interesting argument. (can of worms)

[kev182cup]

came across this argument on the net 'whats better a 200 cup or 205gti'

alot of opinions and experiences thrown around and how can you compare them as statistically the 200 has it licked. but its like george best vs rooney etc technology has improved but does that make them better.

my opinion is that the 205gti moved the goal posts and paved the way for hatchbacks in performance and styling. as good as i imagine a 200 cup is i cant help feel the personality and history of the 205 would bring me to choose the 205gti for that 1 blast down my favourite road.

so thoughts and opinions and what you think makes a great hatchback.

 

[Gally]

I'd say a Trophy was more compariable.

Sounds like a 'tards arguement. 200 vs Williams anyone.

I'm bored already.

 

[theduck]

IMO they offer different things completely, so cannot be compared.

 

[Ali]

Similar arguement stands on here Williams Vs 200...Its not so much a can of worms but more over, pure bias on what you own!

I found driving the Williams was like running the gauntlet, it's out to get you!!! I would imagine the 205 is similar!

 

[kev182cup]

IMO they offer different things completely, so cannot be compared.

so there both not a performance hatchback that were made for the same purpose?

 

[Ali]

The 205 is a nasty looking car tbh! Nothing nice about it tbh!

What was it's rival back in the day? R5T?

 

[kev182cup]

The 205 is a nasty looking car tbh! Nothing nice about it tbh!

What was it's rival back in the day? R5T?

wash your mouth out. the 205gti looks great. obviously dated by todays cars but still cool. id say mk2 golf gti was a rival.

 

[theduck]

so there both not a performance hatchback that were made for the same purpose?

Of cause they are both performance hatchbacks, both built with the same idea in mind. However, would you compare a Commadore 64 to an iMac? Both were built with the same thing in mind after all...

IMO, one offers a modern, reliable, safe, and warrantied ownership experience. The other offers a 20year old car ownership experience in a car that is fun to drive, but not necesarrily own.

 

[jack_kemp]

Can't be compared.
The only argument for the 205 would be it's 'rawness' or whatever you want to call it.
The 200 would have it spanked in every department in a straight comparison.

Since the 'driving experience' isn't a quantifiable thing, there will never be an answer.

 

[mace¬]

Did the 205 have a manual choke? If it did its better. Any car with a manual choke wins.

 

[kev182cup]

Of cause they are both performance hatchbacks, both built with the same idea in mind. However, would you compare a Commadore 64 to an iMac? Both were built with the same thing in mind after all...

IMO, one offers a modern, reliable, safe, and warrantied ownership experience. The other offers a 20year old car ownership experience in a car that is fun to drive, but not necesarrily own.

thats the argument : s. imagine the 205gti as being a 3000 mile minter not a 200 quid dog. the sole purpose is to be fun with great handling and usable.

 

[Ali]

wash your mouth out. the 205gti looks great. obviously dated by todays cars but still cool. id say mk2 golf gti was a rival.

Silence...

You bought a 182 Cup! Poverty edition you have no right to comment son!

 

[theduck]

My answer to the argument is though that, personally, when looking for a car, I would not be considering brand new cars and ones 20 years old, so for that reason to me they are not comparable.

 

[kev182cup]

Silence...

You bought a 182 Cup! Poverty edition you have no right to comment son!

it was the only edition to have imo. didnt you have a mk1 v6?

 

[Ali]

it was the only edition to have imo. didnt you have a mk1 v6?

No no. Dodged that bullet!

 

[kev182cup]

My answer to the argument is though that, personally, when looking for a car, I would not be considering brand new cars and ones 20 years old, so for that reason to me they are not comparable.

its a comparison of ability vs time not what youd buy now. think of a last tank of petrol situation.

 

[mace¬]

it was the only edition to have imo. didnt you have a mk1 v6?

Ali wasn't brave enough to have a Mk1 V6. He took the safe option that when he drove badly would forgive him.

 

[Ali]

Ali wasn't brave enough to have a Mk1 V6. He took the safe option that when he drove badly would forgive him.

Rumbled.

 

[kev182cup]

Ali wasn't brave enough to have a Mk1 V6. He took the safe option that when he drove badly would forgive him.

sounds like he couldnt handle the 205 either. gheyer iirc ; )

 

[Ali]

sounds like he couldnt handle the 205 either. gheyer iirc ; )

True, i do struggle to drive underpowered cars these days!...

 

[mace¬]

True, i do struggle to drive underpowered cars these days!...

lol, best comeback of the day. I will now get in back in my box.

 

[172boost]

205 was an amazing car but doesn't come anywhere near a 200 cup.

 

[Short Norman]

my previous car was a good 205 Gti and my current is a good 172.... All I'll say is they are both very good but different.

I changed to the 172 because it was my daily driver and I have two kids, I managed 2 years using the 205 as my daily car.

The pug has no ABS, no PAS and from my experience little in the way of sound insulation. I loved the pug and would have another tomorrow (I'll say the same about the 172 when thats gone).
If I had both side by side for a drive down a favorite road for me I would take the 205, it just gives more feel.....but as said before it's personal preference really, the cars are the same principle but from two different eras of motoring.

 

[kev182cup]

True, i do struggle to drive underpowered cars these days!...

130bhp 900kg there not underpowered at all. The handling is where it's at.

 

[Gandi69]

No offence to 200 owners but no matter how good the 200 is, it wont be able to ascertain the level of "cult" status the 205 has, purely due to nostalgia and how people remember the car for what it represented and how it drove all those years ago.

 

[Munson]

PMSL. Half the people debating this were sucking a dummy when the 205 was released, much less know anything about it other than what they're read on the internet from heroes who reckon anything with PAS is a girls car. It's not a can of worms, it's a stack of old s**t. About as constructive a debate as comparing bacon to ham.

 

[Gally]

To coin a Roy's Shed phrase.

"There were only fun because the chances of dying were higher"

 

[Poopensharten]

Comparing two cars from different era's is much like my old favourite of comparing a modified car to a standard one, god i love that s**t.

 

[Gally]

Ah Daniel, the number of times you have stumbled on a modified vs Standard debate is funny!

You can smell those threads!

 

[Munson]

What about a 205MI16 compared to a tri-supercharged 172Cup on faceland coilovers and DS2500?

 

[theduck]

The gearbox on the cup would break first time it was used...

 

[CabinFever]

If you would honestly hand on heart choose a 205 for a blast down your favourite road, then you obviously haven't driven the 200 much, if at all!? I also have owned 2 205's, a standard 1.9, and a Mi16, and as good as they are/were, I'd pick the keys up for the 200 everytime!

 

[The Boosh!]

I don't think its an interesting argument!

205 is way past its day. 200 everytime.

 

[kev182cup]

PMSL. Half the people debating this were sucking a dummy when the 205 was released, much less know anything about it other than what they're read on the internet from heroes who reckon anything with PAS is a girls car. It's not a can of worms, it's a stack of old s**t. About as constructive a debate as comparing bacon to ham.

Well I owned 1 8 years ago so I can comment under your terms. For people who are interested in cars and actually driving them it is an interesting debate. Your not interested so why even bother posting? I don't post in your 'should I put 22's on my 300% rally car yo' because I don't give a s**t. It's that easy.

Or ya could be a little interested as I'm sure you've had your experiences with both cars.

 

[Munson]

But your thread title suggested you wanted an argument, which is what we now have. Therefore I've done you a massive favour. No need to get personal.

 

[kev182cup]

If you would honestly hand on heart choose a 205 for a blast down your favourite road, then you obviously haven't driven the 200 much, if at all!? I also have owned 2 205's, a standard 1.9, and a Mi16, and as good as they are/were, I'd pick the keys up for the 200 everytime!

i never doubted the 200's abilities anywhere. Tell me this driving at normal road speeds what would give you more satisfaction? I just find the 205 more alive and raw. No doubt a 200 can go round a track 20 seconds quicker that's not what the argument is about.

 

[kev182cup]

But your thread title suggested you wanted an argument, which is what we now have. Therefore I've done you a massive favour. No need to get personal.

Sorry Roy I just found your approach unreasonable as I thought maybe you out of any1 could of understood and brought valid points to the argument

They were 21" iirc. Lol

 

[Sir_Dave]

Never thought i'd quote Roy, but hey ho ...

"There were only fun because the chances of dying were higher"

The 205 is a more pure driving experience, so for me, that wins hands down, it takes skill to master & peddle it quickly down a backroad, not via a hedge. Any f*ckwit can drive a 200 quickly.

Driving purely for fun/risk of death/hero status = 205
Driving as a means of getting from A to B, with some fun = 200

 

[Munson]

No. They were 20s. Plus I clearly stated that I wasn't asking if I should fit them. Plus I didn't say I wasn't interested in your thread. Had that been the case, trust me, I would not have replied

 

[kev182cup]

out of interest i just checked pistonheads and theres a couple of minter 205's on for 7k im talking time warp condition. would love a drive of 1 of those bad boys.