-out approach to corners has to be adopted with the MK6 GTI when punting it through corners.


Where the Golf R relies on its natural chassis balance with improved weight distribution front to rear driving into corners. The GTI has to rely on its upgraded rear anti-roll bar (24mm hollow/tubular) and electronics such as EDL if it’s a slow speed corner (EDL applies brake forcing torque to the outside front wheel & prevent wheel spin) or XDS in the higher speed bends (XDS applies the brake to pull the GTI into the corner, reducing understeer). Both EDL and XDS in particular, make for added grip levels on the GTI, but take a certain amount of fun factor out of the driving experience.


Which has the better grip levels: GTI or Golf R? Hard to say as they both perform excellently in this regard & the Mark 6 GTI has improved substantially over the Mark 5 GTI in this area (remember that the Sirocco R has FWD and EDL/XDS). The Golf R feels better balanced around corners, making for a more fun drive. The GTI feels to have the better motor for day to day public use.


Ideally, I’d like the Golf R all wheel drive system mated to the EA888 motor of the Golf GTI – it’d be the best of both worlds in that I’d have a motor with tractability and usability coupled with a better balanced chassis front to rear. The grip level between to the GTI and R is not really the issue.


I’ll go out on a limb and say that purchasing a Golf R purely for enhanced grip levels, appears, from this short test drive, to be a fool’s paradise. You’d want the Golf R primarily for it better balanced chassis and not its revvy motor or outright acceleration.


A well balanced chassis tune is very rarely debated, but is crucial to the drive experience. A beaut chassis tune is the defining factor in the drive experience, rather than getting from A to B asap.


In other words:

Would I purchase a Mark Golf R for its outright power & acceleration? No. Would I purchase a Golf R for its quiet & refined EA113 motor? No. Would I purchase a Golf R for its larger brakes? No. Would I purchase a Golf R for its superior AWD grip levels? No. Would I purchase a Golf R for its tenability? No. Would I purchase a Golf R for its better balanced chassis tune with improved weight distribution front to rear? Yes.


Special thanks to Gerald Slaven Volkswagen, Belconnen, ACT and Sales Manager Phil Fairhall for organising for a Golf R test drive at such short notice.

Gerald Slaven Motors in Canberra have a number of GTI and Golf R’s for delivery and have so far offered me the best price on a Golf R.

Thanks again Phil Fairhall.

See pics in the WJ Suspension Thread here:


ROUND 2
THE RE-MATCH OF GTI -V- R:

http://www.vwwatercooled.org.au/f112...-45833-53.html


ROUND 3
GOLF GTI -V- RENAULT MEGANE RS250

http://www.vwwatercooled.org.au/f112...45833-121.html

[Sharkie]

A mating of the EA888 motor and the 4motion AWD system actually do exist already James ..... Can be found in the VW Tiguans ....

[Corey_R]

Thanks for the review WJ.
I pretty much agree with your review until the conclusion. I'd buy the Golf R for all of those things. Although it has low down lag, it DOES have more power and it does have better outright acceleration. The motor IS quieter and more refined, and in addition, I think it also sounds better when you are giving it some stick. The Golf R for it's AWD? Of course, that is one of its main attractions - if you're saying no to that, then why look at the R at all? Stick with the GTI.

It's especially important when you have the 'chipped' debates. A GTI chipped alone is still perfectly driveable with it's standard suspension/brakes and the FWD (if you respect the throttle pedal in weather and on the corners). If you were to take it any further, the brakes, suspension and FWD start becoming liabilities. The suspension and brakes you can upgrade - although changing either one of them will quickly diminsh the saving you had. You obviously can't change the FWD issue, and as you noted, you can also do little to gain the balance that the Golf R does (although maybe some of that could be compensated by good suspension tuning).
But the Golf R chipped will go much further than the GTI can without at least changing to the K04 turbo - which would then give all the negatives to the GTI that you mentioned with the R in relation to low rev lag. The Golf R already has the brakes and suspension to handle that extra power and torque and take it in its stride.

[Glennb]

Does the APR Stg 1 chip bring the torque curve of the EA113 K04 motor down into the lower revs? Or just boost the torque at the same point?
Good write up WJ.

[iBoost]

Thanks for the detailed review WJ, always good to hear your insights.

I think for the money the GTI with an APR tune is great value and sounds like it gives 95% of the thrills for less outlay. I also prefer the GTI styling over the R, but who knows, maybe I'll upgrade to an R in a few years.

[G-rig]

Very comprehensive review WJ, sounds like you are mainly paying for the mid corner grip with the R. I test drove an R yesterday too, albeit a short spin not a good circuit test. The extra lag was quite apparent and the acceleration wasn't overwhelming as you suggested. There's no doubt that it's very balanced compared to the R32 and quite composed in nature leading me to believe it's still somewhat of a tourer. My APR GTI still felt quicker and more lively.

Big question is are you getting one? I agree with iBoost that the GTI is good enough around town and also like the styling with the 18" detroits. An R would be great just not sure if the extra spend gives you that many more thrills. If you track your car sure, would be worth it.

Purchased my GTI from Phil Fairhall and he's very good to deal with!

[Corey_R]

Does the APR Stg 1 chip bring the torque curve of the EA113 K04 motor down into the lower revs? Or just boost the torque at the same point?
Good write up WJ.

It gives both more torque and power at lower RPMs, although how low we can't really tell as the graph only starts at 2500rpm:


However, I would say that the GTI will always have better torque under 2000rpm - there is no getting around the fact that a larger turbo needs higher rpm's to spin up. So it's the compromise you have.... GTI has torque from low RPMs and then runs out of steam a bit in high RPMs. R needs a few more RPMs to get started but then keeps on trucking...

[goodfella]

WhiteJames... fantastic rightup! Almost more enjoyable than any recent AAP magazine's input, actually better because its FREE!!

You did mention that your still running in your car but given the R only had 150 on the clock, it should loosen up in the longrun therefore change characteristics on accel and mid range, but this is an unsubstantiated opinion only.

It'll be interesting do see some other direct comparo's between Mk5 R32/Mk6 R/Mk5 GTI/Mk6 GTI and possibly with other tuned variants there of.

[240z]

I had a look at the R when i picked up my gti during the week and personally I think the gti looks a lot better, I took the gti for a drive through the reefton spur in the wet yesterday and I couldn't be happier, it drove great. Maybe I would look at an R if it was the same price but for around an extra 10k for the r I'm very happy with my purchase.