Dont mean to burst your bubble, but the MK1 wasnt the first car to injection, and the MK2 was defo not the first car to 16v heads. The MK1 is so good because it produced a car that was fast and practical, something no one else had thought of. Engine wise, it wasnt that advanced, The technology was already in use. The MK2 was just a updated MK1, and the introduction of a 16v version again was not anything new. Many manufacturers had developed more economical/better perfomance engines using 16v techinology.
My friend has just picked up his GTI on a 55 plate, took me for a spin in it yesterday and it does feel quick, much faster than I expected - reminded me of the first time I was in a fast valver! Hopefully get to have a proper drive in it a few days so will have a better idea then!
thats ok, you havnt burst it yet are you sure about the 16v? i read that it was the first, in the golf mag when they did the articles on each engine. could be wrong though. and the mk1. i got that from a jeremy clarkson video i dug out the other day. again could be wrong, im sure we will be corrected either way. my point was that it did push boundries, there were cars similar before but nothing that covered most aspects so well, i cant think of any. i wasnt slating the mk5, i do realise its a great car, but comparing them to mk1 and 2's is impossible really. theres just to much of a time gap between them.
well no it wasnt. they only made 80 or so of them. built them by hand in the motorsport workshops, they were supposed to be a thankyou to people high up in vw for the work they had put towards the vw golf. or so i hear.
"sutherlandm" aka "MAstra"!! I sussed it was you! You wrote: "Red Robin - And you bought one even though you could easily afford a new M5?" ....Well, yes but not easily - M5 was absolute maximum. But as you already know the M5 too big and I need a 5-door hatchback for large Mackie 450W amp etc etc. It's like you needing a car which will carry your surfboards. Nice to hear from you.
Phil Hall wrote: "Ive only driven a 1.4 MK5 so im gonna reserve judgement til I drive the GTi - not fair to base a comparison on that but the one obvious thing that I will comment on is the weight of the car. I mean you can really feel the weight of the car transfer around when cornering hard." ....I'm confident you'll feel differently after you drive the GTI - Whole suspension etc etc is different from any of the other Golf Mk5s - Has to be in order to handle the performance.
Redrobin In my experience of GTI's in general the MK5 GTI out of the box is a quality package that's not leary and does everything right and is bang up to date. I drove a Type R recently and the GTI is leagues ahead. Yes it could be modded for more power with a chip and exhaust and lowered on coilovers but it's so good as standard it it needs little modding for fast road and the occasional venture on track. As with most of us on here more track time means more serious work and it's get your plastic out time.(As with my MKIV). The overall package I would say is better than a new 3 series as the Golf is the people's car and is not overtly snobby but it exudes quality. 330 Bmw's will and are everywhere the GTI will be less in numbers and is a brilliant drivers car just like the Focus Ian
Never driven a mk5 but i think they look spot on. would like to see a lightweight version though, 'clio cup' style.
Driven a manual 6spd one. http://www.clubgti.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=52728&KW=mk 5 Liked the steering feel/handling, brakes and mid range power,gearchange was greatly improved over mk4 but was disapointed it 'only' made power up to 5000 rpm - car we drove had only done just over 1000 miles or so, might feel a bit more lively with more miles on the clock. Nice car overall. What's a G60 LTD and 16s got to do with this thread anyway?? Edited by: GVK
