Pics of R20.....

[Sunglasses Ron]

I don't really mind to much whether it's FWD or 4WD. They both have there advantages and disadvantages IMO.
FWD won't be as nimble off the line as 4WD obviously, but with the technology these days 270-300bhp can still be deployed through front wheels without spitting you into a tree, just look at the new RS. Plus if FWD it will be at least 100kgs lighter and quicker once on the move.
But 4WD won't be a bad thing either so long as they don't make it a 1500kg fat kid. Either way I can seriously see me ordering one as my next motor come end of 2010 when i'm due for change.. 

The 32's weight it more the engine mate, haldex is not that heavy! Fingers crossed anyway. If not i think its either a 335i or new range rover sport next 

Yeah the engine on the .:R definately makes a difference no doubt, but so does the 4wd too mate. Just look at the weight difference between the S3 and a 2.0T A3 (FWD). The .:R is nearly 200kgs heavier than a standard GTI and i'm pretty sure that is not just down to the V6.. 

[Jules86]

I'm refering to actual motoring press, not a supplement in a newspaper.  Top gear yes, but also Evo, autoexpress, autocar, what car, parkers.  You clearly love your car but once moving it cannot match a remapped standard gti, standard or remapped ed30.  Take into account transmission losses through the 4wd and then the added weight, the power to weight ratio tells the true story.

Erm, you are aware my car is fwd while rolling? So not sure what transmission loss you mean? 

I own one mate and can tell you its quicker (marginally) than a mapped gti lol, most mapped gti owners will agree. Ed30 is a whole different story though.

Isnt topcats car remapped?

[Jules86]

I don't really mind to much whether it's FWD or 4WD. They both have there advantages and disadvantages IMO.
FWD won't be as nimble off the line as 4WD obviously, but with the technology these days 270-300bhp can still be deployed through front wheels without spitting you into a tree, just look at the new RS. Plus if FWD it will be at least 100kgs lighter and quicker once on the move.
But 4WD won't be a bad thing either so long as they don't make it a 1500kg fat kid. Either way I can seriously see me ordering one as my next motor come end of 2010 when i'm due for change.. 

The 32's weight it more the engine mate, haldex is not that heavy! Fingers crossed anyway. If not i think its either a 335i or new range rover sport next 

Yeah the engine on the .:R definately makes a difference no doubt, but so does the 4wd too mate. Just look at the weight difference between the S3 and a 2.0T A3 (FWD). The .:R is nearly 200kgs heavier than a standard GTI and i'm pretty sure that is not just down to the V6.. 

What about the extras? Im guessing bigger brakes and other extras would add a bit, i dont think the haldex weighs 200kg?

[GTIjames]

those pics just showed the start of the 1/4 mile, at the end Top Cats car was quicker by over a second I believe...

even a stock GTi (none ed30) will be quicker down the strip than a stock r32

its just a heavy car mate, very nice but a bit lardy!

[Oli]

Just to add my tuppence, having owned 1 x MKIV R32, 3 x MKV Golfs - R32 DSG, Stage 2 DSG GTi, and Stage 2 ED30 DSG, and a Stage 2 8P S3, I feel I am in a stronger position than most to pass comment.  The MKV Golf is by far the better drive, loads more feedback than the Audi, and much more involving.  The Audi is very clinical, does the job very well and disguises its speed exceedingly well.

In standard from the S3 will savage all the other cars, and by some margin, add stage 2 to all cars (not including the R's ) and a damp road, and the S3 will still leave the competition, however, on a dry road, it is the ED30 all day long.

The R's are fantastic all rounders, although a little breathless at the top end, have fantastic chassis's, albeit a bit nose heavy, and best of all make an awesome noise, probably the best of all cars I have ever owned, especially when mated to a Milltek, obviously bar my 'old' B7RS4 with added Milltek. The trouble with the R's when compared with the others is they are very juicy, highest group on tax, and a standard Ed30 will keep up with it, and in most situations be more nimble and faster, bar the standard british weather of wet cold road, but as said before, map it and its a different matter.  Also after 20K miles the R32 really loosens up.  If they did the R32 with 300BHP standard it would be an awesome car, that would really befit its price tag, noise, costs etc,  but thay are just so expensive to get more BHP out of the standard, compared to a turbo's lump.

I owned the cars in the following order; (this is in the space of 3 years!)

MKVI R32
MKV GTI
MKV R32
335D (don't ask!!!)
8PS3
RS4
MKV ED30

After selling the RS4 I wanted a cheaper sorted hatchback  to give me everything I wanted - cheaper running, invloving drive etc, and I could have purchased anything as insurance isn't a concern, and having cover 10k+ miles in each of all of the above cars, my one and only choice was another GTi, and moreso the ED30, as I loved the tunability of the S3 engine and the chassis of the Golf.  The only thing I miss is the 4wd, but I find it makes the ED30 more involving, and as its stage 2 brutally fast (faster then the RS4), and exceptionally good fun.

The R32/S3/GTi argument will go on and on, but you pays your money and make your choices, and each has it own benefits!

Enjoy

Im still waiting for the 4wd R20............which for me will be the perfect car!

[Sunglasses Ron]

Spot on write up Oli  Right from the horses mouth as it were (not calling you a horse of course) 

[Sunglasses Ron]

I don't really mind to much whether it's FWD or 4WD. They both have there advantages and disadvantages IMO.
FWD won't be as nimble off the line as 4WD obviously, but with the technology these days 270-300bhp can still be deployed through front wheels without spitting you into a tree, just look at the new RS. Plus if FWD it will be at least 100kgs lighter and quicker once on the move.
But 4WD won't be a bad thing either so long as they don't make it a 1500kg fat kid. Either way I can seriously see me ordering one as my next motor come end of 2010 when i'm due for change..  

The 32's weight it more the engine mate, haldex is not that heavy! Fingers crossed anyway. If not i think its either a 335i or new range rover sport next  

Yeah the engine on the .:R definately makes a difference no doubt, but so does the 4wd too mate. Just look at the weight difference between the S3 and a 2.0T A3 (FWD). The .:R is nearly 200kgs heavier than a standard GTI and i'm pretty sure that is not just down to the V6..  

What about the extras? Im guessing bigger brakes and other extras would add a bit, i dont think the haldex weighs 200kg?

Of course not mate, but as I said in my first post, it will be getting on for 100kg difference if 4WD is added IMO.. The other 100kgs on the .:R will be a combination of the engine, brakes etc as you say..

those pics just showed the start of the 1/4 mile, at the end Top Cats car was quicker by over a second I believe...

even a stock GTi (none ed30) will be quicker down the strip than a stock r32

its just a heavy car mate, very nice but a bit lardy!

Not sure about that James.. If you have a well driven .:R on the strip it will take chunks out of a standard GTI off the line that the GTI would never pull back.
IMO, a standard GTI will keep with a .:R till nearly three figures if a rolling start (then cubic capacity and the extra 50bhp will start to take over).
Standard v's standard .:R v Ed30 would be very close on the strip, but on a roll would see the ED30 have a slight upper hand..

[Oli]

Spot on write up Oli  Right from the horses mouth as it were (not calling you a horse of course) 

Neigh   

[Top Cat]

I'm refering to actual motoring press, not a supplement in a newspaper.  Top gear yes, but also Evo, autoexpress, autocar, what car, parkers.  You clearly love your car but once moving it cannot match a remapped standard gti, standard or remapped ed30.  Take into account transmission losses through the 4wd and then the added weight, the power to weight ratio tells the true story.

Erm, you are aware my car is fwd while rolling? So not sure what transmission loss you mean? 

I own one mate and can tell you its quicker (marginally) than a mapped gti lol, most mapped gti owners will agree. Ed30 is a whole different story though.

Isnt topcats car remapped?

Jules you make me laugh all you ever do is come on here and get your self all upset when anyone dare post something negative about a R 32.
We have 5 or 6 R 32 owners who dont bat an eyelid, and yet you just go through the same routine every time. Which always ends in you saying yet but i would like to see them take me on in the rain. 
just relax dude the R 32 is a great car no matter how many times you prove to us that its not. 

Oh and by the way in that run i beat the r 32 by well over a second. 

[winrya]

I'm refering to actual motoring press, not a supplement in a newspaper.  Top gear yes, but also Evo, autoexpress, autocar, what car, parkers.  You clearly love your car but once moving it cannot match a remapped standard gti, standard or remapped ed30.  Take into account transmission losses through the 4wd and then the added weight, the power to weight ratio tells the true story.

Erm, you are aware my car is fwd while rolling? So not sure what transmission loss you mean? 

I own one mate and can tell you its quicker (marginally) than a mapped gti lol, most mapped gti owners will agree. Ed30 is a whole different story though.

Isnt topcats car remapped?

Regardless of whether your car is 2wd once moving you are ignoring the facts.

My car remapped runs 251bhp and 308 ft lb of torque,
a standard R32 running on bp 102 on the same rolling road ran 246bhp and 240 ft lb of torque.

Now excluding weight, the extra torque of the GTI will make a difference, add to that the weight difference and the GTI is quicker.  

Rough power to weight ratio's

Standard GTI      150 bhp/t
Standard R32      165bhp/t
Remapped GTI    187bhp/t
Remapped ed30  232bhp/t
 
Granted the differences are probably very marginal on the road but there none the less (excluding the mapped ed30)

[Aparoon]

I'm refering to actual motoring press, not a supplement in a newspaper.  Top gear yes, but also Evo, autoexpress, autocar, what car, parkers.  You clearly love your car but once moving it cannot match a remapped standard gti, standard or remapped ed30.  Take into account transmission losses through the 4wd and then the added weight, the power to weight ratio tells the true story.

Erm, you are aware my car is fwd while rolling? So not sure what transmission loss you mean? 

I own one mate and can tell you its quicker (marginally) than a mapped gti lol, most mapped gti owners will agree. Ed30 is a whole different story though.

Isnt topcats car remapped?

Jules you make me laugh all you ever do is come on here and get your self all upset when anyone dare post something negative about a R 32.
We have 5 or 6 R 32 owners who dont bat an eyelid, and yet you just go through the same routine every time. Which always ends in you saying yet but i would like to see them take me on in the rain. 
just relax dude the R 32 is a great car no matter how many times you prove to us that its not. 

Oh and by the way in that run i beat the r 32 by well over a second. 

 

[Poverty]

I'm refering to actual motoring press, not a supplement in a newspaper.  Top gear yes, but also Evo, autoexpress, autocar, what car, parkers.  You clearly love your car but once moving it cannot match a remapped standard gti, standard or remapped ed30.  Take into account transmission losses through the 4wd and then the added weight, the power to weight ratio tells the true story.

Erm, you are aware my car is fwd while rolling? So not sure what transmission loss you mean? 

I own one mate and can tell you its quicker (marginally) than a mapped gti lol, most mapped gti owners will agree. Ed30 is a whole different story though.

Isnt topcats car remapped?

On standing starts my mates r32 murdered my std cupra, but once in 3rd gear it was a completely different story, my car pulled hard and strong reigning the r32 back in big time.

Anyway its funny that you failed to mention that the mapped GTI beat you by a second after a standing start never mind what one would do to you on a rolling start 

Anyway this vid says it all, and just to put it in perspective, a mapped ed30 or cupra is quicker than a std evo fq340 and sti.

[tony_danza]

265 BHP and 4WD - flawed theory my arse....

Truck loads of win!!

http://www.worldcarfans.com/109091421719/vw-golf-r-uncovered-ahead-of-frankfurt-debut

[Oli]

265 BHP and 4WD - flawed theory my arse....

Truck loads of win!!

http://www.worldcarfans.com/109091421719/vw-golf-r-uncovered-ahead-of-frankfurt-debut

Good find!!! 

Not sure on the performance figures though, 0-60 in 6.5??? surely they mean 5.5!

[Hurdy]

I'm refering to actual motoring press, not a supplement in a newspaper.  Top gear yes, but also Evo, autoexpress, autocar, what car, parkers.  You clearly love your car but once moving it cannot match a remapped standard gti, standard or remapped ed30.  Take into account transmission losses through the 4wd and then the added weight, the power to weight ratio tells the true story.

Erm, you are aware my car is fwd while rolling? So not sure what transmission loss you mean? 

I own one mate and can tell you its quicker (marginally) than a mapped gti lol, most mapped gti owners will agree. Ed30 is a whole different story though.

Isnt topcats car remapped?

Yes, but that is TC driving....nuff said

I thought this was a discussion on the R20 though