Golf 40th vs Golf R

[Billecartz]

LOL James nice try, however the performance of the top track-focused FWDs like the Cupra/Clubsport, Megane RS, Type-R has been many validated on the biggest track of all, the 'Ring, (in fact more like a real country road than an actual, perfect track making the performance there even more representative of real-life performance) as well as several other tracks, it is better than an R and naturally so, let's please not argue again on that. It can't be questioned not matter how many traction-biased 0-60 times or wet conditions tests (as in that Autotrader video) you quote. You are yet again confusing traction with performance.

When I saw that vid back in May it sounded very promising because it would be a great opportunity to put up all these cars against each other on a track and see how they do. Yet they conducted the track test part on a wet track rendering all times invalid and prohibiting any useful conclusions to be made. What possible conclusion you may arrive to when putting a FWD/RWD against an AWD in the wet? Might as well have tested them on snow... See how the M135i is also slower on that day than the Golf R when in fact it's know to be a faster car. Based on your reasoning (slower lap time = car's limit) one could state "this is how much power you may put through a RWD", but you do understand, I hope, how that sounds?

Furthermore, I wonder whether I'm the weird guy and if everybody else does otherwise. Like, on a rainy day/slippery conditions, does everybody else think "oh now today's a great day to take the car out for a fast spin and see how fast it can actually go" while on a sunny/dry day they think "I better stay in or at least drive sensibly?" Ok, maybe in the UK it rains 367 days/year but that's a bit like saying that if you live in mud and boots make you run faster through mud, they would also make you run faster on track, compared to runner's shoes....

I mean come on, if we want to be serious the minimum requirements to evaluate any sports/super/hyper car's potential/performance is at least dry conditions and some piece of half-decent tarmac. Have you ever read, in any review: "we had to wait for the track test because unfortunately it kept being sunny for 2 days... Then when heavy rain came the 3rd day we had the perfect chance to test the car" ??? No, but you must have read the exact opposite. Ever thought why?

Ringo, agree with you 100%. Not sure what WhiteJames is on sometimes?

[ringo]

Ringo, agree with you 100%. Not sure what WhiteJames is on sometimes?

Are you saying you also don't go out drive the nuts out of your car when it's wet and save it for the next day that it's dry? Ok that makes it two of us, how awkward...

I am also wondering whether I made the right choice right now as a few posts in this thread suggested that today's benchmark for a sports car's performance is how good it is at drag-racing and at bad road conditions, and even if I understand that for some (minors presumably?) this might be important I personally consider challenging someone or being challenged at traffic lights one of the dumbest things out there on a public road.

As for the the latest argument (wet/ice performance) I must have picked that from my off-road forums browsing, can't be the case with performance cars right?

[Bassik]

I honestly think the statement was just based on that video and nothing else. We all know that the R would out preform in the wet due to it's AWD. I guess in terms and don't judge me but whenever it is wet outside I do tend to drive my car a tad more aggressively and that's only because I lose traction and it's fun, dangerous yes, but easier. On a perfect sunny day it's just like any other normal day right, which is typical here in Oz? So a difference in weather adds variation to the road. I'm not taking sides i'm just stating that it's like a surfer can ride a wave on a normal sunny day but when the surfs up and it's gale winds, it's considered "to dangerous, they take that opportunity to surf. Living on the edge some would say. If you're testing a car in the wet your testing it's limits but that's for safety reasons.

That video should have had it's tests on dry roads otherwise yes it's totally invalid but as you mention it does rain a lot in the UK and geez most of the car reviews I see from there it appears to always be raining. I guess they can't just setup for another day due to costs and what not. I have no idea but I would take that review with a grain of salt. Are we also forgetting tires, drivers experience. These all come into effect as well??

[ringo]

I honestly think the statement was just based on that video and nothing else. We all know that the R would out preform in the wet due to it's AWD. I guess in terms and don't judge me but whenever it is wet outside I do tend to drive my car a tad more aggressively and that's only because I lose traction and it's fun, dangerous yes, but easier. On a perfect sunny day it's just like any other normal day right, which is typical here in Oz? So a difference in weather adds variation to the road. I'm not taking sides i'm just stating that it's like a surfer can ride a wave on a normal sunny day but when the surfs up and it's gale winds, it's considered "to dangerous, they take that opportunity to surf. Living on the edge some would say. If you're testing a car in the wet your testing it's limits but that's for safety reasons.

That video should have had it's tests on dry roads otherwise yes it's totally invalid but as you mention it does rain a lot in the UK and geez most of the car reviews I see from there it appears to always be raining. I guess they can't just setup for another day due to costs and what not. I have no idea but I would take that review with a grain of salt. Are we also forgetting tires, drivers experience. These all come into effect as well??

That was certainly not my interpretation especially with a title: "this is how much power you can get through an FWD" (unless I have trouble understanding the language). There was no direct relation whatsoever with the Autotrader's test and the max power you can put down in a FWD in general. I've seen tuned FWDs way near the 400bhp mark and they are participating on local championships without issues, in fact with great results against similar RWD and AWDs. And the comment about how an R smacked a Cupra implied superior performance avoiding to confine it to the aforementioned conditions though, so it might have resulted in the wrong conclusions.

I don't know what's the whole matter really. Nobody denied the AWD's better traction but seems as if that isn't enough for (some) R owners/fans and we somehow must accept also better performance under all conditions, when this is contrary to both personal experiences and track tests/lap times for the cars in question. I'm a bit bored at this point, and definitely not in a crusade to explain to anyone what does real fast driving mean (at least to me and a couple (or more) of others is not related to mindlessly flooring the pedal though), or what driving characteristics and dynamics of a car are all about. Let alone start personal fights (too old for that). Whatever makes anyone happy is the best for him and good luck with your choice!

By the way, I've seen and read some of the greatest car reviews done in the UK, but on proper dry roads. It's not as if they're unable to get good testing conditions, rarer than continental Europe and Australia maybe but most serious mags don't even bother publish a performance car's review without decent road conditions so those track times are for me a complete failure on behalf of them to attract the enthusiast audience. Honestly Autotrader is not the first name that comes to mind when I'm thinking "driver's magazine" but anyway.

[Bassik]

I'm not even sure what the topic is now? I got confused 5 posts back lol. It's clear to me differences between the two cars so I guess people who haven't been following this thread are just having their 2 cents.

One comment I have to make is you yourself haven't even test driven a CS yet, am I right? Having said that your knowledge on its capabilities are pretty spot on. I'm surprised but not surprised you still bought it.

Have fun when you get it ringo


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ringo]

One comment I have to make is you yourself haven't even test driven a CS yet, am I right? Having said that your knowledge on its capabilities are pretty spot on. I'm surprised but not surprised you still bought it.

Have fun when you get it ringo


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

No I hadn't driven it at the time of the order, not sure there is a possibility even now, 3 months later. Couple of dealerships didn't offer any for a test-drive even though one of them had one on sale. I had test-driven extensively the brother Cupra though with which they are very similar in terms of driving behavior and I knew that was what I was after dynamically, but probably not in the SEAT package.

So I had to do my search. Apart from all the technical similarities between the Cupra and Clubsport, shared components in suspension, drivetrain and overall setup all reviews from both journalists and actual owners (I usually take these more seriously) suggested that the characteristics of agility, feed-back and sharpness were all there and all amplified compared to a GTI or an R. That matched the car's driving profile that I was looking for and hopefully will soon be in a position to confirm first hand.

[Bassik]

No I hadn't driven it at the time of the order, not sure there is a possibility even now, 3 months later. Couple of dealerships didn't offer any for a test-drive even though one of them had one on sale. I had test-driven extensively the brother Cupra though with which they are very similar in terms of driving behavior and I knew that was what I was after dynamically, but probably not in the SEAT package.

So I had to do my search. Apart from all the technical similarities between the Cupra and Clubsport, shared components in suspension, drivetrain and overall setup all reviews from both journalists and actual owners (I usually take these more seriously) suggested that the characteristics of agility, feed-back and sharpness were all there and all amplified compared to a GTI or an R. That matched the car's driving profile that I was looking for and hopefully will soon be in a position to confirm first hand.

When does it arrive? Can't wait to hear you actual thoughts. No doubt you'll be off this site and driving it.

[ringo]

When does it arrive? Can't wait to hear you actual thoughts. No doubt you'll be off this site and driving it.

I don't have a confirmed delivery yet, but 2-3 weeks is what I expect.

[Billecartz]

I don't have a confirmed delivery yet, but 2-3 weeks is what I expect.

I am sure you will love it, very much a sharper tool than a normal GTI and more nimble than an R with the same sort of noises

[ringo]

I am sure you will love it, very much a sharper tool than a normal GTI and more nimble than an R with the same sort of noises

I've been without a proper fast car for over 3 months now and for someone like me that's a lot of time, so you can imagine how I'm feeling... Would you say it's significantly louder than the R? (if louder at all)