aposegil 0 Posted June 4, 2004 well just seen this what do u guys think?? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dr_mat 0 Posted June 4, 2004 Bubble car!!!! :lol: Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
aposegil 0 Posted June 4, 2004 lol is it me or doesnt it look right??? and not as meaty as the original R32?? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dr_mat 0 Posted June 4, 2004 It looks a lot like a Ford Ka. And I hated those, too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kevin Bacon 5 Posted June 4, 2004 No where near as meaty as the MK4 ! It's such a shame Dahlback Racing was the only company (that I'm aware of) that used the VW Motorsport MK4 kit-car arches. That made the MK4 imo. I do like the MK5 though, I think it's got potential. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VR6 0 Posted June 4, 2004 Hmmm....... Let's see what kind of reviews it gets. Still not convinced that I like it, but I said that about the Mk3 and the Mk4!! I'm sure once they get some aftermarket bits stuck on, it'll smarten it up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
coullstar 0 Posted June 4, 2004 Apparently VW have registered the R36 name as they are developing a 3.6 V6 for this car. I dont think it will look like that as that just seems to be photoshopped GTi press photos Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
aide 0 Posted June 4, 2004 :pukeright: golf :pukeleft: Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jim 1 Posted June 4, 2004 Preferred the MK4 R32 by a mile... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
g-master 0 Posted June 5, 2004 Hmmm, in a magazine i have it says the new R32 will be a 3.2 fsi turbo producing 300 bhp :? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chubbybrown 0 Posted June 5, 2004 It could be a beetle with differant lights on the front :gag: Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Henny 0 Posted June 5, 2004 The Golf's not been a real "HOT hatch" since the MKII... (and that was only saved by the 16V and G60 versions...) It's still trading on the GTI name which was made by the MKI (and then MKI)I version 25 years ago! :? Too lardy, too soft and too rounded... :pukeright: Just another anonymous eurobox like nearly every other car in it's class on sale today... You see a MKI or MKII Golf in a carpark and it stands out as a Golf, you see one of these, and either ignore it 'cos it's the same as all the other new cars in the carpark, or have to have a look at it to work out what it is... :? :roll: I'd still lay odds on an original MKI Golf GTI 1800 being a closer BHP/Tonne ratio than most would believe to new 255BHP R32... LOTS of power? Yeah, but by God, it's a fat git! ;) :lol: Wonder if Topgear'd take a MKI up against the new R32 around their track... THAT I'd want to watch... I'd bet there wouldn't be a lot in it... ;) :) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dr_mat 0 Posted June 5, 2004 They already did a comparison on paper - when they reviewed the R32 they commented that it was twice the power, twice the weight, nearly twice the capacity (ccs) and probably twice the price... Bhp/tonne is about the same as the Mk1 GTi, yep, but of course 245bhp and 4x4 means the R32 is much quicker in the real world... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Henny 0 Posted June 5, 2004 I can't wait to come across one that wants to play with my G60... :D :lol: ;) Or my MKI when that's done for that matter! ;) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LowG 0 Posted June 5, 2004 i had a go with the new TT 3.2 version one night, me and my freind in mine and only the driver in the TT, i pulled away about a cars length in first gear than once i could get some traction in 2nd i pulled away further in every gear. My mate in the car has a TT 225 and hew new the story but hell i didnt expect the 3.2 to be that slow. Although it was a convertible meaning slighly heavier, but than again my G60 isnt exactly standart, iv lost track of how much power i have now :lol: Forced Induction all the way baby we aint playing around here :-P Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jim 1 Posted June 5, 2004 I thought convertible = lighter, as it doesn't have as much glass nor a huge metal roof? :) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kevin Bacon 5 Posted June 5, 2004 But the penalty for chopping the roof out (which doesn't weigh much if it's got no sunroof) is a 30-40% reduction in the shell's torsional rigidity. So you have to brace the floor and bulkhead with beefier metal, which adds weight.....then of course you have the weight of the folding mechanisms, thicker windscreen, beefier A pillars etc etc.....all adds up! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Henny 0 Posted June 5, 2004 yup, as Kev says, Convertable = fat get compared with tin top... ;) :lol: Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dubster82 0 Posted June 6, 2004 you'd think.... but surprisingly, the Dodge Viper GTS (hardtop) is HEAVIER than the RT10 (ragtop) reason being it was designed as ragtop first, but still a point of fact AS for the new R32, well it looks a complete photochop, and even the original R32 changed about 3 times before it came out from press pics i seen. i like the MK5 in general, loads of potential, but, it could do with wider arches and a more aggressive bumper, tho it is a chop of the GTI i tihnk. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
