Anyone with a VW GTI?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Mykl
The Corvette isn't a sports car, it's too heavy. It's a GT car.

Challenger R/T a muscle car? More like a "wimpy car."

The problem with using such a heavy dose of subjective opinion in car classification is that the classifications suddenly become meaningless.

The thing is, with this "David" criteria you've essentially disqualified every sport compact on the market. The Fiesta ST, the fine car that it is, isn't faster than any performance oriented vehicle that costs more than a couple grand more, not even a V-6 Mustang. The Focus ST isn't much better and neither is the Mazdaspeed 3. None of them can hang with cars at even the next tier up on the price bracket, and it's not even a close competition. Maybe if you go back 7-8 years you can keep up with a base model Cayman or Boxster, if you're lucky.


More absurd-ism? No, the V6 Challengers are not muscle cars but the 5.7R/T is. The Corvette is only 100lbs more than the GTI... and that includes the 6.2l V8... for the displacement it is light.

Mazdaspeed3, Focus ST, WRX, and...Boxster: All mid 5 second 0-60 and low 14s/high 13w for the 1/4 mile. What was the best Z4, 350Z, and S2000's times? Similar mid-fives in the 0-60 category? This is my point. The Mazda, Ford and Subaru compete with the "bigger" opponents for less money, often 10G less.

What is the GTI again? That is right, mid 6 second 0-60 and 15+ seconds 1/4 mile. Be weary of those V6 Camrys...


Who is the Fiesta "beating" (or at least competing with)... oh, just the GTI. For 20% less. Mid 6sec 0-60 and under 15 for the 1/4mile
 
Last edited:
Listen, I like the GTI. It is a good/great car... but you really have to have the rose-colored glass on or be a GTI fanboy to call it competitive in the performance category against other "hot hatches". It holds its own against other budget sportscars but that is not what a hot hatch is or what was back in the day. 200bhp from a sports-coupe used to be a lot... now folks complain that the FRS/BRZ is under-powered... but the Mk2 MR2 was only 200bhp as well. The FRS and Mk2 MR2 are very similar but one is held in a different light. Standards change and 200bhp in a 3200lbs car just does not make the cut for being "hot".

If Acura rolled out a 270bhp NSX, people would be crying foul.

Now, if the GTI dropped 400lbs to be on the same fighting weight as the Fiesta, then the lack of 250bhp would not be a big deal. It would be "hot"... but you have to look at the current GTI as being either underpowered or overweight.
 
Not to stoke the fire here, but just to clarify, especially on the Focus ST and GTI:

1) GTI listed HP is at the wheels, not the crank. VW underrates the HP, essentially by doing this.
2) Focus ST HP is at the crank.
3) The GTI and ST put down the same HP at the wheels (right at 210 HP). They dyno graphs out there prove this.
4) A simple stage 1 tune ~$500 will take the GTI to about 250 HP at the wheels. I think stage 1 on the Focus ST gets it to about 230 HP.

Anyway. Just wanted everyone to be aware that listed HP values for the GTI don't directly compare to listed HP of other cars.
 
Originally Posted By: jigen
There's a dyno of a stock Focus St making 230/263 at the wheels. Seems like the Fords are a little conservative with their numbers.

Here it is:

http://www.focusst.org/forum/focus-st-discussions/460-first-2013-ford-focus-st-dyno-3.html

235hp 263tq


That is an extreme outlier. Most of the dynos look like this:
http://www.focusfanatics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=297467
or this
http://www.atpturbo.com/root/releases/images/release052213/2013fordfocusdyno1.gif
or it goes on and on.

The exception you posted is drastically different from the consensus.
 
Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
More absurd-ism? No, the V6 Challengers are not muscle cars but the 5.7R/T is. The Corvette is only 100lbs more than the GTI... and that includes the 6.2l V8... for the displacement it is light.

Mazdaspeed3, Focus ST, WRX, and...Boxster: All mid 5 second 0-60 and low 14s/high 13w for the 1/4 mile. What was the best Z4, 350Z, and S2000's times? Similar mid-fives in the 0-60 category? This is my point. The Mazda, Ford and Subaru compete with the "bigger" opponents for less money, often 10G less.

What is the GTI again? That is right, mid 6 second 0-60 and 15+ seconds 1/4 mile. Be weary of those V6 Camrys...


Who is the Fiesta "beating" (or at least competing with)... oh, just the GTI. For 20% less. Mid 6sec 0-60 and under 15 for the 1/4mile


Porsche Boxster, too heavy to be a sports car, it's a GT drop-top like the Sebring convertible.

Ahh yes, the age old stance of over-estimating the speed of cars you like, and under-estimating the speed of cars you don't. You're cherry picking magazine numbers. If you poll various magazines for how quick the GTI is you'd arrive at about 14.6 at roughly 96 MPH, a speed that suggests closer to a 220ish BHP for the GTI. As badtlc says, the car is under-rated from the factory. Independent testing suggests that the GTI has close to 200 at the wheels.

My absurd argument is a mirror image of yours. It's interesting that you have a problem with it. Insisting that your subjective opinion be used to classify cars breeds debate, such as this one. I'd love to read a non satirical magazine review of a hatchback that states "this car doesn't have enough torque steer to break my wrists, clearly it's not a hot car."
 
Originally Posted By: Mykl
Porsche Boxster, too heavy to be a sports car, it's a GT drop-top like the Sebring convertible.

Ahh yes, the age old stance of over-estimating the speed of cars you like, and under-estimating the speed of cars you don't. You're cherry picking magazine numbers.

My absurd argument is a mirror image of yours. It's interesting that you find it to be absurd.


Well, you don't want to discuss my "personal" experience which was less impressive. I bring facts and figures and then you want to dismiss that. I looked across several places reporting their time to get a window (accounting for differences in surface, temp, individual models, and location). You say I over-estimate the cars I like... does that mean the GTI is even SLOWER? I like the GTI... I just don't think it is a a hot hatch anymore.

I call it WARM because it is not a significant increase from the base model, it is overly expensive, and lacks behind its rivals. It is either too heavy or underpowered. They can keep the current powerplant if the give it a diet. Being "refined" is valid hot hatch metric which is the VW best hand.

Look up the term "warm hatch"... it is even on the wikipedia page.

"Warm Hatch"

Quote:
...However, with post-2010 hot hatches now boasting up to or exceeding 250BHP, the term "Warm Hatch" now seems to be applied to cars that output as much as 200BHP and appears to be more dependent on how the manufacturer structures their model range and advertises the vehicle in question.


I get it, you own a GTI. It is your car and darn if anyone says anything that might not align with your thinking. It is your baby. The B student that you think is the smartest in the class. Sorry, the GTI just is not "hot" anymore.
 
Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
Well, you don't want to discuss my "personal" experience which was less impressive. I bring facts and figures and then you want to dismiss that. I looked across several places reporting their time to get a window (accounting for differences in surface, temp, individual models, and location). You say I over-estimate the cars I like... does that mean the GTI is even SLOWER? I like the GTI... I just don't think it is a a hot hatch anymore.

I call it WARM because it is not a significant increase from the base model, it is overly expensive, and lacks behind its rivals. It is either too heavy or underpowered. They can keep the current powerplant if the give it a diet. Being "refined" is valid hot hatch metric which is the VW best hand.

Look up the term "warm hatch"... it is even on the wikipedia page.

"Warm Hatch"


I get it, you own a GTI. It is your car and darn if anyone says anything that might not align with your thinking. It is your baby. The B student that you think is the smartest in the class. Sorry, the GTI just is not "hot" anymore.


Toyota MR2 Spyder = Chrysler Sebring convertible

We've gone round and round enough. The GTI meets the widely accepted definition for "hot hatch." You may choose to call it whatever you want, even in the face of multiple other people who have suggested to you that your description is not accurate.

I don't have an inflated opinion of my car. People who do will not point out the vehicle's flaws and recommend that they explore other options before pulling the trigger on one. I may have been more interested in this conversation because I own one, but what this comes down to is the insistence that you call a spade a spade. If you want to call a spade a club because maybe in the deck of cards you're using the tip isn't as pointy as you would like, that's your business. But it doesn't make you right.

The GTI is a hot hatch. It may be on the softer side of the hot hatch scale, but it is the hot version of a mundane hatchback. Bringing in your personal "facts and figures" does not change that.
 
Originally Posted By: Mykl
Toyota MR2 Spyder = Chrysler Sebring convertible

We've gone round and round enough. The GTI meets the widely accepted definition for "hot hatch." You may choose to call it whatever you want, even in the face of multiple other people who have suggested to you that your description is not accurate.

I don't have an inflated opinion of my car. People who do will not point out the vehicle's flaws and recommend that they explore other options before pulling the trigger on one. I may have been more interested in this conversation because I own one, but what this comes down to is the insistence that you call a spade a spade. If you want to call a spade a club because maybe in the deck of cards you're using the tip isn't as pointy as you would like, that's your business. But it doesn't make you right.

The GTI is a hot hatch. It may be on the softer side of the hot hatch scale, but it is the hot version of a mundane hatchback. Bringing in your personal "facts and figures" does not change that.


It is not a hot hatch anymore. Maybe it will be hotter in the next version. However the MkVI has the same problems as the MkIV. It is nice, but not very hot.

It is overpriced, underpowered, underdeveloped. It is not the giant-slayer that the MkI/MkII once was. Face it, it is Elvis at the end of its career. The same can be said about the path of the 240Z becoming "refined" like the 300ZX. Fat and over-priced.

I gave real-world fact and figures. The third-party timing of 0-60 and the 1/4 mile is slower than other hatches yet the GTI cost more. So if you are comparing it against the performance of others, then it isn't so hot.

What do you call a slow "hot hatch".... warm.
 
I measured the temperature at the tail pipe, it's pretty hot. So were the tires after I ran it through Deal's Gap. I don't believe the S2000's and sport bikes I was tail-gating thought my car was cold.

As far as "speed" it's all relative. If your sliding scale of performance puts a massive difference between the Focus ST and the GTI, I'd hate to see how big your scale is when you add a 3cyl Metro to the comparison.

The GTI is pretty darn quick, it's just not "class leading" quick, which is fine. If you insist upon reserving the term "hot hatch" for the fastest hatchback, you'd have a class of one, and one car does not make a category.
 
This conversation is actually somewhat interesting. It's a very small example of how perceptions of a car change drastically as a model comes to the end of it's life.

When the MkVI GTI was released in 2009, it was considered to be a very competent, capable performance hatchback. The two most popular choices were the Mazdaspeed 3 if you wanted raw bonkers performance, or the GTI if you wanted something a little smoother about how it went about its business. Of course there was also the Cooper S, which I guess you've never thought of as a hot hatch because it's a terrible performance value.

Now the perception has changed, because other companies have responded to the GTI in their own way and this current model has aged.

In six years, I'm willing to bet that no matter how well received the MkVII GTI is (the MkVI was very, very well received and highly praised), there's going to be someone like you saying that it's not "hardcore" enough because a new model has been released that has sharper handling and better acceleration.

That's fine, but no matter what your perception of a car changes to as new cars are released, that doesn't change what it was when it was introduced to the world.
 
Originally Posted By: Mykl
This conversation is actually somewhat interesting. It's a very small example of how perceptions of a car change drastically as a model comes to the end of it's life.

When the MkVI GTI was released in 2009, it was considered to be a very competent, capable performance hatchback. The two most popular choices were the Mazdaspeed 3 if you wanted raw bonkers performance, or the GTI if you wanted something a little smoother about how it went about its business. Of course there was also the Cooper S, which I guess you've never thought of as a hot hatch because it's a terrible performance value.

Now the perception has changed, because other companies have responded to the GTI in their own way and this current model has aged.

In six years, I'm willing to bet that no matter how well received the MkVII GTI is (the MkVI was very, very well received and highly praised), there's going to be someone like you saying that it's not "hardcore" enough because a new model has been released that has sharper handling and better acceleration.

That's fine, but no matter what your perception of a car changes to as new cars are released, that doesn't change what it was when it was introduced to the world.


It is keeping up with the times...

I am a fan of the MkV. If I could find a clean, non-abused MT option, I might consider it in a year (would end up going with a Si if I found it... or a SVX). I kinda look at the MkVI as a "refined" MkV. They just did not invest in the model when others were in a power-torque-steer war.

In 2005/2006, the "hot" options in the low-mid 20s were the 220bhp WRX, the 160ish Civic Si (but 2700lbs), 205bhp Colbalt SS, Celica GT-S with 180bhp, 170Focus SVT, 160ish Mini, and RSX-S 200bhp (a bit more $). The GTI MkV was very strong.... the MkIV was not (with 150-180bhp). Further, they had the R32 in the wings.

Its not that it is not "hardore" enough... it is just that it is "lacking" that same heat (or rather did not up their game when others were upping theirs). The Fiesta is more fun to drive and there are more performance options for less money.

I said earlier that the Six-gen based Civic Si was my favorite out of the recent "hot hatches"... and it is one the "weakest" powerplants of the bunch. Why? It was bonkers fun and cheap. The MkV was bonkers in 2006. The MkVI just seems warmed over. You don't have to have the best performance specs to be a "hot hatch" but if you are going to occupy the highest pricepoint, then it can't be one of the slow ones.

Is the GTI the most fun: No. Is it the fastest: No. Is it the most expensive: Yes. Hot hatches are fast and cheap... and a lot of fun. GTI MkVI is fun "enough" but not cheap and not fast enough. It is the 150bhp MkIV waiting to be replaced...
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: FutureDoc

Is the GTI the most fun: No. Is it the fastest: No. Is it the most expensive: Yes. Hot hatches are fast and cheap... and a lot of fun. GTI MkVI is fun "enough" but not cheap and not fast enough. It is the 150bhp MkIV waiting to be replaced...


I completely disagree. Not only is the car fun, but it's under $30k (Cooper S, Focus ST, and MS3 are all within a couple thousand of each other) and it's certainly fast enough unless you're splitting hairs. It handles great, the engine is a gem, the gearbox is wonderful to use, and it doesn't beat you up on long drives.

It's the perfect hot hatch.

Maybe you prefer a rougher around the edges car and it's not perfect in your eyes... that's cool, but it's still a hot hatch even though the torque steer is under control.



...and as far as "keeping up with the times" goes, you don't reclassify older cars because they don't hold up to standards of today. A 1964 GTO is still a muscle car even though it's absolutely gutless relative to most performance vehicles of today.
 
Originally Posted By: Mykl
Originally Posted By: FutureDoc

Is the GTI the most fun: No. Is it the fastest: No. Is it the most expensive: Yes. Hot hatches are fast and cheap... and a lot of fun. GTI MkVI is fun "enough" but not cheap and not fast enough. It is the 150bhp MkIV waiting to be replaced...


I completely disagree. Not only is the car fun, but it's under $30k (Cooper S, Focus ST, and MS3 are all within a couple thousand of each other) and it's certainly fast enough unless you're splitting hairs. It handles great, the engine is a gem, the gearbox is wonderful to use, and it doesn't beat you up on long drives.

It's the perfect hot hatch.

Maybe you prefer a rougher around the edges car and it's not perfect in your eyes... that's cool, but it's still a hot hatch even though the torque steer is under control.



...and as far as "keeping up with the times" goes, you don't reclassify older cars because they don't hold up to standards of today. A 1964 GTO is still a muscle car even though it's absolutely gutless relative to most performance vehicles of today.


I agree. I can't fault the GTI for being more refined than other hatches. It will go just as fast around a track and be more comfortable doing it.

I will disagree that it's "the perfect" hot hatch. That is the R32 in my eyes, but I'm an AWD fan.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49jASkAJNo4

Mazdaspeed 3 tested against GTI

Notes...

- Mazdaspeed 3 is faster at the drag strip by a fair margin (not surprising)
- Despite big horsepower difference the GTI is only a half a second slower around Roebling Road, credit is given to the GTI's superior handling

Both cars were priced very close to one another. So if the GTI is not a hot hatch, then neither is the Mazdaspeed 3.... because it's just barely faster than the GTI at the track.
 
Originally Posted By: glock19

I will disagree that it's "the perfect" hot hatch. That is the R32 in my eyes, but I'm an AWD fan.


The VR6 sounds so good.
cool.gif
 
The GTI in MkIV flavor only had 180hp towards the end not 150hp that was in the early 2000's. So why bring that up it doesn't make sense.

Plus if you really wanted you could the get 200hp VR6 as well or did you forget that?
 
Last edited:
I probably would have bought a GTI in 2007 if any of the Louisville VW dealers had been willing to order a car to my specs, so I ended up with a Mazdaspeed 3. I've grown accustomed to what I call its "ADHD Pit Bull on Crystal Meth" personality and anyway, I have a geezermobile(the E90) to drive if I want something more sedate.

Having said that, I believe the GTI merits serious consideration if you are looking at something in the sub-$30K FWD performance car segment. Buy what YOU like- but don't disparage the GTI simply because it doesn't fulfill your particular list of requirements...
 
The GTI (which invented the "hot hatch") is not a hot hatch... horse excrement.

"warm hatch"
crackmeup2.gif
21.gif
Who makes this crud up?

Car and driver thinks it is a "hot hatch":

Quote:
Even on the eve of its replacement, the VW GTI remains the hot hatch to beat.


http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2013-ford-focus-st-vs-2012-volkswagen-gti-comparison-test

Guess the Focus ST will be a "warm hatch"
crackmeup2.gif
in 2 months when the MK7 hits:

Quote:
The ST is here because it was the only car able to vanquish the last GTI in our testing.


http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/...te-specs-page-4

I'll save you the work, GTI won by 226>202 out of a possible 240 points.
 
If I buy another FWD car again(unlikely, but who knows?) the Mk7 GTI with the Performance Pack will be on my very short list. The lack of a mechanical LSD on a car with over 200 or so bhp is a deal breaker for me...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

raaizin
new VW Tiguan SE R Line Black 4 Motion/ Honda CRV Hybrid
Replies
15
Views
1K
Sj08
Graham Piccinini
2007-2011 Hyundai Elantra Touring
Replies
0
Views
258
Graham Piccinini
C
Purchased a new car (VW)
2 3
Replies
40
Views
4K
Torrid
Torrid
VW is ending the manual for the GTI.
3 4 5
Replies
82
Views
4K
TiGeo
Bryanccfshr
I am less than thrilled to buy next vehicle.
2 3
Replies
49
Views
5K
TomYoung
Back
Top