fr-s/brz vs 28k cars
 

Read this a while back, and I was kinda shocked the gti was a tick faster. Is it the extra torque and the turbo that makes it slightly quicker?? I figured the extra weight would make it WAY slower than the fr-s.

Comments??

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...n/viewall.html

turbo plus dsg twin clutch vs n.a. 6 speed

the turbo means the git has tq over the twins tho same over. the power also comes on faster combined with DSG super shifting

FRS as Tested:$24,930
GTI as Tested:$29,715

avo turbo kit <4000, ecuTEK tune <1000. I'm interested to see how a similarly priced and more similarly equipped frs would perform vs the GTI. Pretty sure it would spank the pants off the GTI. The very linear torque curve, and the modest bumps in power should still be very manageable with the stock suspension and brakes- so it should be faster in every "power" test, and laptime.

So would the auto fr-s in sport mode slightly make the numbers closer?

In the graphic it shows the FR-S and BRZ were both faster around the track than the GTI.

What stat were you looking at specifically?

The auto FR-S is going to be slower than the manual. I would say as well the DSG trans probably makes up a lot of the difference in weight/HP when doing a 1/4 mile drag race.

Not at all. The twins don't have a twin clutch wonder and are slower than the 6 speeds.

DSG and turbo make the difference in the acceleration but the git came 5th so not sure why being slower in a line matters

Yea, the DCT or SMG or whatever it is lets you do a nice launch + shaves 0.5 seconds off the shift. The auto on the twins shaves time off the shift but you lose a lot of power in 1st gear to make up for that.

Where did they find an frs for that little? And a gti at 29k is loaded up with frivolous stuff that you can't get in an frs, at 29k it makes the same power as a sparse gti at at 21k. And just so people know, mkvi gtis usually dyno 200HP to the wheels and typically have 210lbs of torque stock at the tires. I know its front wheel drive /thread blah blah blah, but in same everyday driving does it matter that much, neither of them are race cars in stock form. Just throwing that out there, and I only went with the gti because it was 5k cheaper and had a very nice interior, etc.

I got mine for MSRP, plus tax, in July, which would put it at $24,900ish (before tax, title and license) which is how they usually quote car prices. Found/Purchased in New Orleans.

I've got both of these cars (GTI DSG and FR-S manual). A couple of things you should know about the GTI:

- The engine is underrated from the factory (actually makes about 220 hp stock)
- On a GTI, DSG is roughly 0.3 s faster than stick from 0-60 and 1/4 mile due to launch control and quicker shifts
- The GTI produces a lot more midrange torque than the FR-S due to the turbo

The combination of the above makes up for the GTI's weight disadvantage (and then some). In the end though, neither is particularly fast in a straight line.

Well said, I am glad someone else agrees that the gti is underrated from the factory, I think that is how the mkvii will get its power bump they claim. I can't speak for the frs, but the gti is quick and has good power and does everything I ask of it on the street.

Since when do we care about straight-line acceleration? Ford Mustang is that way ----->

+1.

The DSG is a very good gear box for the price range,

but you will never enjoy a manual car like you would on a 6SP FRS/BRZ.

Hell I could tell you my current E350C gear box is amazing, but it's boring at the end of the day, even with the paddle shifters.

Where's the enjoyment of driving :P

Drag racing is for *****s ! Lets see them firedubs drift.