Support VWWC

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: RS vs GTI - New Top Gear Aus Magazine

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    323
    Users Country Flag

    How can you compare a hot hatch with a sedan? Those guys are idiots. Next thing we will see is a Porsche Carrera 911 4S against a Range Rover, "they both have advanced 4WD systems yet the Porsche seems unable to climb the same rocky inclines the good old Ranger can. You can't help but feel the Carrera is out of it's depths here in the Scottish Highlands."

    Bloody geniuses those motoring journos are!

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    267
    Honestly. Having owned a MkV GTI and now owning my RS, no one could convince me the RS is a better drive. It is more practical, but it does not perform as well, or as charismatically. The GTI is a brilliant car, and from all reports, the MkVI is even better, if not dramatically.

    Anyone who gets upset by an article like this needs to understand that the RS simply will never be as good as the GTI. In making it a family car with sporting abilities, compromises had to be made. Fact is, it is longer and heavier that the GTI which will change some of its handling abilities. It is also more softly suspended. It does not drive as well at 7/10ths, or above, as the GTI. That does not make it a bad car. It is immensely capable, amazingly practical and built better, albeit with less quality plastics.

    In my opinion, it has better front end grip than the GTI up until the suspension is tested by any imperfections in the road. Then it feels a lot less composed. Advantage of the RS is that the car rides better around town and when travelling and it has bulk cargo space.

    As the guy from mentone said, they arent direct competitors anyway, so stress not. It also is not as good as a Cayman S, but that is more apples and oranges. Dont confuse the existence of a hatch with eligibility for 'hot hatch' status.

    I only sold my GTI for my family. I dont regret it, but there is a hole in my car life where the GTI was which can never be filled by the RS. I can say, however, that I could not go back to the limited space of the GTI after having the luxury of the Skoda's immense boot. I do want another GTI in a few years time, but as a secondary car.

    The fact that the article says they feel similar, recognising they are in the same ball park, is a very flattering statement that any RS owner should take some pride in. Second place to the GTI is not bad.
    Euro look 2... Mk2 love!

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Sydney, NSW
    Posts
    918
    Tbh this article really pissed me off. It went through all the performance details of the GTI and then compared the RS, which with it's heavier/bigger body, is of course going to be slower than a GTI. Especially when the Mk 6 is on the newer-gen platform. They didn't mention the fact that the RS has a MUCH bigger boot, more space, it's MUCH better value (you'd have to spend at least $50k to get an RS specification) and it's a Skoda, meaning it has better reliability.

    But I SEVERELY doubt many people are gonna compare the GTI and RS in looking for a new car so meh
    Last edited by Jake02; 16-03-2010 at 09:09 PM.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Illawarra NSW
    Posts
    568
    Build a bridge, and feel smug in the knowledge you have a car that fits your needs better and you dont have anything to prove. If your happy who gives two hoots what some journo says.
    2014 MY14 Corrida Red Elegance Wagon TDI
    2009 MY10 Race Blue RS Wagon TSI 6 sp. manual. (Gone)
    2011 MY12 Yeti 77 TSI DSG.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Northfield, Adelaide
    Posts
    295
    Users Country Flag
    I couldn't care less, I'm not even compelled to read the article, I'm happy with what I own and dont care what the next bloke is driving or what any journo has to say.
    I can understand why they did the comparison considering they run the same engines I assume and some similar componentry, then why not compare them, I assume it's not a "which is a better sedan" or which is a better hatch comparison is it??

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Victoria
    Posts
    1,981
    The Golf GTI is about as attractive to me to purchase as a Hyundai Getz it's simply not the size and shape of car I want regardless of how well it performs so to me comparisons are irrelevant. To others they may be and that is something that motoring journalists have to try to second guess when they do comparison tests. Just read the test with an open mind then forget it and get on with life.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    ACT
    Posts
    515
    Users Country Flag
    I test drove the GTI around the same time and was lucky enough to get a good long drive where i found some less than perfect roads.. This is where the vRS always eats up the GTI. The different weight ballance and more suited to Australian roads suspension in the vRS along with the imense space made it a no brainer to me..

    Dont get me wrong.. love the GTI and admire the car allot, but i know i found it to be nearly as twitchy in the rear end as my Supercharged 2003 Cooper S was.
    You just dont get any twitchyness with a vRS wagon.. its imensely forgiving. I guess thats due to the fact that the Czech Republic roads are as average as ours here in Aus, and therefore the different engineering specs work well here.
    GTI Perfect on Perfect roads.. vRS Better in the real world of Australian roads.

  8. #18
    The only comparison that really matters is the one you did when you bought your car. If reading an article like this makes you "angry" or other words to that affect, then surely that means it makes you feel bad about the decision you made? Why?

    I don't have a family, yet I still chose the RS. I tested pretty much everything in the segment - from GTis (and Jetta 147s) to MPSs to XR5s, and the RS, in my opinion came out on top. I don't care what any motoring journalist says, the RS is the best car out of all of them. For me. That's the great bit too - I can't be wrong. If the best car for someone is a Hyundai Getz, then great for them. They probably have a very big house, or donate plentifully to charity. Or whatever. The important thing is that when shopping for a new car, people should try everything (that's the fun part anyway!), and make up their own mind, and with a review like this, they might just try the RS. They'll try the GTi, go "that was fun", but then maybe "hmm...it's a bit small", or whatever, then "I read that comparison the other day, maybe I should look up the nearest Škoda dealer". Then if they choose the RS...that makes it better than the GTi. For them.

    Also, for me, I like the fact that Škoda isn't Volkswagen. It's all about sibling rivalry. The "little brother" always tries harder to impress, to stand out. Škoda will put more effort into their cars than VW ever would. VW know they make great cars and that people love them and as such could become complacent and rest on their laurels. Maybe this is beginning to show in the build quality and reliability (or lake there of) of VW stock. Škoda want you to think that about them too, so try twice as hard. Just my theory, but personally I'm glad I'm not driving a VW.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Bathurst, NSW
    Posts
    542
    Quote Originally Posted by selurs View Post
    The only comparison that really matters is the one you did when you bought your car.
    Too true, which is why it amazes me when people buy cars after a trip around the block with the dealer. But I suppose some people just see cars as a way to get to the shops.

    Anyhow, I think any review in Top Gear or Motor needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Neither magazine have ever pretended that they judge cars primarily on their functionality and liveability. While they will mention the highlights and lowlights, most of their scoring is based on how well it drives at 9 or 10/10ths (which IMO is fair enough if you understand the magazine you are buying). The GTI is definitely more performance based, so driven in anger, I would expect it to come out on top. The latest motor magazine laments the poor lowspeed road quality of the GTI without its optional adaptive chassis control (one of the great inventions are the long-term reviews the magazines do now as it brings out liveability problems not found when they are thrashing them through a mountain pass).

    This is why I read the letters to the editor in those mags, "how dare you rubbish XYZ, have you even driven it"... makes me laugh I enjoy the tribalism cars whip up!

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Bathurst, NSW
    Posts
    542

    http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/Ar...eID=69079&vf=2

    OK -I find that one a bit harder to understand. In all the points they make, they seem disappointed with the Subaru, but praise the Scout and it seems the only photos they have are of the Subaru.... I'd say maybe the Scout didn't look good enough, but... its the new Subaru, the only beauty contest it would win is one against the Stavic...

    I'm crying "paid advertisement".
    Last edited by bobski; 18-03-2010 at 05:04 PM.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
| |