SwedeSpeed - Volvo Performance Forum banner
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
test drove a gen. V golf R32 this morning. My God, what a fabulous car! I can get both cars for around the same price. Anyone else had the same dilemma? <br>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
395 Posts
Re: was set on a v50 awd, then (PeterM)

nope, cause it's not in the states yet. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/smile.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>However, talk is a R36 for the states with a 300HP 3.6<I>l</I> VR6. I am guessing if the rumors are true, it will come around late 2007 or 2008 just in time for a replacement. Be interesting to see. <p>The MKIV R32 is pretty awesome too, I thought about it briefly, but was looking for something a little more luxury and for something more reliable (not saying Volvo is the pillar of reliability) but VW has and still has some serious quality/reliability issues to resolve. Was a VW owner for nearly 12 years, so had my share of ups and downs with that brand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,499 Posts
But how are they even compared, though? Hatchback vs. wagon. 5 doors vs. 3 doors. 168 HP vs. 240 HP. Non-sport suspension vs. Sport suspension. They're different beasts altogether.<p>The R32 is a rare gem, an enthusiast's car. The V50 is a nice wagon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
386 Posts
Re: (Razor1973)

Factor in Volvo safety, and that one can quickly turn the V50 into a super hot rod by rear sway bar, lowering springs, sportier shocks, better tires, K&N air filter, turbo boost from any of a bunch of chips, etc. Also, the VW is a 6 cylinder, right? Factor in gas mileage too...<p>I was considering a R32 even though it was unavailable at the time. Still seems like a really cool car. The V50 is a totally different car. NEITHER IS A REAL RWD SPORTS CAR. But the V50 could perhaps rival the R32 with the changes above, AND then continue to be a more practical wagon with Volvo safety standards and probably better reliability. Of course the R32 nominally does not need any changes - so I suppose its already sportier nature makes it more attractive as an initial purchase.<p>I used to have a Golf and did a great many things with a seemingly small space. But the extra room inside the V50 makes it much more usable in my view. So it depends on what you want!!!<p>Personally, I decided that if I want a real sports car, I'd purchase the V50, and then later in life get a used RWD Porsche 911. I wonder whether the R32 is sporty enough to compete with a real sports car.<p>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,499 Posts
Re: (bassman)

You also mentioned they were both around the same price, so I am assuming you would want to stay in that price range. Now, if you add all those mods to the V50, wouldn't that put you $10K over the price of the R32? Can't you get the whole shebang without having to mod anything and void the warranty with the R32?<p>You compare the V50 to the R32 and then say they are similar once you add $10K to one of them and leave the other one stock. Defeats the purpose of a comparison that shouldn't be there to begin with.<p>My 2c.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
386 Posts
Re: (Razor1973)

Razor1973, you're right. My "comparison" shouldn't be taken too literally. It was mostly a thought exercise, but not a particularly good one based on cost and warrantee, etc.<p>As you mention above, I'm not sure that the R32 and the V50 should be compared in any case. They seem like apples and oranges, so to compare them might mean bending the rules a little bit to make an apple more like an orange.<p>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,499 Posts
Re: (bassman)

<u>If</u> it comes to these two, I think it comes down to deciding whether you want the fun, speed and unique factor or the utility, safety and longer warranty (as the R32 can only be used). An average consumer would go for the latter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,028 Posts
Re: (Razor1973)

The S40 factory sports suspension is near perfect, better tires, like me, and maybe just maybe an uprated rear bar vs VW dampers, oh them, I changed my VW dampers at 15K and they were not completely dead, had about as much dampening as a Honda strut at 150K.... My three Volvos, dampers just as good as day one if not better and before anybody says anything I've change many VW dampers over the years, no car maker's dampers wear quicker, just complete trash.<p>Uprated chip only is $832.00 adds nothing to the insurance and puts down 234 HP to the wheels, that is far more then an R32.<p>MPG, gee I pull in 30 MPG lifetime and 5 days a week to work 35 MPG, it is only weekend traffic that pulls me down to “only” 30 MPG. VWs hmm I don’t have an R32, but I know the VR6 crowd are in the low 20s, would expect the uprated 4WD, heavier R32 to be at or below 20 MPG average. Yikes!<p>I like the look of the R32, and I’m sure it is better handler then the S40 even if you went to a bigger rear bar.<p>Clutch, I trashed the clutch on my VW in under a year, same as the Volvo but the Volvo clutch was and is way easier to change. Both are sure to be pricey and hard to find.<p>This is what always kills me about VW, I was on the TDIClub / Vortex when the S40 was first announced. I remember VW guys were trashing the NA 168 HP version saying how slow it would be, near undrivable.,, I chimed in and said what? A 2001 VR6 has a whole whopping 172 HP and this was the top line that you could get and this was the cat’s meow for VW, so why is a 168 HP Volvo pathetic and it is Volvo’s weakest engine in the US and VW’s 172 HP engine just phenomenal? Dunno you gotta have VW blinders on. Same with the R32 gee 240 HP on high test vs a Honda with a smaller V6 and 244 HP on cheap gas. That’s crazy! Yeh yeh, it is phenomenal if you are stuck on VW, but please a 240 HP high performance V6… I gotta start laughing now…<p>Brakes, sound, balance handling, hands down the R32 is a great car… but VW gotta put some dudes back into the engine performance department, instead of relying on Audi’s handme downs or hire some Honda VTEC engineers.<p>Now Volvo has been building turbo cars from the get go and a turbo Volvo can run on regular and car get some unbelievable fuel economy. In fact the new BMW 330 coupe is going to twin small low pressure turbos for the same reasons Volvo has been using them all along. 98% of the time Joe and Jane average needs torque and you get the most usable torque with a variable cam engine and a SMALL low pressure turbo and even better MPG. That is a win win situation. <p>Now the new VW R well that is a phenomenal setup, all new, and to me it looks like all Audi engineering. I’m sure it will be pricey AND is far out of my 25K T5. I’d be happy with the 2.0 FSI, but once again is you like in the USofA your messed up as the primary use of the FSI is a stratified charge injection and that is NOT implemented in the US version meaning it is basically a normal fuel injected car with the fuel injected during the intake stroke. VW just can’t get its stuff together. Mean while other makers are delivering NA 306 HP V6 with direct injection.<p>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,028 Posts
Re: (Razor1973)

simple VW has handling, ergo, but really lacks HP from the engine, MPG, and quality... Their slogan should be wrenchers wanted, cause you just can't drive the thing. Dampers, MAF, coil packs, water pump, windows falling down, the too soft US spec clutch and suspension dampers... VW better get in the game or they go down like GM and the Titanic. <p>I like my VW after I changed just about ever part of the suspension, clutch, doubled the HP from the engine, and fixed the trashed stock stereo, rims and tires, brakes front / rear. See wrenchers wanted. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/zeroforum_graphics/screwy.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>S40 so far: chip, tires, and now a high performance clutch, and yes IMO the stock S40 clutch is a total PoS, is about where my VW was, that is a whole lot less time and money into the S40, and so far my S40 has not busted, while the at this time with my VW I had at least two major failures.<p>I admit the new GTI has game, but I've seen a post of the windows breaking and I though OMG.....<BR><BR>
<i>Modified by Oldman at 6:06 PM 3-17-2006</i>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,028 Posts
Re: (Razor1973)

reviewers ain't fixing busted waterpumps, clutchs, brakes, and dampers that fail in the first year are they? Reviewers ain’t paying for low 20 maybe even TEEN MPG and a thirst for premium are they? Reviews hop into an SUV when they need to put 3 kids into the back seat. Reviewers have a real car when the VW is busted again. Reviewers aren’t face with the dilemma to pay for a clutch job or to do it themselves. Reviews have near limitless money so like on MY VW, it was $375 for the Monsoon sound system and what say you actually did not own a cassette tape well it was $450 for a disk changer that skated like Cristi Yamaguchi at the last Olympics and that was true all the way upto 2003! Yikes.<p><br><A HREF="http://www.modernracer.com/history/vwr32history.html" TARGET="_blank">http://www.modernracer.com/his....html</A><br>Pros :<br>- Tons of naturally-aspirated power and torque.<br>- Seats four full-size adults.<br>- Sports car suspension tuning.<br>- Very German build quality.<br>- All-wheel-drive handling.<p>Cons :<br>- Dated styling.<br>- Not the best chassis for a sports car.<br>- As heavy as some mid-size sedans.<br>- Quite pricey.<br>- Looks like a dressed-up Golf.<p>Lets put the Pros into perspective.<p>- Um it really is not “tons” as it is 4 HP short vs great grandma’s regular gas eating V6 Accord. 50 HP down vs a VTEC V6 Acura. So much for “tons”. The engine may sound good but makes <b> less </b> HP then grandma’s Accord.<p>-Very German build quality… like that is a good thing? <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/zeroforum_graphics/screwy.gif" BORDER="0"> Look up VW’s rating in Consumer Report, forget Consumer Reports, talk to any former VW owner that now owns a Toyota. <p>Vortec quote:<br><i>the R32 was easy to dice between the cones and provided a great balance all the way up to about 9/10ths when, in typical iron-block-completely-in-front-of-the-strut-towers VR6 fashion the car plowed hard at the limit driving wide of the line. Simply backing off the throttle part-way and scrubbing some speed helped correct the problem, but there is little anyone can do when it comes to the pure physics of placing that much weight in front of the wheels </i> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/eek.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>Gee just what I wanted a car that when I push it... it fails big time <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/eek.gif" BORDER="0"> but I can feel like an autoX champion till I flip it over. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/rolleyes.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>MotorTrend quote<p><i>Put it all together, and the R32's handling is both entertaining and <b>compromised</b>. The chassis is so communicative, predictable, and controllable that the tires are easily overwhelmed. As soon as things start to get fun, the Goodyears give up long before the driver or the chassis do. </i><p>Of course MotorTrend is just guessing about compromised, as it is not the tire it is that truck engine slug out front, and tires ain't gonna fix that.<br><BR><BR>
<i>Modified by Oldman at 9:20 PM 3-17-2006</i>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
226 Posts
Re: (Oldman)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Oldman</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">MPG, gee I pull in 30 MPG lifetime and 5 days a week to work 35 MPG, it is only weekend traffic that pulls me down to “only” 30 MPG. </TD></TR></TABLE><p><br>Sorry to hijack, but I need to ask: How are you managing 30-35mpg in your T5 V50? Is it the chip? I drive 75mph on the freeway all the way, no traffic and using cruise control, and am averaging 27.2mpg right now. That may go up a little bit if I cut out city driving all together, but I still won't get anywhere near 35mpg. I'd throw down $800 for a chip if I thought I could get better performance *and* better gas mileage to that degree. Would love to know what you've got up your sleeve.<p>End hijack.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
I have a v70 AWD w the extra seats for when I have to lug family and gear. I'm trading my T4 for this car, the torque is similar for both cars, but the grip and noise is a whole other world! <p>And yes, new R32 comes with 5 doors here. No mention in Europe of a R36 - particularly as this model was only released in October 2005. Thought doubtful. <p>No mods needed at all to the VW - its all there. Naturally T5 would need expensive and warranty threatening enhancements to get close (moss magnuson (sp?) is not european!<p>The new R32 is very different to the gen iv - more neutral handling in particular - very little understeer. <p><A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09s8eMLHIUM&search=topgear%20top%20gear%20bmw%20130i%20vw%20golf%20r32" TARGET="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...20r32</A><p>Five stars from Clarkson in The Times - which is rare to say the least.<p>Five stars in the latest NCAP crash tests too. This was the first part of the equation for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
395 Posts
Re: (PeterM)

I think you will be quite happy with your decision. The MK V has received wonderful reviews from everyone, even unlikely sources as you pointed out. <p>1. The V50 and R cars are different class IMO. I happened to cross shop as you did too. It's not an unlikely comparo, but deciding factors for me were<br>a. Room<br>b. Luxury<br>c. Service<br>d. Reliability<br>e. Tunability (cheaper)<p>2. If you want to really compare purpose built vehicles you should be comparing to Subaru WRX STI and Mitsubishi EVO. If you are like me you will appreciate both of those cars, but will still like the R32 because it still performs well as a DD.<p>3. When all is said and done, reliability was a huge deciding factor for me. Again, as I said above, not that Volvo has been the most reliable either, but VW has been plagued for a number of years with some minor (heated seats catching fire) and some major issues (2 transmissions for me on my W8 in < 40K) that I want to take a break from them for a while in hopes they can get it together. <p>All in all the MKV is a very exciting car, add the 3.2 VR6 and Haldex and how can you go wrong. Enjoy your purchase <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://********************/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,028 Posts
Re: (GoBigRed)

Even at 75 MPH to my other job site I'll still pull in 30 to 32 mpg per computer. 27.5 dunno. never seen that even pre chip, and OEM tire. I have the sports setup so I'm on 17s, I think IMO that the PZero-Nero does give me better MPG vs the OEM setup.<p>The speed limit to my normal job site is 55 MPH in most places and if I leave ealy come home late it is 50 MPH cause of deers falling out of the sky. My cpu MPG will be in the high 30s and i've seen the best of 40.2 MPG for 5 days of driving before the weekend traffic hits.<p>Now we all know the CPU ain't that accurate but I'm still pulling in 30s during my work driving.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,028 Posts
Re: (PeterM)

I see you did say MKV, which maybe a new animal... Hehe good luck, it won't be for a few years that we will get a dumb down version of it in the US with a US spec too soft damper, clutch and detuned engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
386 Posts
Re: (Oldman)

MkV Golf is different from R32. I'm sure the R32 or R36 are great. Golf MkV??? There are lots of decent reviews of it, as if it's a new thing. But isn't it the same as the Audi A3 and the Jetta GLI (2.0 turbo with allegedly sport suspension including 17 inch wheels, etc etc etc)? I drove an A3 AND the Jetta GLI. Very smooth engine, but in the end not a particularly sporty car despite the image and despite reviewers' comments. Of course that's my own opinion - me being a former very happy VW Golf III owner who figured I would get another VW. I was surprised when the Volvo "swept me off my feet." I did not drive a MkV Golf, which only recently came out in the US.<p>Or is the MkV Golf actually different from the other two cars? And I'm not sure how the GTI might be still more different. If there's an R32, then I would expect the GTI not to match up. Why offer both?<p>Anyway, going back to the R32, I never drove one unfortunately. I'm sure it's a lot of fun.<p>By the way, check these out. They may more $$$ as VW Golf R32, and they are not available yet if ever (in the US), so it's a bit unfair to show these. Still, they'll make you think about waiting another year or two instead of purchasing an R32 now.<p><A HREF="http://www.tuningnews.net/news/041103b/volvo-v50-sv.php" TARGET="_blank">http://www.tuningnews.net/news...v.php</A><p><A HREF="http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z10151/default.aspx" TARGET="_blank">http://www.conceptcarz.com/veh....aspx</A><p>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,360 Posts
Re: (bassman)

actually, id rather have a GTI than a R32. lighter, nimbler. a chipped GTI will outrun a R32, and thats basic stage 1.. R32, NA, limited mod potential.<p>a friend of mine hsa a stage one GTI, he already posts similar track times on a F1 track to the evos etc.<br>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,028 Posts
Re: (Mistral)

The V platform is the same for Passat, Golf, Jetta, A3. It is a heavy car 400 lbs more then the IV. So the new R32 MKV is going to be in the 3400 to 3600 lbs range or more. That is getting around S60R weight. I don't see why VW keeps adding on weight. Making the Jetta and Passat on the same platform is crazy. At least VW should bring over a 134 HP TDI Polo, I'd buy one for performance and basic transportation.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top