Contest giveaway time! Send us a pic that shows you're the biggest VW fan alive and we'll high-five you with an MW T-shirt and an autographed MW license plate. send pics to bdavis@mpt.org. best pic gets the swag.
I was 18 years old when this car was new and I showed up to the VW dealership to test drive one and after the test drive the sales guy told me “well if you can’t afford this now the next generation GTI will be even better than this one.” I distinctly remember saying to him “do you think they can improve upon this car? “ That’s how great I thought it was.
1:20 Actually the original 2.8L VR6 was "DOHC" in that it had two camshafts in the single head shared by the two banks, 15 degrees apart. But each only acted on one bank, so it was only 12 valves. My first car was a '97 Passat with that engine in it, and despite less than excellent care from the previous owner, and being saddled with a pretty awful 4 speed slushbox, I loved just about everything about the first gen VR6 I had.
@@chrisdooley1184 No. same motor. Sigle cam per bank on the VR6 regardless of the nation. IIRC the differences were cam profile, exhaust manifolds and such. The SLC Corrado came with a 2.9 that had different intake and better exhaust manifolds.
Nick Dovie They always do it. The most irritating is when they mention how good the engine sounds and then they don't let you hear it because they cover it up somehow. I mean, come on guys, engine sounds are music to the ears of car fanatics!
Tool0GT92 Yes but it isn't acceleration that makes this car so special it's the handling of a sports car that really made people want it. Then you could tweak it to go faster with money saved.
then it came the 4wd vr6. the european gti was slow and soft. i boght one as my 1st car because came out very cheap. later tried to trade it for other cars but nobody wanted it. mazda mx3, small peugeot, corolla... they were more nimble. my uncle had a Mk 2 golf GTI, i loved that car but he never accepted the change. i nearly convinced a friend with a suzuki but changed mind after a test drive, the suzuki felt 500kg lighter but the difference was only 150. that golf had incredibly safe handling but spoiled all the fun
yes, it only had 115 or something but was a lazy engine. the renault, nissan and opel 2.0 had similar power but were faster. in a test i couldn't outrun the golf 1.6 with 100bhp. those small 8 valves engines were indestructible and sometimes had more power at low rpm than the 16v of the time
some things aren't correct. It has a 12 valve engine and if it had a independent rear suspension it wouldnt do the "salute". Otherwise nice to see how these things were marketed arount the world. Especially the fact that the us-spec had cupholders and a arm rest with storage.. Couldnt dream of that in the german vr6
The 12 valve VR6 had 172 HP. The subsequent 24 valve VR6 had 201 HP. But the cars became heavier. So the 0-60 speed in the 24 valve GTI was about 6.5 seconds, whereas in the 12 valve GTI it was 6.7 seconds. Not much of a difference. I'm sure some of the modern day GTI's can hit 60 in just above 5 seconds, stock. Does anyone know which was or is the quickest GTI to date? Just curious.
@Marc A Thanks for that. I'm a fan of ALL the GTI's, from the Mk1 to current. The current GTI's are light and fast, but I still would rather drive a Mk1 or Mk2 GTI. I had a 'Tornado Red' Mk2 GTI (mid 80's, I believe), and it was a BLAST to drive, even though it only had a normally aspirated, 1.8 liter 110 HP motor. I'm 59 now, but I still remember the day I drove it off the dealer lot, after paying only $11,800 for it brand new. Good times!
My mother got me two Volkswagen full-line brochures both from 1995 and 1996 off of eBay in March 2016. I cannot get enough of liking the 3-door GTI VR6 when I look at them!
The Volvo was also better built than the GTI! Even a ‘base’ 850 sedan would do 0-60 in under 9 seconds with the 5-speed manual and was fun to toss around corners. It was more like the GTI’s sensible big brother than anything VW was making at the time.
I had one in 97. bought it with 40k miles and had it my senior year in high school and up to my junior year in college. gsr integras honda hatchbacks were no match. id even give older mustangs a run for the money. great car and i sure miss it. I wish to find it in some car lot one day though the odds are slim to none.
Memories! I owned a '96 GTI VR6 back then and it was a great car but seemingly more of a gran tourer than an outright performance machine. After that, I got into a '99 Jetta VR6 which was more of the same but that all changed when I got into an '03 20th anniversary edition GTI. THAT was the car GTI's should have been with a huge dose of sportiness and handling. But still, I miss those days.
My first car. Well, not quite...I had a '94 Golf with the base engine. And man, was it slow (in Canada, our base engine was a 1.8L with 90 HP). But it was black, two-door, and largely similar to what you see here. These had such superior fit and finish to every other small car on the market at the time. Of course, that meant nothing for reliability, but it sure looked and felt good.
Also you can't say shit about the economy, that engine never went bad and only delivered. I had 3 different 1.8L 89hp Golf 3's. Give it some more air with a nice sport filter, put on a growly exhaust pipe and watch it pick up all them looks from the bystanders, while at the same time, it costs you pretty much NOTHING to be that cool cause the engine runs like a lighter.
I owned a jazz blue vr6 mk3 with a chip, was a 97 driver edition with deisel geeks shorty shifter. brings tears to my eyes boy do I miss my Ole wookie 😔
I miss my '96 VR6. What a fantastic car. It had its' problems but meh. Made it from North of London to my home in Germany in 7 hours. Including ferry time from Dover to Calais. LOVED cruising @ 100mph, or more.
I rushed to the VW dealer to buy a 92 GTI 16v in late 92 before the MK3 was released. Couldn’t warm up to it’s Looks. It was a heavy car, with too much power features and was pricy.But yes, that VR6 is Sweet.
@@spavatch You're 'splitting hairs' spavatch. Of course, the GTI has a long pedigree. It arose from the popular 'Rabbit' platform at the time, then morphed into many subsequent generations of the 'hot hatch' over time. I think we are at 8th gen currently. And it's been around for decades. Need I say more?
My 95 GTI got taken out by a metal highway joint that raised up about 3 inches . Hit it doing about 65mph, bent all four rims and one of the rear shocks broke through the mounting point. Totalled the car, only had 50k miles on it
I had the 97 DRIVER'S EDITION version in Ginster Yellow, great car, but much better with H+R coilovers and a Borla TT exhaust :) Sounded great, but near as good as the MK4 R32 I replaced it with!
Jeff Eppenger I'm sorry but that's simply made up. I understand that you like VW and it's completely fine to like them, but don't give us such bullshit man. Firstly VWs have never been known for their fun-to-drive factor. This is why you'll find people that want fun cars buying the Ford Focus or the Mazda 3. Just watch car channels reviewing the Focus ST or RS, they're smiling like a bunch of retards. You don't get the same smile in the GTI or R. This makes me think you haven't had the chance to drive a lot of cars aside from VW. In their market and price segment, VWs are known for their laid back and classy character rather than the fun to drive factor. Secondly, the amount of tech in today's cars drives reliability down, yes, but don't attribute this to German overengineering, it's simply because of cheaper parts or designs that are not so well thought out. The Audi Q3 is one of the most reliable cars you can find nowadays, and so is the Toyota RAV4 and the new Seat Leon. They are all absolutely loaded with technology yet they're still reliable. VW have simply shit the bed lately in terms of reliability, just like Ford (European) for example. Both German. Yet Audi and Seat hold the bar high, and ironically enough they're owned by VAG. Just note that I'm not saying this to bash you, your conclusions are simply wrong and I think you're being too subjective. The one thing we can agree on is the fact that older cars were much better built. Man those things last ages and so did the cars from the 2000-2005 era. I somehow doubt that today's cars are going to last that long.. They just don't feel as well built.
I wasn't referring to German cars in general, I was referring strictly to VW. You simply cannot compare VWs to the likes of Fords, Audis or BMWs when it comes to fun factor. The difference is so big this isn't even a subjective topic, even though it is at its core. There's just no way VW is a contender in the fun to drive space when Ford exists in the exact same space that VW does. That's Ford's main selling point in Europe. I haven't had bad experiences with German cars, quite the opposite actually. I don't really think I'd buy anything else but German or Swedish (maybe some Italian, I like the new Alfas) at the moment. I'll give you some credit regarding innovations, the Asian market does tend to copy. But you massively dropped the ball when you gave safety as an example. The automotive safety industry has been spearheaded by Volvo (Swedish) for a very long time, not by VAG or any other German manufacturer. And you are definitely not giving the Asians enough credit. The Mazda RX-7 was a handling marvel, made possible by the Wankel engine which could be placed very low and towards the back in the engine compartment due to its size. The Germans didn't even dare touch that engine, so you should give the Asians some credit. The Lancer was never known for its fun to drive factor either. Maybe you misunderstand me, I'm not saying that the Evo or the GTI are abhorrently boring to drive. They can't be, they're sports cars after all. But since you already own a GTI, if you'd hop into a Focus ST for a spin you'd see what I'm talking about. Those reviewers I mentioned earlier are grinning like idiots for good reason.
The editing and smoothness of showing the features in the car is actually kinda sweet considering how old this is. Very fluid made. If you're new in making RU-vid vid's I'd highly recomend copying what they are doing.
Vercus100 clear cote has no colour, that's why it's called clear cote lol. I guess he means you can choose different colour paint, I'm in UK and AFAIK all of ours had cleacote on top, I had a highline which came in black or a lovely purple colour with matching leather. I ended up supercharging it at 12 psi without even intercooling it or touching the compression, I literally did nothing apart from shove more air in, 320 bhp and 275 lb ft made it great and pretty quick too, the engines are bomb proof!
Nice. Playing Ace of Base Dont turn arround in the Radio! Btw. I cant belive 15.0 in the quarter. I did a 15.0 with a Rabbit VR6 AWD 2.9 190hp. Motorweek tested the R32 with 14.5 and 240hp awd.
In 1997, I had the choice of a new blue GTI or a new White Passat VR6. The conservative slant in me chose the slush box Passat. STILL wish I had bought the GTI.
1:20 - "Dual overhad cams drive twenty-four valves..." Hehehe, cheeky VW with their "DOHC" 12v "V6" that uses the same firing order as an I6 and has a crossflow head. I think a three-quarters of the automotive enthusiast community misunderstood this engine :)
I drove a MK3 Jetta 2.0L in high school (aka 2. slow) and I always wanted a Jetta VR6 MK3 model. I now have one in pristine condition and heavy engine mods and it is a amazing car. Even in stock form I ran out of gears during a top speed accel run I wish they had a 6 speed with just a bit longer gears!! They are quick even being the heavy 4 door sedan model stock.
We have an extra green mk3 gti in my vacation house and hasn’t run in a couple years, and we’re planning on selling it… but now I want to fix it so we don’t sell It(but I’m 14 so it’s not gunna be ez)😬
This is not a 24-valve motor, it's only 12 valves. The "DOHC" on this engine spec is marketing BS. They called it that because it had two camshafts under the single cylinder head, but it only had one camshaft per cylinder bank.
dohc isnt marketing bs, it is a twin cam engine and theyre at the top of the head, this is the 12v and the later 2.8 and 3.2l were 24v but still have twin cams
@@Scoobydcs It's not marketing BS, per se, but it operates as a SOHC motor. By design, it has to have two cams under the head since it's a single head V motor... but each cam is dedicated to both intake and exhaust for a "single" bank.
I think it was a 12 valve V6 not 24 valve as they said in the 1:22. Also the only reason it is DOHC is since it is a V6 that shares one cylinder head. Strange engine, I don't know if they should have just made it an inline 6.