ClioSport.net
Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
Golf VR6 race
- Thread starter dawso
- Start date
I cant really see the Zenons being that heavy mate, its only a light assem.
Im also only going by the weights recorded at weighbridge the alloy bonnet fitted to the MK1 was weigh at 1093KG, the MK1 with the steel bonnet was weighed at 1100KG. Thats the only difference so the bonnet can be the only factor in the weight difference!
Quote: Originally posted by GirlRacer on 24 February 2003
The current Golfs are now much heavier and slower than the earlier ones. A guy at our garage has a newish GTi, but my little 172 can beat him up the hill near where I live! They were OK up to and including the VR6 but afterwards a bit sluggish!
They were ok upto and including the Mk2 2.0 16V. The mk3 and beyond are all boats including the VR6 which needs that 2.8 V6 engine to actually do anything impressive
172 man eats humble pie !
I wasnt telling lies after all was i !
I can scan and post a picture of the new 172 cup brochure if you still want proof !
Or if any 172cup owners with a brochure can come forward and state what i have just said, as now one seems to believe me on this one.
Cheers
Jonathan
I would say the mk2 GTI is overall better than the mk1 GTI (and ive had a race spec mk1). It is unfortunate that the golfs have got big and heavy but thats what consumers wanted so really VW succeeded. The VR6 wasnt that bad a handler, it just wasnt that fast around the corners, but it certainly isnt bad. Mk3s are probably the ugliest though.
If a guy is driving dangerously get out of their way, my little adventure at the weekend could have resulted in the death of a young child (see shocked topic). If the guy wants to risk his and his girlfriends life then that is his look out, but they could have both been on drugs.
172man eat no pie..... i know how much the cup weighs . I was argueing that mine has 166bhp per ton due to weighing 1035kg as is stated in the brochure as has youve already seen the link you little pea of a brain should know this mAAAaan. Also why would i want you to scan and post the brochure when theres a URL ?
172man - do you READ any of the posts, i have been on about the mark 2 all along and have stated this in capitals, many times over ! I also dont agree with the figures on this website. I will use the ones that renault publish in THEIR LATEST brochures, as i think they no best ! You keep refering to one peice of possibly outdated information on which to base your argument on ! God i hope your not a solicitor, for your clients sake !
i didnt post that rubbarb. The brochure clearly states 1035kg mk1 172. If you understood that a steel is over twice as heavy as aluminium youd know that renault forgot to update the weight for the mk2 it also got much more kit than the mk1. I cant understand this making up business on renaults behalf, its not like oh yeah lets just say the car weighs this much , that to me is insane. What im explaining is that the mk2 gaining weight then renault reduced the weight of this car by 80 something kg whcih gives you the cups weight. Roughly 10 or so kg lighter than my MK1 !!!
LISTEN FFS! CLIOSPORT WEIGHED THE MK1(WITH ALLOY BONNET), THE MK1(WITHOUT THE ALLOY BONNET) AND A MK2 AT A WEIGH BRIDGE!
ALL RESULTS ARE ON THE MAIN PAGE UNDER CAR SPECS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sorry for shouting!
This test was carried out to find out why the MK1 and MK2 are near identical in terms of performance.
how can you weigh your car LOL?
i notice you have a mk2 is it because your annoyed? Renault brochure 1035kg do you think they made it up LMFAO!
Also if you did weigh them ? Then the scales are well out due to the inaccuracies of the weight of aluminium vs steel. was the test independently ajudicated with renault observing etc, this sounds daft.
The steel bonnet will be at least twice as heavy
so if it was (al) 20kg
then (st) 40 kg at least
+ weight of larger rims and spare 15kg?
+ xenons 3kg
+ all that extra kit like the bin under seat ive lost the details on the kit extra in the mk2.
i cant see how they weigh the same, having drove both mine felt quciker thats why i kept it. They did compensate for the weight by altering the gearing and doing some other things to the car, but on uptake mine felt faster.
Thought id best chime in!
The guy who reckons he blew a VR6 IS talking sh*t! maybe a williams could beat a stock VR on a really twisty road, i accept that! but the distance the clio 16v would have put between himself and the VR on the bend would have been nil as soon as the guy in the VR gave his throttle a blip coming out of the bend! I know this for a fact!
How can you lot possibly compare a 1.4 clio to a VR6? That in itself is a joke! A VR6 would totally spec off a clio 16v within seconds! Its like comparing a R1 to a 125cc moped!
Ive read all the posts above and cant get my breath at some of the comments! lol
How can you possibly think a Clio of any year or spec looks better than any golf? Especially the new ones! Ill give credit where credits due and the williams was a great little car! But you lot talk of VW going down hill!?? Ha are you all forgeting what the latest clio to be churned out of france looks like?
As for both looks and build quality any VW is leagues ahead of anything france can offer!
Anyway to the point, Rhys172 was this the car in question?
http://muchos.co.uk/members/golffy/carfrontsmall.jpg
You may be talking about me as i drive down that road twice everyday, i know the road and its more like 7 miles than 1 mile! and as far as im concerned its one of the safest roads for going fast around this part of the country! I cant remember this happening at all but then again i wouldnt remember seeing a clio anyway! More than likely i would have been in a rush to get to work! This is an example of people lying about racing etc. If it was me, i know i wouldnt have done anything that i thought would damage me, my car, anyone else or their car! So your comment about weaving in and out is utter BullSh*t! (if it was my car in question)
The fact of the matter is, wether it was me or not you were proberbly blown away and made up a cheap excuse! You never expected whoever the VR driver was to come on here, so you knew you could talk b*llocks!
If it wasnt me ill be more than happy to teach you and your french mobile the error of your ways! Any time this week is fine by me!
Id like to add i have nothing against clios or their respective owners, being as they are mainly owned by young sexy hairdressers!
I was just pointed in the direction of this thread and thought it was my duty to educate you all!
Ill leave you all with something to think about, sell your french sh*t and buy a REAL car before you go sl*gging off VWs!
I could stand for constructive critisism from someone with a decent car, but you lot?? come on, get with it!
VRG
The VR6 weighs 1,281 kg, an old clio probably weighs as much as 350kg less!
The mk3 is the ugliest golf, any car can look nice with a good set of wheels and slammed.
The fact that you have to bring reliabilty into a discussion about handling and performance suggests youre running out of good things to say about your golf!
Dont get me wrong i love most VeeDubs but dont fool yourself into thinking you have a genuine all round performance car mate!
-Rob
Similar threads
