Golf R -v- Golf GTI

[Corey_R]

Is all this DSG 0-100 times in reference to Launch Control being activated?

You would have to assume that with the DSG, any 0 to 100 time is via "Launch Control", as it is not possible to "rev" the car at a standstill without using launch control. Note however that the "Launch Control" is not a completely automated system such as in Ferrari and the Nissan GTR etc. The process of enabling Launch Control in a VW actually disables the traction control, so you still need to appropriately adjust the gas pedal to prevent wheel spin and achieve the optimal launch (more of an issue in the GTI than the R obviously).

[Mountainman]

Pfft. Sif use Golf GTI/R manual times. The Golf GTI/R manuals suck. It's as if Volkswagen haven't bothered with it because the DSG is so great.

If we change the above to a Golf R DSG, the cost goes up by only $2500 (and back down by $1500 if you pick the 3 door instead of door), the weight goes up by 20kg, and the claimed acceleration goes down to 5.7 second. However, the tested acceleration, depending on which magazine performed it, would put it at between the two WRX's to better than the STI - if the STI is still a manual. If the STI is the Auto, then that's slower than the WRX, so Golf R DSG then wins out big time.


But yes. VW's manual gearboxes = big weakness. (At least when it comes to acceleration times)

Manufacturers' 0-100 claims =
Golf GTI man 6.9secs
Golf GTI DSG 6.9secs
Golf R man 5.9secs
Golf R DSG 5.7secs
Doesn't seem much of an advantage.
Subaru WRX 5.3secs
Subaru STI 4.9secs
Now that's an advantage when judged by acceleration alone.

But how can you say VW manuals suck? I didn't think critical remarks like that were allowed on this forum. I thought they now have a reputation of some of the best manual changes around.

[Capercat]

Interesting, I've only LC'd a PDK tranny so I'm guessing its similar to Nissan & Ferrari.
I've never LC'd a DSG, but I'm looking forward to it, I like the idea it's not completely automated.

[triode12]

Manufacturers' 0-100 claims =
Golf GTI man 6.9secs
Golf GTI DSG 6.9secs
Golf R man 5.9secs
Golf R DSG 5.7secs
Doesn't seem much of an advantage.
Subaru WRX 5.3secs
Subaru STI 4.9secs
Now that's an advantage when judged by acceleration alone.

But how can you say VW manuals suck? I didn't think critical remarks like that were allowed on this forum. I thought they now have a reputation of some of the best manual changes around.

That GTI Man 0-100 of 6.9secs must be a misprint. The old MKV GTI Man did 0-100 in 7.2secs. Surely, the DSG in the MKVI is as good as the old one and shifts faster than the manual.

[MkVIGTI]

If you your person that just want to beat other quick cars off the lights to the next set of lights get or live where it snows get a vw golf r / evo 10 / subaru sti.

Evos are famed for their excellent handling too...

[MkVIGTI]

That GTI Man 0-100 of 6.9secs must be a misprint. The old MKV GTI Man did 0-100 in 7.2secs. Surely, the DSG in the MKVI is as good as the old one and shifts faster than the manual.

No it's not a misprint. VW claimed that the new Mk VI GTI manual has improved from 7.2 to 6.9 seconds in the 0-100km/h dash, while the DSG remain unchanged.

[Corey_R]

Manufacturers' 0-100 claims =
Golf GTI man 6.9secs
Golf GTI DSG 6.9secs
Golf R man 5.9secs
Golf R DSG 5.7secs
Doesn't seem much of an advantage.
Subaru WRX 5.3secs
Subaru STI 4.9secs
Now that's an advantage when judged by acceleration alone.

But how can you say VW manuals suck? I didn't think critical remarks like that were allowed on this forum. I thought they now have a reputation of some of the best manual changes around.

I can say that they suck because that's my opinion, and because none of the magazines can actually replicate the claimed manual times, as your post to which I replied also displayed (6.63 sec tested vs 5.9 sec claimed). Whereas the claimed DSG times are regularly matched or even beat in magazine tests.

Try and stick with the one type of data for your arguments. First you use magazine test times to prove your point, then when I point out that you've forgotten about the DSG, you switch to manufacturer claims to try to disprove me...

[G-rig]

so what yields the fastest times, LC and sports mode, or manual shifting?

[elisiX]

How does LC work in the DSG GTI?

And I think Sport mode would be quicker than manual shifting Greg.

[bcm]

Whilst there is no doubt that the DSG version of the R is quicker off the mark, I'd be very interested in seeing a back to back around a track between a manual and a DSG. I doubt there would be much in it. My understanding (happy to be corrected) is that you can't effectively left foot brake in a DSG equipped car so you can't use that as a technique to keep the motor on boost whilst braking. Does the manual behave the same way?

[Corey_R]

Whilst there is no doubt that the DSG version of the R is quicker off the mark, I'd be very interested in seeing a back to back around a track between a manual and a DSG. I doubt there would be much in it. My understanding (happy to be corrected) is that you can't effectively left foot brake in a DSG equipped car so you can't use that as a technique to keep the motor on boost whilst braking. Does the manual behave the same way?

Yes, I'd like to see this too. I'm not sure if there has been any valid tests of two equally equipped Golf R's (apart from the manual and DSG) tested side by side on the one day.
However, you can left foot brake if you want. The left foot braking "issue" is around the fact that Volkswagens have a "brake override" which overrides the accelerator in the case where the foot is on the brake. This is present in both the DSG and manual cars though. However, it has been tested that the brake override doesn't affect your ability to left foot brake in the context of track driving (and several other tasks that require it... there was a link somewhere on these forums, but I don't have the time to look sorry)

[bcm]

So you can brake and have your foot into the accelerator and it doesn't cut engine revs?

Or are you saying you can left foot brake, but that the application of the brake over rides the accelerator and the engine revs drop as a result?

I'd look for the link but I'm lazy

[Corey_R]

Obviously when you put your foot on the brake, it'll slow you down, and if its in gear, you'll start dropping revs (all cars since beginning of time are like that if their brakes are working! auto/dsg/manual, doesn't matter).

But with any modern car with a "Brake override", when the foot is on the brake for too long, the accelerator input will be ignored. This is for safety reasons, and will probably be mandatory for all cars within a few years (if the NHTSA and EU have their ways). But as was tested by the magazine (as per that link), the brake override in the cars that they tested still lets you have your "fun" (i.e. it didn't cut in when they were doing heal/toe, or the other things that they tried)

[Capercat]

Whilst there is no doubt that the DSG version of the R is quicker off the mark, I'd be very interested in seeing a back to back around a track between a manual and a DSG.

Kinda off topic, but will have to do until someone can post an R DSG vs manual track test

[YOUTUBE]hegwH4W66J8[/YOUTUBE]

[bcm]

You are of course correct. What I should have said is can you keep the engine under load using the throttle and the brake together in order to keep the car on boost as you're braking. I'm still not sure. I've read you can heel and toe in the manual, but that's a very short duration using both inputs together. Everything I've been able to find so far (haven't searched for you link yet) suggests that the throttle body would close after a couple seconds on the brakes irrespective of what you're doing with the throttle.

In any case it sounds like the DSG and the manual work the same way. Very different philosophy to an Evo.