Whats the big deal about VR6's?

[The Seater]

I had two Mk2 GTi's, they handled as well as a front wheel drive car could but were slow as a wet week. I sold them and thought a VR6 was the answer. I was wrong.
I went out test driving VR6's and discovered that they really aren't that special at all. They do sound very nice though, and that did bring a smile to my face. I felt that the cars were exceptionally heavy in the front; handled like pigs; took a lot of effort to pull up and were all round too heavy. After learning about running and maintenance costs I was totally opposed to buying one.

I ended up buying a Seat Cupra Sport GTi. It has all the safety aspects of the VR6's with airbags etc. Has brakes practically the same size (Seat-280mm, VR6-288mm) both with ABS. Power is a bit shy (Seat-110kW, VR6-128kW). Same supposed "Traction Control" which is total crap in both circumstances. Less maintenance issues - 4cyl vs 6cyl. More comfortable - they have the same Recaro seats but Seat's ride is more supple.
Considering it is about 300kg lighter (and most of that is in the front end) the Seat has better handling, ride, performance, braking and economy. It's also years newer, and built with VW parts. In so many ways it is more of a proper GTi than Mk2, Mk3 and Mk4 golfs.

To put the performance side of things into perspective, I had two other people in the car at a set of lights next to a VR6 which only had a driver. The Seat won by half a car length to 100. Had it have only been me, I would have slaughtered it. Come to a corner, heaven knows how far in front of it I would have been.

So why all the hype about VR6's? :roll:

[Golf Loon]

I agree that the SEATs are underrated as a car. I think they are great buying and as you say like the original GTI, rather than the overweight Mk3, 4 and 5 Golfs.

BUT VR6s do make a great noise.

I have the best of both worlds, a Seat, with a VR6 in it! 8)

[TassieGTi]

What I continually find ammusing is that people take so much from the fact that they may have 'dragged'a car from the traffic lights!! I have owned many modified cars with impressive specs on paper and have been involved in circuit racing for a number of years.....but have NEVER bothered trying to involve myself in a 'drag'. It would be very naive of you to think that your Seat out-performs a VR6 simply beacause you could reach 100 faster from the lights! What crap!

Apart from the fact that the Seat Cupra and Golf VR6 are completely different sized vehicles (Seat like a Polo) the specs are:

VW Golf VR6: 1245kg, 0-100 = 7.6 secs, torque = 235NM
Seat Cupra 16V: 1100kg, 0-100 = 7.9 secs, torque = 180NM

I only just recently sold my VR6 and loved it! I also drive a highly modified MK1 GTi 16V that can't even compare to the VR6 when it comes to pulling power, especially overtaking on the highway! Sure the MK1 handles better, but it does only weigh 850kg.

When intially sold for around $50 000, I am sure the type of people buying them were not those wanting to go dragging from the lights! For driving around the city and the odd drive on the highway...what a beautiful vehicle! With such great torque from the 6cyl, you don't need to rev its tits off to get around and change gears all the time! For driving on the highway you can't compare! As an example accelerating from 30-50mph in a VR6 takes 4.5 secs as compared to 7.3 secs in a 16V.

As for issues about maintenance, I have never had any more problems or costs associated with keeping my VR6 on the road than any other 4cyl VW I have owned!

The biggest issue for me is the fact that it is a Seat! Apart from using VW mechanicals, Seats to me look terrible and are ugly things! Tell your average Joe off the street that you own and drive a Seat and they will look blankly at you! It might aswell be a Lada! The Seat has not developed a reputation within Australia and their re-sale is terrible! I would not buy one for that fact that I would find it near impossible to sell it! The best thing about them being so cheap is that soon you will be able to pick one up for next to nothing , rip all the mechanicals out and put them in a MK1!

As for being a proper GTi it can never be......It's a Seat!

[imported_brackie]

Seats to me look terrible and are ugly things!
Beauty is definitely in the eye of the beholder. I like the look of Seats. Sure, they ain't the prettiest car in the world but then neither is the Golf 3 or 4. I d agree that the main reason that they didn't sell well here is because of how they look, but we Aussies are a bit reluctant to take on unknown Europeans. Remember Lada and Skoda?? It always amazed me how well the Korean cars were marketed. We all know they aren't the best but soooo cheap!!!!

[The Seater]

I can honestly say that the Seat is quicker. I test drove 5 VR6's and none of them would contemplate arriving at 100 in less than 8 seconds. I would like to know if someone has achieved better than that in a standard car.
Around a track the VR6 would be horrible - it might have a marginally higher top end speed but would understeer too much in corners (as seen in a video I have seen, as you may well have, of a highly modified purple VR6 around Phillip Island). I believe a standard VR6 wouldn't be any quicker than a standard Cupra Sport around any track.
As for highway driving, again the VR6 might have the higher top speed but unless you go to the NT its useless. The Seat would have no trouble in accelerating at the same rate. You might have to work the engine harder and use the gears but its designed to do that and its fun.
I also found the VR motor highly inefficient. While test driving I noted 18ltr/100km while driving mildly quickly after a 15 minute drive. The VR6 puts out a measly 128kW and 235Nm. I used to own a 1978 Mercedes 280CE that put out 136kw and 240Nm from the same size motor (that standard engine setup was developed in the early 70's).
The Golf is 200mm longer, but cabin space is practically the same - only the boot is slightly smaller in the Seat.
Current prices of VR6's are a good indication of how they are not as good as they're cracked up to be. They were a $50,000 car 10 years ago and now can be picked up for under $10,000.
I agree, the Seat isn't the best looking car, but its not bad. The amount of blank stares coming off peoples faces after I've burnt them off sure is sweet though. The rarity factor is good. In fact I can only find one of them for sale at the moment:
http://carsales.com.au/pls/carsales/!cs_content.private_vehicle?vehicle_id=2790994&current_rec=1&used_rec=6&total_rec=8&sort_type=&total_rec=8&sort_type=&make_id=25&state_id=-1&search_distance=25
Doesn't seem like too bad a price either compared to what you get for a VR6.

[aprr32]

I would have to say that none of your compaints about the vr6 have ever shown up in my R32 which is the best Golf ever made and the best looking water pumper to come out of VW!

[vee_dub]

oh well....

i believe MK3 is a very nice car...despite the facts Seat is a nice car too.

I personally drives 2 Mk3 GL n VR6, 2L with H&Rs handles, u canot believe how good it feels, with bit of camber adjustment it loveable.

VR6 is around 10 years old, i got it from a car wrecker recently, share between me n my cuz, so the suspension is abit weak n old :S indeed it feels abit under steer n stuff. Honestly if u install a set of coilovers n nice camber it wouldnt be a problems.

As u said VR6 SOUNDS GREAT, n it got a very well structure. High Torque engine~. LOOKS fat when u lower an MK3.~ indeed it sucks up lotta fuel, but may be it worthwhile hehe...n also it's an 6 cylinder 2.8L of course it sucks more.

with regard to service n parts heheehehe as if european cars service n parts can be cheap in australia. OO" heeheeee On the other hand, i aint sure about parts of SEAt.. i believe MK3 is easier to obtain than seat.

May be i am baised..cause i own 2 MK3...but that's my opinion~. when i compare cars..i compare to there chassis structure first, VR6 5 doors hatch and Seat Gti is a 3 doors hatch. It would be fair if u compare seat to CIVIC or 206 GTI. those 2 doors + Lock is pretty heavy.

as aprr32 said heheh R32 indeed the best golf even made....STANDARD it already looks Stunning! Despite the 3.2L..with 4 Motion it handles like a beast. I WISH i got one..:D

BUT EVERYONE GOT THEIR OWN WAY TO VIEW THINGS..I RESPECT THAT~


Big DuB

[evorobin]

Well having watched that vid of Matt's VR6 on the Island this weekend I'd say that it handles very well. Coming into the first corner after the straight it snaps into oversteer which he corrects 8)

The Seater update your profile mate

[vee_dub]

if u really hate the under steer...snap a rear sway bar on from Whiteline 200 bucks hehe n then if u got bit og money camber the rear a lil
for sure over steer nor under :D

[TassieGTi]

You are never going to convince me with your argument Seater! As for saying the Seat is quicker...well I can only quote the facts, especially the 0-100 times as that is something I am not interested in testing! I own and drive a car for many reasons and burning someone off at the lights is certainly not one of them!

You are making alot of assumptions about the VR6 based on test drives, especially believing that a VR6 would be horrible around the track.....based on what experience? Additionally, believing that current prices of VR6s are an indication that they are not as good as they are cracked up to be is a highly ignorant comment!

I think that you missed my point when trying to compare a VR6 with a Seat Cupra! However, you have made your purchase and are obviously happy with your acquisition.....that's all that matters!

Personally, trying to compare a Seat with a Golf VR6 is like comparing a Porsche 924 with a 911!

[Golfwise]

One doesn't compare a SEAT Ibiza to a Golf they are not in the same size or price value category.
A SEAT Ibiza is a Polo with a Spanish body, short and narrow.
A Golf is a Golf.Say no more,they have already proven themselves.
And Seater when you burn everybody off at the lights think of the families of the 77 plus people that have died on Australian roads over the Christmas holidays. :cry:

[mikinoz]

will this be the discussion that we have of the R32 in years to come?

If Seat is a VW then an aircooled Beetle is a Porsche!

[GoLfMan]

sorry mate nothin will compare to the R32 :lol:

[DVR68U]

hey guys ive been absent for a while, but i have a vr6 and i get 8l/100 and with a chip and front koni's i have nothing to complain about. but the vr6 was and is the best motor VAG has come up with. variations have come in many forms w8 and w12 engines. isnt it the w12 which is the most powerful current production car . 1000hp!

no matter what is said and done ill always love the VR6. The way it sounds with intake and exhaust ever time i get behind the wheel, im in a state of bliss with the pedal to the floor.
cheers brenton

[Golf Loon]

Good to see you back on the forum. Mate. I can hear his VR6 from 10ks away when he comes visiting, it has such a resonance to the exhaust. :lol:

[GoLfMan]

how is ur VR6 going Loon... is it quick 8)

[Golf Loon]

It will be, I need the computer setup and all the dyno places are away until next week. Soon...

[GoLfMan]

what did u do with the big exhuast?

[GoLfMan]

isnt it the w12 which is the most powerful current production car . 1000hp!

no mate its the W16 in the Bugatti the specs are, 736kw 1250nm of torque and 0-200 b4 you reach 100 :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Golf Loon]

what did u do with the big exhuast?

Its still in the boot :D

[lyle-act]

heh, i can see why seater would say that stuff about a VR.

When i went and test drove mine they were running the cheapest crappest fuel they could find, and it hadn't had a service in over a year. The suspension in it was orginal as well. Really handled pretty average...

After getting some decent tires, suspension, exhaust and just a big pod filter it handles a MILLION times better. You might keep up with it to 100, but if you were already moving you'd get fairly kaned.

[Golfwise]

Go those beautifull sixes :D :D :D :D :D

[DVR68U]

vr6's are great cars, just do front suspension, intake exhaust and chip, then u have a unforgetable car

[WABIT]

we have bilstein yellow shocks in the front and that clearded most of the under steer up :)

wabit

[ausgolfer]

Top Gear says it best, VW didn't make a car that could beat the Mk2 Gti 16v as an "all rounder" untill the mk5 GTi.

[DVR68U]

yeah thats stock , we are talking about slightly moded vr's
the mod's make a big difference

[Golfwise]

Yeah and the "Top Gear " ****s reckon the Mk1 is the "Car of the Century "
I've had my share of new cars and will never waste my money again so mk5s are out until they are cheap.I've got a 1 2 and 3 had a 4 but like the variety of model ownership.

[ausgolfer]

Language, there are people under 18 on this forum. :wink:
I love my 16v mk2 and feels so much nicer to drive than any VR6 I've been in, both standard and modified.

[Golfwise]

What language ?? :?

[DVR68U]

also a vr is safer , dual airbags and stuff.

[WABIT]

doesnt matter mate ive heard far worse **** than ...! :P hahahahha

wabit

[ausgolfer]

DVR68U a VR is safer than what? I'm assuming you're comparing it to a Seat Cupra, but don't they have dual airbags aswell? Does your VR6 still have the standard airbag steering wheel?
If you were comparing it to a Mk2 16v Gti, I said it was a better "all rounder" and I stick buy that.
Also in this discussion many people are comparing modified cars to standard cars and standard cars to modified cars. As we've all probably seen standard cars that run well and standard cars that run poorly, aswell as modified cars that run both well and poorly, it'll always be difficult to say whats best. I can't wait to encounter a VR6 down at phillip island :D .
Tassie GTi when you were quoting acceleration in gears where were you getting your info from? and what gear was that in? I'm interested to know :wink:
Cheers.

[ausgolfer]

Also Wabit and others(about the language comment) this is still a publicly viewed forum, we don't want to give a poor impression of this community. :wink:

[DVR68U]

i was comparing it to a mk2 , and yes i still have steering wheels airbag in.

[The Seater]

Well, if we're comparing modified cars then I better get my two cents in.

I've changed the suspension in my Cupra to Koni Sport Adjustables - it handles very nicely, and I'm sure a damn site better than any VR6 could. Even without modifying sway bars etc. I raised the ride height back to standard to increase suspension travel and the handling is just as good if not better, but ride comfort is far better. This is probably due to the crappy Australian roads. If the car was on a smooth track then lowered would be better. Though it still can't compare to my previous MX5. No front wheel drive can ever compare to the handling of an MX5 with a perfect 50-50 weight balance. This is partly the reason why Im selling my Cupra and going back to the MX. If anyone is interested in an immaculate low kms Cupra.

Low:
http://www.vwwatercooled.com.au/forums/images/imported/2006/02/5-1.jpg
Standard:
http://www.vwwatercooled.com.au/forums/images/imported/2006/02/standardride-1.jpg

You have to face the facts: A VR6 is a front wheel drive with a lot of its weight in front of the front wheels, recipe for a crappy handling car.

How much more power are VR6's getting with changed inlet's and chips?

I'm still confused about TassieGTi's sweeping statements.
One: How can your VR6 have more pulling power (driving on the road, not pure engine figures) than a MK1 with a 16v which has just 38bhp and 70Nm less in a car more than 400kg lighter?
Two: "accelerating from 30-50mph in a VR6 takes 4.5 secs as compared to 7.3 secs in a 16V." Where the heck did you get these figures from - I think you drink your bathwater!
Three:You can quote figures on our cars, which are slightly wrong. But have you driven both? I have, I timed them to 100, threw them through corners, did mid range acceleration; if I thought the VR6 was quicker I would have bought one.
As for comparing a Cupra to a VR6. How is that anywhere near the same comparison as a 924 to a 911?

Also, to Golfwise: I am not an irresponsible driver, here on the mainland we do have roads that go to 100km/h starting from a set of traffic lights. How fast you get to that point does not make you irresponsible. In my 8 years of driving I have never once received a speeding fine.

[Tim]

this thread is funny as.
so many haters!
give us some sweet VAG lovin. theyre all awesome cars. even your Chair Ibiza cupra thingy :D

[DVR68U]

boys this is the mk3 and mk4 forum so if u want to talk about others go into their forums . otherwise i will have to just delete your posts . this is for mk3 and 4 lovin :wink: right tim

[GoLfMan]

seater. your seat is on carsales. why are you selling it?

[The Seater]

Selling to buy a house and go back to a proper rear wheel drive

[Golf Loon]

I reckon you should take the stickers off the side of the car.
I laugh at RWD in the wet mate.

[The Seater]

Don't mind the stickers. A lot of people take them off, so I want to leave them on. Plus the bright white would be too much, needs something to offset it.

Probably sidetracking here a bit from the MK3 and MK4 discussions, however:
I acknowledge that the VW group of cars are probably the safest and nicest front wheel drivers; but rear wheel drive is great fun in the wet and sublime in the dry. Nothing is more embarrassing than when you're trying to take off moderately quick or fast and break into silly amounts of wheel spin, while a lower powered (eg. my old 1.8ltr MX5) rear wheel driver will simply take off, have proved this against a Golf GTi 16v. To have the steering wheel trying to be ripped out of your hands when traction control cuts in and the front of the car is dancing all over the road; it looks silly, feels silly and is uncomfortable. SO, I don't do this out of desire but sometimes neccessity to beat traffic etc.
Understeer and torque steer greatly annoy me. Front wheel drive is great for little and low powered cars, but I believe there is no point in having a high powered front wheel drive car. It's simply awful. :cry:

[Golfwise]

I got the specs from a road test from 90s VW mag for Tassiegti.
I'd print them up for those who don't believe but a little research would find them anyhow.
A Seat will never be a Golf anyway so who cares really and front drive will never be rear drive so make your own choice there. :D

[ausgolfer]

I'd like to see those specs, and still no word of what gear the acceleration is measured in? Because it's hard to believe that 30-50mph takes almost as long as 0-100km/hr.
Cheers.

[WABIT]

OMG THEY ARE 2 DIFFRENT CARS!! WITH DIFFRENT SPECS

compare a VW 2lt witha SEAT 2lt OOHHH WAIT THEIR THE SAME ENGINE :P 8V 16V... SAME SAME!! (wog accent) :P

wabit

[The Seater]

Yes WABIT, they are two different cars. That's why we're comparing them. It hardly makes sense to compare two identical cars.
As Ausgolfer said, "I'd like to see those specs, and still no word of what gear the acceleration is measured in? Because it's hard to believe that 30-50mph takes almost as long as 0-100km/hr."

[lyle-act]

You obviously havn't driven a VR6 very long Seater. After driving one for several years, i can tell you that they are alot better handling than you think. You just have to learn how to drive it properly ;)

[vee_dub]

mmmmh dont worry everyone got opinion....

seater may not get used to driving a heavier car...!!

[The Seater]

Please enlighten me as to how you need to drive a VR6 to enjoy what it has to offer? How differently you would drive a VR6 compared to something like my Cupra, a Golf 16v or any other hot hatch for entertainment value.
I like the VR6 for their nice sounding engine and pleasent looks. I nearlly bought one on engine note alone. But dynamically they are a pig of a car, and it really put me off (high fuel consumption also). I have driven enough of them for long enough to know. VW knew this and that's why they brought in the 4motion. I have been in an R32 and dynamically thanks to their 4WD they are far superior car. Thats a car that can handle the extra weight and power.

The VR6 is nice family transport but its no hot hatch.

PS: As I previously mentioned, I used to drive a Mercedes which was a very heavy car, I got very used to it. Grew tired of it.

[V8quattro]

It's well known the VR6 suspension spec was changed during its time on sale here. Some VR6s handled better than others. It was a bit of a lead tipped arrow at the very limit, but then I don't agree that it's a pig of a car - it's all how you set up to corner the thing; set up early in a VR6 and I reckon they are quick and agile.
I've driven the Cupra when new, and I thought the quality was very ordinary, the 16v really lacked torque and while it handled quite well it was not as agile or tactile as I hoped it would be. Don't get me wrong -I like the Cupra and personally have thought of buying one, but I like torque and power, not just high-revving power. And it really felt cheap and had lots of rattles compared to other VAG products of the time. Harsh ride, too. VR6 was not perfect, but as a new car more accomplished than the Cupra. Having said that, the point of this thread is a bit lost on me because they were not cars in the same size or price class anyway. While as usedcars they may sell for similar prices, they still are very different in philosophy.

[vee_dub]

mmmmahh this threads funny hehhe...

everyone got different taste...saying VR6 is a pig is kinda wrong...

[DVR68U]

yeah i like the power and speed from 80 up, thats when the vr6 shines

[lyle-act]

saying they use lots of fuel made me laugh.

I guess when i turn it on it says 20l/100km, but after 5 mins its down to under 10l, and then by the time i get to work it says 8.5/100km. Even when i strapped it UP mt hotham chasing a mini2 it didn't go about 11!

My gfs 1.8l Cordoba uses more fuel! ahaha....

[Tim]

yeah i think i agree there.
On my recent road trip along the eastern coast i was averaging as low as 7.6L/100kms according to the MFA. (which according to my calculations on fill ups seemed to be quite accurate)

In peak hour traffic i rarely get worse then 11L/100kms
Even thrashing the pants off it in the mountains. maybe 13L tops?
Will have to see what happens when i get a chance to do a track day :twisted:

[DVR68U]

yeah i easily get 7-8ltrs/100 , goes out to 11 if i really get on it and cruze at high speeds. they are good motors , no doubt about it the best i can get is 5.4l/100 out my way but thats really being carefull and using all the hills to my advantage. and sittin on 80 :wink: i enjoy MFA its a fun game to play

[bombsquad21]

this post just keeps going, i personally like both these cars, for different reasons. Its not really apples vs apples...the vr6 is probably more complex, the Seat is more likely to have lots of tiny dents on the body????(whats that about) but regardless they still have lots on offer, and now is a great time to buy either car. And then u run in to an R32 and realise that u have a ways to go!

[Bug_racer]

To keep it simple :

VR6 : Straight line speed

Seat Cupra : Cornering ability

[Golf Loon]

To keep it simple :

VR6 : Straight line speed

Seat Cupra : Cornering ability

VR6 Ibiza Slays them all :wink:

[Bug_racer]

I was keeping it simple :wink: .

[aprr32]

I've seen 83 l/100km on the R32 and also 7.9 l/100km- the difference between fun and cruising, but then even cruising in the R is fun.

[Bug_racer]

Ive had the vr6 down to as low as 4.5 , when I took it to the runs it was 17 .

[DUBING]

i get constant 14.5L/100km urban, i feel its a litte too much, before bug_racer changed my oil pump i was getting around 17L/100km :x

[Bug_racer]

Does it ever misfire ?

[DUBING]

Does it ever misfire ?
amm. some times on ideal, it doesn’t ideal smooth not sure if its missing... :!:\

[Bug_racer]

you'll need those sparkies changed .
I'll pm you the correct heat range when I get a chance

[moto]

I had two Mk2 GTi's, they handled as well as a front wheel drive car could but were slow as a wet week. I sold them and thought a VR6 was the answer. I was wrong
I know its an old thread, but I just joined here and I'm catching up. Great read. IMO comparing a VR to a GTI - is like comparing a merangue to an oyster. They're both heaps of fun. But sure as anything the taste's different.
Its true - especially the early VRs - don't like bad roads and putting a couple of big mates in the back seat throws the balance right out, but.. heck, that's what Holdens are for isn't it?.
On the other hand, pulling out to pass a double bogey semi in a VR is a rare experience. Whhhooooom and its 210 in the dial and climbing fast. And its just as much fun to launch one hard into a corner, set up the correction and back off. It'll slide through for a moment, wash off some speed, then ... at precisely any time you want to ..... whoooooom again. I don't buy the story they're nose heavy. They just "feel" heavy .. but its the "feel" from relatively low power assistance on a very high ratio. The proof of that is the tyre squeal from the back always comes long before any from the front. As well, the power assist on the brakes is also relatively low and that's accentuated by pedal actions that are very short. Its not heaviness one ought to feel .. its directness. For me a VR is a real throwback in the direction of proper sports cars. Huge grunt, light tight footprint, and very direct controls. Its only got a few serious limitations and one of them is fwd. Even so, take the time somewhere where its ok to get it wrong and pretty soon I'm sure you'll be staggered at how accurate and confidence inspiring these things are.

[16valvertwin45s]

You need smaller mates :D :D
And I have no idea what Holdens are for :shock:

[DVR68U]

the holdens are just for the cops :wink: because it doesnt matter if they get wrecked or shot at lol :D
cheers brenton

[kai_h]

I'm a big fan of the VR6, I think it's one of the best engines any manufacturer has ever made. It's compact, it's not a complex as a lot of people make it out to be, it delivers nice, smooth power, it takes well to forced induction, and it sounds very sweet.

I was hooked after owning a Golf VR6 and when the time came to get something newer, the #1 car on my list was the Bora 4Motion, as the only car from the MkIV series that came in with the VR6. (OK, so there are some commercial vehicles, and the R32, which I'd love too!)
It's just such a smooth engine, the power delivery is quite linear, and (especially on the 24V) there's plenty of torque throughout the rev range, from 1000rpm to redline.

Peak power output figures don't tell the whole story, as it's torque, and torque at low revs in particular, that gets you off the line and gives you drivability.

In gear acceleration in a VR6 is just sublime, drop it back to 3rd on the highway and you'll give a lot of more powerful cars a good run for their money, oh, and did I mention the sound? =) :twisted:

[imported_brackie]

Peak power output figures don't tell the whole story, as it's torque, and torque at low revs in particular, that gets you off the line and gives you drivability.

You're singing "The "Diesel Song"! Sorry to hijack the thread (and me of all people! :oops: ) But torque reigns supreme.

Power is the rate of doing work; force x distance moved...or how fast you move an object through a distance, while torque is the moment of a force; the measure of a force's tendency to produce torsion and rotation about an axis, equal to the vector product of the radius vector from the axis of rotation to the point of application of the force and the force vector.

Anyway, enough of this science teacher cr*p....Torque at low revs is more useful and cheaper than power at high revs in most road driving situations. It's different on the race track (or so I've heard.)

[tenji`]

hi found this forum from vwvortex.

would just like to say i love my r32.

and comparing say a seat to a golf would be unfair it would be like comparing a proton to a mitsubishi seeing asthough proton used old mitsubishi car parts for ages.

[Bug_racer]

Only r32 has flapper mod .

[tenji`]

yeh pretty much the cheapest mod u can ever do lol

[kai_h]

OK, so we're all agreed then, the VR6 is all good! =)

[Golf Loon]

OK, so we're all agreed then, the VR6 is all good! =)

its a noise thing!