The 2 litre Golf (115bhp) is only an 8 valve old designed engine, and apparently is not known for being that quick. I don’t think they sell many of them these days, but of course anyone looking for a quick Golf would likely turn to the 1.8 litre GTI or the diesel GT PD130/150. That said I recently read that a staggering 80% of all new VW cars sold are diesel, so it looks as though petrol models have seen their best days.
For the record the 2 litre Golf does 0 to 62mph in 10.5 seconds. To say the FSI at 9.7 secs is faster by .08 of a second is not technically true, when the test for the FSI was only up to 60mph. How long would it have taken to achieve that extra 2mph on the speedo ?
Even though I quite like them, judging by what most motoring journalists are saying, I think VW need to launch a new Golf. All I have heard is that the build quality is still excellent - but that most other mid-sized hatches offer a better drive nowadays - and then there has been the campaign to get rid of the GTi badge on the 2.0.
If VW do not have a new Golf in the pipeline, the only thing you can be sure of is that the Golf will soon have the Polo/Lupo face with the double headlamps - its only a matter of time Potato.
I think I am probably more harder in my opinions of the Golf’s old fashioned styling than a vast majority of people, however according to the number of Golf’s & A2’s on the road the facts would indicate that many drivers (young & old) prefer good old fashioned convention and proven engineering. That said the basis of debate was the aspects of performance, and if this is to include economy, drivability, tractability, comfort, and a gearbox that is a shear pleasure to use then the Golf (like a PD130) cannot be easily dismissed. If it could I would not be driving one.
Comparing any two cars will in 95% of cases end up as a bit of a joke, but as may be recalled I did try my honest best to compare some aspects of the Golf and A2 under the topic “Golf Now In Sight”
In terms of the FSI model I have not as yet read anything worthwhile (preferably from an A2 owner) of how the model generally relates to the standard A2 (petrol and diesel). Alas when I read magazine reports I am never too sure if the words and performance figures have been supplied by the manufacturer – or strongly influenced by the manufacturer. I suppose I am suspicious of much printed matter, and how right I am when we have just witnessed a bit of manipulation in someone playing around with the “book” performance figures of the Golf. Indeed take away the element of deceit, and what have you got. Answer – nothing, because suddenly the “main” claim has no credibility, and lets face it the impact of a statement like the FSI is a fast as a Golf is nowhere as “impressive” as saying it is faster.
I never ever tried a 0 to 60mph speed test in my A2, but forget 10 seconds or whatever when as a guess I reckon it took me 15 seconds to get into third gear. In fact for many cars I do seriously wonder if the figures are somehow computer calculated as opposed to actual. I can see some reality in cars where second gear can nicely fly past 60mph, but for all those where another gearbox change is required (via a dogleg path) I have strong doubts. Anyway I suppose the real bottom line is that anyone who purchases an A2 or Golf for the element of speed is a nutter – because it cannot really happen. Moreover according to those experts on the “Driven” tv programme if a car cannot be sent sideways around a bend, or perform a handbrake turn in the middle of the tarmac – then its no good anyway, and would by default fail the Tesco car park test.
I seem to recall that the 2.0 litre Golf GTi was a bit of a UK creation, a little like Chicken Tikka Masala. Apparently, the 1.8T was only ever destined to be the one GTi but when the 2.0 arrives at the docks they get re-badged. To distinguish them the quicker car has the RED i at the end.
Apparently this rebadging causes no end of problems for the rest of the range as it wandered off into the TDi models and left VW UK without a bit of a headache. So now you have red "i"s, red "di's" and red "TDI's."
All this used to be so much easier with Audi's A4 the red i was 110 and the silver i 90. No-one really knows what anything is anymore.
Of course Audi have an equal daft problem in that it has numerous cars with the 1.9 litre TDI badge – yet they are totally different in their BHP. I would have thought it easier for VAG to have adopted a policy of using basic digits like “TDI 130” or whatever.