Golf R32 (Mk 4)

[pp205 17]

So I've always liked the R32s, I personally think the mark 4 is a lot better looking than the newer models. Does anyone here have one or ever driven one? Just wondering what people think of them and how they are to drive? Still at around £5-6k generally so a little out of my personal price range!

[welshpug 1,622]

http://pistonheads.co.uk/doc.asp?c=52&i=26579

[MiniGibbo 142]

I like them.. are a little hefty and in turn a little slow but look awesome, sound awesome and will be reliably.

[stu8v 68 1 Cars]

Slow....

 

Boring....

 

My mates lasted about a month before it was sold on for the above reasons.

[eddie bullit 37]

Nice sounding, purposeful looking..overweight, snatchy throttle, slow witted and expensive to run.

[grandos 16]

Would rather have a BMW 130i rapid sounds good and would obliterate the golf!

[welshpug 1,622]

Would rather have a BMW 130i rapid sounds good and would obliterate the golf!

 

but I'd imagine you can't get one for 5k can you?

[Anthony 1,000]

Not far off now to be honest Mei - they're routinely down to £6.5-7k or so for a fairly tidy 2005/2006 model with sub 100k miles and you see a few down around £6k, so I imagine that you could get an early leggy one for £5k.

 

Obviously newer ones or tidy low mileage examples are a bit more, but equally that applies to R32's as well.

[welshpug 1,622]

an interesting prospect then, Right Wheel drive vs wrong wheel drive (or at least till the front wheels lose grip, so you just understeer at warp speed instead!)

 

a little more power, similar torque, less cc, and must be lighter as its over a second quicker to 60.

Edited October 31, 2012 by welshpug

[Anthony 1,000]

Look at the price of E46 330i now... now that's tempting, as a manual touring would make a lovely daily hack

[ORB 227 1 Cars]

Top gear once put the 130 vs the R32. I'm sure it's on YouTube

[ORB 227 1 Cars]

Yup

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oikXN8HHIac&sns=em

[Baz 421]

Couple of friends & BiL's had both Mk4&5 R32's, both dull & boring BiL although he loved them, though coming from an ST170 & 350Z i can see why!

[Bogsye 22]

I've got a mk5 and it's a bit love hate to be honest.

Got this following the S2000 and I just can't get the character of the S' engine out my head. While the R' has reasonable torque it runs out of puff as the S' would have just been sparking into life and going nuts.

 

It's a nice car, but I can't help think a Gti would have been sensible and more economical. In terms of depreciation it's been okay, and I get 24mpg overall which is okay.

 

Would prefer to have my 205 running and enjoy that.

 

Mk4 is in my opinion the more attractive car.

[kyepan 291]

A friend has a Mk3 Vr6, on coilovers and decent rubber, that thing handles, and sounds fab. Mk4-5 are all too heavy.

[MiniGibbo 142]

A friend has a Mk3 Vr6, on coilovers and decent rubber, that thing handles, and sounds fab. Mk4-5 are all too heavy.

 

Mk3 are even worse for weight haha.. for a 2.5 the vr6 is pitiful performance wise.

 

Just that noise

[S@m 156]

Mk3 are even worse for weight haha.. for a 2.5 the vr6 is pitiful performance wise.

 

Just that noise

 

Its a 2.8 which makes it even more pitiful! Although the corrado's are 2.9.

[welshpug 1,622]

a funny statement that, the MK3 wasn't that heavy at all, a mk3 VR came in at around 1155 Kilos, so about the same as a 306 S16, or the Rallye.

 

the old 8 valver was 1140, so either they both are bloody heavy engines, or that 2.8 boat anchor isn't that heavy at all...

 

 

1.4 weighs in at 960...

Edited November 1, 2012 by welshpug

[MiniGibbo 142]

Blonde moment, haha

 

2.8 that produces 174hp and returns the pitiful stats it does, thats either down to weight or vw are very conservative. i know with the gti's vw had the opinion the mk2 was powerful enough so just added refinements making the mk3 gti a huge fail in both 8v and 16v.

[mw2655 0]

doesn't help their cause that the MkV R32's are expensive road tax iirc. and on the thirsty side.

[Alan_M 66 1 Cars]

doesn't help their cause that the MkV R32's are expensive road tax iirc. and on the thirsty side.

 

Chap at work bought a Mk5 R32 and not long afterwards moaned about the tax and thirst. You'd think would-be buyers would check up on those things before splashing out five-figure sums for a car!

 

I was in the market for an Mk4 R32 several years ago, and decided to get a 120d instead. Wouldn't say slow, but they won't set your hair on fire. The tax and thirst topped it all off for me. SAve a few more grand and get a 130i. Hell of a car, half decent mpg for a 260bhp engine, a hatch (next to useless though unless you fold the seats down) and RWD If I didn't have to do 15k miles a year, I'd get one.

[MiniGibbo 142]

Yeah the mk5 is 460 a year and yeah thats double most other cars in that league... buts its £200... does that really matter in the grand scale.

[MrG 3]

I would agree with Baz, look at the e46 330i, superb piece of kit, well screwed together. A saloon is an underated car, the coupe far too common, best of the bunch would be the touring.

 

Looked at R32's before I got mine (46 330i touring) and the two didn't compare. Love my e46!

 

But this doesn't answer the OP's question. I found the R32's that I drove very comfortable, felt solid to and looked very good but when I pushed on it didn't feel as poised and it lacked some grunt. Could have been the ones I drove though (2 of them)!

Edited November 2, 2012 by MrG

[kyepan 291]

Blonde moment, haha

 

2.8 that produces 174hp and returns the pitiful stats it does, thats either down to weight or vw are very conservative. i know with the gti's vw had the opinion the mk2 was powerful enough so just added refinements making the mk3 gti a huge fail in both 8v and 16v.

 

it's headline power figure is poor, but in reality it's got over 150ftlbs of torque everywhere, which means it pulls like a train, all the way round the clock. It's a deceptively quick car actually, whack a set of cams in it and get it breathing at the top end and i'm sure you would see higher headline figures. However it's just plain grunty.

[GLPoomobile 958]

Ref Mk3 VR6s - I was taunted in to having a play with one on the A1. I mean literally taunted, the guy had slowed right down to 50mph and I followed him for miles not wanting to play stupid buggers and in the end I had to accept that if I wanted to make any progress I was going to have to give him what he wanted. Poor excuse I know

 

Anyway, my standard Mi on 1.6 box was pretty even with his VR6. The Golf did sound lovely though I have to admit that after that I did have a look at them on Autotrader as I was quite tempted.

 

As for the Mk4 R32, never driven one, but always fancied them. Look lovely in blue, and much nicer than the later ones. A US company used to do twin turbo ones that were insanely fast from a standstill (IIRC they modifed the rear suspension to use double shocks, to help with squat). I'm sure the vids will still be on Ya tube. I think the all started blowing up though, and the company got bad press for it. The name HPS rings a bell.

Edited November 2, 2012 by GLPoomobile