andy 0 Posted September 30, 2004 Report Share Posted September 30, 2004 Thinking of changing my Golf VR6 for a Corrado VR6, I'm interested in peoples view on the differences between the two cars. Pros/Cons of both if poss please. I prefer the look of the rado and fancy the better handling. Should i do it??? Link to post Share on other sites
gazbrook 0 Posted September 30, 2004 Report Share Posted September 30, 2004 i do like corrado's ,i think they look a bit better and handle better than the golf, saying that i still would prefer my golf, it still looks good and has 30 plus years of history behind it and wasn't discontinued after just a few years like the corrado,also the 2.9 is supposed to be more unreliable(don't know why) but that is the popular opinion and is also stated in either glasses guide or parker price guide too Link to post Share on other sites
Eat this 2 Posted September 30, 2004 Report Share Posted September 30, 2004 the 2.9 is basically a bored out 2.8 hence thinner block Link to post Share on other sites
andy 0 Posted September 30, 2004 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2004 not sure that's why its considered more unreliable though, people bore these engines out to 3.2 remember. On a different note, its not that I think the handling is so bad on the golf its just that it seems you have destory the ride quality to get acceptable handling. I'm hoping that the Corrado is better as standard...anyone? Link to post Share on other sites
anorak 0 Posted October 1, 2004 Report Share Posted October 1, 2004 I'd say the Corrado definately handles way better as standard (although mine wasn't standard for long!)As you say, the Golf can be made to handle as well - it just costs a bit. You really can take diabolical liberties in the C and it lets you get away with it (ie - it makes you look like you can drive better than you actually can 8o) ).I did 6 track days in mine - drove like a pillock to begin with and got away with a few high speed fishtailing moments Golf feels slightly better screwed together. I think the C was assembled by Karmann not VW.As for reliability I had to replace a head gasket (could happen to any VR) and thermostat housing in 2 years - not bad.No room in the back though (good reason not to take passengers ) Link to post Share on other sites
SankysVR6 1 Posted October 1, 2004 Report Share Posted October 1, 2004 the C is a nice car and you get a racing like driving postion in it. and if there's just 2 of your ok.but if you've got a family your better off sticking with Golf Link to post Share on other sites
shail 0 Posted October 1, 2004 Report Share Posted October 1, 2004 I think the rado looks very nice from side and rear - not to keen on its front end tho - always seemed to have a bit of a jimmy hill chin cos of the front bumper. I'd still have one over a golf. Link to post Share on other sites
Joenose 0 Posted October 1, 2004 Report Share Posted October 1, 2004 Really depends on what you mean by 'acceptable' Andy; But as standard the Corrado does not ride particularly well, and with so many Corrados now having aftermarket suspension firming up things even more, going for ride comfort as any kind of purchase reason is not the right motivation. It doesn't bother Corrado owners though (including me!) as the handling payoff is so much fun. Not to mention the driving position and excellent, feelsome steering... Link to post Share on other sites
andy 0 Posted October 2, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 2, 2004 True, I demand a lot suspension wise, was disappointed with the suspension when I got the Golf, its just not composed. You get this incredibly smooth engine and a ride that's a bit embarassing to be honest. I came from a pug gti and you could nail that car through the bumpy and twisty stuff one up or four up and enjoy it. After upgrading the golf to Konis and Eibachs I expected miracles, its miles better but too firm and fussy for me.Tried a 100% standard Corrado yesterday and found the handling/ride tradeoff sooo much better, my golf certainly handles now its got £600 worth of suspension mods on buts its just too firm for the majority of the roads I drive on. The Corrado just takes the same roads in its stride, no fuss, just flat composed cornering, well impressed. So impressed I've bought it... :-)) Details to follow, thanks for the comments chaps. Link to post Share on other sites
tandino 1 Posted October 2, 2004 Report Share Posted October 2, 2004 You lucky B'stard 8o) - Golf for the week and a 'rado for the weekend Looking forward to some piccies and spec.Pete. Link to post Share on other sites
MarkGolf 6 Posted October 2, 2004 Report Share Posted October 2, 2004 Corrado by far!!Especialy when the looks are worked on!! Link to post Share on other sites
acf8181 0 Posted October 3, 2004 Report Share Posted October 3, 2004 i agree with andy that the biggest prob we have with the golfs is that to get them to handle you have to ruin the ride. mine handles like a pug 306 now, but its soo harsh, and i'm on 205/50/15. hate to think what it'd be like on 17"s.i'm gonna give it a chance to soften up, if it don't (and i don't get pissed off and sell the thing by then) i may go another way...gmax springs on new o.e. shocks with uprated arb's. maybe then it'll give ride and handling. Link to post Share on other sites
andy 0 Posted October 4, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 4, 2004 You lucky B'stard 8o) - Golf for the week and a 'rado for the weekend Looking forward to some piccies and spec.Pete.I must clarify......the Corrado will replace the Golf, I'm not that loaded unfortunately. Never been 100% happy with the Golf but will still be very sad to see it go, its occupied so much of my time over the last year. Link to post Share on other sites
Corr28VR6 0 Posted October 4, 2004 Report Share Posted October 4, 2004 I'm probably a little (more than a little if the truth be told) biased, but I just love the look of the Corrado. Never driven a VR6 Golf so can't really comment on the driveability etc. Corrado's really are no use as passenger cars so if your just after a car for you and one other then defo go with the raddo. Link to post Share on other sites
vealige 0 Posted October 4, 2004 Report Share Posted October 4, 2004 I drove both rado's and Golfs before i got mine. The Corrado was more raw and more fun to sling about. The one i looked at had a FVWSH but 114K not a rattle or squeak i was quite suprised. It never had the cam tensioner changed which put me off the car. Was up for the same amount as my VR6 which has only done 50K and has a FVWSH. To be fair i know the Rado's are supposed to be quicker but the Golf seemed to pull so much better and seemed quicker then the Rado. Driving position in the Rado was excellent though and you do have the added bonus of that cool spoiler but i'm glad i went for the Golf as god forbid getting a dent on that Karmann body! Link to post Share on other sites
CHRISVR6 0 Posted October 5, 2004 Report Share Posted October 5, 2004 I must be the only one who prefers the golf then ?! , i have a golf vr6 and a corrado vr6 at the moment, and yeah the rado is very good on handling but also very harsh (lowered 40mm), but i have driven standard rado's and they dont seem much different. The power is much better in the rado i must admit, but i feel the golf is more poky in lower revs where as the rado will only pick up after 4k (but it does pull like a train at 4k though), handling on the golf is superb as i have eibachs springs and 17" alloys on there, but it aint as bad as the rado IMO. Plus getting bits for the rado is getting harder now, they are never in scrap yards (apart from early ones with the different interior to my vr6) so it does make it a pain if you need anything. Both lovelly cars though. Just cant wait to get my new inlet manifold then see how close the power is !amazed , and i am selling the rado now as i am more than happy with the golf. Link to post Share on other sites
FishWick 21 Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 Fit H&R springs, Koni TAs (all round) and a Neuspeed rear 25mm ARB to a Corrado, plus a chassis bush refresh and you won't look back handling wise.Engine wise, the 2.9 isn't all that great and to be honest a well sorted 2.8 can keep with it. In fact, when my Corrado's engine expires, a 24V will be taking it's place as it's far superior to either 12V unit.Anyway.....The Corrado's handling is largely down to it's negative camber and track correcting rear axle bushes. Mirror that setup on the MK3 (which shares the same 'plus' suspension) and you're almost there. At the front you want -1.2 camber and 0 toe. You can mirror the Corrado's rear camber and toe with shim kits from VW, which adjust the stub axle position.In my honest opinion, buy a Corrado for it's looks, not it's handling. A MK3 can easily be made to handle as well as a Corrado, so if you're happy with your Golf, keep it and apply the above tweaks.Don't forget the Corrado came with stiffer suspension than the Golf to begin with, so was already onto a head start.I bought my Corrado because I'd had Golfs for years and always fancied a Corrado when I was poor and couldn't afford one!Mechanically they are as tough as the Golf, but the trims are fragile and unique to the C, so cost and arm and a leg to replace. And as mentioned already, it is not bolted together as well as the Golf, but still, the C looks good today and can hold it's own against more modern coupes.K[ Edited Fri Oct 08 2004, 07:36PM ] Link to post Share on other sites
tandino 1 Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 Have to admit - i would sell the Golf tomorrow if a lovely VR6 Storm came along - but then again i dont think many people wouldnt ,Currently thinknig about getting one for the missus - would have to be a G60 or 2litre 16V version as i dont think we could afford to run two VR6's and the cost of VR Corrado's is prohibitive - still mind you weve both got 2.8 6 cylinder cars now anyway - its only money :! Pete. Link to post Share on other sites
FishWick 21 Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 Don't bother with the 2.0 16V, it's got the gutless 136bhp 9A engine, but nothing a pair of KR 1800 exhaust cams can't sort out ;-)G60 is quality. Easily and cheaply tunable to 200+ bhp - just watch that G-Lader. Fragile units. Get it refurbed if the history of it is not known, and not at Jabba "the cut-and-shut" Sport, but rather the excellent G-Werks.I've driven a 33K Strorm and they're OK. Don't waste your money on them. All you get over a normal VR is leather and different wheels.Corrados have a certain something about them and are highly rewarding to drive on the limit. The sheer mechanical grip is awsome, but as already said, this can be replicated on the MK3 easily and cheaply.At the moment, I'm the other way round, I'm warming to a nice Highline at the moment, but it would have to be a good one to compete with my Schricked, 268'd, AMD throttled and chipped Corrado. Maybe I should have both! Hmmm...yeah right, can't afford that! Link to post Share on other sites
tandino 1 Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 As you say the 9a is rather restricted in stock form but it has potential.I dont think the KR has enough torque to pull the Rado though so i think the 2 litre is better suited in real day to day driving.Keeping my eyes open as we speak but i think im gonna have to embark on another get rich quick scheme soon All to keep the missus happy eh :! Pete. Link to post Share on other sites
FishWick 21 Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 You'd be surprised actually. The 1800 pulls better than the 2.0. Many 1800 owners see 150 brake on the rollers instead of the quoted 139, but the 1800s are early and therefore didn't get the later refinements, such as the better interior, lights, fogs, indicators, VR6 humped bonnet etc and therefore look dated imo.Get rich quick and get a VR. The motoring pundits and Top Gear all agree the VR Corrado is the best of the lot, and there is a reason for that ;-) Link to post Share on other sites
tandino 1 Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 Only 150 - i had 185 out of mine in my Mk1 Gti 8o) Link to post Share on other sites
FishWick 21 Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 185.....from an 1800? Must have had some pretty wild cams then. I had a MK1 16V too and it never pushed anywhere near that...more like 160.... Link to post Share on other sites
tandino 1 Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 Flowed ported and skimmed, Ashley 4- 1 mani and system, Mangoletsi inlet manifold with Weber 45's with 38mm chokes - 155 mains iirc....Ran a Golf 1300cc dissy on it for advance and retard...Made 185 at 7100rpm and 150lb/ft at 5000rpm ish at Gerald Dale Motorsport in Hastings - loads of torque.Was about the 4th quickest British Mk1 at Inters 2000 - ran a 14.4 uphill with an open diff and fryed clutch - 60 was 6.05 secs 8o) Pete. Link to post Share on other sites
Eat this 2 Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 blimey thats impressiv Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts