no personal experience but wife wants one when when she sells her '97 2.8 VR6 (which shes had a great run with & happy with the brand). They go like cut cat even compared to the 'factory boy racer' offerings & insurance is wayyy cheaper
n1smo_gtir,
Oct 11, 2:50pm
i'd go for evo X.
fiatracer,
Oct 11, 2:52pm
Not sure that the R32 performance is a match for the Evo X, but my god they are infinitely better looking!
edangus,
Oct 11, 2:54pm
Hard Call. Whilst I am an Evo X fan, the everyday suitability of the R32 wins for me. Don't believe you will regret either decision.
charlie4561,
Oct 11, 2:59pm
R32 makes less power and is slightly slower according to the stats, but 1 second slower 0-100km/h, doesn't make any difference for a street car that isn't going to go racing apart from probably a track day every few years.
it's all highly subjective of course - but the R32 is a desirable beast. Haven't driven either, but have been in an Evo X and gotta say it doesn't appeal to me one bit.
charlie4561,
Oct 11, 3:06pm
One problem though is I know these cars are not reliable and will be spending lots of time in the shop, and in my area there is no VW agent, so would have to take it to some local garage, but I have no confidence in the local rough spannermen. There is a Mitsi agent close by though and they are good.
magicmat,
Oct 11, 3:13pm
Interesting read. Though I think the Evo is an amazing little car, I dont know if I could live with one as a daily driver so it would be the VW for me.
gman35,
Oct 11, 3:29pm
Geez , you will have a reply from a particular person soon re: your #8 comment ! **Just remember that you can't fit a towbar to the R32 due to the twin centre-mounted pipes (these cars aren't made to be pulling caravans obviously) , but if you ever want to hitch a trailer or bike rack , it's a no go. Otherwise are apparently a very smooth , less manic and better drive 90% of the time over the Evo. That one you show doesn't seem too bad $$wise either for a dealer vehicle (the benefits of a 100ish kms car that 99% of people think is "worn out")
fiatracer,
Oct 11, 3:43pm
that's a bummer - surely it'd need the right diagnostic tools, etc, and as is the case with most euro stuff [actually, no, most stuff that's not common on nz roads] you can strike mechanics that have no idea and crew things yp.
I'm still stinging from the local garage who filled a Xantia's hydropneumatics will brake fluid, which resulted in awriteoff, and refused to take any responsibility for their actions. Oh, and the MTA backed them up. Not amused. will stop now before i defame them. But not amused. One bit.
charlie4561,
Oct 11, 3:45pm
What I meant to say there is that neither Evo or R32 is going to be particulary reliable. It is always that way with hi-po turbo vehicles. I wasn't idiotically bagging Euros as being unreliable compared to Japanese ones, as I know some people are apt to do.
fiatracer,
Oct 11, 3:53pm
R32 isn't turbo though, right! but yes, fair comment
texastwo,
Oct 11, 3:54pm
Sigh! Be nice to buy something that costs about $30 grand.
audi_s_ate,
Oct 11, 3:59pm
I would drive one first - The nose heavy feeling in the R32 is not something I enjoyed handling wise compared to other factory quick hatch's.
audi_s_ate,
Oct 11, 4:06pm
Also the audi A3 3.2 is worth having a look at - very similar (auto though) at a more reasonable price.
ct9a,
Oct 11, 4:21pm
dont go taking the corners at the same speed entry as the evo !
thejazzpianoma,
Oct 11, 4:34pm
I have not had an R32 (had other Golf's though) but I fail to see why it would be unreliable!
I don't really follow the R32's but my understanding is the 3.2 is just a modified VR6 engine which is a good reliable unit IMO as used in plenty of high volume production vehicles with great success.
The other I think is just a variation on the FSI 6 Cylinder which is also reliable, only issue I have come accross with those is timing chain replacement which sometimes needs to be done a bit earlier than some would like (from 150'000km sometimes).
00quattro00 Would be able to tell you more about them I suspect.
As for the regular Golf bits in the car, those should be very reliable, ours have all been problem free and we have had a few. VW Parts are cheap and easy to get too, no problem with being rural as they are not hard to work on for a savy general garage or at home. Pretty much anything you want (for the regular Golfs at least) is available overnight to your door for a great price from your choice of third party importers.
What year R32 are you looking at!
Depending on how much power you actually want and how much of an every day car this is going to be I would suggest at least having a drive of a MK5 GTI as well. (sometimes bought cheaper as an A3 Turbo).
I really like the handling of the Golf GTI and find it plenty quick enough to have fun in, plus its very reliable and amazingly is properly economical too. Nice and straight forward to work on, mount a towbar etc too. Each to their own though, if you want the maximum HP possible in something like that it may not suit, worth a drive though just in case.
Happy shopping!
charlie4561,
Oct 11, 4:38pm
Quite right. I was reading about the GTI just before, which of course is.
thejazzpianoma,
Oct 11, 4:41pm
Not to disagree (because I think its well worth checking out too) but its not really an "auto" its the 6 speed DSG with flappy paddles. Arguably a better transmission than many super cars had in them when it came out.
As someone who loves to drive and maintain manual transmissions I REALLY like driving the DSG a lot. They change quicker than you can blink and you can have as much manual control as you want. Maintenance is cheap and easy. Whats not to like!
With regard to the 3.2 in general, aside from the 4WD I prefer the GTI, which by my seat of the pants accelerometer feels similarly quick to 100km/h (not sure what the times are on both, feel free to look them up and prove me wrong.
Not sure if its in my head or not but I am sure the GTI feels much nicer for the lighter engine up front and while economy probably isn't a big factor in your decision the GTI is properly cheap to run. Which to me means I would use it more.
Funnily enough, I often see 3.2's cheaper secondhand than GTI's though. There was even a tidy one went for something like 12K not so long ago, I was so very very tempted.
thejazzpianoma,
Oct 11, 4:43pm
You can have a MK5 GTI from about half that! I bought the Audi badged version for the father in law last year for $16K.
fiatracer,
Oct 11, 4:52pm
speaking of GTis, caught up with a mate last night who is looking at R32 and Gti also. Was underwhelmed by the GTi, but they can be remapped for good gains. He also drove a GTi Edition 30 [I think it's called] and said that was much better. Have heard other people state a preference for remapped GTis over the 6 cylinder cars.
charlie4561,
Oct 11, 4:54pm
What model Audi is this, please! I would probably buy a Golf GTI version anyway, as everyone knows what it is and that its the business hot hatch wise.
thejazzpianoma,
Oct 11, 4:58pm
The Audi version of the Golf is the A3 and the A3 Turbo (2.0 T) is the equivalent of a Golf GTI.
Personally I would buy whatever comes up best for your budget. The A3 is properly respected as well and arguably the more premium brand, I guess it just depends on which circles you move in. Personally I buy for myself not someone else if that makes any sense.
What I do notice between the two though, is the Audi's seem to be sold new more as a base car that you add options to and the Golf's come more as spec'd packages. (this is my theory anyway, I could be wrong)
What this means in reality though is I often find Audi's with fairly low spec (because presumably the first owner got a bit frightened at the cost of some items on the spec list) while the humble VW versions often have notably more goodies. Depends entirely on the car though, but in general is what I have noticed.
thejazzpianoma,
Oct 11, 5:03pm
Silly question but he was looking at a MK5 GTI aye!
I find the MK4 very underwhelming, nice car but I see it as just a nice car not a performance car.
I guess some people are just used to a LOT more HP than I am as I find the GTI has enough to entertain me without losing my license. I would appreciate more go if I was using it on the track though.
Not sure on re-mapping never looked in to it, (but clearly you have and that's great to know!). I would have though the FSI technology might limit you a bit with what you can do at least physically to the engine but remapping certainly makes sense. The extra KW over a naturally aspirated 2.0 FSI is not that much so it would make sense that the potential is there.
00quattro00 could probably tell us more.
charlie4561,
Oct 11, 5:05pm
I had a B5 Audi S4 2.7T once. Awful car handling wise, lots of torque steer. It broke down a lot and wasn't even that fast.
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.