good news for aspiring R32 owners:

[lemming]

the good news? MarkIV prices are about to take a serious dive in residuals with the MarkV R32 coming to the US.

the bad news: the MarkV 2.0T is probably all around a better car than the Mark IV R32.

okay news: the MarkV R32 weighs 3600 pounds and will ship 5000 per year to the US.

[Sharp11]

Originally Posted by lemming

okay news: the MarkV R32 weighs 3600 pounds and will ship 5000 per year to the US.

That's okay news? Are you serious? That absolutely blows huge chunks!!

The new E92 328i will weigh-in (at a still heavy) 3300 plus lbs, but will be much larger (imagine if BMW kept the size down), why can't VW get with the program and start weight-engineering their small-ish cars?

Ed

[lemming]

Originally Posted by Sharp11

That's okay news? Are you serious? That absolutely blows huge chunks!!

The new E92 328i will weigh-in (at a still heavy) 3300 plus lbs, but will be much larger (imagine if BMW kept the size down), why can't VW get with the program and start weight-engineering their small-ish cars?

Ed

being facetious, of course.

VAG does know how to remove weight: VW has now separated the audi TT and golf platforms because TT platform uses a lot of aluminum and its curb weight in 2880 pounds, incomparison to the 3300 pound 2.0T GTI.

[John V]

Originally Posted by lemming

being facetious, of course.

VAG does know how to remove weight: VW has now separated the audi TT and golf platforms because TT platform uses a lot of aluminum and its curb weight in 2880 pounds, incomparison to the 3300 pound 2.0T GTI.

2880?!

C+D just said the FWD 2.0T TT manual was going to weigh 3150ish. LeftLaneNews.com is saying a FWD 2.0T manual will weigh 3100ish.

That's a far cry from 2880.

[lemming]

Originally Posted by John V

2880?!

C+D just said the FWD 2.0T TT manual was going to weigh 3150ish. LeftLaneNews.com is saying a FWD 2.0T manual will weigh 3100ish.

That's a far cry from 2880.

don't hate on the messenger, dude.

http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dl...73249728608832

[TD]

As I don't track or autox, I can reluctantly get over the weight issue. But the lack of manual tranny availability is a deal-breaker.

[John V]

Originally Posted by lemming

don't hate on the messenger, dude.

http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dl...73249728608832

Jeebus, they quote 2772 in the lead-in.

Maybe one of the other mags is incorrect and they're quoting a loaded, DSG, Quattro, 3.2 model.

[Jeff_DML]

Originally Posted by John V

Jeebus, they quote 2772 in the lead-in.

Maybe one of the other mags is incorrect and they're quoting a loaded, DSG, Quattro, 3.2 model.

seems that way ...

bottom of this page has word docs with the official audi numbers.

1260kg(2777) for 2.0T FWD
1410kg(3108) for 3.2 awd dsg

edit: forgot the link

http://www.vwvortex.com/artman/publi...cle_1725.shtml

[lemming]

Originally Posted by Jeff_DML

seems that way ...

bottom of these page has word docs with the official audi numbers.

1260kg(2777) for 2.0T FWD
1410kg(3108) for 3.2 awd dsg

3100 pounds for the full-on AWD version is really good.

betcha the 3600lb MkV R32 wishes it could be that light.

[John V]

Originally Posted by lemming

3100 pounds for the full-on AWD version is really good.

betcha the 3600lb MkV R32 wishes it could be that light.

The MkIV R32 was pretty heavy as well... 3500lbs or so if I recall correctly. But the car seems to be universally praised for being involving and fun. The weight is unfortunate, but if the car is fun to drive, then maybe it doesn't matter so much.

The MkV R32 is supposedly faster but way less involving and fun.

All hearsay since I haven't driven either.