Golf R -v- Golf GTI

[WhiteJames]

Purchasing Power

Reading an article from Top Gear recently which indicates how the Volkswagen/Audi group will go about cost cutting. Due to their stronger purchasing power, which covers over 10 different brand names, VAG have purchased a super-jig machine capable of making up to 30 different chassis types - this includes transverse and longitudinal layouts (I.e. VW/Skoda - Audi). It has been suggested that VAG will be able to make vehicles up to 20 percent cheaper than the likes of BMW, Mercedes, etc. The 20% saving will be divided up into thirds: 1/3 on interior quality; 1/3 on price reduction; and 1/3 profit to VAG. This is already evident in the cheaper price for the Polo and Golf R in comparison to other makes of vehicle of similar type. This is in addition to improving the build time and process in developing VAG vehicles and motors - not neccessarily cost cutting.

Cheers
WJ

[G-rig]

I still have to disagree on this point and everyone is entitled to their opinion. Better presented perhaps (more bling) but not better made - the quality of the plastic is IMO of a lower grade and rattles still plague the new car.

Jester_Fu summed it up well on MKV:

The cost of the MkV was because the design guys were basically left to their own devices - no consultation with the production guys. The MkVI was redesigned with optimising assembly and production in mind = production letting the design guys know what needed to be changed to optimise the build process. That isn't quite the same as 'building to a budget' as that could just mean using cheaper materials and removing things. My understanding is the overall brief was to bring the cost of manufacture down without reducing quality of build.

We'll see in a couple of years, but all reports are the MkVI is a much better put together car than the MkV. It's just a shame it took VW so long to decide to make the changes, IMO. I wouldn't say the loss changing from a MkV to a MkVI was worth the improvements either - the MkV is still an excellent car.

[WhiteJames]

EA888 TSI - Self Study Program

See link: EA888 2.0 litire TSI Self Study Program

http://www.arinahnell.com/other/vw/tech/20tsi.pdf

Includes colour pictures.

Cheers
WJ

[Guy_H]

Just completed 25 laps of lakeside raceway in both the GTI & Golf R (25 laps each) on R spec tyres, stock oil systems. GTI used 3 litres of oil, the R used none. - Apart from that both cars were fantastic and ran within .3 seconds of each other.

The extra weight of the Golf R bought it back to the lighter, less powerful GTI.

Both cars stage 3 mind you, not standard.

[G-rig]

That's a great comparison Guy, having the Stage 3 cars with similar upgrades.

Sounds like the AWD isn't a huge benefit with the extra weight, but always thought that was the case.

How differently do they drive? Assume that the R is more composed and easier to drive/less of a handful?

3L of oil is quite a bit isn't it? I don't track mine but interesting none the less.

[Guy_H]

That's a great comparison Guy, having the Stage 3 cars with similar upgrades.

Sounds like the AWD isn't a huge benefit with the extra weight, but always thought that was the case.

How differently do they drive? Assume that the R is more composed and easier to drive/less of a handful?

3L of oil is quite a bit isn't it? I don't track mine but interesting none the less.

Lakeside does not reward an AWD car like some circuit's - its fast & flowing (our average speed was ~ 145kmph over the entire lap). Certainly the Golf R was much easier to drive at the limit, the Golf had much more of my attention under the bridge & through the kink @ ` 200

[Guy_H]

Couple of pics courtesy of Boost Cruising:





James asleep under the R:

[WhiteJames]

3 litres of oil in 25 laps at Lakeside Raceway is a lot of oil in a short space of time. That’s a lot of oil to be blowing by the piston and rings and up through the PCV valve on the GTI’s EA888 motor. Is there any other explanation for the heavy oil use on the Mark 6 GTI? Guy_H: What sort of suspension package are you running on the Mark 6 Golf GTI? Has the XDS/EDL disengage itself on the tighter circuits to prevent brakes from overheating? Was the Golf GTI and Golf R closely matched at Eastern Creek time trials?

Cheers
WJ

[WhiteJames]

BFYB title goes to Golf GTI:

My Mark 6 Golf GTI has close to 7500km on the odometer in just under 3 months. Not a drop of oil used to date. Bear in mind that my GTI spends 90% of its time on country/tourist/freeway drives. The absence of incessant warm up and cool down phases of regular short city trips would also aid in keeping oil consumption to a minimum.

GTI recently saw a longer interstate trip to South East Queensland. Had a few drives around the Gold Coast Hinterland – Mt Tamborine, Springbrook, and the northern NSW Tweed Valley inland routes snaking behind the Hinze Dam to Byron Bay.

Saw oil temps reach as high as 114 degrees Celsius going up Mt Tamborine on a 20 degree Gold Coast winters day. Highest oil temp recorded to date. Hit 111 degrees consistently traversing from Gold Coast up the winding roads to Springbrook.

Made a few more observations in the last 2,500km of touring from Sydney to Queensland Border:

EA888 TSI Mark 6 GTI motor, although more doughy with lower compression than the Mark 5 (EA113) GTI motor, the EA888 offers greater refinement and balance in the higher rev range. The earlier EA113 FSI motor in the MKV GTI had a greater NA feel to it with higher compression rate, but also offered greater vibration higher in the rev range. The EA888 has newly designed balance shafts on each side of the motor to take out some vibration from the motor, which is noticeable higher in the rev range.

The new Mark 6 GTI has inherited the intermittent squeak from the passenger’s seat base with no occupant to weigh the front left seat down – only seems to occur on rougher B-grade routes where chassis flex may occur. The B-pillar vertical plastic sheath on nearside left interior has made that infamous clicking sound several times in 7500km – not sure if it occurs with chassis flex or whether it’s a result of having the interior temperature and humidity varied against the outside temperature and humidity. The change in temps and humidity may have an effect on drying out the plastic interior. Although the Mark 6 chassis is stiffer than the outgoing MK5 Golf chassis, flex in the chassis may have moved to another location of the Golf hatchback. This could be a problem for both the GTI and Golf R.

Oh yeah – the sun visor cover for the small face mirror often rattles when closed with the sun driver’s sun visor pulled down. The cruise control, when decreased in single digits with separate prongs on the stalk, km/h reverts up to the 5th digit when going down to the zero digit (i.e. 85 – 84 – 83 – 82 – 81 - 80 – 85) – only a minor concern. Finally – exhaust scavenging is still apparent – more so under load between 2400 – 2600rpm and not really an issue on protracted highway cruises/long trips, unlike some drone from the Golf R on the highway.

Fuel consumption for journey from South Coast Sydney to Surfer Paradise and return on the Pacific Hwy – door to door – averaged 6.75 litres per 100km, showing an improvement on the older MKV GTI. Considering that Mark 6 GTI motor was still a bit tight, running on less slippery mineral break-in oil and not strictly driving for best economy in varying the revs from time to time as the TSI is still fairly new. A strict economy run in the old MKV GTI with DSG in drive mode and using Pacific Hwy and alternative New England Hwy had a best of 7.0 litres per 100km door to door for the same trip. Mark 6 GTI already showing an improvement in economy over the previous model GTI. Hopefully a full economy run will yield @ 6.5/6.6 litres per 100km for the same trip once completely run-in and using super slippery full synthetic oil after 15,000km service. Fuel consumption working the motor harder up Springbrook Mountain Drive and Mount Tamborine in Queensland had the GTI’s fuel consumption reading showing @ 9.0 litres per 100kms, which is very good indeed imo.

My thoughts on Dynamic Chassis Control (DCC) after 7,500km including an interstate journey:

Well worth the money for a street driven vehicle. For competition, you’d want something a bit stiffer in spring & damper rate. I used Normal mode for entire trip from Sydney to Queensland. Mt Tamborine climb had Normal and Sport modes as roadways further up Mt Tamborine can be quite rough in texture.

The drive from Gold Coast (Nerang) to Springbrook Mountain involved having the DCC in normal mode for first half of the mountain climb as a test on driver satisfaction, enjoyment and feeling. After the first half of the Springbrook Mountain climb of this fantastic route, I opted for DCC Sport mode. The DCC steering mode in Normal to too light to make for a cohesive drive – the driver and Golf GTI failing to gel with a certain type of awkwardness when climbing the hilly bends (think NSW Macquarie Pass near Wollongong, only longer and more flowing) with the GTI having a tad too much body lean at the lower speeds and too much driver effort required into lighter steering around the closely knit string of bends leading up the valleys.

DCC into Sport mode at half way was spot on in terms of chassis adjustment for the climb up to Springbrook in Queensland’s South East Hinterland. In DCC Sport the GTI sits flat on its springs, EDL/XDS unobtrusively aids the punch out of tight corners when driving responsibly within limits smoothly and consistently stringing a series of bends together. ESC does not cut in, rather acting in an unobtrusive way (Golf R has EDL at the front for lower speeds; but not XDL). The larger Mark 6 rear sway bar (MK6 24mm –v- 22mm MKV) also aids in reducing understeer. The added weight and directness of DCC Sport steering provides for that direct connection between driver and vehicle, and coupled with the flat stance of the chassis, really does transform the drive experience.

Alternatively: The drive from Gold Coast via – Nerang – Murwillumbah – Byron Bay – the hinterland route through the Tweed Valley had DCC in a combo of Sport and Normal - mostly Sport with me putting up with a terse ride on the rougher sections of flowing bends leading up to the Queensland – NSW border just for the better driver experience; then Normal leading up to & around the township of Murwillumbah, returning to Sport out of Murwillumbah to Bryon Bay along the old Pacific hwy flowing roadways. DCC soft was used to climb Cape Bryon to Byron Bay lighthouse – that’s a rough bit of tourist roadway for a popular tourist destination.

Great thing about DCC is that it softens or hardens the damper tune according to speed. I have noticed, and it has been stated on another review on Ausmotive.com.au re: Golf R that when Dynamic Chassis
Control is in the hard Sport mode, steering kickback may occur from time to time on mid corner upsets.

I’ve experience some mild kickback on the GTI on occasions with DCC in Sport when negotiating rougher B-grade roadways. This is something that I never experienced in the old MKV GTI, despite having up to six different suspension combinations and the last of those combinations being a much firmer & stiffer KW V3 coil over suspension and H&R solid adjustable sway bars front & rear. Steering kickback does not occur when DCC is in Normal or Comfort modes – only Sport.

Amazed at how flat the GTI sits with DCC in any setting, esp. harder Sport mode, without the use of aftermarket adjustable sway bars as I had on my old MKV GTI. The aftermarket heavy duty solid sway bars really do sharpen & quicken the one wheel bumps creating a brittle type of ride over these similar routes (esp. Mt Tamborine) when fitted to the old MKV GTI. In contrast, the new Mark 6 GTI settles into uneventful slight understeer when pressing on, but offers a much improved ride. When in either Sport or Comfort mode and travelling at faster speeds, the DCC electronic dampers can be caught out in the first ¼ of a second when striking big roadway hits. In this respect, I’m guessing the more expensive & reactive Audi/HSV/Ferrari magna-tec dampers may work that bit faster than Dynamic Chassis Control.


I see the Golf GTI won the MOTOR Magazine ‘Bang for Your Buck’ 2010 title.

It’s easy to see why from the perspective of usability and all-round ability of the Mark 6 Golf GTI. Strictly speaking, the Golf R and more importantly, the Renault Clio 200 Cup would offer more bang for your buck. Problem with both the Golf R and Renault Clio is that you have to put up with each vehicles idiosyncrasies for that added performance.

In Renault Clio’s case: smaller vehicle, 3 door only, terse low speed ride, lack of low end torque, manual only option. In the Golf R’s case: Turbo lag creating lack of excitement lower down in the rev range, vehicle not being able to be used to full extent on public roadways regarding it’s very high grip threshold and peaky large turbo engine response, extra weight creating lack of adjustability on the throttle in public roadways and added fuel consumption.

Not surprising to see that Golf GTI with fast spooling small turbo'ed EA888 motor is only 0.1 seconds slower than the Golf R in the crucial 80-120kph real world performance test. 0-1.0km acceleration test has the GTI only 1 second slower than the Golf R over the full 1km run - impressive. No difference in braking ability in either stopping power or consistency between the Golf R and Golf GTI, according to MOTOR magazine. Most importantly – WJ has not rushed out to trade his White GTI in for a Golf R. Very happy with the Golf GTI ownership and drive experience, despite some minor squeaks and rattles.

Re: Idiosyncrasy of Golf R – see link from this forum:

The Golf R is great, BUT..

See WJ Suspension thread for pics of Springbrook, Queensland and Tweed Valley, New South Wales.



Cheers
WJ

[WhiteJames]

Pictures - Post # 282 WJ Suspension Thread

Picture One: Springbrook Mountain with Gold Coast in the far distance.
Picture Two: Queensland - NSW border crossing with Tweed Valley in the distance.
Picture Three: Same as picture two, but from a distance.

See link and post # 282:

WHITE JAMES: Suspension & Wheel Reviews - Page 13 - VW GTI Forum / VW Rabbit Forum / VW R32 Forum / VW Golf Forum - Golfmkv.com

Cheers
WJ

[Corey_R]

WhiteJames, you have mentioned several times that the Golf's come with a mineral based break-in oil. However, other forum members have asked dealers and service depts and attempted searches on the internet and haven't come across any information on this, apart from you saying that it is so.

Are you able to expand on that topic? Cheers.

[WhiteJames]

My salesperson and service managers (McGrath - Sutherland) strictly told me not to change the oil myself with full synthetic oil as a mineral based oil is used for the first 15,000km. Changing to synthetic oil within 15,000km will void my warranty, dealer tells me. Reason being is that a modern engine like the EA888 TSI has such fine tolerence levels from the factory in terms of bore cross-honing and piston rings, that a thicker mineral based oil is required for the first 15,000km to ensure a sufficient mate between cylinder bore and piston rings. Full synthetic oil would be too slippery for the initial break-in process, hence the mineral based oil. Don't know what type of oil Volkswagen dealers use for breaking in motor. Some makes, like Porsche, start off from factory with synthetic based oil. I read an article where motoring journos drove a 911 Carrera Porsche around Australia and used about 500ml of oil every 1,000km. Synthetic oil being more slippery, may find its way past the piston rings much easier than thicker less slippery mineral oil. I'm expecting my GTI to use a bit of oil once I go to synthetic oil at 15,000km. The hill & mountain climbs I've been doing during break-in process heat the motor and therefore heat the oil up - this causing the motor to expand and oil to thin as it becomes hotter, which will in turn keep the oil slippery and bring the piston rings and cylinder bore closer together to for nice close shave & mating process. Only a theory of mine at this stage - time will tell in the longer term on results of this run in process. Many engine builders recommend mineral oil for first 1-6 months of new engine reconditioning.

Cheers
WJ

[shakespeare]

Thanks WJ for the extensive write up and feedback, it was great reading Also nice pics!

A little OT here but FYI relating to Mineral based oils, Mazda dealers have recommended for the MPS that synthetic oils be used only after the 10,000 km service, ie 20,000 due to the running in period of a new motor (the MPS motor is also direct injected, if this is related?) Interestingly the recommended oil ongoing in the MPS is a mineral/synthetic blend.

[WhiteJames]

Synthetic oil is based on mineral oil - see link and link below for more info:

What makes synthetic oil superior to conventional oil?

I recommend synthetic motor oil to all my customers to prevent sludge. Why?

Synthetic motor oil is made from a blend of mineral oil, natural gas, and special additives. Because this blend is extremely pure from the beginning, it can withstand more torture in your vehicle's engine.

Synthetic lubricants cost just slightly more than conventional oils, but offer the best engine protection because:

■synthetics remain stable at high temperatures (conventional oils break down faster at today's higher engine temps)
■synthetics remain fluid at very low temperatures (conventional oils thicken)
■additive packages are formulated with special chemicals for top cleaning and anti-oxidant protection

Remember, you can switch to synthetics on any car regardless of age or previous motor oil. If your vehicle has been acting up, have your technician check for sludge.

Quote comes from another link in this thread:

http://www.vwwatercooled.org.au/f112/tips-breaking-brand-new-engine-42450-19.html

In respect to motoring magazines - I think it's important to note that each of the three local magazines are aimed at slightly different target markets. MOTOR favours the harder core sports/track enthusiast. WHEELS extends it's views towards the general minded motring enthusiast. TOP GEAR Australia - not sure on that one. Point is, even though the Mitsubishi EVO X pipped the Golf R in the previous issue MOTOR comparison test, the same test in WHEELS would likely favour the Golf R as less emphasises is placed on the outright sporting ability, rather focussing on the whole package with all owners and drivers in mind. I found this when the MKV GTI first arrived and was compared to the Subaru WRX. Not being a hard-core enthusiast or track day runner, I'd put most weight on the WHEELS magazine reviews, although MOTOR magazine tests tend to be more in depth in terms of performance data - only wish they'd regularly post fuel consumption figures - whether on or off the track. My GTI with 7500km involving over 90% extra-urban driving is beginning to losen up nicely atm. Hopefully the motor will last over 300,000km with regular maintain and care based on my extra-urban long winded break-in process.

Another issue I'm finding with the Golf GTI, which will be a bigger problem for you Golf R guys, is that when running in the EA888 TSI motor, the eastern state limit of 110kph comes up before the tacho hits redline in 3rd gear (DSG). 2nd gear will get you to @ 90kph. In this case, most modern sports hatches are too fast - in this repsect, the Renault Clio would be suited for local conditions, as it offers greater element of fun at lower speeds (probably Mini as well). Have to keep things in perspective - 25 years ago a VK Brock Group A Commodore were posting slower acceleration times than the Golf GTI/R, but using twice as much fuel.

Cheers
WJ

[G-rig]

Sounds like you've been going on some good drives WJ. Another good write up.

Agree with you that the economy is quite good with the new GTI, I often get ~6.9 - 7.5L/100 on highway commutes.

Interesting read on the other forum too, sounds like some people prefer the R32 than the R even though it's a bit more nose heavy. Also agrees with my thoughts about having useful power for around town ie minimal lag and with the R's grip would have to be doing higher speeds to get it unsettled and masks it's speed very easily compared to the GTI. I won't be trading mine in either (given i already have it) and don't really see the big advantages for a street car. Given there are still a few rattles from the B-pillars and build quality issues I wouldn't want to spend too much on a VW either.

As far as oils, I would have thought the oil grade (ie 5W40 etc) would give away the Mineral/Synthetic blend..