Golf R32 (Mk 4)

[MiniGibbo 142]

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.

 

Friends on mine have had them in various states of tune, slow as s*it mate.

 

I was comparing them oem for oem with the likes of a 36 328 sport which leaves them for dust.

 

Not saying i wouldnt have one though, id love a high line with a straight through exhaust haha.

[Henry 1.9GTi 36]

iv'e only ever been in a mk3 vr6 and the sound was awesome!! grin everytime.

 

however it got sold shortly due to 15mpg and being pretty slow.

 

as for the newer ones my Reno outpaces a mk5 r32 quite comfortably much to the owners annoyance and it handles well to boot! probably does better mpg as well

 

sorry, bigging up the frenchies.

[Anthony 1,000]

Friends on mine have had them in various states of tune, slow as s*it mate.

Everything is relative, but it's a strange world you live in if a Golf VR6 is "slow as s**t".

 

Even by todays standards, it is fairly quick, and by the standards of the early 90's it was a fast car.

 

Indeed, I'm struggling to think of an early 90's hatchback that was quicker, in a straight line atleast.

[MiniGibbo 142]

The 328 for a start

 

The vti Honda civics

 

The rover 25 gti

 

[Anthony 1,000]

The 328 for a start

Not a hatchback, nor around in the early 90's.

The vti Honda civics

Nope, they're slightly slower by conventionally used statistics (0-60, quarter mile etc) and almost certainly "real world" slower by a fair margin.

The rover 25 gti

Rover 220 GTi is slower, although the (rare) 220 Turbo is a little quicker, granted. Rover 25 was mid-late 90's.

[JRL 14 1 Cars]

If I was interested in that sort of modern hatch I would probably look at the s3 as its slightly more economical and slightly quicker. I borrowed a friends 1.8T quattro its had lots of grip but handling didn't seem as sharp as I thought it would. The r32 and vr6 i should imagine are not thst mind blowing lower end but really love mid range to top end. Im not 100% sure but i think the mk3 golf was the heaviest they made? I do think the mk4 is the better looking out of the vr6, s3.

[MiniGibbo 142]

If you want to be pedantic then the e36 325 and the 200vi.

 

And yes the turbo coupe is also faster but suppose that or the 36 don't count as they're coupes.

 

And the vti and intact the jdm sir are faster.

[Anthony 1,000]

220 Turbo was available as a hatchback, but is very rare hence I'd forgotten it. Most were coupes.

 

Anyway, I've proved my point quite effectively that it was a quick car when released by the fact that you're having to resort to JDM imports to find something quicker in its class when it was new. Even by modern standards, an 1150kg odd car with 170hp/170lbft+ is not slow.

 

I have no particular like for Mk3 Golfs, and the handling of a VR6 in standard form leaves me cold, but equally I respect it for what it did offer as a package considering that it's over 20 years old now. Unfortunately, your blinkered view of the automotive world outside of E36 BMW's leave you spouting some utter rubbish sometimes.

 

Oh, and a Rover 200vi was mid-90's and slower btw.

[Baz 421]

Unfortunately, your blinkered view of the world leave you spouting some utter rubbish sometimes.

 

 

 

EFA.

 

E36's aren't fast, not even the holy grail M3's are even that quick.

[MiniGibbo 142]

Dunno mines pulling over 280bhp per tonne NA and that's a mid 90's rep 'coupe.

 

36's ain't too shabby but yes you're not wrong Anthony I do have major BMW blinkers. That I won't argue haha

[S@m 156]

A 309 gti16v would have been faster as far as early 90's hatches go! Shame they never came to this country.

 

A mk3 vr6 is decent enough in a straight line - was about equal with my 306 D6C even though on paper i should have been beaten, it was in the corners that the golf would really badly struggle to match the 306. But as we know any dabble on the (private) road has far too many variables to mean anything definitive. A different set of drivers and a different golf/306 may have ended differently, who knows.

 

Sam

Edited November 2, 2012 by Sam306

[Tom Fenton 1,526]

If you want to be pedantic then the e36 325 and the 200vi.

 

And yes the turbo coupe is also faster but suppose that or the 36 don't count as they're coupes.

 

And the vti and intact the jdm sir are faster.

 

Congratulations on single handedly rubbishing your own argument.

[MiniGibbo 142]

Thanks.

[kyepan 291]

Ryan's vr6 is a Sponkingly awesome bit of kit, and he didn't drive it slow. Batfunk can testify to that. Ps Batfunk is batfinks hungover alter ego., he races karts with me and ryan. It effortlessly covers big distances in relative comfort at great pace, it will quite happily sit at 120 plus for extended periods on the way to.. On the autobahn.. Ahem. Or eat up a roads cross country ..My mates 328 just didn't feel quite as good or sound as rorty..It drinks the fuel yes, but doesn't seem bothered two or three up.

[grandos 16]

Maestro turbo of the late eighties anyone?

 

Renault 5 GT Turbo was still made back then, but it took a google search to check specs!

 

Oo Oo Oo just checked Lancia Delta ...... Hands down winner, or one word Cosworth.

 

But for your money the Golf takes the win!

Edited November 2, 2012 by grandos

[MrG 3]

And the Montego Turbo, don't forget that one.

 

Thing is we all like what we like, so if you're going to look for and own an R32 then get the best you can afford!

[TT205 42]

You guys need to get involved with making some new 'Top Trumps' :lol:

[Rich 3]

friend of mine has mk2 syncro with R32 running gear and super charged suicide machine.

[pp205 17]

Thanks for all the replies guys, certainly a mixed bag of opinions!

 

The thing that really draws me to the r32 is that noise and just the look of it! I think I'd like to have a drive of one to see how I find it but I can see that it might be quite front heavy. I guess I'm looking for something to potentially replace the 205 that's a little different but not mega expensive. However I'm not personally interested in Jap cars and would want the German reliability!

[EZ Tutty 7 1 Cars]

I've got a Mk4 R32...

 

I do love it, the 4motion system is good fun if you learn how to drive it properly, and the sound is frankly epic (if you get one look up the exahust flapper mod)

I do occationally get a bit bored and sometimes find it doesn't feel as quick as it actually is, but as an alrounder it's a great motor.... only downside is MPG

 

Reliability wise i can't fault it either, mines recently rolled over 100k and it still as tight as a drum (recently mines also been running Nitrous Oxide without any issues), friends with newer cars often comment how they can't believe my car is 9years old!

The main thing that annoys me is the price of certain parts... a pair of front discs for the mk4 are the best part of £300 for the proper items (there a fancy 2 part disc, and aftermarket items often warp too easily... not so much of an issue on a mk5 though), and a pair of front dampers is nearly £400 as there a bilstein item (again not so bad on a mk5)

 

One thing i'd deffinetly recommend is getting it remaped (revo are resonable money), the gains aren't huge, but it completely transforms the way the car drives due to extra mid range torque and raised limiter... also comments comparing them to 3series e46 BMW's are just so so wrong, mine walks past 328's & 330's, and since being mapped gives Manual (SMG are a different story) e46 M3's a run for there money up to bmw motorway speeds and in the wet the R is a much more usable car (a friend who used to own an SMG M3 fully agreed)

 

I'm also running uprated ARB's, H&R Springs, Lightened Pulleys and a few other bits

Edited November 4, 2012 by EZ Tutty

[MiniGibbo 142]

There isn't a performance difference between manuals and smg's..

[Matt Holley 11]

If you like the R32 and can afford to run it then does it really matter what a load of people on the internet think?

 

You could have the same argument about any car, horses for courses and all that.

 

I've got a MK5 golf gti but if I could afford the fuel for the R32 I would have one just for the noise.

[MiniGibbo 142]

You mean a sound like this..?

 

 

 

 

[EZ Tutty 7 1 Cars]

There isn't a performance difference between manuals and smg's..

SMGII can change gear in 80ms in the most aggressive mode... I very much doubt an human can do that with a manual... however SMG is slower off the line due to the automated clutch engagement, but faster once moving due to shift time.

Edited November 4, 2012 by EZ Tutty

[MiniGibbo 142]

Meanwhile in the real world, no noticeable difference.