all good points there also safer they may be a bet sluggish and fat but i have chewed up many a mk4 GTI in my anniversary
heh... and at the end of the day thats what its all about, just so long as your better and faster then then next guy then its happy days Just when its the other way round it means there's room for improvement Thats why i threw lots of shiny hard earned pennys at the leon the day after GTi inters last year lol
Dont quite agree on that, granted the mk3 was never going to live up to the mk1 and mk2 but i dare say the mk4 is a very fat mk3 so i can hardily say its a better car. The standard 20vt is not exactly fast just tunable because its turbo. The mk3 was ground breaking on safety that the mk4 followed hence making it fatter. But i chose the mk3 as its a perfect blend between old and new. My 2p
Yeh I agree on the postage. Just call me over the weekend if you want them. there getting in my way at the moment.
mk4 -- traction control, definately more tunable because it is a turbo as you say, better management, better handeling/tunable chassis, better looking? and an R32 available? I think given two equivelent cars (1 mk3 and 1 mk4) and an identical budget the mk4 would make the better track car?
ummm have you been drinking? Its crap, horrible delivery, expensive to get real decent power from. Drive it back to back say with a nissan 200sx and you will realise how poor that engine is. Its a diesel in disguise. wrong again, a mk3 is actually very close to a mk2, standard form it was under damped, but take a bit of weight out (easy) and give it decent suspension it is pretty much at mk2 levels of handling with a cracking engine (ABF) your going to have to go a long way until a mk4 is a decent track car. Yes they have loads of grip due to advances in technology/chassis but loads of grip doesnt make good handling. I should know - my vectra has buckets loads of grip, but you guessed it, handles like pooop once the grips gone, balance is horrible
Ah right... deep breath and here goes... Take off your "MK3 GOLF BLINKERS" 2 things i know about there -- the 200sx - i have one/race one -- lets face it, your comparing a sports car to a hot hatch? fwd vs rwd, open diff viscus LSD etc etc etc?? and in standard guise between a 180bhp anniversary Golf and a s13 (CA18DET) there aint a lot in it. unless your talking the s14 (SR20DET) then thats a 2.0 turbo -- again not that fair a comparrision. again i think, i campared the standard mk3 with the mk5/4/2/1 etc -- comparing a stripped/prepped mk3 to a standard mk2 is kind of a no brainer. and i work for Vauxhall by day -- believe me no Vectra gripps or handles well lol "under steer" -- 4WD insignia VXR is a good'un though! and by weekend (untill recently) i was all too farmiliar with the mk4/5 golf chassis working in the vw cup -- the mk4 is a better all round package. even the Diesels did well. (i exclude the Caddy here though that was still awesome) (insert a Pascal quote here) I'm not at all saying the Mk3 is a bad car? i've owned all the chassis from 1-4 and i currently own a mk3 -- i think my point was based on the standard road going cars. i also know a mk3 golf with the right mods and enough money spent on it will handle well enough (again pascal's car will prove that) The ABF was quite mild though (i know the bhp figures and how the stroke was longer etc etc etc so dont quote this) because of that dam inlet cam was detuned for exhaust emmission/cats etc so all in all you were no better off it compared with the mk2 1.8 Basically i just think VW could have done more woith it to make it better... but thats the best thing about history -- you learn from it.
mk3 with 1.8t technology with the sound of a VR6... now that would be awesome... or just an R32 bi turbo The stuff dreams are made of I'd take the mk3 too -- well i just did to hammer a point home for some
i was meaning delivery, not car for car. As a 2 seater RWD sports car is always going to more exciting than a hot hatch. The 1.8T is never exciting, unless you spend mega money, and in that instance anything can be exciting. The sx properly races to the redline, and it is fun. Even a 230bhp audi S3 is boring because of the bland 1.8T... my reference to mk2, was you comment about same money spent on mk3 and mk4 the mk4 would make a better track car? and with a little money a mk3 can be very close to a mk2 (which we all know is a good thing ) however, a mk4 is a long way from being a lightweight (ish) hatch with good feedback and tail happy handling. I dont think the ABF is that mild, it does make it's power very high up still? does feel slightly suffocated though if you know what I mean? oh, and my vectra (elite with 17" alloys) doesnt suffer from understeer at all, you just have to be easy with the throttle mid corner. However, ask it to go round a corner AND go over a bump at the same time and its in all sorts of trouble!!! aweful chassis!!
I had Mk2 blinkers for a long time, and even said I would never own a Mk3... But TBH, mine has been a revelation. Ok, the 1.9 TDI engine is never going to be a trail-blazer (78whp...), but I was pleasantly surprised at it`s chuck-ability...not what I was expecting at all. And that`s on cheap crap ebay coilovers, and f*cked bushes throughout! Proper coilovers, ARBs, and polybushing would see it handling brilliantly I`m quite sure. Nowhere near my Mk2, obviously, but more than adequate for what I always saw as a lardy no-hoper...
As everyone is having there 2 pence, here is mine! Having had a mk4 based car with my old Leon Cupra, and now having the VR6. I can say the handling on the mk3 is definately better, more feedback, and a lot less vague. No over assisted brakes either makes a difference. Feels a lot lighter and doesnt wallow like the Leon Did, both cars had been lowered only on springs tough. Fuel consumption on the 20vt is pretty horrific I managed between 22 and 27 for the 3 years I owned the car. I have had the VR6 for 6 months, done 10000 miles and averaged 29. Only thing I miss from the Leon is the 6 speed box, and electric leather! Yes it wasnt a mk2, but the mk3 is still a good allrounder, maybe not the best car in its class but certainly not the worst!
Ha Ha i see i've provoked some heated debate here -- its all good though. i guess different cars suit different drivers and beauty is in the eye of the beer holder... i think we can all agree to disagree on some things here I dont know what set up the Leon had, mine is Awesome on the track/road but then it has had a fair bit spent on the chassis (coilys, ARB's, braces, light weight wheels good tyres big brakes etc etc etc) though standard i wanted to throw its Lame ass back. The mk3 is pretty lame at present but i'm sure with a similar set up it will be equally as good. its just going back in time 15 years in motoring history it feels a lot less sharp then the leon and my previous golfs. i'm looking forward to the VR6 (maybe 24 valve) transplant but not too keen on the extra KG's over the front wheels. I think a 1.8t would help the handling (reduce under stear etc) although its not the cheapest of conversions. which i guess brings us to a " what form of induction" we all prefer... N/A (carb or throttle body) - turbo or a charger etc etc. -- everyone will have their own fave set up and some people wont care so long as it looks good.
Daily driver (for sale) -- i'm not spamming! Toy (Work in progress) Yep -- she's mine, only a 1.4 at the min though i'm torn between 20vt power or a vr lump with the aim of moving to an R32 from there. if the Leon doesn't sell this week i'll be breaking her to standard (GUTTED) but then begs the question... is she the ideal donor vehicle?? or do i trade out for an older ibiza cupra and rob the lump from that. the VR's just sound awesome though and i really want that sound! Nothing is final untill something is actually in the car. got all the Vr hubs etc etc with new bearing and all blasted up and powder coated ready for the transplant
I completely agree with this. I had mk2 blinkers on for a long time and often jibed Matt about his lardy mk3 (and I still refer to my own golf as a lard mobile) - but they are not actually that bad at all. Like stu I've got cheap coilovers (FK AK's) at the cost of 180 brand new off ebay and the original bushes on 92k with toyo proxes all round and its suprising just how well the car handles - granted it doesn't 3 wheel round corners like the mk2, but its still fun enough. The ABF has been a revelation! Its not as revvy as my old mk2 which I had the little 1.8l lump pushing 165+ bhp, but the power delivery is alot smoother, the torque range much better. (If and when I buy another mk2 or mk1 as my toy car it will have the ABF lump in my current valver thrown in, cam'd and tb'd or turbo'd. Coming on to the mk4 - its laughable your trying to claim this has a good chasis and good handling?! You claim everybody else has blinkers on but if the mk3 was a blemish in golfing history then the mk4 was a giant turd! The 1.8T was an engine that produced the same bhp as the ABF but in a car that weighed 10 metric tonnes! VW even had the audacity to produce a NA engine'd model! The wheels are over-sized so the ride is hard, the bushes and suspension as standard are average at best, and need replacing far too early on its life, regardless of whether you want it to handle like a boat or not. I could go on.... mk1 - legendary, mk2 - amazing, mk3 - good enough, mk4 - bah, mk5 - yes please etc.
180bhp anniversary mk4??? when did the abf produce that or anothign close to the torque figure??? Anyone got the mk3 16v GTI kerb weight, torque figures and 0-60?? The 18bhp Gti mk4 kerb weight |+ torque figures and 0-60?? Standard in both cases please? i guess the mk4 at around 1300kg and the mk3 at around 1100ish? bhp on the mk4 180 torques ??? bhp on the mk3 140 (ish) torques ??? o-60 on the mk4 7ish and mk3 around the same? but then the mk2 was prob around 850kg... this could go on all day... sod it, lets put a performance table together for the mk1-5 and we could also do bhp per tonne for fun on the end?? LET the figures decide!
