Golf R Observations and Questions

[pologti18t]

Interesting article about the US first review of the R coming to the US

2012 Volkswagen Golf R First Drive - Motor Trend

the reference to the DSG is interesting in that they speak of 2 different types.. hope we get the good one..

I also found it interesting that for such a large market that, unlike here, they give the buyer only the option of a base spec and a luxo model. No plethora of options. So basically there are 5 colours and 2 spec levels. 10 combinations.

[SilvrFoxX]

The forums seem to indicate that there is a lot of overhead in getting certain options made compliant with US laws ( hence all the things they dont get) and drive up the costs. Also US drivers have perceptions about what is lux for the money so they bundle them up, anthing over 30K has to have leather and if it has Lux in the name it has to have a sunroof.. here in oz we dont identify the same way

[Tim]

I also found it interesting that for such a large market that, unlike here, they give the buyer only the option of a base spec and a luxo model. No plethora of options. So basically there are 5 colours and 2 spec levels. 10 combinations.

I think VWA could learn from that. Could see an end to the silly waiting times. You would think that for a high volume market such as the US it simplifies things a lot.

[Corey_R]

Never heard of the "two versions of DSG" they mention in the article. If anything though, it sounds like a software change...

[SilvrFoxX]

Never heard of the "two versions of DSG" they mention in the article. If anything though, it sounds like a software change...

Or just bull****e, I mean the reference was info from a friend of a friend...

[Glennb]

Took my R on it's only little Targa up to the top of Mt Buller this week.
Awesome run with the road to myself, windows down and exhaust popping and tyres screaming.
Absolute blast and my respect for the car's ability has jumped hugely. It just sits so flat and neutral around the hairpins and i definetly recommend people take theirs for a similar run to stretch the R's legs and see what it can do.

[autosalbei]

I'm too tight to pay for an RVC. That's my excuse anyway.

Just $500 on top of ~$55,000 for an item typically only available on ~$80k+ cars? I am not sure "tight" is the word!

I'd be surprised if second hand GTIs and Rs with RVCs weren't worth at least $500 more than those without, even over the long term.

My friend waited over six months for her GTI manual with sunroof. When I asked if she got the camera she said she did not think it was worth the extra $1,400 (probably because Park Assist makes for an impressive demo and the camera was not demonstrated by itself).

Based on the number of factory orders and dealer inventory with numerous costly options amounting to thousands of dollars but no RVC specified, it looks like VW dealerships are not appreciating and communicating to customers the benefits and outstanding value of the factory-fitted RVC.

It's a shame for new car buyers and those looking in the used car market in years to come. Happy days for those who have one though!

[SilvrFoxX]

Watching all this to and fro over RVC and its potential resale value add is joke worthy.. no problem with what ever options folk choose , if you can and want to afford these items then good for you.. the relationship to that and resale is insignificant.

If a buyer wants a model second hand they will only have a few items that will seal the deal and the long list of items available will be lost in time. they will look at the redbook or carsales and see what the going price is and that will be the benchmark. Additional options are a bonus and make the car more saleable but more expensive pfft I dont think so.....

[autosalbei]

I take it, SilvrFoxX, that you overlooked or passed on the RVC when placing your R order with ~$7,000 worth of other options . . .

Whatever the case, I really think the RVC is something else; an option quite apart from all others, especially given its relatively insignificant (ie <1%) additional cost. An option that transforms a car and the ability of the driver to navigate safely when reversing. Quite remarkable for $500!

Most other factory options, especially the more costly ones, have been available on cars for eons.

Against optioning the skin of a dead animal to line your seats for $3,300, or improving night visibility for $2,000 or letting the sunshine in for $1,900 (I went with leather and roof), an RVC in a car is a technological marvel that for $500 should be commended to all motorists who have the option of selecting it if only for the potential benefit to the people whose persons or possessions might otherwise be harmed or damaged.

Applying camera technology to cars is a quite remarkable advance in automotive engineering that has only been made feasible as technology for compact colour cameras has become as affordable as it has early in the 21st century.

We tend to take technology for granted these days, what with iPhones, iPads and the like. But being able to equip affordable passenger vehicles with a colour reversing camera that pops out from under a badge to provide an unobstructed view to the rear is not to be sneezed at.

Not only is the ability to apply such advanced technology for such a low cost remarkable, the benefit of being able to see parts of the road that would otherwise be invisible to the driver cannot easily be overstated from a safety and convenience perspective.

The driver of an RVC-equipped car can reverse their car with complete confidence as against the educated and experienced guess work of the driver of a non-RVC-equipped car who never knows for sure how close they might be, or what is immediately behind their car: witness the oft-reported injuries to children and the no doubt many crushed bicycles and toys.

Again, this is technology which until very recent years has not been available in any passenger cars, let alone mass-produced VWs for around $40k. In years to come it will be far more common and, in no short time, expected.

It is certainly not joke-worthy. But it is a shame when people express such disrespect and disdain for the opinions of others, even if they are only reacting defensively to their belated realisation at their oversight by not spending $500 to future-proof their ~$60,000 2011 car which they may well be driving for some time after RVCs have been mandated by law or at least totally justified on any cost-benefit analysis.

Happy for you to disagree and I am sure you will enjoy your $55,000-odd car without this 21st century technological advance that delivers so much more than any other comparable priced option, but please don't tell others what they believe is a joke, let alone when there is so much evidence to the contrary.

[Tim]

RVCs will never replace common sense. Personally I think all this relying on technology is actually making things more dangerous in some instances.

[Idle]

RVCs will never replace common sense. Personally I think all this relying on technology is actually making things more dangerous in some instances.

I don't think they're really intended to — hence the warning that always pops up on the VW's RVC screen: "Make sure it is safe to reverse"

Speaking for myself, after 70+ years of driving without one I'm having problems learning to trust it.

It's quite a help at times, though.

[SilvrFoxX]

I take it, SilvrFoxX, that you overlooked or passed on the RVC when placing your R order with ~$7,000 worth of other options . . .

.

I see you completely miss read my post. Again with hand puppets, everyone could have been talking about wheel nuts and the technology and value add they might be because of stress and security.. it still has little to do with resale values..

And again " now with Auslan" I have no opinion on what options people do and dont select it is all personal preference.

But reading your post has now made it quite funny.. appreciated the distraction from reality

[autosalbei]

RVCs will never replace common sense. Personally I think all this relying on technology is actually making things more dangerous in some instances.

Unlike PDC which could more easily deceive you, using an RVC is not much more "relying on technology" than using a rear-view mirror, both of which should be used with common sense, not instead of common sense.

The computerised parking system is another matter as you give up some control, but all the camera does is improve your view. If it fails to operate you are no worse off than someone without it.

[autosalbei]

I see you completely miss read my post. Again with hand puppets, everyone could have been talking about wheel nuts and the technology and value add they might be because of stress and security.. it still has little to do with resale values..

And again " now with Auslan" I have no opinion on what options people do and dont select it is all personal preference.

But reading your post has now made it quite funny.. appreciated the distraction from reality

No, I quite understood your post, this last one however has me a little confused and suggests that you do not take my point about not disrespecting the views of others.

I have also concluded that either you now realise you made a mistake when you omitted the RVC or that you would rather pay, say, $57,000 for a Golf from which you cannot see what is immediately behind the rear bumper than, say, $57,500 for a Golf from which you can.

Big difference in functionality, inconsequential difference in price.

While it makes no sense to me and saddens me a tad when people miss out like this, I do not treat your opinion as a joke or suggest it represents a departure from reality, even though $500 for such a feature (which will cost $1,000+ aftermarket) would be a "no-brainer" to many people.

I mean, why wouldn't you option an RVC for $500 when spending that kind of money on an R?

[SilvrFoxX]

*sigh* I assure you my care factor about going backwards is quite low. I am not going to continue to bite , if you think I am making some commentary on the RVC then so be it, I give it the same thought as I do if someone picked white or black as a colour. Finally if respect of others opinions is your point then value mine