coullstar 2 Posted June 20, 2006 Report Share Posted June 20, 2006 Well I am just not taking to the Mk3 16v so I am going to start looking for either a VR6 or maybe even a 1.8T Mk4 however how do these compare performance wise? I would probably end up getting a basic 1.8T remap but nothing more.Might even stretch to a V6 4mo, what are these like as standard? Link to post Share on other sites
Russ_vr6 12 Posted June 20, 2006 Report Share Posted June 20, 2006 depends what u want from a car mate,performance wise they all roughly bout the same,dependin which 1.8t u go for Link to post Share on other sites
vr6vento 0 Posted June 20, 2006 Report Share Posted June 20, 2006 There is no replacement for displacement.A turbo is a clumsy way of extracting power with poor off boost performance and a brutal rush of power when turbo kicks in - not what you want mid corner.Also 1.8T is characterless - engine sounds like any other car while a VR6 sounds like a thoroughbred.As for reliability - I quote those who race these engines and they call them "bulletproof" - I quote mechanics who look after VR6s driven by people who red line them all the time and again they are amazed by the abuse they can take.A V6 4motion is no quicker than a VR6 apart from off the line in the wet - I recently paid £500 for a Vento VR6 and it was as quick as my £10k V6 4motion with AmD One Click and Miltek - good for 230 bhp apparently!I also have a customer desperate to swap his 1.8T for a Golf Highline like the one he owned previously and misses - he had to spend £900 on a clutch and dual mass flywheel for his 1.8T - no silly DMF on a VR6 to have to replace thank god!PS I am a dealer in these cars and the Mk3 VR6 holds the most affection for me and the demand for them is still very strong and I suspect clean original cars with FSH will remain sought after regardless of fuel prices. Link to post Share on other sites
coullstar 2 Posted June 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted June 21, 2006 Thansks for that. Didnt think the 4Mo was that much quicker. I miss my old Highline. Probably just go for something similar again. Just need to find a low mileage example again. Link to post Share on other sites
vr6highline28 0 Posted June 28, 2006 Report Share Posted June 28, 2006 can definitely vouch that the 4motion is no quicker in a straight line than a vr6 in standard form - must be the power / weight ratio !! Link to post Share on other sites
purple highline monster 0 Posted June 28, 2006 Report Share Posted June 28, 2006 a friend of mine just bought a V6 4 motion, can definately say its on a par with a vr6 performance wise just with more traction! really nice spec car with leather and all the bits, he only paid 7k for it, its a lot of car for that money imo Link to post Share on other sites
vr6highline28 0 Posted June 28, 2006 Report Share Posted June 28, 2006 yep agreed in fact theres little dfference between the v6 4motion and the mk4 r32 apart from different styling ... basically any golf with a v6 engine in it is gonna go well ! Link to post Share on other sites
vr6matt 0 Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 My mate has a chipped 180 anniversary, and there is no doubt its quick, but as said before, the engine is characterless, and extremely uninvolving to drive. I still think I could have the edge over 140 too! I hate the 1800t with a passion, i my opinion its not a proper engine, and I would have my VR over one any day of the week. Link to post Share on other sites
coullstar 2 Posted June 29, 2006 Author Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 Totally agree which is why I went for a 4mo. Get it tomorrow.Anyone interested in a nice Mk3 16v get in touch. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts