Golf R -v- Golf GTI

[REXman]

Similar thing with the top of the motor re: strength. Cost cutting does not mean cutting on quality materials, but making the motor build process simplified.



Cheers
WJ

I agree the one does not mean the other. Like the interiors for example.. Some say that the MKVI was supposed to be a cost cutting excercise, but according to many publications (and some owners) the MKVI has the better made and better presented interior. I agree after sitting in an MK V.

In saying that, its the beauty of the MK V that got me onto/into Golfs and VW.. never glanced at them for a second, before that beautful piece of automobile .

[triode12]

In the past couple of weeks we have learnt why VW (and Audi) don't use the new "EA888" motor for any of their "top end" performance models (Golf R & S3, Scirocco R) nor do they use it for Motorsport.

Apart from internal strength (the FSI motor is stronger), the oil delivery system & the "separate" oil sump on the new motor will not cope with reasonable G forces & supply oil to the bearings.

I'm sure this will be addressed in future generations of the motor.

SO the older 113 engine is stronger! The rumours were right after all.
I wonder if certain MKVI GTI owners (who have been putting down the 113 engine) will eat their words now.

[triode12]

I still have to disagree on this point and everyone is entitled to their opinion. Better presented perhaps (more bling) but not better made - the quality of the plastic is IMO of a lower grade and rattles still plague the new car.

I agree the one does not mean the other. Like the interiors for example.. Some say that the MKVI was supposed to be a cost cutting excercise, but according to many publications (and some owners) the MKVI has the better made and better presented interior. I agree after sitting in an MK V.

In saying that, its the beauty of the MK V that got me onto/into Golfs and VW.. never glanced at them for a second, before that beautful piece of automobile .

[WhiteJames]

Speaking of environmental creditials - Green Car Congress on sustainable mobility indicates that it takes 1.2 seconds for the EA888 KO3 turbo to spool to max torque as opposed to 1.7 seconds for the KO3 in the EA113 motor. This relates back to the four lobe cam, new Bosch fuel pump, new six hole injectors in addition to having the manifold incorporated into the turbo on the EA888 motor. This is evident in how the EA888 motor in the GTI manages to cover 80-120kph sprint to within 0.2 secs of the Golf R and EVO X. That's without variable cam lift tech. See link:

Green Car Congress: Audi Expands Application of the 1.8 TFSI Engine to the A4 and A5 Lines

A water-cooled type K03 turbocharger manufactured by Borg Warner charges the cylinders. Its turbine housing is integrated together with the elbow in a single module made of high-alloy grey cast iron. An optimized turbine wheel improves the response characteristics at lower engine speeds. At an engine speed of 2000 rpm, the 1.8 TFSI needs just 1.2 seconds to build up its peak torque of 250 Nm. The predecessor engine, a 1.8-liter unit with manifold injection, needed 1.7 seconds to develop its 225 Nm.

Cheers
WJ

[WhiteJames]

The new EA888 TSI motor is designed to have the bore and piston/piston rings expand at the same rate to ensure that one doesn't wear the other out. This can be a problem with aftermarket engine builders that put in super hard rings, only to find that the bore linning is too soft, or vice versa. Audi worked in conjunction with steel mills to find the best combination of bore metal and piston/piston ring material to ensure both heat up and cool down at the same rate. This should ensure longevity of the EA888 motor.

Cheers
WJ

[WhiteJames]

Reading an article from Top Gear recently which indicates how the Volkswagen/Audi group will go about cost cutting. Due to their stronger purchasing power, which covers over 10 different brand names, VAG have purchased a super-jig machine capable of making up to 30 different chassis types - this includes transverse and longitudinal layouts (I.e. VW/Skoda - Audi). It has been suggested that VAG will be able to make vehicles up to 20 percent cheaper than the likes of BMW, Mercedes, etc. The 20% saving will be divided up into thirds: 1/3 on interior quality; 1/3 on price reduction; and 1/3 profit to VAG. This is already evident in the cheaper price for the Polo and Golf R in comparison to other makes of vehicle of similar type. This is in addition to improving the build time and process in developing VAG vehicles and motors - not neccessarily cost cutting.

Cheers
WJ

[G-rig]

I still have to disagree on this point and everyone is entitled to their opinion. Better presented perhaps (more bling) but not better made - the quality of the plastic is IMO of a lower grade and rattles still plague the new car.

Jester_Fu summed it up well on MKV:

The cost of the MkV was because the design guys were basically left to their own devices - no consultation with the production guys. The MkVI was redesigned with optimising assembly and production in mind = production letting the design guys know what needed to be changed to optimise the build process. That isn't quite the same as 'building to a budget' as that could just mean using cheaper materials and removing things. My understanding is the overall brief was to bring the cost of manufacture down without reducing quality of build.

We'll see in a couple of years, but all reports are the MkVI is a much better put together car than the MkV. It's just a shame it took VW so long to decide to make the changes, IMO. I wouldn't say the loss changing from a MkV to a MkVI was worth the improvements either - the MkV is still an excellent car.

[WhiteJames]

See link: EA888 2.0 litire TSI Self Study Program

http://www.arinahnell.com/other/vw/tech/20tsi.pdf

Includes colour pictures.

Cheers
WJ

[Guy_H]

Just completed 25 laps of lakeside raceway in both the GTI & Golf R (25 laps each) on R spec tyres, stock oil systems. GTI used 3 litres of oil, the R used none. - Apart from that both cars were fantastic and ran within .3 seconds of each other.

The extra weight of the Golf R bought it back to the lighter, less powerful GTI.

Both cars stage 3 mind you, not standard.

[G-rig]

That's a great comparison Guy, having the Stage 3 cars with similar upgrades.

Sounds like the AWD isn't a huge benefit with the extra weight, but always thought that was the case.

How differently do they drive? Assume that the R is more composed and easier to drive/less of a handful?

3L of oil is quite a bit isn't it? I don't track mine but interesting none the less.