raced a mk5 r32

[H13VYY 0]

raced a mk5 r32 off the lights today. i was dissapointed with the r32. Got to about 60mph and the r32 was about a car length ahead. I reckon cams and a remap and it will be touch and go!

[pimpcat 0]

but was he really goin 4 it tho as a dsg r32 is nearly a second quicker 0-60

[H13VYY 0]

yeh he was going for it for sure.. we was going in and out of traffic for about a half a mile before we reached the lights. He didn't launch it though. however his tyres did screach slightly.

[Eat this 2]

0-60 hed kill you 60 onwards itl be fairly close

[jaysVR6 2]

Come on guys please. I was running a charged VR with nigh on 290hp and I still only just reeled in a MKVR. There isn't a chance a standard or cam'd VR will live with an MKIV or MKV R and i'm saying this from experience!

[craggsy 91]

I was wondering when you would end this Jay

[jonny_gti 0]

standard mk4 r32 vs camd vr6 common mate the vr is gona win mabey not off the lights but once it gets traction it would take the r32, there not that great as standard not really any faster than audi s3's

[H13VYY 0]

But you would expect the r32 to be quicker because of the power/torque difference. Plus the sound that r32 made..crazzzy. How much heavier is the r32 then the vr?

[Phat VR6 3]

All depends how much the mk5 owner booted it off the line. Also alot of the old boys don't like to hit the redline and tend to be alittle nicer to the engine

Think there quite abit heavyer aswell

[matty.vrt 120]

ive blown a mk5 one in my 2.9 cammed mk3 i was quite dissapointed in the r 's performance suppose 4 wheel drive and the extra weight did him no favours. your wright sum peple dont no how to use there car to its full potentail.

[gti-r-vr6 0]

Are the r32's not 4wd?if they are they would have a lot higher transmission losses than a fwd vr so there 250 atf would soon be 180 atw plus they proberly weigh 250kg more than a mk3 vr so i think it would be closer than you think?

[tubby 0]

The mk 5 should have no power loss through the 4 motion sysyem as it only engauges the rear wheels when the front lose traction so not on all the time much better than permanent

[gti-r-vr6 0]

Ah i see,still the transmission losses should be more than a fwd vr?

Does anyone know what the transmission losses are for the r32??

[tubby 0]

I would imagine these would be marginal i wil try and find out or if someone on here knows speak up

[Charged VR 0]

The Mk5 Haldex/4motion is slightly different to the Mk4. This system runs a electric pump to supply instant presure to the coupling, so instaed of waiting for wheelspin/slip it pedicts it and engages the 4wd before you pull away, so there will be slightly more transmisson losses than a vr but better traction, Also if the 4wd cant cope then esp will take over and back off engine torque,

Does that make sense?

[pimpcat 0]

the mk5 r32 is much quicker its 3 seconds a lap faster than the old one round the top gear track and the mk4 aint exactly slow as it would still beat a vr

[goonersteve 0]

Come on guys please. I was running a charged VR with nigh on 290hp and I still only just reeled in a MKVR. There isn't a chance a standard or cam'd VR will live with an MKIV or MKV R and i'm saying this from experience!

Surely Jay has the most relevant point here, seeing as he has owned both :^)

Still an interesting topic though

[jonny_gti 0]

bog standard mk4 r32 does the 1/4 mile in 14.80

i can do 14.917 with a filter and exhaust, so i would hope for a easy 14.5 with cams

[pimpcat 0]

were on about the mk5 but yea i dont disagree u can get a vr faster than the mk4 r32 but u have to spend money on it where u dont with the r32. if u spent the same amount on the r32 the performace gap would increase me finks

still the oldest model is not going to be able to live up to the latest one but was a ground breaker when released plus no matter which one u own u still get that growl!!

[Phat VR6 3]

Yeah I think the point is that the mk5 R32 is def quicker 0-60 and in general.. The reason it was so close is because the mk5 owner wasn't using all his power to its full potential. By the sounds of it the mk5 R32 is the best 6 pot they have made so far

What makes it so much qwicker round the track? Light weight or that new rear axal?

[jaysVR6 2]

If we're gonna be like that, I tell you what i'd love to see, a standard VR v's a standard MK5 R32 around the top gear track! Now that would be funny!

I'm not entering into any arguments!

[gti-r-vr6 0]

I totally agree that around a track a mk5 r32 would make a vr look very silly indeed!

But in a straight line i am still not sure?

The orignal argument/discussion is would a r32 standard beat a vr with cams chip ex/airfilter,i think it would be close?

mk5 r32 4wd 250bhp and around 1500kg vs mk3 vr fwd 200+bhp and around 1220kg

[H13VYY 0]

Standard vs Standard the mk5 r32 really should make the vr look stupid in a straight line aswell. It makes more sense that the guy i raced must of taken it easy.

[jaysVR6 2]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5m5vJ-R0nFs

I cant really comment on a manual R32 as mine is DSG, however from what you can see in this video, the launch control is pretty good at it's stuff

I've seen 0-60 performance figures quoted from 5.9-6.2 seconds for DSG and launch control.

To be fair, even if mid range was similar to a VR6 by the time 100mph is achieved, I seriously doubt the VR6 would recover from the 0-60 drag as the R32 would go on to 155mph without a loss of breath all the way to the limiter.

[philbatesvr6 0]

i have raced / followed a mk5 R32 and there was no way i could keep up with it,

i was sat @ 140mph ( private run way officer) and he was jus pulling and pulling away till we got to the end and stopped at a round about , he giv me a nod and a thumbs up then shot out of site,