By on February 26, 2013

When I helped Volkswagen launch its Golf GTI in 1976, Volkswagen wanted to make only 5,000. They wanted to make even less, actually, but 5,000 were needed for homologation as a racer. Volkswagen was convinced that no mentally stable person would be nuts enough to buy a little car like that with a 110 hp engine. Boy were they ever wrong. It took well into the 80’s for the Golf GTI to come to America. When I said “Americans love muscle cars,” the answer was: “Haven’t you heard? 55 miles an hour.” Wrong again. Today, Volkswagen shows the seventh generation of the archetypical hot hatch. at the Geneva International Motor Show.

With 220 hp, it has twice the power of the first GTI. For the first time, you can have even a little more. The GTI Performance comes with 230 hp and a front axle differential lock. Both are powered by a turbocharged gasoline direct-injection engine (TSI).

In Germany, advance ordering for the new Golf GTI begins on the 5th of March. Prices start at 28,350 euros.


Facts overview:

Market launch in Europe: Initial markets starting May 2013.
Debut of first generation Golf GTI: 1976.
Engine: Four-cylinder TSI (turbocharged direct petrol injection); front transverse engine; displacement 1,984 cc; bore/stroke 82.5/92.8 mm; compression ratio 9.8:1.
Power: 162 kW / 220 PS from 4,500 to 6,200 rpm.
Torque: 350 Nm from 1,500 to 4,400 rpm.
Gearboxes / drive type: Manual 6-speed gearbox; automatic 6-speed DSG; front-wheel drive.
Brakes: Disc brakes front and rear, front 312 x 25 mm, ventilated; rear 300 x 12 mm.
Fuel consumption / CO2 emissions (manual): 6.0 l/100 km;
139 g/km CO2.
Driving performance (manual): 0-100 km/h in 6.5 s; V/max 246 km/h.
Unladen weight: 1,351 kg (base version including driver [68 kg], luggage [7 kg] and 90 % filled fuel tank; calculated as per RL 92/21/EEC.


GTI Performance:

Power: 169 kW / 230 PS from 4,700 to 6,200 rpm.
Torque: 350 Nm from 1,500 to 4,600 rpm.
front axle differential lock (VAQ).
Brakes: Disc brakes front and rear, front 340 x 30 mm, ventilated;
rear 310 x 22 mm, ventilated.
Driving performance (manual): 0-100 km/h in 6.4 s; V/max 250 km/h.

 

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

94 Comments on “Volkswagen Shows The Car It Did Not Want You To Have: The Golf GTI...”


  • avatar
    CJinSD

    The published figures represent about a 300 lb weight reduction, putting it on a par with cars from the companies with the good engineers. The styling and interior pretty much define stasis, but at least they got the lead out.

    • 0 avatar
      mike978

      I wouldn`t have thought you would mind “stasis” since the companies with the “good”engineers embody that in their designs usually.

      It is an achievement to have a car weigh the same as those competitors but have a much higher quality interior, which weighs more.

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        When I think of a quality interior, I don’t think of one that ages in the sun like a donut.

        • 0 avatar
          mike978

          The commonly held view of a “quality” interior is one that has soft touch plastics, woven headliner, dampened grab handles and a solid thunk when the door closes. Whether or not these things are actually important is irrelevant, they add weight.
          So to make a car that has a higher quality interior but weighs similar to a “good engineering” companies car is good and you should applaud it even if it isn`t by Honda.

          What is your complaint about the looks and being similar from generation to generation? Other companies do that with no complaint from you.

          • 0 avatar

            Oh if I know CJ the problem is that it’s not Japanese :)!

          • 0 avatar
            mike978

            Marcelo – you are right, but it isn`t even Japanese companies he is referring to but just Honda and Toyota. I haven`t seen him praise or defend Mazda or Nissan. I find that strange since those two companies have if anything done a better job of appealing to enthusiasts which CJ is (based upon his writings and previous BMW purchases).

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            Ride in a an un-garaged MKV and get back to me about the wisdom of equating fancy with quality.

            I criticized the conservatism of the 2012 Civic redesign, but I understood it. The radical 2006 Civic took some time to catch on with buyers. Besides, look at the radical TL redesign of about five years ago. Even better: don’t look at it. The MKVI Golf was just a decontented facelift of the MKV. Making the MKVII its twin seems a bit like VW is out of ideas.

        • 0 avatar
          andyinatl

          I don’t know what those “good engineering” companies are, but I live in Atlanta area, and around here, Honda is a leader of faded/peeling paint. There are no other brands that have worse quality paint jobs that Honda/Acura. I’ve seen old Hyundais with better quality paint jobs that withstood Georgia’s 8 month of heat/sun per year. I’ve also owned my share of VW, Volvos, some Infinitis, and ALL of them had better interior/exterior finish quality than Hondas that i’ve owned (i get bored with cars easily). Mechanically, Hondas are superb. Everything else, meh….

          • 0 avatar

            Purely anedoctal I know but I have started to notice many, many Hondas with burned lights. I know that after you notice something, your mind starts looking for confirmation, but…

          • 0 avatar
            mike978

            Mechanically reliable is his definition (and it isn`t completely unreasonable.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            I live at the beach, and I’ve had one of my pearl metallic Hondas here for 6 years. It’s been parked in a garage probably 15 nights in that time. My condo is on rocky ocean front. Every day my car is covered with salt spray and sand. Once every month or two, I take it to an automated car wash. Then it looks fine and gets compliments until its accumulated about two nights worth of salt and sand. I have a pearlescent painted Acura that’s been parked outside in Virginia for 9 years too. Its paint looked just fine when I drove it in December, although the car does have a bit of hail damage. The BMW parked next to it looked just as much like a golf ball.

            Bulbs Marcelo? That just sounds silly to me. Honda’s electrical systems are about as hardy as they get. It was the case when I worked for Crutchfield in 1994, it was the case when I moonlighted as a service writer in an all-makes shop in 2006, and the closest thing to an electrical issue our 2004 TSX has had is a worn out lock solenoid, which is apparently a common problem as they age. The car still has all its original bulbs, including the HID headlights. Same for my 2007 Civic Si. When I worked as a service writer, darkness would often bring in UVA sorority girls with burned bulbs in their VWs. It was a running joke that the cars were wired…badly. Crutchfield is a car stereo place, and there were some makes where aftermarket systems or alarms were as likely to create lasting headaches as not. Hondas were not such cars. They were plug and play, and in addition to not burning fuses, wires and switches, their interiors were made in such a way that they could be disassembled and reassembled without breaking hardware or creating bad fits and rattles.

            I don’t promote Nissans or Mazdas because they aren’t in the same class with Honda and Toyota. Without Honda and Toyota, Japanese cars would not be synonymous with reliability and durability. Nissan builds some good products and plenty of bad ones, and then their support ends when many people still expect their cars to work, having thought they were just buying a Toyota from another dealer. Recent experiences with Mazdas have not been as good as they were in the ’80s and early ’90s. The last girl I recommended a Mazda 3 to had the engine blow at 80,000 miles after numerous dealer visits for CELs. When she started having problems, I went online and found that lots and lots of people were having similar problems without a factory fix, well out of proportions with sales numbers.

          • 0 avatar
            kuman

            Based on previous experience, Toyota and Honda to some extent Suzuki are the leading edge of durability, everything else from japan are just not as good…

            Nissan for one is notoriously known for cutting corners on their lower tiered cars ( the design or material used are simply not sturdy enough ) the interior and paint might be nice, but the strut tower bushing is made of low quality nylon, the fuel meter is prone to failing, CV joint on Latio / Livina clunks on hard right turn and need repair or fails only after 3 years of usage.

            Mazda are known for bad after sales and service, exorbitant priced parts, poorly stitched seats, glove compartment hinges failure ( they dont use metal hinges or locks )

            Mitsubishi… well their trucks are tougher than nails and i do swear by them, but their passenger cars are just rubbish.

          • 0 avatar
            tbone33

            1. I too have noticed the peeling paint on red Hondas.

            2. As a guy that owned a ’99 Miata until last year and has a Mazda5 in the family, I have never seen a hinge issue. Also, Mazda parts are no more highly priced than Ford or Nissan in my experience. Also, our seats have held up great! The camber issue on the 5 and the tendency for the body panels to rust on the Miata were issues.

          • 0 avatar

            Yes Cj bulbs. May experience is probably different than yours. When I started buying cars back in 1989, bulbs were in need of change at least twice a year (not all at he same time). This interval just kept growing. Today, my Renault Logan, bought brand new in August 5 yrs ago has never needed a new bulb. It changed the battery last year. The car we had before, a Fiat Palio, for example, never had to change a bulb the 4 yrs it changed with me, though I had to change the battery twice and I really thought that was pretty bad. In the case of the Palio I even took it to a mechanic to try to track down why the battery only lasted a year and a half, but he didn’t find anything.

            So, I atatted noticing this about 4 months ago. Stuck in traffic, ahead and surrounding me there were 4 Hondas. The oldest one was fine, but the other 3, all 2008 or newer had on burned break light. It was surprising to me considering the newness of the cars and from the hghly-reputed Honda. So now I probably guess my mind is playing tricks on me, but I’m seeing a whole lot of Hondas with burned out break lights.

            Silly? Dunno. Probably nothing wrong with them, but my perception is that Honda break lights don’t last long. I’ve had 2 Renaults with me and between them I have had 8 years of Renault ownership. 1 turn signal light was all I needed to change. 1 battteru. Oh yeah, and one horn on a Clio, I thought that was pretty weak cause I had never ever heard, read or seen a car’s horn needing replacement.

            Like I said, purely anecdotal. But that’s how we build our perceptions. My perception is that Honda is not all that’s it’s cracked up to be. I’m not saying they’re not, but if they are, they are by a very slim margin indeed.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            There’s a tuner that came to an S2000 club meeting who would disagree with you. He does work for a number of OEMs. I don’t want to cause him any problems by naming the manufacturers, but he backed up what every mechanic I’ve worked with said while pointing out modifications he installed on a cutaway engine. There is massive daylight between the precision of Honda engines and other brands that are commonly modified in California, pretty much on the order of the difference between a musical instrument and a lead painted toy.

            Drive whatever you want. Selecting another car when you could have a Honda is its own punishment. Check out the story about the guy that believed there are no bad cars anymore and that GM figured out to make them after more than 100 years of trying. His Cobalt is not as painless to own as any of my Hondas.

            I’m taking the 2012 Audi in for its second scheduled service and fourth(or fifth – I don’t always drive it) visit to the dealer today. Isn’t even one problem supposed to be a full allotment now? We make lists of items for the dealer to rectify. One thing I’m sure we’ll hear is normal is the 8-speed automatic that now always seems to be in the wrong gear and no longer shifts seamlessly…after 15,000 miles. The car is a lease, but spending the next 30,000 miles with the transmission’s good days behind it is a bitter pill. Car and Driver had the same experience with their S8. At 40,000 miles, the car’s acceleration was diminished by 10%, and they attributed it to the 8-speed automatic because the cars 1/4 mile trap speed remained the same. That indicates that the engine is at least as strong as it was new. My business partner blames me for this A6, which is hilarious. Had it been up to me, we’d have picked up a car from one of the two companies I trust. All I did was keep us from leasing an S4, which was ridiculously cramped for a car that has to carry clients from time to time, or anyone else for that matter. He was the one that wanted a smart phone on wheels, so that’s what we got, with a smart phone’s service life and a smart phone’s rate of performance degradation.

  • avatar
    johnny ro

    Among other things I like the plaid cloth. The 1980 UK Golf GTI I knew had that.

  • avatar
    TW4

    I’m happy to see the flat horsepower curve. Little is gained by increasing the peak power on small front-wheel-drive vehicles b/c the torque steer becomes uncontrollable. Flattening the horsepower curve with trick electronic turbo management makes the performance more useable. Plus, we are probably entering the era of fuel-flow-limited racing vehicles so flat horsepower and torque delivery may become valuable sales concepts.

    • 0 avatar
      wmba

      Lost in the hype of new model release is the truth about this new version of the EA888 engine made in Mexico.

      It has a mere 4 counterweight (instead of the proper 8) crankshaft whose main bearings have been reduced to 48mm from the previous 52. It looks like a bent paper clip. The resulting vibrations we are assured are not likely to be noticed by the customer, but the engine is not suitable for the tuner crowd to turn the boost to eleven, as they will no doubt soon discover.

      The new cast iron block is super thin, only 3mm thick in places.

      The new super wowee rotary slide valve cooling management system is ditched for a thermostat for the US.

      The variable lift exhaust valve arrangement is ditched for the US.

      The dual port and direct fuel injection system is ditched for the US. Direct injection only.

      You wanted a cheap GTI, America? You got it.

      • 0 avatar
        TW4

        Reducing crankshaft counterweights (often replacing them a counterweight flywheel), reducing the size of crank bearings, and eliminating dual port/cylinder injection are all fuel saving strategies.

        CAFE 2025 demanded a fuel efficient engine, and that’s what the US market will get. The fuel efficiency upgrades made the engine less tuner-friendly so they ditched the performance upgrades.

        Product-perception may be as much to blame as CAFE 2025. In the US, small cars are still regarded as fuel-sippers. In Europe, the GTI is a performance vehicle.

        • 0 avatar
          wmba

          “In the US, small cars are still regarded as fuel-sippers. In Europe, the GTI is a performance vehicle.”

          Can’t disagree with your post except for those last two sentences.

          Presumably, US buyers of the GTI were not hatchback haters, and DID think they were buying a performance car. Did Mr and Mrs America buy GTIs as parsimonious grocery getters? When they really wanted a big car but couldn’t afford one?

          That’s why there are almost a hundred posts her I’d guess.

          • 0 avatar
            TW4

            I’ve owned a couple of GTI’s based purely on the cars credibility as a performance-oriented hot hatch. Yet, I look at the WRX’s fuel economy rating (19/25) or the Mazda Speed3′s economy rating (18/25) and wonder why both cars guzzle gas. Perhaps my opinion is purely empirical, but I think the fuel economy expectations for small cars are more pervasive and subconscious than people may realize.

            I think we are entering an era when small cars, performance-oriented or econobox, need to hit 30mpg combined to have market gravitas.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            “..I look at the WRX’s fuel economy rating (19/25) or the Mazda Speed3′s economy rating (18/25) and wonder why both cars guzzle gas.”

            That’s not bad for what they are. They’re geared to for impressive 0-60s, but something’s got to give somewhere. No free lunch? These are not V8s and actually, they’d get better mpg with 400+ hp V8s.

        • 0 avatar
          wmba

          “In the US, small cars are still regarded as fuel-sippers. In Europe, the GTI is a performance vehicle.”

          Can’t disagree with your post except for those last two sentences.

          Presumably, US buyers of the GTI were not hatchback haters, and DID think they were buying a performance car. Did Mr and Mrs America buy GTIs as parsimonious grocery getters? When they really wanted a big car but couldn’t afford one?

          That’s why there are almost a hundred posts here, I’d guess.

    • 0 avatar
      carlisimo

      “I’m happy to see the flat horsepower curve. Little is gained by increasing the peak power on small front-wheel-drive vehicles b/c the torque steer becomes uncontrollable.”

      I’d argue that peak power has nothing to do with torque steer. Torque steer is caused by torque (peak or not), and you can increase power without increasing torque steer as long as it’s by increasing revs instead of torque. A flat horsepower curve implies that they’ve done the opposite of that, which is bad. So I’m not happy to see a flat horsepower curve.

    • 0 avatar
      CJinSD

      A flat horsepower curve is provided by the opposite of a flat torque curve, horsepower being a function of torque times engine speed divided by a constant(5,252). The engine described above will have horsepower climbing at a linear rate from 1,500 to 4,400 rpm and torque falling from 257 ft/lbs at 4,500 rpm down to 186 ft/lbs at 6,200 rpm. Torque steer is generally exacerbated by torque, so having lots of it at low rpm will generally create more torque steer than having it drop off as revs climb will diminish it. Whether the GTI has torque steer or not will have more to do with chassis geometry and drive shaft angularity than it will with the flat power curve at high rpm. 257 ft lbs at low engine speeds certainly has the potential to create torque steer if they don’t get everything right. An engine with a flat torque curve at all engine speeds will produce the highest power while not introducing torque steer to a sound chassis. Such an engine will have a linear power curve, with peak power near redline. The engine above just looks to have an undersized turbocharger and low rpm torque management rather than a clever strategy to make using high engine speeds redundant.

  • avatar

    Just under 3000 lbs. Not bad, MQB.

    • 0 avatar
      Kevin Jaeger

      I’m looking forward to trying one of these. Quite literally the ONLY thing I don’t like about my MKV GTI is it’s a little too heavy for a sporty hatch. Otherwise it’s awesome.

      Worth trading in for a new one? We’ll see, I guess.

    • 0 avatar
      Xeranar

      Four living adults can fit in it and it’s under 3K weight, that really is not a bad deal. I wish Toyota would get the message to TRD and make the Corolla competitive in this category with a turbo model.

    • 0 avatar
      kuman

      Hai Derek, is it just me or it is true that the weight norm for hot hatches is used to be around 900-1200 kgs ( 2000 – 2400 pounds )

      Hot hatches used to be very lightweight, simple and robust. They used to be so cheap and tough people don’t care if they were thrashing them around any patch of road they can find.

      They simply understand that their car can take it, if it cant replacement and repairs are easy and affordable. Some cars you can even go DIY route!

      3000 pounds and over 200HP is just un imaginable back then… let alone ABS based torque vectoring or stability control… i know the amount of gadgetry and horsepower also increases significantly, but it has turned itself into a high speed living room more than anything.

      A 13HP gokart delivers more thrill and fun than any M3 at a quarter of its speed i dare say.

      Yes we get horsepower number, yes with all the amenities, but where the fun and thrill has gone?

      I tested a new A3 recently and its even duller than my old one.

      • 0 avatar

        Kuman

        As someone who races 125cc karts, I know what you mean. But we live in a different era. The luxury features, safety equipment and greatly enhanced safety standards mean added weight.

        But you know what? I am not complaining. I used to drive my father’s MKV Jetta 2.0T. At roughly 3300lbs, it was not a lightweight by any means, but I adored that car. It was quick enough for every day driving, handled well, got decently mileage and was as quiet as his previous 530i on the highway. The one flaw was the crappy stereo. I suspect that if VWs suspect reliability wasn’t looming over his head, he would have kept that car past the warranty expiration date.

        • 0 avatar
          kuman

          The car before the A3 was a peugeot 307 XS 1.6L it has more amenities and safety features than the A3 ( except the rear end rides on torsion beam ) it weighs only 1100kgs. Love every bit of that thing.

          I kinda like the A3 too especially the power, but now the 5 years extended warranty is expiring… and yeah we are baffled to found the new one doesnt drive as involving as the old ones. I think we’ll keep our current A3, so far the german gremlins doesnt seems to like 3rd world country climate ( finger crossed )

  • avatar
    Signal11

    I’m loving those seats.

  • avatar
    golden2husky

    I have a soft spot for the GTI. My brother had an 84, yes a PA built car, but the original shape. 5 speed manual, manual steering. Coming out of my 72 Fury, I felt like I was driving a 911 in terms of driving precision. Of course the Fury would clean its clock in acceleration but the GTI taught me what corner carving was about. Not the most reliable, but what a blast. When he traveled out of the country, he would toss me the keys…

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      I was talking to an old timer about two weeks ago about the VW plant in New Stanton, PA, and I wasn’t even aware of its prior existence until the conversation. He was some kind of raw material salesman at the time and related some interesting stories about the German management getting along with us yinzers. He also claimed the reason the plant was eventually shut down was because it was turning out less defects per unit than the German and Mexican plants were and they got into a political thing with Wolfsburg over it.

      • 0 avatar
        Xeranar

        The New Stanton plant was highly efficient, it was later converted into a TV factory till the claimed cost of retrofit for the new flat panels would cost too much. I believe it was parceled out to smaller manufacturers now.

  • avatar
    Athos Nobile

    Nice, but still meh. +1 on the seats, they look lovely.

    It’s got electronic handbrake.

    It’ll still like hotcakes here.

  • avatar
    Ryoku75

    So they have a GTi and a “GTi Performance”? Whats the point in having two slightly different variants?

    • 0 avatar
      mike978

      I would assume it costs more and is the most expensive spec level. They did something similar with the 30th anniversary model which had 230hp.

      Mazda do it also with the current 3 – 155 and 165hp versions. Just the 165hop has terrible fuel economy so I don`t know why anyone bothers buying one of those.

    • 0 avatar
      mnm4ever

      Agreed. The power bump is likely negligible. You are paying for the diff and probably some nicer trim. VW will package it so that is the only way to get a proper LSD and therefore those that care about ultimate performance will pay the increase gladly (the MK5/6 needs an LSD badly, especially when chipped).

      It is possible that the Performance variant will include a better intake or turbo making it more tune-able than a standard GTI but that’s not likely.

      • 0 avatar
        MeaCulpa

        According to autozeitung the VW Golf GTI Performance should retail at 30k euros sharp. I don’t think that the larger brakes (F: 340mm R:310), 10 horses, the LSD and different rims is all that overpriced at 1650 euros over stock.

        • 0 avatar
          mnm4ever

          I agree, that is not a bad price bump for the Perf pack, but that is in Europe. In the US VW sometimes packages them differently and is notorious for overpriced option packages. Actually I suppose overpriced isn’t the right word, it is just that they package a very large list of options together like the Autobahn package and then make that the only way to get a few key pieces that many people want. If they keep the Perf pack under $2000 here then it will be a big seller.

    • 0 avatar
      Charlie84

      If it’s a real limited-slip, the diff alone would be likely be worth the upgrade “Performance pack” for me. The larger brakes are a nice surprise. Coming from E36 and E46 BMWs, I’ve always felt my Mk6 Golf and Mk6 GLI to be slightly weak in the braking department.

      I could hardly care less about the 10 hp bump. Given that it’s probably just a software tweak, they should just make that tweak standard IMO.

  • avatar
    hf_auto

    If VW brings the GTD to the US, I’m doing something stupid.

    • 0 avatar
      mnm4ever

      I thought the current Golf TDI was equivalent to the GTD already? It already has the sport seats (no plaid but still) and suspension and wheels from the 2005-07 GTI. I have a 2008 GTI, and my suspension is a bit more firm and low, but after living with it for a few year I would prefer the slightly softer setup of the TDI anyway. I already have 17″ rims, I tried the 18s, didn’t like them. Tires are much cheaper too.

      • 0 avatar

        Not Quite. The US TDi has the “Golf Sport” suspension, and brakes of the base car. It’s nice and firm without being harsh, and rolls on 225/45 x 17, an aggressive size. The GTd also has 170 hp compared to the TDi 140. You still get the nice interior, good seats, and a very good radio, even in the base TDi. A GTD is a GTi with a diesel. Our TDi is a ‘Trendline’ car.

        Having said all that, I love my TDi, and drove it on a favorite twisty road today on the way home. Massive torque dictates a different driving style than a revving GTi but still fun.

        • 0 avatar
          MeaCulpa

          Not quite, the GTD has a slightly softer setting – according to VW in AMS due to diesel drivers driving further – and is now bumped to 184 horses and 380 N/m ( 1750–3250 rpm) while weight is down to 1377 kilograms, 0-100km/h in 7.5.

        • 0 avatar
          mnm4ever

          Thank you both for the clarification, makes sense. I still think the US TDI suspension is perfect for regular roads here, my GTI is a bit harsh around town, at least here where the roads suck. And I think you can chip them and get pretty good results too, should make it a worthy GTD alternative.

          Funny though that you call the GTI “revving”, I think of it and bought it because of its “massive torque”! I was used to Hondas and Toyotas that were high revving, the GTI redline is close to where my other cars started to make power.

  • avatar
    Prado

    Hopefully with Mexico production VW will provide the US with more trim levels for the Golf. Right now there is nothing between the hubcaps only low level Golf with the old inefficient 5 banger and the hot hatch GTI riding on 40 series tires. Something in between would suit me well.

    • 0 avatar
      mnm4ever

      Well VW doesn’t really have anything else to offer. I suppose they could have a 2.0 Golf like the base Jetta. But VW will gladly sell you optional rims for the base Golf, that car isn’t really a stripped out model as it comes.

      I was hoping they would offer the Jetta hybrid drivetrain in the Golf, to me that would be the most appealing combination.

  • avatar
    Robbie

    Does anyone know if this German price level is higher than that of the mkv6?

    We’ll have to see how Volkswagen’s Mexican Buickification of the GTI works out. I would like to buy a GTI, but I am looking out for alternatives. Am I the only person in America who would be willing to pay a lot more for a “German” GTI and thinks that that is good value, but would think that a Buickified Mexican GTI should cost a LOT less for me to be interested?

    • 0 avatar
      mike978

      Looking at vw.de the current GTi is 27,700 euros. So a small increase, 2-3%.

    • 0 avatar

      Yup. Seeing the N.A Jetta/Passat next to the Euro Golf shows you that the competition is a lot tougher in Europe. A lot.

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        Hasn’t the Golf been the best selling car in Europe for much of its existence while here it is cause for party hats when the Jetta breaks the top 10 in sales for a month? The US Golf TDI is pretty much representative of an average Euro Golf. It doesn’t make many people’s shopping lists. You’ve a pretty selective way of defining tough competition.

        • 0 avatar

          I think a look at the c class cars, in Europe, shows a much nicer market than we get. Small cars are still “cheap” in the US. Ignoring VW, look at Euro Honda and US Honda models…we get their Accord, but here it is an “up market” Acura. Golf has to fight that car in Europe on level ground. Here, Golf fights what, Chrysler 200 ? Ford Focus (decontented), or Camry ? There, a whole raft of c class worthy contenders exist. A US TDi isn’t an average Euro Golf. It would have the biggest engine, and is only decontented by leather, adjustable shocks, and full climate control, which do come to our northern neighbor. We get “the big one”. There’s a whole raft of tiny engines and no option/stripper packages we don’t see….check the GB or the AU VW sites.

          The typical American drives a better vehicle than the typical Euro, and for far less money-that c class GTi, GTd or Bora in Europe is at our 35k price point, where it competes with the 1 series 5 door, which we don’t get.

          My made in Canada Acura has given me far more trouble than my made in Germany Golf or 3 series. I think at this point it’s pretty much a random experience how much trouble your car is.

    • 0 avatar
      Boxer2500

      The Mk1 GTI was built in Pennsylvania for US consumption, and the Mk2 and Mk3 were hecho en Mexico. All were great drivers cars. VW knows what GTI buyers are looking for, and they’re not going to Jetta-ize it.

      The nationality of assembly line workers has much less of an impact on build quality than processes or supplier quality control do. The B5 Passat was German-built and could be just as problematic as the Mexican cars of the same era.

      • 0 avatar
        th009

        Mk2 was built first in the US and later in Mexico. I owned a US-made ’86 GTI and then one of the first Mexican-built ones, a ’90 GTI 16V 2.0L. Both a lot of fun to drive. And, no, I didn’t spend a fortune on repairs, either, in the 13 combined years we had the two of them.

    • 0 avatar
      Charlie84

      “Am I the only person in America who would be willing to pay a lot more for a “German” GTI and thinks that that is good value, but would think that a Buickified Mexican GTI should cost a LOT less for me to be interested?”

      You are not the only person –half of the peanut gallery over at VWVortex feel similarly. But you need not be concerned. VW will not “Buck-ify” the new Golf/GTI and quality from the Mexican plant is just fine. My parents’ Jetta Sportwagen TDI appears to be every bit as well-built as my previous Wolfsburg-built Golf and every other recent German-build VW I’ve come in contact with.

  • avatar
    Skink

    Those metric metrics are oh so useful. While you’re at it, how about posting the stories in Esperanto?

    • 0 avatar
      Pig_Iron

      The US population is <4.5% of the whole world. Everyone else uses metric. All automakers have used metric since ~1980, including US ones. As does the US government. I personally never made an auto part in inch in twenty years, except of one service part for the 1958 T-Bird. Nominal wheel diameters, are the only thing still listed in old units.

      Taking your arguement to the opposite extreme, the specs should be in runes, with Roman numerals, and with base units as cubits. Its really not that hard to convert into the old units, and if you send Mr. Schmitt a polite PM, he will probably list them in brackets as reference measures.

  • avatar
    gslippy

    It’s slower, smaller, and less reliable than a Camry V6 or Sonata 2.0T. But the True Believers will sop them up.

    • 0 avatar
      Kevin Jaeger

      Camry??? There doesn’t seem to be any shortage of people who buy those, but I don’t know if your claim is true having never seen one at either auto-x or a track day. Maybe they’d do fine.

      Do you have any actual evidence that a Sonata turbo is more reliable than this GTI?

    • 0 avatar
      Boxer2500

      For a supposed car enthusiast site, lots of the commenters here seem unable to see a car as anything more than a spec sheet and a reliability score. Absurdly overpowered V6 or not, the Camry and GTI are cross-shopped by precisely no one. As lovely a transportation pod as it is, the Camry just doesn’t deliver what most driving enthusiasts are looking for.

      With reliability improved across the board, today’s “unreliable” brands would have been in the upper half of the pack 10 years ago. I would gladly take the risk of an extra fraction of a problem-per-car in exchange for certain intangibles that other cars do not deliver.

      • 0 avatar
        tbone33

        “For a supposed car enthusiast site, lots of the commenters here seem unable to see a car as anything more than a spec sheet and a reliability score”

        Amen. Almost every car is able to fill out a spec sheet in an impressive way. The quality of the car is found in things that are hard to quantify, Furthermore, some of the worst speced cars, like the Honda Fit, are the most fun to drive.

        • 0 avatar
          mcs

          “The quality of the car is found in things that are hard to quantify,”

          Very true. Everclear grain alcohol always wins the spec sheet battle against a single malt scotch or fine bourbon, but which would you (well, most of you) rather drink?

      • 0 avatar
        SayHiToYourMom

        Speak for yourself. I *ONLY* feel like a car has delivered what I need when it feels grounded to the ground.

        Sincerely,
        enthusiast driver

    • 0 avatar
      dts187

      Because a Camry and Sonata are the perfect option for someone looking to buy a small and quick hatchback.

      The GTI is also smaller than a Ram 1500, lacks a bed for hauling cargo, and has a much lower towing capacity.

    • 0 avatar

      @Gslippy

      Have you driven these cars back to back? There is NO comparison whatsoever. An F-150 Ecoboost is “faster” than an MX-5. It’s a meaningless measure of driving enjoyment.

    • 0 avatar
      jkross22

      It’s more fun, nimble and involving to drive than the boring Camry V6 or the Sonata 2.0T. But the true believers will sop up those land barges.

      See, it works both ways!

  • avatar
    LeeK

    The extra horsepower will allow this update of the classic Hot Hatch to compete with other vehicles that are nipping at its heels (Focus ST, Mazdaspeed3) and the lighter weight will be a delight to everyone dismayed by the steady accumulation of mass over the years in nearly every vehicle on the market.

    The US spec 1983 Rabbit GTI weighed just over 2000 pounds and had 90 HP. It was the first new car I ever purchased and despite the 0-60 time of 10.8 seconds (Car and Driver), it always managed to feel like you were capable of going a million miles an hour. Thirty years later I’m driving a Mark VI GTI and continue to be amazed by how refined it seems compared to the tin can Mark I. We’ll see how well the Mark VII carries on the tradition.

    Oh, yeah, my VW is coming up on three years of ownership and hasn’t experienced any catastrophic issues. So there.

  • avatar
    Littlecarrot

    I wonder if they’ll offer a V-Tex option in cornsilk beige? I’m not as big of a fan of the plaid seats.

    • 0 avatar
      mnm4ever

      I do not think they have ever sold a GTI with a beige interior. Maybe white with plaid back in the 70s, but all others were German serious business black IIRC. You will definitely be able to get leather with no plaid, but I doubt any other cloth will be offered but plaid, and I would bet you will have a choice of dark charcoal cloth or black leather.

      • 0 avatar
        number9ine

        I moved metal at a VW dealership in a prior life, back when the MKIV was new. You could get a GTI with beige leather, which got you beige on every surface of the interior save for the dash and door card tops. For the first few years you could get silver with a beige gut, which is a strangely alluring color combo.

        • 0 avatar
          mnm4ever

          Oh yes, I totally forgot about the Mk4, I even test drove an orange GTI GLX with the sand interior and really wanted it, but with black inside. I should have known better. As many VW fans do, I try to block that 4th generation out of my mind. That is when things really got bad.

  • avatar
    Mark in Maine

    Perhaps it’s just the color, but this thing looks to me like a minivan from the back. That said, I’ll bet it will sell like the proverbial hotcakes. Mine was a white ’84 – I hope that this one will be as much fun to drive as that one was.

  • avatar
    pb35

    My GTI was a Mk2 built in PA. I loved that car, drove it to 123k and sold it to my nephew who drove it to over 200k. It didn’t hurt that my girlfriends dad was a VW mechanic that had a garage full of spares. Nothing but great memories, cranking the sunroof open by hand and taking those off-ramps at double the posted speed.

    I would love a GTD if it’s offered stateside.

  • avatar

    I love it how people make blanket statements about the quality of a car, the night before it goes on show in Geneva. Apparently, that quality is now measured by weight ….

  • avatar
    threeer

    Now if VW would see fit to bring over the Polo in GTi trim. Oh, yeah…forgot…us ‘Mericuns don’t like small hatches. Bummer, as I spent some time in a (non Gti) Polo in Germany just a week ago and loved it. Probably because it’s closer to the original Golf than the new Golf is!

  • avatar
    Mykl

    If the quality of this car will be at about the same relative (to peers) location as the MkVI GTI when released in 2009, then this car will be at the top of the heap; of course, it’ll be priced according to that as well.

    Concerning interior durability, my 2010 GTI has been a southern car for all its life, and with a windshield sun-shade and lightly tinted windows the only noticeable wear after nearly 60k miles is on frequently used buttons that used to have dull plastic; now they’re a little shiny where I’ve used them. Even the plastic screen on the touch-screen stereo looks no worse for wear. So I have little doubt that with occasional cleaning VW interiors can still look fantastic after many years/miles.

    I think this car deserves consideration if you’re shopping for a sporty compact.

  • avatar
    dts187

    I really like the look of this.

    Good styling, lighter, and the option for factory diff/upgraded brakes.

    I hope you can get a GTI Performance without nav and sunroof.

    My Mk6 may be getting traded in.

    • 0 avatar
      Fordson

      If I trade my MK6 on this the new one will be loaded just like the old one – I will just add the Performance package too.

      GTIs are not really light (even now) or cheap – I’m not going to make it that way by leaving creature comforts off. This will be my DD and I’m not going without.

      • 0 avatar
        dts187

        And you shouldn’t have to. Maybe I wasn’t clear enough. Hopefully we can have the performance package without adding or subtracting any other options.

        My GTI is my DD and I wanted it without nav and no sunroof. With my standalone GPS and my 2 smart phones I don’t really need another nav system. Also, I don’t like sunroofs. I will never use one. To me it’s just an added expense that adds weight and sometimes eats headroom.

        Different strokes, my friend.

        • 0 avatar
          Fordson

          Yes, I am interested in how this perf pack is going to be integrated into the current option packages. I just have a hard time conceptualizing it. Last time there was a performance option (summer tires), it was applied across the board – base models all the way up to Autobahn. But tires are a swappable thing. Not like an LSD.

  • avatar
    bumpy ii

    “The GTI Performance comes with 230 hp and a front axle differential lock.”

    They put an actual locker in it? That should all kinds of fun when the electronics puke and it fails on in a corner.

  • avatar
    Fordson

    The MK7 looks a lot like the MK6, but that’s OK with me – the MK6 started out looking good.

    They got the weight of the GTI sans fuel and driver down to just over 2800 lbs.? That’s stunning – nobody gets a weight reduction like that anymore.

    It’s pretty commonly known the current 200 hp/207 lb/ft GTI makes around 205/220 at the wheels.

    VW always does this – the new 220 hp and 230 hp engines will easily make that at the wheels.

  • avatar
    Charlie84

    Is anyone else just over-the-moon about the weight reduction here? Seriously, if they kept everything the same from the Mk6 and ONLY reduced the weight by such an amount, they’d probably have my money.

    Combined with an an optional LSD? They’ve nailed it. This has everything I could reasonably want in a daily driver.

    • 0 avatar
      dts187

      I consider this an upgrade pretty much all around from my Mk6.

      Better styling (my opinion anyway)
      More power
      Even more power with performance pack
      Available diff and upgraded brakes
      Substantial weight reduction

      Once these hit the lots I’m definitely in for a test drive.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributing Writers

  • Jack Baruth, United States
  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Vojta Dobes, Czech Republic
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Cameron Aubernon, United States
  • J Emerson, United States