Mk7 Golf R Discussion Thread

[Paul_R]

this is my quick idea of how the front bumper could have been more aggressive with out being too aggressive IMO

Getting rid of the horizontal bar is a definite. What's it look like with the vertical left as is, or even turning it out more than you have already done? Also, putting the DRLs back down there would help. I wonder why they are all being incorporated in to the headlights these days?

[Dutch77]

Something similar to the early internet mock ups which were just using the mk6 design definitely end up looking more aggressive, but I think the wheel design plays a part in that as well.

[fletcher]

the amg a45 has 19" wheels for oz, this didn,t affect the 6.9l/100km average consumption. fletch

[Mikey1]

On the S3, it's 6.9 ltr/100km on the S-tronic (DSG) and 7.0 ltr/100km on the manual, so the 7.1 ltr/100km is manual or DSG Golf R?

Combined fuel consumption specification for the Golf R DSG is 7.1l/100kms (0.2 km/l above Euro spec) and 7.3l/100kms (0.2 km/l above Euro spec) for the Golf R manual. The comparable Audi S3 Sportback figures for both European and Australian markets are the same as per Longy's quote, but to me this doesn't acknowledge the fact we receive a detuned version of the Euro spec engine, and I would think the fuel consumption can't be exactly the same in each category which makes up the combined figures. Because of this possible anomaly, Audi have a marketing advantage because its S3 is now pushed up into a higher LCT threshold.

It could well be the 19inch wheels on the Golf. Maybe a reason the S3 doesn't offer a 19inch option.

Audi will not permit the S3 to be fitted with the 19 inch wheel option, which is available for the sedan version, for the simple reason there isn't enough room to accommodate the wider wheel in the Sportback. This information was provided to me by an Audi sales representative who was advised by Audi Australia head office.

The 19 inch wheel option should have a slightly detrimental affect on fuel economy due to its heavier weight and slightly more blunt wind resistance profile.

[driftn]

DrK can you respond to my PM regarding your purchase.

[DrK]

DrK can you respond to my PM regarding your purchase.

Just did mate

[tigger73]

Combined fuel consumption specification for the Golf R DSG is 7.1l/100kms (0.2 km/l above Euro spec) and 7.3l/100kms (0.2 km/l above Euro spec) for the Golf R manual. The comparable Audi S3 Sportback figures for both European and Australian markets are the same as per Longy's quote, but to me this doesn't acknowledge the fact we receive a detuned version of the Euro spec engine, and I would think the fuel consumption can't be exactly the same in each category which makes up the combined figures. Because of this possible anomaly, Audi have a marketing advantage because its S3 is now pushed up into a higher LCT threshold.



Audi will not permit the S3 to be fitted with the 19 inch wheel option, which is available for the sedan version, for the simple reason there isn't enough room to accommodate the wider wheel in the Sportback. This information was provided to me by an Audi sales representative who was advised by Audi Australia head office.

The 19 inch wheel option should have a slightly detrimental affect on fuel economy due to its heavier weight and slightly more blunt wind resistance profile.

The other reason for variance in fuel consumption is the day the two cars got consumption tested on was likely different ambient conditions.

Car manufacturers try and get their cars tested in a time of year that is most conducive to providing the lowest emissions and the best fuel economy. It ends up that everyone wants their cars tested in a two week period which all the car makers have determined is the best weather/conditions that are going to be most favourable to providing a good result.

Could well be that the Audi guys got a good day and the Golf boys left it a bit late to book in for their emissions and economy tests and hit some warmer weather.

I'm not sure if the specs quote any aero drag figures or not but likely it's a combination of factors which has the Golf R at a slight spec disadvantage.

As we all know it's how heavy you are with your right foot that has the most impact on fuel usage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mikey1]

I have been advised by the sales manager of a Melbourne dealership that after the initial launch shipment of DSG Golf R's have been sold, there will be no more stock until September. This shortage of supply is forcing dealers to not offer any discounting on retail sales and corporate pricing concession only equivalent to the Volkswagen Australia dealer rebate for corporate program customers. A cynic might suggest this strategy alienates potential Golf R customers from the brand, by sending them to its nearest competitor Audi, who apparently are offering generous discounts. Given they're both part of the Volkswagen Audi Group, VAG head office probably don't see this as a bad outcome. Well done to those who have secured an initial launch allocation and received a good deal. They will definitely be in the minority.

[tigger73]

I have been advised by the sales manager of a Melbourne dealership that after the initial launch shipment of DSG Golf R's have been sold, there will be no more stock until September. This shortage of supply is forcing dealers to not offer any discounting on retail sales and corporate pricing concession only equivalent to the Volkswagen Australia dealer rebate for corporate program customers. A cynic might suggest this strategy alienates potential Golf R customers from the brand, by sending them to its nearest competitor Audi, who apparently are offering generous discounts. Given they're both part of the Volkswagen Audi Group, VAG head office probably don't see this as a bad outcome. Well done to those who have secured an initial launch allocation and received a good deal. They will definitely be in the minority.

Well at least the Audi guys are discounting to get the sale even if the cars are having to be ordered from the factory.

Maybe they just want to get more Audis on the road so they can knock off BMW in sales numbers....


2013's Top 20 Best-selling Brands
1.Toyota - 214,630
2.Holden - 112,059
3.Mazda - 103,144
4.Hyundai - 97,006
5.Ford - 87,236
6.Nissan - 76,733
7.Mitsubishi - 71,528
8.Volkswagen - 54,892
9.Subaru - 40,200
10.Honda - 39,258
11.Kia - 29,778
12.Mercedes-Benz - 27,547
13.Jeep - 22,170
14.Suzuki - 22,075
15.BMW - 20,522
16.Audi - 16,009
17.Isuzu Ute - 10,209
18.Land Rover - 8350
19.Renault - 7016
20.Lexus - 6920

[Dutch77]

Maybe they just want to get more Audis on the road so they can knock off BMW in sales numbers....

2013's Top 20 Best-selling Brands
1.Toyota - 214,630
2.Holden - 112,059
3.Mazda - 103,144
4.Hyundai - 97,006
5.Ford - 87,236
6.Nissan - 76,733
7.Mitsubishi - 71,528
8.Volkswagen - 54,892
9.Subaru - 40,200
10.Honda - 39,258
11.Kia - 29,778
12.Mercedes-Benz - 27,547
13.Jeep - 22,170
14.Suzuki - 22,075
15.BMW - 20,522
16.Audi - 16,009
17.Isuzu Ute - 10,209
18.Land Rover - 8350
19.Renault - 7016
20.Lexus - 6920

You'd think that is very do-able given their volume sellers (A1, A3, A4, Q3) are more consumer friendly than what BMW is offering (1/3 series, X1, X3 - ok the BMW 3 series is nice).

Interesting to see those numbers though and how the mighty have fallen - 94,000 Commodore were sold in 1998 and it sold in the 80s into the early 2000s. Falcon peaked in the mid 90s with just over 81,000 sales. Conversely last year just 10,610 Falcons found homes - while 8,177 people parked the Toybaru twins in their garages.