Golf R 3 door/5 door speculation/information thread

[Corey_R]

The Golf R has a few improvements over the S3 - namely that it's available with DSG in the 3dr (vs the 5dr sportback of the S3), the DSG's electronics are improved (reducing lag etc), the halex systems are improved, and it has more power (although it'll have the same in Australia) and more torque.

But seriously... all your posts seem to be justifying your purchase of your GTI, you keep on pointing out every possible tidbit to critise of the R to try and convince everyone (and yourself) that the GTI is fine. The GTI is fine, but lets keep that discussion out of this thread. There are plenty of GTI vs R threads in the forum! Lets keep this thread for information on the R

[G-rig]

MY09+ S3's have the new haldex as well (Gen4).

[Corey_R]

Including the pump to move power to the rear wheels before traction is lost?

In any case, the Wheels article WJ linked was from 2007...

[G-rig]

Not sure..

[WhiteJames]

This would be a very short thread if it focussed on information solely on the Golf R. Only details that remain are release date, shipment dates, number of vehicles destined for our shores, std spec, option list, option prices, and price of the vehicle. All other aspects of the vehicle can be gleaned from overseas reviews & brochures. Otherwise this thread would lay dormant for the next 2-3 months, and you guys would have nothing to read.

In deciphering how good the Golf 'R' actually is, as Einstein said, everything is relative: We must relate the Golf R to the compeitition to see if it is worth the spend, whether it be the Megane, Focus, Audi or GTI. How else are we going to determine if the R is worth the extra spend?

There are a number of guys on forum sitting on the fence between the GTI and R. Yes, to others that intend solely on purchasing the Golf R, it may seem superficial conversation.

After reading that last review in my last post, I'm leaning back towards the GTI today.

Cheers
WJ

[elisiX]

Everything you're saying just says to me what I have been thinking for a while. At $40-45k, the GTI is by far the better/smarter option. 90% of the R lets say for about 2/3 the cost. However add a few options to a GTI and the game changes completely. And with speculation that the R wont be 1/3 more expensive anyway, the game will change even further toward justifying the R over the GTI. I would happily pay $65k for an R with a couple options vs a GTI with a few more options at $57k. But it seems like the R might not even get as high as $65k with leather, xenon, MDI and a sunroof. And if that's the case - it's a no brainer in my book. $60-62k on the road with a couple options... perhaps even with Nav?. Hell yes - that's what I would much prefer to take home.

[graeme86]

Did you see the Hockenheim link from the R20 German Test:



Pulling over 1.0 g on the corners.

[WhiteJames]

^Impressive. ^^I'm hearing you on the GTI-v- R. AWD grip and better weight distribution front to rear are the most desirable attributes of the R imo. Not to concerned with the extra power or speed.
Cheers
WJ

[Corey_R]

Whilst I agree with what you're saying WhiteJames, even the Golf GTI is going to be 'bad value' against the new Polo GTI. The further up you go, the more you spend for less return. It depends on what you need and what you want vs how much you're prepared to spend.

To me the Megane and Focus are not alternatives. The Megane is french, too harsh, and just not up to the 'quality and all-roundness' of the Golfs (either GTI or R). The Focus RS isn't (and sounds like will never) be in this country, so we don't even get a chance to consider it (although from what I've read, it could be even further 'out there' on the other side of the Megane.

I've already owned a GTI (MKV APR Stage II) and it was fantastic, but I'd like a little more... handling, braking, and acceleration - with less effort managing the throttle. I'm also not interested in going for aftermarket suspension and brakes to do this - cause otherwise you're spending more than the difference between the GTI and the R, in which case you may have already just purchased the R... which is why I'm sitting on the R side of the fence.

Sure - you can buy a GTI, do a stage II or III upgrade, and do all the corresponding suspension and brakes etc, and it'll probably be better than an R, except for acceleration, but it'll also cost far more than an R...

[WhiteJames]

^ Well said. Agree totally. Exploring the upper reaches of the GTI requires a lot more work than the R. The R will be an easy vehicle to drive in the upper reaches of its chassis tune.

I agree on the Megane Cup LSD and Focus RS (if available) being to focussed ... great 20% of the time, not so compliant 80% of the time.

Reading this & other threads, the guys that own GTI's that are chipped up are most anxious to jump into the R come trade in time. This is perfectly undertstandable ... I've driven a variety of the APR, GIAC, Bluefin tunes on the GTI, and to be quite frank, you realy do need that all-paw grip to cope with the extra power & torque.

My GTI was not chipped, only mods were KW V3 coilover suspension & small H&R sway bars f & r. This further improved grip levels reducing the FWD idiosyncracies, but definitely not eliminating them.

I'd say if you have your heart set on chipping up, the R is the better alternative.

Another issue brough to my attention with the FWD GTI is that when the front wheels slip and compromise the drive, XDL/ESC may proactively intervene, that is the brakes are applied. This would definitely be the case in corners with XDL electronic diff. This may put strain on the gearbox as it would be working under the load of the brake being applied. Chipping up on the FWD may excerbate this problem with the additional torque at lower revs.

The haldex on the AWD Golf R takes care of this mechanically, with the halex diff being a like a wet clutch on a motorbike, which is designed to slip with the lube taking care of most of the heat & slip issues. Similar thing with the DSG box, it's basically a sealed wet clutch box that is designed to last the life of the motor, or possibly longer. The dry clutches in the 7 speed gearboxes may require replacement clutches as in the case of the manual gearbox.

For me, no fancy leases, no tax deduction, I'm paying cold hard cash for my GTI. If an R is available in White - 18" wheels - 5 door - DSG - ACC for around 55K (with corporate discount) may seriously be on the cards. Even at that price, it would is still a difficult decision between the GTI -v- R. At 55-56K, in 3.5 years time, the R should retain a higher value based on its exclusivity. I originally aimed to spend around 45K, but now have my GTI at 50.5K.

Another issue for me is fuel economy, it not a big issue in terms of cash, but more a personal issue. I have seen in the past that the EVO and STI with big turbos, when asked work a fair bit, have similar economy to the HSV V8's, which always suprises me. Keeping the large turbo cool demands a lot of fuel, as fuel has a cooling effect in addition to providing ignition. I don't think the R will be anyting like an EVO or STI for fuel usage, but when asked to breath deeper, it will definitely use a bit more than the ideal Euro stated figures.

Anxious wait on pricing and availability. My money is on MAV's my-gti site to spring the news, as was the case for the MK6 GTI.

Cheers.
WJ

[G-rig]

I agree that the GTI is the good value for say 40-46k but any more than that people may as well get the Golf R.

That's just me and everyone has different requirements and how long they plan to keep the car may also differ. Too many overpriced options is throwing money away though when buying new cars but nice to pick them up on a second hand car.

[fourmo]

I just buy the best performer for what I can afford.

After all, there are bigger things in life.

[WhiteJames]

Here is a thread from another forum that lists links to many reviews in the one place for ease of access:

http://www.golfrforum.co.uk/smf/index.php?topic=3.0

Second page of the review has some commonly asked questions.

Didn't realise that the boot floor height was 4 inches higher than the FWD Golfs.

Cheers.
WJ

[Corey_R]

Yeah - it's the case with the R32 as well. It's not immediately obvious when looking at them in real life - it's just less distance to lean down when putting the shopping bags in the back

[G-rig]

Didn't realise that the boot floor height was 4 inches higher than the FWD Golfs.

Cheers.
WJ

The R32 boot floor is also higher, and the foam sits around the spacesaver. Sounds like the R20 could is the same.