Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Volkswagon GTI 1.8t vs VR6
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
You put exhaust for $600, an intercooler and pipes with a blow off valve for $500 and you have a GTI with way more power around 215-245hp and $1500 to spare!!!.... Just try to get that type of power out of a VR6 for $1500 try $3600-$5000 to get the heavy VR6 to perform in that sense...
MTM has an Audi 1.8t with 400hp with stock internals and all bolt on mods what does that say to you?????
Though I really like the VR6 engine for its growl, I honestly think (and the auto mags attest to that) that overall, the 1.8t is a better fit for this car. My engine is stock, and will most probably remain that way. Still, it delivers plenty of power for my needs. The torque delivery at low rpms makes this engine feel much bigger and powerful than it really is. Acceleration from stop is a blast, and cruising at highway speeds is very, very comfortable - and quiet! (I know, I'm getting old, but I like being able to talk when I'm doing 'only' 80).
The suspension is a good compromise for everyday use, and offers fine cornering, but race enthusiasts will definitely want to firm it up, and ad some low profile tires (like the 17'' offered as an option). I have the 'regular' 15'' and though comfy, they don't do the car justice (but in NJ the roads really suck, so I'll leave the 15'' on for now!)
Oh... that traction control thing is really nice and works wonders on slippery roads.
Option wise... my car is black on black: I went with the cloth interior and the regular stereo; the cloth seats are really nice and supportive on the new GTIs (recaro-like) and the standard sound system does the job for me. I have the monsoon on my Jetta and am not crazy about it (it tends to saturate with bass).
What more can I say? I am really, really happy about the car. People stop and stare and ask everywhere ('c'mon, it's only a Golf!').
For new owners, a word of advice: always check that the fuel cap is screwed to the click sound, otherwise the engine computer lights up!
When I was shopping, I also considered the Civic Si and the Integra GS-R. Both fine cars. Personally, I'm really happy about the subdued sound of the 1.8t though. It does make commuting a lot more comfortable. Also, some will argue that the GTI is usd 2000 more expensive than the Si. I agree. But check out how well the GTI is equipped. You don't have to worry about ABS, (plus you get SRS or whatever it's called), alarm, and an interior finish and design which simply beat anything in this class. To me, the GTI is also more convenient with the hatch, and has an overall appeal which is more 'grown-up' than the Si (yes, I know, I'm getting old).
Pricewise, I paid 19,500 (before tax) delivered and all (cloth int. / std sound system + trunk CD changer).
For the US market, the GTI comes in GLS and GLX trim. The GLX is the 'fully loaded' car with VR6, and the GLS is equipped with the 1.8T.
This was also the issue with some modified Audi S4 and A4s.
P.S.: I noticed a lot of posts here saying that aftermarket chips void the warranty. The salesperson who helped me today said she was into GTI-racing, and that air filters, exhaust mods, and chips were the 3 best ways to beef up your GTI without voiding the warranty. Has anyone actually checked on this?
Also, - I may have misunderstood the article, but on Vortex it seems that they drove the GTI 1.8t and the GLX on a curvy track, and the 1.8 made the best times despite having only the 15' wheels on. If this is true, it's something to think about.
I'm extremely happy with my 1.8t. It has cloth interior and the 15' wheels. I would have preferred the 16' but the 17' are a bit extreme in my view, especially since I drive in the NJ/NY area where there are more potholes than asphalt!
Hey... both cars are great!
They liked the engine and interior in the VW better. They liked the tranny and suspension better in the Civic. The exterior is really up to taste. In the end they said the Civic is a great deal for all out performance, but if you want more of a car there is no way you could speed the difference on the Civic to make the interior as nice.
SCC reviews alot of different cars from US made Ford Focus even Cougars! to VW Golfs to Japanese Nissan Sentras. So I can dare say that they have a wide array of cars to choose from and not biased to certain continental make vehicles.
Coming from Stats background, I tend to require more evidence and not take things as is....
I think the VW is a more grown up car. I like the quaility of interior and it feels like BMW 318ti with a good motor.
Toss on an exhaust system and you've got a great sounding, fast VW.
I'm selling it for a Jetta VR6 because the family requires a 4 door.... :-)
I have no idea what kind of rpms you typically run when starting from a stop light in daily driving. My guess is that unless you rev the engine and dump the clutch (and finding yourself making the boat payment for the trasmission mechanic), the 1.8t would be worse than the base 2.0 in getting you through the first couple hundred feet or so crossing the intersection and going through the first half of the street block due to the smaller displacement and the restricted exhaust system that spins up the turbo.
All chipping accomplishes is introducing more exhaust restriction (higher pressure turbo) and moving the torque curve to the upper right; that is, getting better peak output at the expense of extending the dead zone between idle and when turbo kicks in. I suppose a car with performance characteristics like that would be very useful when they start installing stop lights every few miles on the 75mph free way.
For what it's worth, I currently drive a 2.8L inline 6, probably not fundamentally all that different from the VR6; it turns over at about 3000rpm when the car is travelling at 90mph. In city driving, the revs are mostly between idle and 1700rpm; ie. mostly in the dead zone if it were a turbo. Of course a small dislacement I4 would rev higher.
Increasing the boost on the 1.8T does not shift the torque curve to the right and up, in increases power over virtually they entire rev range. There's going to be slightly increased lag due to it making a lot more boost and that boost taking a little longer to be generated. It's not enough to be an issue.
"the 1.8t would be worse than the base 2.0 in getting you through the first couple hundred feet or so crossing the intersection and going through the first half of the street block due to the smaller displacement and the restricted exhaust system that spins up the turbo."
You've obviously never driven both of these cars, if you had you wouldn't be making statements like this. It's also obvious that you don't know much about cars, specifically the VW's which you are attempting to expound upon. The 1.8T makes 155 lb/ft from 1750-4200 rpms (It doesnt peak around 2000 or 2500 and then decline to redline, why make general comments about turbo engines power output when you can make specific ones about the car you're talking about?). The 2.0 makes 122 lb/ft @ 2600 rpms. So how exactly is the 2.0 going to be faster in the first couple hundred feet? Care to retract that careless, uninformed, incorrect statement? The 1.8T not only makes a lot more torque, it makes it at a lot lower rpm.
If you don't know what you're talking about, don't talk.
the torque curve to the right and up, in increases
power over virtually they entire rev range.
There's going to be slightly increased lag due to
it making a lot more boost and that boost taking a
little longer to be generated. "
That "little longer to be generated" effect is precisely the result of torque curve being shifted to the right and up; what else can possibly be happening? somehow the engine stopped spinning up after adding turbo? that delay in time corresponds to the shift in torque curve.
"The 1.8T makes 155
lb/ft from 1750-4200 rpms (It doesnt peak around
2000 or 2500 and then decline to redline, why make
general comments about turbo engines power output
when you can make specific ones about the car
you're talking about?). "
Don't mean to be insulting, but do you know anything about IC engines aside from quoting from VW brochure? Engines don't have perfectly flat torque curve tops like an idealized line on digital computer. VW simply choose to market its product with the given spec, which is quite consistent with the generalized picture of turbo engines I described. Notice I said _slowly_ declining to redline; that slow decline does not adversely affect performance much in the mid to high rev range (which is indeed the advantage of turbo-charged engines, the good mid to high rev range performance). What does concern me is the left side of the torque curve, which falls off precipitiously below 1750rpm.
Of course the 1.8t can beat 2.0 NA if you rev up the engine for a dump-clutch start, which my original post readily acknowledged, but dumping clutch is not a feasible way of driving for regular use. The 2.0 engine has much more torque off idle than the 1.8t, which is not only smaller but also has to work against the turbo exhaust restriction before it's spooled up.
As for shifting point, what percentage of the time in your daily driving are you at or near your shifting point? Not to mention that the overwhelming majority of buyers buy automatic transmission. I'm not talking about enthusiast driving here, but the car's ability to get out of its own way off idle. When joe average driver lets the brake go at the street light and step on the gas, initially the 1.8t is probably making less power than the 1.7 liter in Honda Civic thanks to the back pressure created by the turbo (made worse if you chip it to high-pressure turbo).
BTW, I've no intention to comment on you as a person.
Anyone tried turboing a 2.0 golf?
"Not to mention that the overwhelming majority of buyers buy automatic transmission. I'm not talking about enthusiast driving here"
Who gives a rats patoot what the majority of people buy? Why someone would buy a performance automobile with a slush box is beyond me. I don't care what they think. If you want to talk about automatic 4 bangers go somewhere else. Regardless, the auto 1.8T would still get off the line quicker because when you give it the gas the rpms are going to surge up to right where the 1.8 is making much more power than the 2.0.
'Engines don't have perfectly flat torque curve tops like an idealized line on digital computer."
I don't recall saying they did.
"but do you know anything about IC engines aside from quoting from VW brochure?"
I've driven both of these cars, have you?
Virtually ALL modifications increase high end at the expense of low end. Exhausts. Intakes. Cams. Do you really think people that want 200+ HP out of their GTi, Golf, Passat, whatever, care if it's lacking under 1500 rpms?
Thanks in advance, Mike.
The Vr6 is a great car if you don't want to do a lot to make it faster, becuase it's going to cost you a gang of money to squeeze a lot more performance out of it. But for about 3 grand on the 1.8T, you can put a bigger K04 Turbo, chip, exhaust and a few other things on it to make it ridiculously faster.
Also, the Vr6 has goodies/gadgets you can't get on the 1.8T, but I don't miss them much. Automatic rain-sensing wipers, dark wood trim (nice!), auto climate control...but you can get the leather package including heated seats on the turbo, for about $1000 more (that's what I got).
And so far, I'm not missing the extra power. On the freeway, the car is excellent. The power is available at all times, and 110 is easily reached without even trying (although you can definitely hear the engine getting it's rev-on). Nobody passes me on the highway. On the street, the car also pulls nicely, and I've surprised many a lowered Civic or unsuspecting Mustang owner (is it because I don't have "VR6" showing on the back?) That's another thing, they opted to keep the "1.8T" off the back of the GTI's, but kept it on the Golfs, so folks think you have 2000's 115 hp GTI. A real sleeper!
I Just purchased a Jetta 1.8T (yes I test drove the VR6 and decided to go with 1.8T)
Break in period: Does anyone have a good solid answer on this? I am having so much fun with it, however I keep it under 81mph and not go over 4k rpm. Comments ???
Chip upgrade: Ok there is no real data here from real people who have experience the difference and what are the effects of having this chip on the following:
- Gas millege
- Temparature of the engine
- noises
- boost
- manufacture warranty (including extended warranty)
Comments??suggestions??
8er
Neo
HE pretends that the car is very scarse in the Bay ARea (SAn FRancisco), which happens to be true since no other dealer seems to have it.
Am I getting a good deal paying flat out MSRP?
Thanx!