Golf R -v- Golf GTI

[REXman]

The 2nd-gen MPS appears to have addressed this issue. Buuuuut, it's not by improving the suspension or drive-train, it's simply by limiting the torque accessible in lower gears.

Actually it's got a super LSD in it now. It also has revised gearbox, that include wider gear ratios, triple syncs on 1st, 2nd and 3rd, an improved and stiffened chassis over the older gen, it also has a brand new suspension set up in it with Mac struts and thicker sway bars. Wider tires..

http://www.gkndriveline.com/drivelin...3_MPS_-_EN.pdf

[AdamD]

Actually it's got a super LSD in it now. It also has revised gearbox, that include wider gear ratios, triple syncs on 1st, 2nd and 3rd, an improved and stiffened chassis over the older gen, it also has a brand new suspension set up in it with Mac struts and thicker sway bars. Wider tires.

The 3 MPS certainly represents awesome bang for your buck. Pity it looks the way it does (inside and out) - I could never part with $40k for something that looks so ugly! The 1st gen was such a nice looking sleeper too...

I tend to think of the 3 MPS as a car that would appeal to the stereotypical WRX buyer - big performance at the expense of some refinement and quality. In that respect I don't see the GTI or R as playing in the same market.

[REXman]

The 3 MPS certainly represents awesome bang for your buck.

Thats very true, it is a solid performing car. Like I said, even as a fan of VW, credit where its due. Its an excellent performing, and well made package. It simply blows away a GTI in the straight line performance category, so it has to be pretty good!

I tend to think of the 3 MPS as a car that would appeal to the stereotypical WRX buyer - big performance at the expense of some refinement and quality.

Well again the GTI has refinement and is nice inside, but it does have a rattle, that is clearly not an engineering marvel at the best of times and on some peoples cars is terribly annoying. The cars also have had there fair share of problems like most mass produced cars I guess.

And on a separate note, (a lot of people might not agree with this),a stereotypical WRX buyer is actually not a young 21 y.o with chains and hiphop blaring. There is actually a lot of people who buy a car like that, (that can actually afford a $45K brand new car) and are not necessarily like that. A lot of old guys, and women bought these cars. Its the aftermarket once they are 10 years old that attracts the "other" bad bad people.

In that respect I don't see the GTI or R as playing in the same market.

The GTI and the R are not in the same market either If you think like that.

And I dont think you forgo much, actual quality or refinement. Its definitely no chalk and cheese situation like the performance? It more an issue of brand image.

The more your in the know of car values, the better. People who dont know might be very impressed by the 2003 BMW 330CI Convertible that rocks past leaving some thinking, how well off the owner might be.. But they think nothing of the sort when they see the 2005 STI rock past - even though they are worth the same money!

I value opinions that are good calls, like when you said the car was ugly - that is subjective and I have no right or view on your opinion there, more than fair enough. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. As for the brands, I would also say VW is more prestigious.

But refinement, power, features etc.. It pretty tight with a GTI.

The GTI, I tend to see compared with the WRX, Ralliart, Renault Clio Sport, Mazda MPS.. And the GTI normally wins as the all rounder! (But dont forget the testers dont live with the Rattles)

The R is different beast altogether hence it being compared to different cars, and not being as heavily discounted as the GTI.

[AdamD]

[A] stereotypical WRX buyer is actually not a young 21 y.o with chains and hiphop blaring. There is actually a lot of people who buy a car like that, (that can actually afford a $45K brand new car) and are not necessarily like that. A lot of old guys, and women bought these cars. Its the aftermarket once they are 10 years old that attracts the "other" bad bad people.

I think you're right there - certainly for the new car purchases. But that's what differentiates the stereotypical WRX buyer (the image, if you will) from the actual WRX buyer.

And I dont think you forgo much, actual quality or refinement. Its definitely no chalk and cheese situation like the performance? It more an issue of brand image.

This, too, then is somewhat subjective. The ways I assess quality may well differ fundamentally from how you or others may. Let's take rattles as an example - I hate rattles, but have heard them in cheap and very expensive cars alike (while I've also lived with at least one Commodore that was rattle-free), and therefore don't equate the presence of rattles as a key indicator of poor quality. I look at things like panel gaps, interior plastics finishes, paint finish, NVH, structural flex, the "thunk" of a door closing solidly, etc etc, when making up my mind. In areas like these, the Golfs have comprehensively outperformed the competition in my assessment.

And as an aside - every WRX I've driven or been driven in has rattled, and has felt flimsy and comparatively "cheap", even though I know the engineering is sound and they've gone like cut cats.

The R is different beast altogether hence it being compared to different cars, and not being as heavily discounted as the GTI.

I actually don't see the R as all that different, to be honest. I think the GTI and R are for different buyers and do suit different requirements, but because they share that same solid base (according to my assessment of quality, style, refinement), but just differ in terms of the degree and flavour of performance, both appeal to me, whereas a WRX, 3 MPS or RenaultSport Clio (to name but three) don't even get a look in.

I'm not for a moment suggesting my opinion is right for anyone other than me, however, so please don't interpret this post as a "you're wrong, I'm right" rant.

[SilvrFoxX]

I actually don't see the R as all that different, to be honest. I think the GTI and R are for different buyers and do suit different requirements, but because they share that same solid base (according to my assessment of quality, style, refinement), but just differ in terms of the degree and flavour of performance, both appeal to me, whereas a WRX, 3 MPS or RenaultSport Clio (to name but three) don't even get a look in.

Yup.. different buyers alright .. GTI screams " I am under 40..." R Screams " I am over 40".. which I have no issue with as I am over 40 and getting an R...

[Pepe]

Yup.. different buyers alright .. GTI screams " I am under 40..." R Screams " I am over 40".. which I have no issue with as I am over 40 and getting an R...

Erm... as early 30s, I take offence to that Seriously, from the outside, there are so many combos of colours/wheels for the R that the scale ranges from very conservative to fairly agressive looking. Pretty sure my Blue/Black combo is on the later end of that scale.

[dave_r]

Where do you guys come up with this stuff? I'd love to smoke some of the **** you're on!

[Corey_R]

Where do you guys come up with this stuff? I'd love to smoke some of the **** you're on!

Lol... that's what I've been thinking Well... not the me smoking part

[REXman]

Hahahahahahahaahhaaah (small laugh wasn't allowed {haha})

[SilvrFoxX]

heh... just marketing really..