Volkswagen has gone mad.... 400hp Golf

[Atropine]

Originally Posted by Burrcold

This has NOTHING to do with the point I was making. Cheap surfaces aside, it's a purpose built chassis not based on a entry level economy car (I.e. Mazdaspeed 3, Civic Si, Focus RS, VW GTI).

Is an EVO or STI an econocar?

[Reaper]

The evo is.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

[Burrcold]

Originally Posted by Atropine

Is an EVO or STI an econocar?

As their base, yes. As a finished product, no.

[Joakim3]

Originally Posted by Burrcold

As their base, yes. As a finished product, no.

Essentially this

The Twins were designed to have a CoG lower than 99.9% of the cars on earth, built with a short chassis and tuning in mind from the very beginning

From a sports car DNA chassis perspective.... This is more pure sports car than an M3 as even that still has econobox at it's base

It's a god send Subbie and Toyota really went out there way to build a new chassis rather than mullering an Sti's, they I hit the nail on the head with it

[f0rge]

Originally Posted by Joakim3

Do you want 95% of the performance of AMG or M car, in the form of uber modded econobox, but with the usability of 4WD and a hatch

or

Do you want the full 100% raw experience of owning a pure breed performance M or AMG car, but sacrificing your wallet in the process and being able to only drive 6 months out the year or risk killing yourself the other 6

95%? Hardly. Maybe in a straight line, but an e90 M3 would annihilate this thing on any type of road course.

You can also drive an M3 in the winter, I drive my FR-S all year and I live in Canada.

The other elephant in the room is the 2015 Mustang GT. It'll cost less than this Golf and be quicker almost everywhere.

[DarkSunrise]

If they offered this as a 4-door hatch w/DSG, they'd probably have a decent-sized market base out there. There's currently no STI hatch or Evo hatch. The closest competitor might be an S4 avant or S3 hatch, but this would probably be a much sportier car than either.

[Dave-ROR]

Originally Posted by Joakim3

Hell no, this thing will give you 98% of the performance of an M3, for 20k less. In terms of the quality/price-to-performance ratio this this is INSANE. You'd strictly be paying for pedigree of saying I have an M3

Yes they aren't going compete directly, but you can't argue a 190mph capable 4wd MANUAL hatchback that's gonna be ~50k isn't ridicoulsly enticing for any performance buff

Because all cars feel the same and only numbers matter.

That's why we are all here obviously.

And is 50K the published price? The new Golf R's are heavily overpriced IMO. The MK4 R was nice, and manual only.. the 5 was DSG only so who gives a shit. I almost bought a 6 R instead of the BRZ until I sat in one and saw the price..

[OrbitalEllipses]

Originally Posted by Reaper

The evo is.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

As was said before: So's the STI.

Originally Posted by Joakim3

It's a god send Subbie and Toyota really went out there way to build a new chassis rather than mullering an Sti's, they I hit the nail on the head with it

Shortening and modifying an Impreza chassis isn't a new game to them.

[Joakim3]

Originally Posted by f0rge

95%? Hardly. Maybe in a straight line, but an e90 M3 would annihilate this thing on any type of road course.

Ugh thats very debatable.... Seeing they weigh virtually the same, but the M3 has ~40ft/lbs less torque, and R400 has a Haledex 4WD system which is currently the top of the totem pole

Unless we are talking about race car drivers who can ring out every single ounce of an M3, I'm pretty sure if you put two regular guys in both cars, one would not be lol stomping the other

Obviously the F80 M3 is a completely different monster but your paying 70k+ for that thing when all the options are checked off

Originally Posted by f0rge

You can also drive an M3 in the winter, I drive my FR-S all year and I live in Canada.

An M3 has twice the torque and hp of our twins.... I'd imagine you can't simply lol floor an FRS (let alone an M3) without the everlasting fear of I may spin off into a guard rail

There is a reason people get 4WD cars when mother nature decides to **** us over

Originally Posted by f0rge

The other elephant in the room is the 2015 Mustang GT. It'll cost less than this Golf and be quicker almost everywhere.

Have the 15' stangs even been track/performance tested yet? But yeah price wise for a new car, you really can't get much faster than the 15' stangs

[Joakim3]

Originally Posted by Dave-ROR

Because all cars feel the same and only numbers matter.

That's why we are all here obviously.

And is 50K the published price? The new Golf R's are heavily overpriced IMO. The MK4 R was nice, and manual only.. the 5 was DSG only so who gives a shit. I almost bought a 6 R instead of the BRZ until I sat in one and saw the price..

Of course feel is ALWAYS going to be the deciding factor (the whole reason we love the Twins)

A 2015' STi starts at 34k, so it's really not that outrageous. What the R lacks in performance (compared to an EVO or STi) it makes up with having the interior quality and bells and whistles of a car twice it's price



Honestly though, I'm just happy we are getting all these options for cars now a days.... it makes choosing your weapon to attack road to work all that more fun

[chrisl]

Originally Posted by Joakim3

An M3 has twice the torque and hp of our twins.... I'd imagine you can't simply lol floor an FRS (let alone an M3) without the everlasting fear of I may spin off into a guard rail

There is a reason people get 4WD cars when mother nature decides to **** us over

That's not a good idea in any car in slick conditions though - I can light up all 4 tires in my Outback (175hp on a good day) with blizzaks in any of the first 3 gears if the roads are slick. If the conditions are bad, you should drive cautiously in just about any car, regardless of drivetrain layout and power.

[Dave-ROR]

Originally Posted by Joakim3

Of course feel is ALWAYS going to be the deciding factor (the whole reason we love the Twins)

A 2015' STi starts at 34k, so it's really not that outrageous. What the R lacks in performance (compared to an EVO or STi) it makes up with having the interior quality and bells and whistles of a car twice it's price



Honestly though, I'm just happy we are getting all these options for cars now a days.... it makes choosing your weapon to attack road to work all that more fun

Did VW fix their shitty interiors? They feel nice.. and then all that coating shit starts falling off and it looks like an 80s chevy quality wise after 3 years.. and the headliner glue fails.. and the pillars...

yuck.

VW interiors suck in my experience from the late 90s to the late 2000s at least.

The Mk6 Interior is one of the reasons I stopped looking at it, looked and felt cheap IMO. Not saying the twins aren't, they are better than I expected, but they aren't 36-38k or so either...

[Nefded]

If I had 50K in my wallet to spend on a new car, this wouldn't be it.. Not even close.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by Dave-ROR

Did VW fix their shitty interiors? They feel nice.. and then all that coating shit starts falling off and it looks like an 80s chevy quality wise after 3 years.. and the headliner glue fails.. and the pillars...

yuck.

VW interiors suck in my experience from the late 90s to the late 2000s at least.

The Mk6 Interior is one of the reasons I stopped looking at it, looked and felt cheap IMO. Not saying the twins aren't, they are better than I expected, but they aren't 36-38k or so either...

That's odd. I'm not a dash-stroker by any means (hell I bought an FR-S), but I think the mk6 GTI has a great interior. It's definitely a step above the typical hot hatches in the price bracket. I actually think whenever a GTI wins a hot hatch comparison, it's mostly due to the interior and refinement. Lawd knows it's not the performance.

I also haven't had any quality/flaking issues in the 3 years that I've owned the car. It literally looks new.