There seem to be a lot more VR6's for sale than 2.0l 16v's, which is some what annoying. Also I have read a coupe of things which surprise me.
1) VR6's need a head re-build at 100K
2) VR6's do about 28 MPG
I'm not sure why a VR6 would need a re-build at 100K, as most people joke that a VW has only just been broken in at 100K. Also the book MGP for my Golf is 28, so that would imply the direct running costs would be fairly similar, which is very surprising.
Please tell me if I am wrong or if i have been mislead.