Golf R first drive...and coming to the US? But not til 2011

[JST]

http://www.insideline.com/volkswagen/golf/2012/2012-volkswagen-golf-r-first-drive.html

Important bits: The car is good. If they sell it here, it will be spendy. It will probably be a limited edition. At this time, it does not sound like it will be DSG-only, though really, who knows? Finally, it might even come in 5 door form.

But it won't come until next calendar year as a 2012 model.

[equ]

As I posted here,

http://forums.carmudgeons.com/showpost.php?p=255318&postcount=2

I'm highly interested in this 'mobile. It is cuter, shorter and likely more playful than my a4. The a4 does have some advantages though. It's a sleeper in both torque and handling. It has a torsen center diff with no delay, closer to neutral weight and power distribution. In fact, despite the size/tuning disadvantage, I'd bet a sport-pack, MT a4 is not far behind the R dynamically. And of course, it is serene and efficient on the highway. It just doesn't look as hot.

Side note: there is a good chance that the 4-cyl in the R (ea113) is not as efficient as the 4-cyl in the a4 (ea888).

[Jeff_DML]

still think it would be decently efficient, better then the VR6

[lupinsea]

Interesting. But $32k? Wow.

[JST]

Interesting. But $32k? Wow.

If it is just 32K, that would be a big surprise. I bet it'll be closer to 40. The original R32 was 29 without options back in 2004; the subsequent Mk. VI R32 was pushing 36, IIRC. Hell, you can get a GTI near or above 30K these days if you tick the right boxes.

Is 36-40K for this car crazy? Not really. It exists in a category basically all its own; in the states, at least, it doesn't have any competitors. The WRX and Evo are rolling penalty boxes on the inside compared with this; the Mazdaspeed3 a bit less so, but it's FWD only and doesn't have the luxury kit this car would have.

[lemming]

If it is just 32K, that would be a big surprise. I bet it'll be closer to 40. The original R32 was 29 without options back in 2004; the subsequent Mk. VI R32 was pushing 36, IIRC. Hell, you can get a GTI near or above 30K these days if you tick the right boxes.

Is 36-40K for this car crazy? Not really. It exists in a category basically all its own; in the states, at least, it doesn't have any competitors. The WRX and Evo are rolling penalty boxes on the inside compared with this; the Mazdaspeed3 a bit less so, but it's FWD only and doesn't have the luxury kit this car would have.

i intensely dislike the majority of haldex AWD vehicles mostly because the transfer of power to the rear wheels is decidedly not transparent.

was/is the R32 a constant split feed to the front and to the rear wheels? the a3 sucks, as do any "4motion passats".

[equ]

i intensely dislike the majority of haldex AWD vehicles mostly because the transfer of power to the rear wheels is decidedly not transparent.

was/is the R32 a constant split feed to the front and to the rear wheels? the a3 sucks, as do any "4motion passats".

FWIW, the older 4motion passats are torsen, I think the newer transverse ones are haldex. So it's not like quattro = torsen and 4motion = haldex... Both are wrong, pure branding.

[John V]

AWD and a spiffy VW interior isn't enough to make up for the $13,000 (or is it $21,000) price delta between this and our MS3.

[lemming]

FWIW, the older 4motion passats are torsen, I think the newer transverse ones are haldex. So it's not like quattro = torsen and 4motion = haldex... Both are wrong, pure branding.

ergo, this would be haldex, then?

there aren't any VWs with longitudinal engines, are there?

[JST]

Not anymore. The older Passats used to be based on the A4, and had longitudinal engines. The new Passats are transverse.

The Golfs have always had transverse engines.

[lemming]

Not anymore. The older Passats used to be based on the A4, and had longitudinal engines. The new Passats are transverse.

The Golfs have always had transverse engines.

can they just electronically default to feed more power to the rear?

[equ]

ergo, this would be haldex, then?


Correct, so far transverse implies haldex (whether branded as quattro or 4motion).

[lemming]

Correct, so far transverse implies haldex (whether branded as quattro or 4motion).

on the newer audis, such as yours, they default to higher percentage of torque to the rear wheels.

has VW ever done that for its VW line of cars?

[equ]

I don't know. The length and perhaps the tuning (steering/suspension) of the b8 makes it less attractive than the golf R, but then the weight distribution is better as is the torsen. I'm not sure if you can give that much power to the rear with a front-heavy distribution like the gold. Even with the 56/44 distribution of the a4, the 40/60 is very noticeable and makes the car feel rather neutral. Driven aggressively on snow/ice, this a4 needs a regular dose of countersteer, something my previous AWD cars didn't seem to have a clue about. When I pushed my b8 in deep snow lots, it seemed "tail happier" than the 330xi (also 40/60) and almost as much as the 330i. My current snow tires are not as aggressive as the ones I had on the 330i for those conditions, but in my colored memories, my old b5 50/50 was a far more stable.