I believe for these races to be scientific, they need to be done at least 3 times to obtain accuracy as there are so many variables that could affect a car's performance than relying on just one take.
Sure, but I believe you can use 1 lap to determine that, because the signs to a good car is very dependent on how easy it is to access the power, handling overall performance and how quickly the driver can get in tune with the car. Honestly speaking the more you drive a car the more you learn how to use it effectively, and the manufacturers success is partly determined by how much confidence the car gives it's driver from the get go.
You need to do multiple laps as each car is different in the way it delivers power (FWD vs AWD). The driver needs to learn the car to get the fastest time out of it. If he just jumps in and goes he might set a fast time but that's testing how good the driver is. When it comes to tests like this, we need to see how good the car is. Therefore human error needs to be taken out of the equation by doing multiple laps, the driver can then reduce his times by altering his lines, braking areas and adjusting his driving style to suit each specific car. I believe that this would be a more accurate test if this was done. However, we cannot see on film whether they've spent the entire day there and are only showing clips from the fastest runs or whether it's a one time lap. I feel that the driver needs to be more active in the track day videos, giving a description of what the car is like to drive, because In the end, we buy performance cars with out hearts not our heads and need to know what it's like to drive on track (not that many people will track their Golfs)
I do imagine that what you are seeing for the lap is really just the compilation of many laps that the cars did (standard practice in the car review industry). For sure this is a number of laps, and the best overall single result is taken for each car. Had it been a single lap only, the camera would likely have been onboard instead, and the times perhaps slower due to inexperience with the car. :)
really only 1.5 seconds when you consider the slower start from the fwd GTI. On a flying lap, they'll be pretty damn close. with a ecu tune, the GTI will be faster around the track lap to lap than an R, and still cost a hell of a lot less. Only thing the R does better is launch
By that logic, ButWhoWasMoto, you can tune the R too and then it gets an advantage as well. Anyways, these street cars are only going to be taken out for track days, as long as the owner has fun the time should be secondary.
Do you realise 3 seconds around a 1.30 track is an extremely long time? It's a short track. The GTD being 5 seconds behind the GTI is eternity... thats a massive difference per lap. If you are a second a lap behind someone in motorsports you are getting destroyed.
They did the same thing they've done on the MK4 Gti. The Golf 4 was de-tuned while the Audi TT which had the same engine and turbo at the time had its full capacity. so if the R. had its full power it would have done much better. I guess if you want to properly enjoy that extra 100k you have to have an engine remap tune on your golf R to unlock its full potential
The R has a lot of more weight. A friend took her TCR for the Nürburgring and was a lot quicker than the R. I really wanna see a stage 1 race / comparison as that's propably what most will want to drive
I would really love to see a lap time on the same day with a BMW 120d just for interest. As the BMW has 20kw more than the GTD and 20nm more than the R
3s quicker with a standing start making up a fair bit of that and a dsg box making up the rest. Match gearboxes and do a rolling start and there's pretty much nothing in it.
In Australia,VW are importing 150 examples of the GTI Performance Edition1 with 180 kw and 370 nm.The examples also include "a so-called Front Differential Lock - an electronically controlled variable unit capable of zero to 100 percent slip mitigation between the axles - and larger brakes"I dare say,the Golf GTI ED 1 could equal or even beat the Golf R's track time.
You know the part that killed me is "a 100k for 3 seconds?" I always think along those lines too. Hence my preference of a C43 over a C63. The difference in pricing doesn't do justice to the difference in performance between the C63 & C43.
These arnt track cars.....predictable times. These cars are allrounders......Jack of all trades. A car that can be driven easily at its (almost) limit on a daily drive with no scares....and absorb the bumps...is a GOLF.
That is how the car comes. If anything the tire needs to be the same that would make a bigger difference. even in a roll race, the golf R would have been 2 sec quicker than the GTI. I would have got a GTI but I got tired of FWD and wanted awd so I drive a Golf R my next car will be a RWD.
naah dude, it would have been much slower. Remember the clubsport is basically a normal golf with some aero kit. If you'd said Clubsport S, obviously that is a different story, but Clubsport S is horrid on the road for daily use anyway. So it wouldn't really be a fair comparison
I meant the Clubsport. The Clubsport has more power than the normal GTi and is lighter than the Golf R. Golf R is slow on the corners because of the added weight by the drivetrain. And remember the Clubsport in terms of performance matches Honda Civic Type R
Yeah, but I think more than the clubsport having more power than the GTI I would say it's very much dependent on the track as well. This track they are on doesn't have technical challenging corners, cause if it did then the GTI or Clubsport would have it 100%. But this track has more long corners and even straights, so the R can make up for the lost time on the sprints and coming out of corners. Cause I bet you if you did the same test on a track like Kyalami Circuit, GTI would be 1st, R 2nd and GTD will be destined for the same fate obviously. Either way they are all a great choice, I guess it comes down to how big your pockets are.
you've got it backwards Nhlanhla. an all wheel drive car does much better on challenging corners than a rear or front wheel drive. getting out of the corners with a sprint from the AWD system ads on to the advantage
Mazwi Zwane not this awd system the clubsport and gti performance pack handle better than the R. The Halsey system weighs quite a bit more, so the clubsport ruins the R in every aspect. Tuned gti's best the R every time on a roll. R great car for launching that's about it.
Would be interesting to see the difference around the track if the GTi had a 40bhp remap! Cheaper than buying a golf R and I would guess not much noticeable difference in performance.
there more to the golf R engine to make that 40hp more than just a remap there are different internals and a different turbo two that is why the cars don't have the same engine codes look it up on any VW chat site and also you can look at askdap right here on youtube
is that what the golf R Is? AWD systems are not cheap. even though the Golf R comes with different internals of the engine makes it a batter base for modifications and able to handle more power.
So this is me taking a long shot. So I have recently started loving cars, yeah still getting the petrol head status. So I am studying Engineering at Stellenbosch University and seeing as you make car videos around Cape Town I was wondering if I could help out some weekends. You don't need to pay me or anything and I could work with the camera crew since I'm still learning how to use video editing software. I really just want to experience being around some of the cars and hopefully someday own the ones that steal my breath away.
The differences in currency also mean a lot in terms of making a buying decision. 'a hundred grand' he says, but in South African currency, its hard to rationalize if you don't know what you can buy with just one dollar. Here in Canada the Golf R is just over 40k a similarly equipped GTI is just under 40k - so does $1000 CAD equate to 100,000 South African Rand? Checking google currency conversion its about 10,000 Rand. So then 100,000 Rand is $10k CAD or there abouts. Which looking at VW's website is more comparing a base GTI to the R - which to me isn't very fair in terms of making a buying decision. My guess would be South Africa may not have a base model of the R just like we don't here, whereas the US for example does - and that saves about 4k. That would be a better comparison.
you mean more parts in the drive train, not in the transmission. they are going to have the same number of parts. 300 pounds does not make car understeer that much more. understeer is just an issue you have to deal with fwd and AWD cars and even some RWD cars have that issue. now the weight might make the car slower though say a slalom.
I don't thank so. the GTI does 0-60 in 5.8 seconds, not in 7.5 the golf R does it anywhere from 4.5 to 4.9 depending on what you read. last time I check 4.5 from 6 is not 3 at most 1.5 seconds. I like both but if you plan on moding the car the R is the beater choose because at some point you just can not lay down power in an fwd car and that point daily driving cars is 450 hp and higher
Who cares about track performance ? 0.1% of population... In real conditions more important are accelerations from 30-70, 70-120 kmh, and of course fuel consumption. I am also interested in skidpad and lateral g, and balance. Probably GTI has little bit better balance than GTD, less understeering because of lighter engine, but 50% higher fuel consumption. If you buy daily car, what is more important, fuel consumption or understeering ? Also GTD TDI engine has lot more potential for high mileage than GTI TSI. GTI has better exhaust sound, better acceleration and less understeer, but worse fuel consumption....
...because the Imperial system makes no sense and South Africa, like 95% of the world, uses the Metric system. HP and Torque (I assume you mean ft/lbs here) is abnormal.
The GTI is only 3 sec slower (lap), considering a 70 lap race. YOUR ONLY 2.5 LAPS BEHIND. So while i am poping the champagne, the GTI driver is still on the track. Saved money, LOL. The Golf R driver just went home with the prize money. WTF
Thats wrong, because on the following laps no drag start is needed, so the GTI is on the next lap only 1,5 sec slower. Because thats the difference from 0-100km/h GTI 6.2sec an Golf R 4.7sec ;-)
Please ditch the manual stopwatch and use GPS meter. Showing hundreds of second while doing the manual stopwatch method is ridiculous, frustrating and horrible.
I have no doubt that the stopwatch (and single lap footage) are only for added drama and visual references. The times were surely done using GPS and the lap was a number of laps not a single one. This is a very standard practice among all of the channels, the video would be a ton longer, and perhaps a lot less 'entertaining' to some people if they showed the entirety of the testing. :)
Can't stand all these cars now. All VW and Audi, seat and Skoda. All of the hot hatch versions are the exact same car. There is nothing separating them. It's just become so boring. The JDM market is beating the shit out of the European market. They're becoming cheaper and better quality. The interiors are matched if not better than somw European models. Plus, they all have their own platforms. So there's is genuine competition.