 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / UK Car Forums / Car Modifications (UK group) / July 2009Today I have been mostly driving.
The Golf GTI MK3 8V The one that pretty much everyone with an interest in cars told me was the worst possible version to buy on account of low power and it being a heavyweight. I really like it. Nice and torquey compared to the A4 and the suspension is in much much better condition. Theoretically the A4 has a better front end and certainly resists understeer much more, but the Golf had new springs and dampers within the last 12 months and feels a lot less discombobulated. I also suspect that for me, Golf sized cars are the right balance between large enough to be comfy and small enough to play with in the bends. So, I like it and will be keeping it. Not 100% convinced about the Deutsch stylee pressed steel effect plates or the Wolfsburg surrounds right enough, but it's a presentable looking thing. Pics to follow to ruin everyone's dinner ;-) P.S. Audi A4 for sale... If you need a very presentable looking banger etc.... > The Golf GTI MK3 8V > > The one that pretty much everyone with an interest in cars told me was the > worst possible version to buy on account of low power and it being a > heavyweight. It's a fine car but it should never have had the GTi badge. >> The Golf GTI MK3 8V >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > It's a fine car but it should never have had the GTi badge. I agree.  SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com "Bob Sherunckle" <zilspeed@beeteeopenworld.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > The Golf GTI MK3 8V > > The one that pretty much everyone with an interest in cars told me was > the worst possible version to buy on account of low power and it being a > heavyweight. I had a couple as company cars when they were current. "Everyone" was right. > The Golf GTI MK3 8V > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > thing. > Pics to follow to ruin everyone's dinner ;-) I quite like the MK3s too. They're not as fun as the 306 or ZX, but they are far better built. I don't really get the whole "MK3s are terrible" thing. >> The Golf GTI MK3 8V >> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > are far better built. I don't really get the whole "MK3s are terrible" > thing. I started working for a VW dealership a month or so after the mark three was launched. What people didn't like about the mark three compared with the mark two is that some of the detail didn't feel as solidly put together, engine-for-engine they weren't as pokey to drive and their handling wasn't as fun. People tended to ignore that the mark three was generally more economical (engine for engine), cheaper to service, more spacious and better equipped (that said, the run out mark twos were generally loaded). The 2.0 GTI was universally disliked because at the time, it boasted of 115 bhp (more than the outgoing 1.8 8v of course) but lacked the charm of the old engine. More a slugger than a zinger. Still, lots of mark threes were sold. The above were minor complaints - people liked the mark three. It just didn't have the immediate charm of the mark two. SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com >> The Golf GTI MK3 8V >> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > are far better built. I don't really get the whole "MK3s are terrible" > thing. It was an opinion of its time. It was a bit heavier than a MK2 which was heavier than a Mk1 of course. Gaining weight is a bad thing in cars, yes. The MK4 subsequently went on to be even heavier of course but had the saving grace of a choice of a 1.8T engine plus the other MK4 attributes which car enthusiasts hate but the general public love in spades, so I won't go into here. Anyway, the MK3 was loathed for being a heavyweight at the time - it's 1060kg. A current 1.6 Polo 5 door is 1200kg. A Focus 5 door 2.0 is 1327kg but does have 142bhp. Looked at in that context, it's not a heavyweight. I think what I'm trying to say here is that the opinion is possibly more out of date than the car is - based on where cars are these days. This is 'it suits me' logic, so I won't hear another word on it. Not that any of you lot care right enough ;-) (Doki excepted - being a Gentleman of fine taste....) >>> The Golf GTI MK3 8V >>> [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > Not that any of you lot care right enough ;-) > (Doki excepted - being a Gentleman of fine taste....) i quite liked the MK3 Golf too but hate the MK4 and 5. and 1060kg aint heavy, my mini i think might weigh more lol >> Anyway, the MK3 was loathed for being a heavyweight at the time - it's >> 1060kg. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > i quite liked the MK3 Golf too but hate the MK4 and 5. > and 1060kg aint heavy, my mini i think might weigh more lol Aye, 1140kg, according to the book. Tubby little thing. >> i quite liked the MK3 Golf too but hate the MK4 and 5. >> and 1060kg aint heavy, my mini i think might weigh more lol > > Aye, 1140kg, according to the book. Tubby little thing. That must be close to twice what an original Mini weighed. I suppose its got about twice the power. I doubt you can get a modern car with a roof and all the accompanyments we expect these days that weighs much less than a tonne. SignatureDouglas >>> i quite liked the MK3 Golf too but hate the MK4 and 5. >>> and 1060kg aint heavy, my mini i think might weigh more lol [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I doubt you can get a modern car with a roof and all the accompanyments > we expect these days that weighs much less than a tonne. I think the original mini was a shade over 600kg, but then it did have 38Bhp or thereabouts. My 1400 had a devastating 104Bhp. I miss that car; shouldn't have stuffed it through a wall, I suppose. Hindsight, eh? The Citroen C1 weighs in at about 800kg, I think. It definitely has a roof, but I don't know about the rest of your spec.. >>> The Golf GTI MK3 8V >>> [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > Not that any of you lot care right enough ;-) > (Doki excepted - being a Gentleman of fine taste....) Thing is, VW gave the Mk1 GTi 112 bhp to move <800kg. The Mk2 GTi was available with 138 bhp in the 16v one to shift 950kg. The Mk3 2.0 GTi had 115 bhp and 1060 kg - *and soft wobbly suspension*. The Mk3 2.0 8v GTi was UK only was it not? The rest of Europe had a the same 2.0 car but it wasn't a GTi, it was a Trend or something equally suitable. Me, I love old Golfs, but the softer and squidgier they've got the less interesting they've become. I have a soft spot for the early VR6 just because it goes like stink then sh.ts itself at the sight of a corner. SignaturePete M - OMF#9 Rover P6 3500 Auto Range Rover V8 Turbo (sold) Volvo 850 T5 CD Estate Mk1 Golf GTi 1.8 (Sold) "In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and is widely regarded as a bad move." >>>> The Golf GTI MK3 8V >>>> [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > same 2.0 car but it wasn't a GTi, it was a Trend or something equally > suitable. I thought that was the MK4 2.0, but you're more likely to be right than me on this one. It's certainly not a fireball, I guess. > Me, I love old Golfs, but the softer and squidgier they've got the less > interesting they've become. I have a soft spot for the early VR6 just > because it goes like stink then sh.ts itself at the sight of a corner. Sounds like fun... >>>>> The Golf GTI MK3 8V >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > on this one. > It's certainly not a fireball, I guess. The Mk4 2.0 was sold in the rest of the EU as the Highline, I think it also got a GTi badge in the US. >>>> The Golf GTI MK3 8V >>>> [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > available with 138 bhp in the 16v one to shift 950kg. The Mk3 2.0 GTi had > 115 bhp and 1060 kg - *and soft wobbly suspension*. I have a couple of books on GTIs. The late MK2s are generally listed as being just a smidge over a tonne, and the early MK3s are about 60 kilos more at 1100 kilos or so. Unless my memory's playing tricks. IME the weight difference of a MK3 has been massively overstated. > Thing is, VW gave the Mk1 GTi 112 bhp to move <800kg. The Mk2 GTi was > available with 138 bhp in the 16v one to shift 950kg. The Mk3 2.0 GTi had > 115 bhp and 1060 kg - *and soft wobbly suspension*. All well and good, but you're not really comparing like with like. The Mk3 GTI also got a 16v engine, so either use that one in your comparisons with the Mk2, or use the Mk2 8v in the comparisons. Signature"For want of the price of tea and a slice, the old man died." >> Thing is, VW gave the Mk1 GTi 112 bhp to move <800kg. The Mk2 GTi was >> available with 138 bhp in the 16v one to shift 950kg. The Mk3 2.0 GTi had [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Mk3 GTI also got a 16v engine, so either use that one in your comparisons > with the Mk2, or use the Mk2 8v in the comparisons. I bought Ronnys brothers old 8v Mk3 Golf GTi. For all its tatty appearance, it drove bloody well. Better than you'd expect, if your only experience of them as such at the point you jumped into it, was what you'd read from some in here. SignatureJackH >> Thing is, VW gave the Mk1 GTi 112 bhp to move <800kg. The Mk2 GTi was >> available with 138 bhp in the 16v one to shift 950kg. The Mk3 2.0 GTi had [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Mk3 GTI also got a 16v engine, so either use that one in your comparisons > with the Mk2, or use the Mk2 8v in the comparisons. The 16V wasn't available at launch, so you basically had an engine that was slightly (3bhp) more powerful than the old 8V, in a car a good hundred kilos heavier. The end result was a 0-60 time of 10 seconds. You can see why people would be miffed, and how they got such a bad name. >>> Thing is, VW gave the Mk1 GTi 112 bhp to move <800kg. The Mk2 GTi was >>> available with 138 bhp in the 16v one to shift 950kg. The Mk3 2.0 GTi [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > The 16V wasn't available at launch Nor was a Mk1 GTI with 112bhp... SignatureJackH >>> All well and good, but you're not really comparing like with like. The >>> Mk3 GTI also got a 16v engine, so either use that one in your [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Nor was a Mk1 GTI with 112bhp... As in the GTI wasn't about when the Mk1 Golf was launched, or the first Mk1 GTI didn't have 112bhp? Signature"For want of the price of tea and a slice, the old man died." >>>> All well and good, but you're not really comparing like with like. The >>>> Mk3 GTI also got a 16v engine, so either use that one in your [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > As in the GTI wasn't about when the Mk1 Golf was launched, or the first > Mk1 GTI didn't have 112bhp? The latter. 112bhp came later with the introduction of the 1.8. SignatureJackH >>>> The 16V wasn't available at launch >>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > 112bhp came later with the introduction of the 1.8. Ah yes - the original was a 1.6 IIRC. Signature"For want of the price of tea and a slice, the old man died." >>>>> The 16V wasn't available at launch >>>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Ah yes - the original was a 1.6 IIRC. It was 2 horses down on the 1.8. A complete POS. No wonder people were saying it wasn't as good as the previous class leader in a class that didn't really exist previously ;). >>>>>> The 16V wasn't available at launch >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > saying it wasn't as good as the previous class leader in a class that > didn't really exist previously ;). I had a 1.6 GTi Mk1. Felt bloody quick at the time. SignaturePete M - OMF#9 Rover P6 3500 Auto Range Rover V8 Turbo (sold) Volvo 850 T5 CD Estate Mk1 Golf GTi 1.8 (Sold) "In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and is widely regarded as a bad move." >>>>>>> The 16V wasn't available at launch >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > I had a 1.6 GTi Mk1. Felt bloody quick at the time. I had an early Mk2 Scirocco 1.6 GTI, and it felt quick at the time too. Not as torqey as the 1.8, but still pretty quck for then. >>>>>>>> The 16V wasn't available at launch >>>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > I had an early Mk2 Scirocco 1.6 GTI, and it felt quick at the time too. > Not as torqey as the 1.8, but still pretty quck for then. The one I drove was an early one and compared to most other stuff about, felt utterly bonkers - but then if you've driven 1.1 and 1.3 Golfs, Escorts, Astras (1.2 and 1.3 here heh) I suppose it would. I remember driving a 1.8 mark two Golf and thinking something along the lines of, "meh, doesn't feel as quick." And it didn't. But it was. *sighs* Refinement, eh? Kids today... ;) SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com > The one I drove was an early one and compared to most other stuff about, > felt utterly bonkers - but then if you've driven 1.1 and 1.3 Golfs, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > lines of, "meh, doesn't feel as quick." And it didn't. But it was. > *sighs* Refinement, eh? Kids today... ;) The 1.8 Mk2 Golf - we talking a GTI or a carb'd jobbie? I guess the Mk2's more refined and muted than the Mk1, but my Xantia (Activa) feels shitloads more refined and muted than the Golf (as you'd expect, really). The 2.0 bottom end goes some decent way to making it feel quicker. Can't wait to get that bloody thing back on the road.... Signature"For want of the price of tea and a slice, the old man died." >> The one I drove was an early one and compared to most other stuff about, >> felt utterly bonkers - but then if you've driven 1.1 and 1.3 Golfs, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > bottom end goes some decent way to making it feel quicker. Can't wait to > get that bloody thing back on the road.... Might be time for you to apply for the logbook? SignaturePete M - OMF#9 Rover P6 3500 Auto Range Rover V8 Turbo (sold) Volvo 850 T5 CD Estate Mk1 Golf GTi 1.8 (Sold) "In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and is widely regarded as a bad move." >>> The one I drove was an early one and compared to most other stuff about, >>> felt utterly bonkers - but then if you've driven 1.1 and 1.3 Golfs, [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >> > Might be time for you to apply for the logbook? D'oh! Promise I will do soon..... pesky DVLA for not f.cking processing things properly in the first place.... Signature"For want of the price of tea and a slice, the old man died." > >>> All well and good, but you're not really comparing like with like. The > >>> Mk3 GTI also got a 16v engine, so either use that one in your [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > As in the GTI wasn't about when the Mk1 Golf was launched, or the first Mk1 > GTI didn't have 112bhp? Didn't the very first MK1 GTi have carbs? SignatureCarl Robson Get cashback on your purchases Topcashback http://www.TopCashBack.co.uk/skraggy_uk/ref/index.htm Greasypalm http://www.greasypalm.co.uk/r/?l=1006553 >>>>> All well and good, but you're not really comparing like with like. The >>>>> Mk3 GTI also got a 16v engine, so either use that one in your [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> > Didn't the very first MK1 GTi have carbs? Isn't the 'i' for Injection? SignatureDouglas >>>>>> All well and good, but you're not really comparing like with >>>>>> like. The Mk3 GTI also got a 16v engine, so either use that one [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Isn't the 'i' for Injection? Indeed it does. Signature'88 Porsche 911 Targa '00 Golf TDI estate '99 Integra Type-R >>>>>>> All well and good, but you're not really comparing like with >>>>>>> like. The Mk3 GTI also got a 16v engine, so either use that one [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Indeed it does. *anorak on* Despite the German word for injection being einspritz, hence the Opel GTEs... >>>>> All well and good, but you're not really comparing like with like. The >>>>> Mk3 GTI also got a 16v engine, so either use that one in your [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> > Didn't the very first MK1 GTi have carbs? No. SignaturePete M - OMF#9 Rover P6 3500 Auto Range Rover V8 Turbo (sold) Volvo 850 T5 CD Estate Mk1 Golf GTi 1.8 (Sold) "In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and is widely regarded as a bad move." > >>>>> All well and good, but you're not really comparing like with like. The > >>>>> Mk3 GTI also got a 16v engine, so either use that one in your [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > No. Even though in Germany where it was first release the i for injection would have meant bugger all. I'm sure many years ago I read somewhere that the original german release had carbs, quickly swapped for injection. SignatureCarl Robson Get cashback on your purchases Topcashback http://www.TopCashBack.co.uk/skraggy_uk/ref/index.htm Greasypalm http://www.greasypalm.co.uk/r/?l=1006553 >>> Didn't the very first MK1 GTi have carbs? >> No. >> > Even though in Germany where it was first release the i for injection > would have meant bugger all. Ah, the famous Golf GTKraftstoffeinspritzung? SignaturePete M - OMF#9 '62 Rover P4 100 '61 Rover P5 3 litre '72 Rover P6 3500 Auto '78 Escort 1300 Sport '96 Volvo 850 T5 CD Estate "In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and is widely regarded as a bad move." >> >>>>> All well and good, but you're not really comparing like with like. >> >>>>> The [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > I'm sure many years ago I read somewhere that the original german > release had carbs, quickly swapped for injection. That was the whole USP of the original Golf GTI though - injection. >> >>>>> All well and good, but you're not really comparing like with like. >> >>>>> The [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > I'm sure many years ago I read somewhere that the original german > release had carbs, quickly swapped for injection. GT, maybe, but the GTI had fuel injection. I have a '83 road test annual somewhere that talks a little bit about the history of the Golf GTI. SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com > GT, maybe, but the GTI had fuel injection. I have a '83 road test annual > somewhere that talks a little bit about the history of the Golf GTI. I can't have imagined it. I don't really have an imagination. There wasn't a GT before the GTi was there? The GTi was the original "sport" golf that went from prototype to production. SignatureCarl Robson Get cashback on your purchases Topcashback http://www.TopCashBack.co.uk/skraggy_uk/ref/index.htm Greasypalm http://www.greasypalm.co.uk/r/?l=1006553 >> GT, maybe, but the GTI had fuel injection. I have a '83 road test annual >> somewhere that talks a little bit about the history of the Golf GTI. >> > I can't have imagined it. I don't really have an imagination. > There wasn't a GT before the GTi was there? The GTi was the original > "sport" golf that went from prototype to production. The MK1 Golf GTI engine was based on the Audi 80GT's carbed 100bhp unit. The first prototype ran that engine with a dual choke Solex. They then slapped on K-jet, which they'd already had knocking around in order to meet Californian emissions regs. They also made a 1471cc, 75bhp carbed Golf engine based on the 80 engine - that might be what you're thinking of, as it'd look pretty similar to a GTI engine. > > GT, maybe, but the GTI had fuel injection. I have a '83 road test > > annual somewhere that talks a little bit about the history of the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > There wasn't a GT before the GTi was there? The GTi was the original > "sport" golf that went from prototype to production. No, there wasn't. At least in Germany, there was a Golf GT but that was a MkII GTI-look Golf with a 90bhp engine as the latter was more insurance friendly. Signature'88 Porsche 911 Targa '99 Integra Type-R '00 VW Golf TDI Estate |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.