How to silence R32 critics .... VERY QUICKLY INDEPENDANTLY !!! .......

[vr6highline28 0]

this has worked for me at work when i have said there aint much in it between me R32 and an M3 .... these independant results by the same driver prove a point i hope !!!! no wonder civic type r drivers give an r32 a wide berth ( though from experience can spank a vr6 !!!) ... i wonder where a stock vr6 would be ???? trail down to a mere No' 50 to find the R32 ! but see whats below it though ! porsche 911 turbo ffs !!!! this has to be best link some of you may have seen for a long time as a bloke at work couldnt believe the where R32 was and he knows his cars !!!

http://www.topgear.com/content/tgonbbc2/laptimes/thestig/

[Paul1982 0]

Sorry NiveVR6 but there is no way on gods earth is the R32 Faster than half them cars - like top gear there r dry laps and wet ones and i'm 99,9% sure a 435bhp AM DB7 GT would pull an R32's pants down and rap him:

http://www.fast-autos.net/vehicles/Aston_Martin/2003/DB7_GT/

The Audi S4 (Which one???) If they was going on the new cars then give over lol

Now i watched this one onlt yesterday as the new r32 was up against the BMW 130I and it beat it. Both very dry laps!!

Now the 911 Turbo was a 444bhp 996 that was tested and it was on a very very wet day. Now the 911 Turbos are animals and fook me not many cars live with it!!

Plus dont get me started on the VX220 Turbo - Now that was Topgears Car of the year and there is NNNNoooooooo way in the world in the same conditions would you be even 4 seconds close to one.

Now i love the R32 but we have to be realistic here

[Roan 0]

Exactly Paul, those results show the 911 Turbo to be slower than the 911 Carrerra S - this is obviously not the case. NOt to mention the track cars like the VX220 Turbo! The times were alll performed on different days on different surfaces if you have ever watched the programme (?!), so the fact that the R32 is up there can't be verified. Although it would be nice...

[mike 6]

i watched the program and i have it on my pc...

the stats for r32 is wrong it was 1.33 it got not 1.30 wich is still good but not faster than m3 and other you stated. ...they said it was amazing how it was only one second slower than the focus RS...at 1.32

here it is http://www.buzzhumor.com/videos/1714/Top_Gear_VW_Golf_R32 1.33!!! :s

[VR6gaz 0]

i watched the program and i have it on my pc...

the stats for r32 is wrong it was 1.33 it got not 1.30 wich is still good but not faster than m3 and other you stated. ...they said it was amazing how it was only one second slower than the focus RS...at 1.32

im pretty sure it was the mk4 R32 that got 1.33 and the mk5 R32 got 1.30

[antera309 3]

i watched the program and i have it on my pc...

the stats for r32 is wrong it was 1.33 it got not 1.30...they said it was amazing how it was only one second slower than the focus RS...at 1.32

here it is http://www.buzzhumor.com/videos/1714/Top_Gear_VW_Golf_R32 1.33!!! :s

That was the mk4 R32. I would expect a mk5 R32 with DSG to be at least a second quicker, so maybe the original post refers to the mk5.

The Audi TT V6 (which has the same engine as the R32) put in a time of 1.32.7, which is still better than the CTR's 1.36.5

You can't blame BOTH times on favourable weather conditions.

Face it - the Golf R32 is superior to the Civic type R in every respect. It's faster, handles better, sounds better, looks nicer, has a nicer interior, is more refined and has far more presence. You would have to stick Pavarotti & Dawn French in the back of the R32 for the CTR to stand any sort of a chance. You may as well be comparing Giorgio Armani with George at Asda, or an entrecote steak with a McBurger & cheese.

As soon as the cabrio sells and I have my shiny new R32, I will happily pee all over a CTR on the dragstrip. Then somebody lend me a mk3 VR6 with a Schrick, cams & a 3.94 FD and I will happily humiliate it again.

[GVK 1]

I drive my gf's mk4 R32 quite a lot, yes it's quick but tbh, it's no quicker in a straight line than my mk2 with a 2.8 OBD II VR ....

R32 has Schrick 264 cams, sports cats etc etc

1/4 mile times are low 14s for both cars.

It's a cracking car but just too heavy.

Saying that, it is amazing in the wet, so much grip....

Showing a clean but very damp pair of heels to a GT3, Ferrari and an Evo @ Spa...

[mike 6]

i watched the program and i have it on my pc...

the stats for r32 is wrong it was 1.33 it got not 1.30 wich is still good but not faster than m3 and other you stated. ...they said it was amazing how it was only one second slower than the focus RS...at 1.32

im pretty sure it was the mk4 R32 that got 1.33 and the mk5 R32 got 1.30

ahhh havnt seen the mk5 r32 episode...im pretty sure nicevr6 that made teh post has a mk4?

[purple highline monster 0]

yeah i think those "stats" are somewhat out, there is no way on gods great earth that an Aston martin DB7 or a porsche 911 are slower than an R32 whatever gearbox its got!! anything with 450+ bhp will anhialate one, those figures show the time achieved on that particular day as said, sure the golf will contend with better machinery due to its good balance of power and handling, its probably a far easier car to drive fast around a track than some of those cars anyway, you cant use a 911 turbos full potential on a track or youd just end up in a barrier!!! i have seen a Jaguar XK220 get spanked by an escort cosworth around Brands Hatch purely because the Jag could not use its massive power on the tight bends and even on the straights it struggled! solely down to its driveability on that circuit, if it were Le Mans or a more open British track like snetterton then the escort would have been breathing in spent fuel and dust from a rapidly dissapearing Jaguar! on the flip side comparrison can be made to Pikes Peak, an R32 would fair far better than loads of the other cars just due to the enviroment and not being turbod and more agile than others in that terrain, its all relative and at the end of the day the R32 is better coz its a Dub

[vr6highline28 0]

gotta be honest guys this was a tongue in cheek post and what a great response !!!! i would just love to know how many of you who have posted have driven an r32 and raced against m3's, 911's etc ? all this stuff about 400 bhp being much quicker i cant argue with as have never driven an rs4 etc - all i can say is that having seen how the veyron performed on top gear even with 1000 bhp it was very quick till a point then it slowly edged up to its maximum speed due to laws of physics ... interesting !

[mike 6]

i havnt driven one , i need to! think id have to buy one if i loved it...the r32 is alot more advanced than a vr6 and handling wise id love a r32.....but its not a supercar in standard trim and your takin the p** is you think it is.....even tho youve admitted you are takin the p*** lol

[binliner 0]

gotta be honest guys this was a tongue in cheek post and what a great response !!!! i would just love to know how many of you who have posted have driven an r32 and raced against m3's' date=' 911's etc ?

[/quote']

Have you raced a 911 turbo or even a Civic type R then or are you basing all your knowledge on that list?

[Paul1982 0]

The Civic type r is only 200bhp and all that power is in high revs - The torque Levels aint that good with them - Plus they are a 2.0. Personally i've pi**ed on a few tyre R's chips and as they are friends they openly admit it. One of my other mates does have a 911 Turbo 996 model and f**k me that is serious - Now that is a supercar!!

The mk5 r32 is a fast hatchback and thats it. Great car as we all love them - but £ for £ i'd be happier with a VR and this is why i still have my VR right now lol

[purple highline monster 0]

I think someones a bit "R32 pi*sed" does anyone else? its a fantastic car...the greatest ever.........nothing can get near one.....not even the space shuttle or a Brabus Merc SLR can match its acceleration....there....can we talk about something else now? please......

[antera309 3]

LOL @ PHM!!!

Anyone got a link to the Top Gear feature on the mk5 R32?

[Paul1982 0]

This is the new Mk5 R32 vs The 130i BMW

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghmSo-yaIws

[antera309 3]

As good as the R32 is, I doubt it could keep up with a BMW E46 M3, which has 100BHP more under the bonnet.

A fully loaded R32 with DSG costs £27k brand new. For that money, you can get a mint 4 year old M3 with less than 50k on the clock. Maybe even one with the SMG paddleshift 'box, which is not as good as the VW DSG, but not far off.

So which one would you go for?

[purple highline monster 0]

Antera ...... or for racing about..........get a mk2 golf that looks like an old can of beans with an RTT (new way of saying it ) Otto engine and a DSG box that does 11 second 1/4 miles coz it weighs as much as a Mcdonalds M&M Mcflurry

240 bhp is NOT enough for a mk4 RTT to worry any of the other high end machinery mentioned, its more of a package than an out and out racer, having said that it was designed to be a more aggresive type car than the mk5 version as that is aimed at high end luxury driving as opposed to "rally" type motoring, i like them and will get one when the times right but i wont be comparing it to Hondas or anything else when i have, i will just pamper it and admire it as i have all the other VW`s i have owned, and regardless of its power output or capabilities that a "bloke darn the pub said" i can live safe in the knowledge i have bought into a brand that is quality and has a superb cult following, try getting a focus or type R honda owner to say that!!!

[mike 6]

lol @ RTT i think the word R32 should be banned, its gettin more talk than anthing atm

[jezmoz 0]

www.r32oc.com

my god i did that as a pissss take and there is one haha

[mike 6]

lmao BAN!!

[purple highline monster 0]

R Thirsty Too

[stuart colgan 0]

As good as the R32 is' date=' I doubt it could keep up with a BMW E46 M3, which has 100BHP more under the bonnet.

A fully loaded R32 with DSG costs £27k brand new. For that money, you can get a mint 4 year old M3 with less than 50k on the clock. Maybe even one with the SMG paddleshift 'box, which is not as good as the VW DSG, but not far off.

So which one would you go for?

[/quote']

Never in a million years would the r32 keep up with an M3, ur right, for the money I wouldnt even consider an r32 at 27 grand, a 993 911 (the best shape and chassis porsche ever did), the e46 m3 (would try and scrape an extra 7 grand and go fot the e46 m3 CSL though!) or an e39 M5 (for 20 grand and spend the remaining 7 on a mint vr6) And whilst fast VW's are awesome we all know that it requires a bit of money to make them good track cars, the main problem with the r32 is the weight of the engine and lack of overall chassis balance, (just my expereince as a passenger on a track) still awesome cars though.

[vr6highline28 0]

haha what a lovely thread .... i knew damned well the 1.30 secs time was from a mk5 ... and yes the mk4 was 1.33secs .... so why on a vr owners site are people so quick so slag off an r32 ... rather funny me thinks .... as for the balance of the car you aint driven one thats all i can say ... my old vr6 was a nightmare with that heavy lump in it but in r32 u dont know its there! ... and as for the comment about keeping uith m3's ? av u ever raced one and got the thumbs up from an m3 driver as basically they thought it was just a golf ? ... but this was a tongue in cheek post at end of the day and the responses well funny ... some were good educated ones and few from people who have never driven one and looked at stats off the internet or youtube.com !!! the point i was making was simply for about 16k you can get a great 4wd car which will give most high performance motors a run for their money around a TRACK ! not the m1 when its closed ! there you go - a good response to a lighthearted thread lol

[Eat this 2]

I drive my gf's mk4 R32 quite a lot' date=' yes it's quick but tbh, it's no quicker in a straight line than my mk2 with a 2.8 OBD II VR ....

R32 has Schrick 264 cams, sports cats etc etc

1/4 mile times are low 14s for both cars.

It's a cracking car but just too heavy.

Saying that, it is amazing in the wet, so much grip....

[img']http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i270/GVK34/DSC_3870.jpg

Showing a clean but very damp pair of heels to a GT3, Ferrari and an Evo @ Spa...

i really like r32s but was suprised by the 1/4 mile times considering the 4wd traction

a guy at the pod i spoke to had the stage 4 (iirc) n/a upgrade cams remap and a few other bits and pieces he claimed 300 bhp (which i believe) and his best time was 14.0!!