Quick Golf Q

[Floodie]

Howdy - friend just bought a Golf GTI 1.8 turbo... now.. he and someone else is saying that it ISNT the V5 because the V5 is a 2.3L engine or something.. now thats completely new to me!.. i always thought the engine range for golfs (and many others) were:

1.8 v5/20v Turbo

2L GTI (Non turbo)

2.9(?) V6 4 motion(penultimate mark)

Can someone advise plz... as ive believed for years this was the case and to be told different is like "oh, sh*t"....

Thanks

 

[jon_r]

The 1.8 is the 4 pot.

 

[bigsi]

Yeah the v5 is a normally aspirated 2.3L version above the gtis

Nice motors too... a friend of mine has just bought one. Not as fast as a 172/182 tho.

 

[Floodie]

Ah well i never!!!! you learn something everyday! jesus, thanks peeps!...

 

[admob]

Quote: Originally posted by Floodie on 05 July 2005
Howdy - friend just bought a Golf GTI 1.8 turbo... now.. he and someone else is saying that it ISNT the V5 because the V5 is a 2.3L engine or something.. now thats completely new to me!.. i always thought the engine range for golfs (and many others) were:1.8 v5/20v Turbo2L GTI (Non turbo)2.9(?) V6 4 motion(penultimate mark)Can someone advise plz... as ive believed for years this was the case and to be told different is like "oh, sh*t".... Thanks


dont forget the awesome r32, 3.2 litre v6... more torque than you can shake a stick at!!!!!

 

[Fred@BTM]

Quote: Originally posted by admob on 08 July 2005

Quote: Originally posted by Floodie on 05 July 2005


Howdy - friend just bought a Golf GTI 1.8 turbo... now.. he and someone else is saying that it ISNT the V5 because the V5 is a 2.3L engine or something.. now thats completely new to me!.. i always thought the engine range for golfs (and many others) were:

1.8 v5/20v Turbo

2L GTI (Non turbo)

2.9(?) V6 4 motion(penultimate mark)

Can someone advise plz... as ive believed for years this was the case and to be told different is like "oh, sh*t"....

Thanks

dont forget the awesome r32, 3.2 litre v6... more torque than you can shake a stick at!!!!!




shame its a lardy ass

 

[CHRIS172CUP]

The R32 I went out in was seriously quick and with 4 up, stuck to the road like sh*t to a blanket. Felt as nimble and quicker than my cup! He has got the chip upgrade though.

 

[McBunny]

not as good as the alfa 147gta tho (except in the bends)

 

[Ali]

R32 would kill a 172, any place any time. Prob not the best place to post on a cliosport forum but its true, ive driven both at pace and i loved the handling of the R... Cups fun tho!

 

[zack172]

i have just come out of the mk4 golf gti....had it remaped at jabbasport last year 212 bhp..from 150.. .nice cars but they do ues a lot of fuel very hevey and not very good on the corners as standerd.....oh! and the clio is just as quick as the chipped golf was....

 

[-BaJ-]

Yeah the V5 is the 2.3

I think the confusion of the 1.8T being a V5 comes from that fact that it has 5 valves per cylinder ... 4 pot x 5 valves = 20v. Its more a case of 5v than v5

Oddly enough i used to think the same until recently! Ooops

 

[CHRIS172CUP]

i agree, might be a bit different round a twisty track but then the R32 isnt as much of a trackday tool.

 

[Mondial172]

Agreed the GTA would murder (ish) the FRS,R32,182,CTR and LCR in a line.

250bhp though the front wheels as standard! Madness!

 

[Jim172CUP]

Quote: Originally posted by AJRMOTORSPORT on 08 July 2005

R32 would kill a 172, any place any time. Prob not the best place to post on a cliosport forum but its true, ive driven both at pace and i loved the handling of the R... Cups fun tho!

but they weigh in at 1500kgs+, ita heavy old engine in a robust car. power to weight theyre the same as a 172 but cost twice as much. once moving itll be effortless to get it upto silly speeds as its got shed loads of torque.

 

[sargeantinio]

my mate had a v5 nowt but trouble with it never out of the dealer