ClioSport.net
Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
Anyone raced a VW Golf V6 4Motion
- Thread starter Rich-D
- Start date
Neil - the only in depth test of a 16v Ive ever seen timed the 16v with some impressive stats: 0-60 in 7.3 for starters. Theyre a fair bit better than a 4Motions stats! Why do you think the Willy is worthy of comparison but the 16v not?
The big engine Golfs (with the exception of the R32) are not aimed at the mainstream hot hatch market anyway.
Rich-D
ClioSport Club Member
E90 LCI 330d
I just expected them to be quicker I suppose...
Easily had him from the lights, but that was not surprising.
I was more impressed with the top end performance on my Rallye, as we both gunned it from approx 80mph (both in 5th it seems) and he moved over at about 100mph as I sailed on by with ease. Thought it would be closer than that and he was not letting off either, becuase as soon as I backed off he was there again.
Assume the Golfs must be geared quite high at the top and the 306 will probably be bouncing off the limiter in 6th way before the Golf would. But I would rather have the closer gearing that I have.
Tried to coax a Cooper S into a race this morning too, but he was having non of it.
Neil82cup. one thing that you obviously strugle to understand is power/weight ratios and distance traveled. i have raced my mates BMW328 and slapped it up to around 110mph even though he has a quicker 0-60 time. the reason for this being they dont cover as much ground. had a race with a fiat coupe 20v turbo the other day, they do 0-60 in 6.0 secs, but because of its weight and traction issues, i stayed with it easily to 60. they are not designed as out and out hot hatches like the clio/saxo/106 therefore they can be very shocked.
i dont understand why you would make such a bold statement, obviously knowing very little about 16valvers
Had a go with a couple of V6 4 Motions while I had my Integra, and mullered both of them. The Integra is about the same in the accelerative department as my Cup.
I find this very hard to believe - these are 150 mph flying machines once on the move, i have struggled to keep in front of these above 40, and above 110 mph, they are gone, scoobs aint the most aerodynamic wheres as they are and with 220 bhp, 220 lb/ft torque.
I am sorry to say they do about a 14 sec 1/4 mile and once in second gear would waste a 16v, thats not taking anything away from a 16v. I think a cup would struggle to keep up all honesty too.
Alfa Mito 155TB
Lets not forget driver ability helps win races too
As a former owner of a Fiat Coupe 20V Turbo, I can say that the Fiat was either driven by a grandma or there was a problem with the car (not uncommon unfortunately although mine was fine). The 20v Turbo will get you to 100 in 14.5 seconds in standard form and is definitly faster than my C172. Are you sure it was a turbo, becuase there isnt much to distingish it from the NA 20v version.
The standard 220bhp is easily boosted to an extra 10-15bhp by fitting a freer flowing exhaust and induction kit and indeed one was RR tested to 243bhp with these easy mods. Given that RR can be some what inaccurate, thats still a big increase. Traction is too much of a problem either due to the Viscous Coupling slip diff.
Jon C and Jonto, there was a post on this a while ago, same as now, forum users didnt to believe it, until someone who saw the race(it was at a local cruise) proved they saw it. Adiclio16v has spoken to the owner of the coupe and the coupe owner is more then happy to admit that from a standind start over a short distance(i managed to get to 70mph) there was very little between the two cars. just goes to prove that races are very much down to driver ability, and that 0-60 times are nothing to go by because side-by-side distance travelled is more important(power/weight ratio)
By "big engine" I mean the 2.3 V5 and the V6 4Motion. Theyre big engines.
The Mk1, 2 and to a lesser extent the Mk3 Golf GTis were proper hot hatches for the hot hatch fan. I dont think that an off the shelf 2.0 115bhp Mk4 Golf GTi is really considered a hot hatch any more. Lets face it, VW dont exactly advertise the sporting prowess of these models becuase...erm...they dont have any.
All credit to VW, they helped invent the hot hatch genre (though not completely, as they claim - see Lotus Sunbeam, Renault 5 Gordini etc for earlier hot hatches/GTis). But the Mk4 Golf GTi/big engine range is not an enthusiast-aimed range. VW do not market the 2.0 as a "GTi" anywhere except the UK. Moreover, the V5 and V6 4 Motion have never been branded as hot hatches by VW. Rather, they are considered mile munchers and the chassis engineers would have worked harder to make better weight distribution and suspension to cope with the drivetrains extra weight if they were after a slice of the hot hatch market. In the end, they did. Hence we have the R32 - a mega hatch.
That leaves the 1.8T and the TDi GTi range. Now they are the core "hot hatch" range. With the TDi, VW are exploring a new genre and have made a hot hatch with a unique driving experience. Sadly, the Mk4 chassis is not exactly noted for its amazing handling (which is why the Mk5 will shadow the Focus suspension).
VW are the kings of PR and advertising. I have a GTi anniversary supplement from a magazine in the summer. They list some of the "pretenders to the GTi crown"...like the BX GTi, 1981 Fiat Abarth and XR3i! They rather conveniently ignored the GT Turbo, 205 GTi, 106 GTi, Clio 16v, Williams and pretty much any other good hot hatch! Interstingly, somewhere in the small print is the rather revealing fact that the supplement was sponsored by VW! What a suprise!
