R32 v R

[thezoneR32]

Having driven both the R and the R32 and knowing that I'll rarely (if ever) drive either car anywhere near their limits I'd have to go for the R32. The first time I drove either car I was underwhelmed but only because I was hoping for more than a GTi can deliver. Neither really drives significantly better than a normal GTI to justify the extra money and the GTI just does everything really well w/o the wank factor of 4wd which isn't needed in this country. I'd likely choose a GTI over either except for the one thing the R32 has over both the GTI and the R and that's character.

Well said. Everyone has there own take on it. They are all good in different ways but most of us can only afford one so there needs to be a comparison. If I could afford all 3 I would probably buy an m3 or rs5!

[silver32]

My take on the comparison

Hi, I have read only pages 1-3 of this thread, but I thought I might comment too.

I have owned my R32 since new for 10 months now, and I was seriously looking to purchase the R last month, however, after seeing it in the flesh, and hearing it (I did not get to test drive it, but I would assume not too far off from a remapped GTI- in regards to the engine being turbo'd), I have decided to forego the purchase. I was completely underwhelmed by it to be honest.

I have concluded it is because of this: The reason I purchased the R32 was because it had many special characteristics: a big engine in a small car, blue-painted calipers, had a big car feel in a car that is comparatively small and made me feel safe and planted even in extreme conditions, and an exquisite exhaust soundtrack that has turned heads MANY times, and even stunned some V8 drivers I'v met. I realised the R had none of those, and that's what put me off.

To me, the R line was all about the big engines and noise and special engine configurations like the narrow angle VR6's in the R32 and R36 and the twin turbo V10 in the R50. And the subtle blue that was characteristic of the R range.

I feel the R owner now will be those more inclined to wanting a clean 'surgical' experience rather than a hammer-style execution that the R32 offers.
From what I've read (and seen) the R is a fantastic vehicle, very capable and certainly will have a market following it, but to me, I think VW has lost the essence of the R line, although I believe they were 'forced' to due to emissions regulations. In any case, I would go for an R36 over an R if I were to move up a notch. I just cannot enjoy my drive without that tactile and aural feedback. As much as it may have flaws, it's still a beautiful GT car to drive and makes me glad I own one every day. I do realise this is just an opinion though. You may want something else from your car. As long as it does it for you, go for it!

[G-rig]

Having driven both the R and the R32 and knowing that I'll rarely (if ever) drive either car anywhere near their limits I'd have to go for the R32. The first time I drove either car I was underwhelmed but only because I was hoping for more than a GTi can deliver. Neither really drives significantly better than a normal GTI to justify the extra money and the GTI just does everything really well w/o the wank factor of 4wd which isn't needed in this country. I'd likely choose a GTI over either except for the one thing the R32 has over both the GTI and the R and that's character.

Fair enough we don't have snow here but AWD does a bit more than you think in managing traction when you take off (especially with a heavy foot) and in wet conditions & over b-grade or bad roads. Agree with normal driving in Australia it's not necessary but helps in some conditions and on the track.

It's not worth trying pushing your luck in the wet just because you have AWD. It is a good safety feature but may create a false sense of security - once the car lets go you'll be sliding and no better off than anyone else.

Agree that the R test drive was a little underwhelming but i only went for a short drive so hard to get a proper idea. Certainly wasn't as exciting and didn't feel as fast as a retuned GTI. The power was more linear than I was expecting as well, but would be interesting to drive one that had a retune. A GTI is really as good as you need over an R/R32 with it's lighter weight, better fuel economy, responsive no-lag turbo and the DSG farts still sound good anyway.

[thezoneR32]

Go on admit it, you miss your R32!

[G-rig]

Go on admit it, you miss your R32!

Yeah wasn't a bad car but wanted DSG and something faster. N/A linear power and being too settled gets a bit boring after a while, but made a nice sound .

[Sqeaky]

I read this with interest. Thinking of getting an R32.

I had a MkV GTI for 4yrs, got one of the first in the country It was a great car (DSG, leather, bi-xeons & sunroof) but had a choice to make when the lease ran out. Now have a R36 wagon.

I am now in the market for a second car and can either get new GTI, R or R32. After now having the R36 something is drawing me to the R32 but I can't put my finger on it.

[Valver.]

I also took up VW's offer of an R test drive and walked away unimpressed. I tend (or try to...) approach all the different cars I get to drive with an open mind, but I must preface this by saying I already knew the R had lost a big chunk of soul before I even started the engine. The R32 already bordered on too-subtle in the styling dep't (both inside and out), but the R has taken this to another level; the outside is just plain uninspiring and this vibe sticks once you open the door. The Mk6 GTI actually holds more physical appeal (and I actually think it's a better, more simplistic and fluid car - though, this is another story). Several Rs have since passed me on the street and I hardly notice them as anything other than pops in his common-rail rattler.

To the drive, though, I found the R had noticeably more front end grip (the R32 is a painfully bad understeerer and hardly responds to throttle input or trail braking compared to other AWDs, like the RS4) and significantly more stick, but it's really just an S3 given a dust up. The R32 is definitely lacking in straight line performance (whether linear or not, it's too slow), but the R is still no rocket ship alongside the EVO 10 or new STi, which one can't help comparing it to, now that it's just 'another' turbo four-pot, AWD! And this is just the point, VW has removed exactly what set the R32 apart from its price rivals, which was a soulful and responsive engine with a fantastic exhaust note. Driving an EVO 10 against an R is simply comical - the EVO looks like a performance car, and has leagues more front end grip and outright performance and the R has nothing to offer in comparison.

The R is effectively a chipped Mk6 GTI without the axle tramping of FWD... What else does it have to offer? VW has simply killed what was a distinctive model division in the Mk5 era and thrown itself into a basket with other significantly more competent Japanese rivals. Yes, we'd all buy the Euro car regardless, as the build quality is a large reason we're all here, but if I owned an R, I couldn’t help but wonder what it would be like with a supercharged V6 or a 3.6+ NA engine.

And, on this note, who really cares about the weight over the front wheels? If you’re that worried about understeer or chassis balance, why did you even buy a front engine AWD vehicle anyway? Not only is VWs software tuned to favour understeer, so is the mechanical layout of the car itself! They all understeer and there’s only so much you can drive around it, particularly on a public road.

If I wanted a Mk6, I’d get the GTI and be like everyone else, because if I paid extra and bought an R, I’d also be like everyone else with their WRXs and EVOs... it’s just that my car would be slower in all circumstances. At least the GTI is a willing competitor to an RS Megane or Focus.

We all buy our VWs for similar reasons but it’s nice to know that they stack up against the competition, when you look beyond their refinement and build quality. The R32 was special because it didn’t have to do this – there was never a 6cyl EVO and never will be, and there was certainly nothing else that sounded better for similar money.

Yeah, the R goes ok and is a better performance package than the R32, but it’s also soulless and has little which sets it apart from the GTI, or its other competitors.

My 2c anyway 

[G-rig]

I am now in the market for a second car and can either get new GTI, R or R32. After now having the R36 something is drawing me to the R32 but I can't put my finger on it.

Depends what you want, if you already have an R36 I'd be inclined to get something different.

Interesting review Valver. How long did you own an R32 for? The power gets pretty dull when it tapers off after ~4k rpm. Either way the R32 was too heavy/slow for the pricetag (when new).

They are all good in different ways, not hard to do a few cosmetic mods and you should be considering the R after it's retuned as we do get the detuned version here and i think it may leave you with different thoughts (not that i've driven one but would be a lot more potent). EVO's and WRX's are fine for all out speed, but lack refinement.

[Corey_R]

Driving an EVO 10 against an R is simply comical - the EVO looks like a performance car, and has leagues more front end grip and outright performance and the R has nothing to offer in comparison.

EVO's and WRX's are fine for all out speed, but lack refinement.

Yeah, you don't even need to drive an Evo, WRX and R to see what the R has over the other two...

[G-rig]

And it's based on a Lancer, LOL.

[Corey_R]

Yep, the Golf is a much better starting block than a Lancer.

To me, the biggest appealing factor of the R32, the engine, is also the main reason I decided to buy a GTI instead (back in 200. It's just too heavy and upsets the handling of the car too much. At the same time, it's just too slow and too expensive to make it go quick enough to offset how much it negatively affects the handling.

Having said all that, it did sound awesome!
But as G-rig has said. You eventually get over that.

So for me it was just not enough

[Rob Burns]

And it's based on a Lancer, LOL.

Erm, it's not based on a Lancer, it is a Lancer.

I work with a guy who has a Subaru. He calls it a WRX and he gets mad when I call it an Imprezza but that's all it is.

Don't get me wrong, a Golf is still a Golf no matter what designation it has after the Golf part. You can't be an elitist when you drive the people's car.

[adzy]

ah yes the e-penis is alive and well. Actually you could just strap a rocket to it and do 0-100 in 0.5 secs! That would make it a much better car to drive. The very though of driving around with that sort of power coming out of a 2 litre is just mind numingly stupid. There is a reason that all the euro car manufacturers put V8, V10 & V12 motors in their flagship cars. Bigger motors are more reliable and much more smoother the drive.

Sorry mate but this is a truly ludicrous statement, realy!! Mind numingly stupid?? To tune one of these engines? They are one of the most responsive engines to tuning in our day and they have proved their reliability and potential, period.

We can see you love your R32 massage to your senses, mainly just sound, but lets not get too excited with biased opinions now.

Will be interesting to test drive the R after reading these comments. The biased R32 boys stand out like dogs balls but there have been a couple of points, almost, worth considering. I drove an R32 for a couple of hours and the sound "was" pure sex but the iron blocked V6 hanging over the front end was very apparent when pushing hard where as in the GTI, for example, it is much easier to dial in some lift off over steer or to adjust your cornering line mid corner with steering and throttle adjustments.

[thezoneR32]

Because it has such good low down torque the R32 can feel a tad understeery in stock form if you throttle on too hard in the wrong part of a corner. But the gen 2 haldex set to race and some good coilovers certainly eliminated that. But if you only drove one in stock I suppose you would never know that. At least there is a scope for improvement to the awd. Unfortunately for the gti it will awlays be a fwd.

[G-rig]

Erm, it's not based on a Lancer, it is a Lancer.

I work with a guy who has a Subaru. He calls it a WRX and he gets mad when I call it an Imprezza but that's all it is.

Don't get me wrong, a Golf is still a Golf no matter what designation it has after the Golf part. You can't be an elitist when you drive the people's car.

I know what you mean, but a lancer is a cheap average car made to a price point. The golf is a better quality car and a good basis for other variations IMO.