Polo R getting closer

[Corey_R]

I understand the point of a car, but just because it's all of that, isn't an excuse for a ****ty engine. The power is fine... it's the lack of torque and fact that it's at 6600 rpm which is stupid

[Tim]

I disagree. There is something really cool about driving a car that you need to wring its neck to get the best out of it. Makes it more of an event. Especially if it makes all the right noises.
Judging how good a car will be without having driven it is just stupid.

[gavs]

That's what I thought when driving the Civic Type R up the tourist road, VTEc etc, 9000rpm I thought was cool. But then, when trying to really accelerate uphill without any torque to pull you along, it's just rubbish. Awesome on a flat windy road or downhill, not so crash uphill. But, I agree with Tim. You can't rubbish a car without having driven it.

[Corey_R]

I disagree. There is something really cool about driving a car that you need to wring its neck to get the best out of it.

Wringing a cars neck on a track maybe... or if you're breaking the law on the streets. It's like the Corolla Sportivo with its 2L 147kw motor a few years back. By the time it got to the "power band" in 2nd gear, you were already over 80km/h, making it useless for anything but track work or breaking the law. Worse still (and a complaint that the Celica with the same engine shared) was that the powerband was so small, once you'd changed gears, you were below the powerband and had almost "old fashioned turbo lag" until the revs picked up again. After being a Toyota owner for 10 years, and test driving the Sportivo, I kept on saving and bought my first VW instead. I've no intention of even considering the GT86 whilst it has a motor such as it is being advertised to.

Give me torque from 1500rpm any day

I mean, it's not like the GT86 is an 800kg car either... it's still ~1250kg...

That's what I thought when driving the Civic Type R up the tourist road, VTEc etc, 9000rpm I thought was cool. But then, when trying to really accelerate uphill without any torque to pull you along, it's just rubbish.

Yeah, that's another good point

[Hail22]

If only this becomes a reality...humana humana

[pologti18t]

Not my point, the point of the car, which is handling and balance. It's not meant to be a Supra. There's plenty of alternatives with more grunt, but not many with the low weight, RWD and low low low centre of gravity of this thing.

There is the Mazda MX5. Been around for 20+yrs. It's all sweetness and lightness but owners invariably complain in the end about not enough power. My friend made sure he got a MX5 SP with the turbo engine. It makes the car a joy (150kw, 280Nm) to drive in ALL situations.

[Buller_Scott]

Wringing a cars neck on a track maybe... or if you're breaking the law on the streets. .... making it useless for anything but track work or breaking the law.

sorry, but i cannot reconcile this school of thought in my mind. i recently encountered the same argument on carsales news - "why are you talking about a megane obliterating a v8 ford on the great ocean road? grow up and stop breaking the law"...

especially on this forum, i find this argument redundant as... how many stage two cars are there in here? oh, a golf R / GTI isnt good enough, so let's just spank it up to stage 1+ and put megabuck almost-but-just-shy-of R spec tyres on it, so that we can... "not break the law". stage two, so that we can get to 60kmh in 3.5 seconds but then that's where it stops. seeing as we're "not breaking the law", those almost-R-spec tyres and Bilstein Pss10's will come in mighty handy when going for a drive in the hills, sticking to the 35kmh around corners as suggested by the street signs.

reminds me of people in the old polo forum who would log their 0-100 times, even showing videos of their acceleration, but saying "these are my times, i dont want to know about yours unless it was done on the safety of a private track".. funny how many of us have friends with private tracks, 3 lanes wide, median strips and median reflectors installed, and 10m high street lamps. what a crock.

nothing against anyone on here nor there opinions, but these are mine. i love torque, dont get me wrong... but there are cars out there whose handling advantages will exceed other cars' torque advantages in the hills (polo 77tsi is one of them - no problems, in tight bends, keeping up with mk5 r32's, chipped gti golf etc - i dont care to read the doubts of naysayers, either - anyone in vic who has driven with dan77tsi, will know that this is true).

[Corey_R]

Well to clarify, my point was that with any of the cars you mentioned (polo's, golf's, meganes etc), you have engines which gives fun amounts of power AND torque in ALL conditions, so whether I'm accelerating from 30 to 60, or faster, it's great. Unlike these silly torqueless Japanese engines of late which have no torque and only good power from 6600 to 7000 which then equates to 80 to 90km/h in 2nd gear. You're right about the Polo 77TSI etc, our one is great. Anyway... I'll stick to my turbo euro cars

[dubmc]

thought i would chime in on this one...a good friend of mine had a sportivo, great car..if you intend on ripping burnouts and speeding everywhere as it was pretty much useless otherwise...the high power band and the sound it made, made it hard not to drive it on the revlimiter...

but i also think cars with low/mid-range torque not only make it much more driveable on the street but better for racing and punching out of corners...i adjusted the cam on my mk1 to bring the powerband down from about 3500/4000rpm to 2500rpm...got better fuel consumption, better times and more fun to drive as a daily...

[Buller_Scott]

Well to clarify, my point was that with any of the cars you mentioned (polo's, golf's, meganes etc), you have engines which gives fun amounts of power AND torque in ALL conditions, so whether I'm accelerating from 30 to 60, or faster, it's great. Unlike these silly torqueless Japanese engines of late which have no torque and only good power from 6600 to 7000 which then equates to 80 to 90km/h in 2nd gear. You're right about the Polo 77TSI etc, our one is great. Anyway... I'll stick to my turbo euro cars

absolutely. and quite frankly, a couple of "tdiclub.com" mods have given me the ability to ''putter'' along in crayphaus melbourne traffic at ludicrously low revs just fine... but the power TORQUE is there when i need it (steve mcqueen, was it? i forget)

i find myself looking stupid, as i agree with most of the sentiments on here - get caught out of torque, go home. my diesel has torque - conveniently, most of the corners in the hills here in VIC, see me just etching at peak torque whilst others might be struggling for gears.

i cannot stand the idea of a.... and these are my words... ''pathetic'' attempt at an engine whereby you're isht outta luck for 90% of the rev range...

but god damn........ drive a.. ehem... french car from a particular marque... around a few bends. GAME OVER.

this, in spite of my enduring VW loyalty.

once again, i hope i didnt offend anyone... i like these kind of discussions, however i honestly feel that the running in is a hugely important part of the process (baby it = lose, try to murder it once warm = win according to evo magazine dyno tests).