Next Car: 2015 GTI or 2015 WRX?
Get a wagon! Golf R Wagon coming? http://jalopnik.com/the-hot-volkswagen-golf-r-wagon-is-real-and-its-coming-1660045142
[color="RoyalBlue"]1992 Miata Project[/color]
-
roninsoldier83
- Posts: 664
- Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:14
- Location: Lakewood, CO
- Contact:
I would honestly love to have a Golf R- wagon or otherwise! Unfortunately though, it's going to be priced considerably higher than the GTI/WRX. 
If my budget was considerably higher, I wouldn't even be making I thread- I would just buy the Golf R lol.
The GTI w/DSG & performance pack will likely ring up around $29k and it seems most people are able to negotiate about ~$1500 off the top of them, leaving it around $27,500 or so.
The WRX w/Premium Package & CVT is around $30,900, but I've seen a few dealers letting them go for around $29,200.
The Golf R is rumored to start around ~$35k, with rumors guessing price will be anywhere from $34k to $40k. Adding DSG will likely add another ~$1000 onto the price. So, I would be looking at roughly ~$36k+ most likely. And if it's anything like the last Golf R, they're not going to want to discount them... but with wishful thinking, maybe I'd be able to get them to knock $1500-$2000 off MSRP; but that would still leave it at around ~$5000 more than the WRX and likely around $6500 more than the GTI. That's a large lump of extra cash....
If my budget was considerably higher, I wouldn't even be making I thread- I would just buy the Golf R lol.The GTI w/DSG & performance pack will likely ring up around $29k and it seems most people are able to negotiate about ~$1500 off the top of them, leaving it around $27,500 or so.
The WRX w/Premium Package & CVT is around $30,900, but I've seen a few dealers letting them go for around $29,200.
The Golf R is rumored to start around ~$35k, with rumors guessing price will be anywhere from $34k to $40k. Adding DSG will likely add another ~$1000 onto the price. So, I would be looking at roughly ~$36k+ most likely. And if it's anything like the last Golf R, they're not going to want to discount them... but with wishful thinking, maybe I'd be able to get them to knock $1500-$2000 off MSRP; but that would still leave it at around ~$5000 more than the WRX and likely around $6500 more than the GTI. That's a large lump of extra cash....
AKA- [color="Blue"]arctic_blue83[/color]
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
-
roninsoldier83
- Posts: 664
- Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:14
- Location: Lakewood, CO
- Contact:
Just read a few reviews of the upcoming Golf R.... I found of couple of them to be pretty interesting:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-reviews/2015-volkswagen-golf-r-european-spec
^^^Road and Track stated that they preferred the GTI over the Golf R.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/hatchbacks/1407_2015_volkswagen_golf_r_euro_spec_first_test/
Motor Trend posted test numbers from both cars:
Golf R:
-0-60mph: 4.9 seconds
-1/4 mile: 13.5@101.3mph
-60-0 braking: 104 feet
-Skidpad: 0.97g
-Figure 8: 25.0 seconds at 0.77g
GTI w/Performance Pack:
-0-60mph: 5.7 seconds
-1/4 mile: 14.2@99.9mph
-60-0 braking: 100 feet
-Skidpad: 0.96g
-Figure 8: 25.1 seconds at 0.76g
It's no shock that the Golf R has a sizable advantage from a stop- AWD traction really helps get it off the line. But weight and drivetrain loss don't help it's case. Only a 1.4mph trap speed advantage in the 1/4 mile. The GTI stops better. The skidpad and figure 8 are splitting hairs close. With that said, I'm sure the Golf R will undoubtedly be faster around a racetrack, but the specs aren't too far off (other than 0-60mph) for the likely ~$6500 price difference.... but the AWD would be nice in the winter and part of that price gap comes from the fact that the Golf R has more standard features than the base/"S" GTI.
The 0-60mph is considerably faster in the R, but I would be willing to bet the rolling start 5-60mph test would be much closer. I would think the GTI's greater low-end torque (less turbo lag from smaller turbo) would be more daily commute friendly.
Although I also remember my old GTI and Golf R.... I had my GTI APR tuned, whereas my Golf R stayed stock. My GTI had more low-end grunt (much more noticeable when tuned), and the magazines said their trap speeds were close as well... but in reality, my old R pulled considerably harder and smoother at freeway speeds. But I also remember that after tuning my GTI, torque steer was considerably more annoying; whereas the e-LSD on the new GTI is said to get rid of torque steer almost completely- which is good, as the new GTI power/torque wise (stock) is almost the same as the MK6 GTI with a tune. Proof:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcU8YNDGoBY
Either way, I like the Golf R, but I don't think I could [once again] justify its cost over the GTI. If I was looking at STI vs Golf R (higher price bracket), it wouldn't be a contest- Golf R all day long.... but the GTI just offers so much content for so much less money that its tough to beat.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-reviews/2015-volkswagen-golf-r-european-spec
^^^Road and Track stated that they preferred the GTI over the Golf R.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/hatchbacks/1407_2015_volkswagen_golf_r_euro_spec_first_test/
Motor Trend posted test numbers from both cars:
Golf R:
-0-60mph: 4.9 seconds
-1/4 mile: 13.5@101.3mph
-60-0 braking: 104 feet
-Skidpad: 0.97g
-Figure 8: 25.0 seconds at 0.77g
GTI w/Performance Pack:
-0-60mph: 5.7 seconds
-1/4 mile: 14.2@99.9mph
-60-0 braking: 100 feet
-Skidpad: 0.96g
-Figure 8: 25.1 seconds at 0.76g
It's no shock that the Golf R has a sizable advantage from a stop- AWD traction really helps get it off the line. But weight and drivetrain loss don't help it's case. Only a 1.4mph trap speed advantage in the 1/4 mile. The GTI stops better. The skidpad and figure 8 are splitting hairs close. With that said, I'm sure the Golf R will undoubtedly be faster around a racetrack, but the specs aren't too far off (other than 0-60mph) for the likely ~$6500 price difference.... but the AWD would be nice in the winter and part of that price gap comes from the fact that the Golf R has more standard features than the base/"S" GTI.
The 0-60mph is considerably faster in the R, but I would be willing to bet the rolling start 5-60mph test would be much closer. I would think the GTI's greater low-end torque (less turbo lag from smaller turbo) would be more daily commute friendly.
Although I also remember my old GTI and Golf R.... I had my GTI APR tuned, whereas my Golf R stayed stock. My GTI had more low-end grunt (much more noticeable when tuned), and the magazines said their trap speeds were close as well... but in reality, my old R pulled considerably harder and smoother at freeway speeds. But I also remember that after tuning my GTI, torque steer was considerably more annoying; whereas the e-LSD on the new GTI is said to get rid of torque steer almost completely- which is good, as the new GTI power/torque wise (stock) is almost the same as the MK6 GTI with a tune. Proof:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcU8YNDGoBY
Either way, I like the Golf R, but I don't think I could [once again] justify its cost over the GTI. If I was looking at STI vs Golf R (higher price bracket), it wouldn't be a contest- Golf R all day long.... but the GTI just offers so much content for so much less money that its tough to beat.
AKA- [color="Blue"]arctic_blue83[/color]
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
-
roninsoldier83
- Posts: 664
- Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:14
- Location: Lakewood, CO
- Contact:
Well, I've taken the time to speak to my "closest advisers" (i.e. the little woman, my brother and a couple of my gear-head buddies) and they all reminded me of a couple of things... When I drove both of these cars back to back several months ago, I stated that I had more fun in the CVT WRX and preferred it over the GTI. To which, I remember stating that, but I also remember thinking later that it might have been due to the much longer, more involved test drive. Either way, in retrospect, I do remember preferring the WRX... I even remember saying that I liked the CVT better than the manual in the WRX (blasphemy!!), as the paddle shifters in S# mode were very responsive.
3 out of 4 of my advisers stated they would also get the Subaru... not that it matters much, as its ultimately my car. But, I've made my decision: I'm getting the Subaru. Here's why:
-When I drove both of them, I do remember having more fun in the Subaru.
-Even though the Subaru rides rougher than the GTI, I don't remember thinking it was very rough. As a matter of fact Motor Trend states the WRX rides smoother than the Focus ST:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1404_2014_ford_focus_st_vs_2015_subaru_wrx_comparison/
^^^I think that sounds about right; and in reality, I've never complained once about the FoST's ride.
-The GTI is relatively expensive for a car that is still FWD. Its a good bang for buck overall, but at the end of the day- its still FWD. On the opposite end, the WRX is a relative bargain for an AWD sporty car.
-The GTI is quieter, but my current FoST is loud and it doesn't bother me in the least. And in reality, there's nothing stopping me from adding sound deadening if it grows to bother me that much.
-The WRX has a bigger gas tank (15.9 vs 13.2 gallons). This seems petty, but with the amount I drive, this is a nice feature.
-The GTI has a better stereo. <----This is something I can solve with ease.
-Obviously the WRX will be not only better in the snow, but it'll be more fun/enjoyable in the snow as well. It's hard to beat sporty AWD antics in a snowy parking lot!
-I remember coming away being impressed with the WRX's seats. I'm sure the GTI's might be a hint better, but they're pretty damn close and they're both better than the base FoST's seats which lack bolstering IMO.
-While the DSG is a great gearbox, the CVT has gotten great reviews as well, some even saying that it does a better job of keeping the car on boil in S# mode than the DSG does in S mode.
-Real world MPG is comparable.
-The DSG shifts quickly, but many reviewers have said its "clunky" at low-speed bumper-to-bumper driving. I haven't experienced this myself, but I do know that if left in "I" mode, the CVT in the WRX is very smooth.
-Maintenance costs will likely be cheaper on the Subaru. Although the GTI has a lower initial cost, so this would likely make it more of a wash.
-Made in Japan holds a bit more weight than Hencho en Mexico. Probably a bit of a stereotype, but its still something that plays in the back of my mind.
-I've owned 2 of both.... with my VW's I was always paranoid about something being wrong with them or reading uber-expensive horror stories online. My two Subaru's were the two cars that I've owned longer than any others. There's something to be said about that. Especially when I would like to find another car that I can hold onto for a few years.
-The interior of the GTI may be nicer, but to be honest, the "lower rent" interior in my FoST doesn't bother me and I remember thinking the WRX had a nice interior than the FoST.
-I prefer hatches over sedans on principle alone; but the reality is, I only utilize the extra space in a hatch a couple times a year at most. Maybe I'll get lucky and Subaru will solve that problem for me! *Crosses fingers about new WRX hatch*
-Being Colorado, resale value for the WRX will almost undoubtedly be higher. WRX's that are 2+ years old still go for near brand new prices and WRX's that are 12 years old still go for $10k+. The GTI has decent resale, but nothing compared to a WRX in Colorado. As an "investment" (even though they're all depreciating assets), the WRX is the better proposition. This is something that I should probably place more weight on.
-Lastly, and most importantly: I could see myself regretting not getting the car that is AWD and more fun to drive. Whereas with the GTI, while I really like the car, I'm less likely to regret not getting the FWD car with a slightly nicer interior that rides a bit smoother.
So, I've finally voted in my own thread. I'm getting a WRX. I think I've covered every possible aspect of the two vehicles (in more detail than most people care about!), and the WRX just makes more sense to me.
I'll have to test drive them both again in the spring, but until then, I've made up my mind... for now...
3 out of 4 of my advisers stated they would also get the Subaru... not that it matters much, as its ultimately my car. But, I've made my decision: I'm getting the Subaru. Here's why:
-When I drove both of them, I do remember having more fun in the Subaru.
-Even though the Subaru rides rougher than the GTI, I don't remember thinking it was very rough. As a matter of fact Motor Trend states the WRX rides smoother than the Focus ST:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1404_2014_ford_focus_st_vs_2015_subaru_wrx_comparison/
^^^I think that sounds about right; and in reality, I've never complained once about the FoST's ride.
-The GTI is relatively expensive for a car that is still FWD. Its a good bang for buck overall, but at the end of the day- its still FWD. On the opposite end, the WRX is a relative bargain for an AWD sporty car.
-The GTI is quieter, but my current FoST is loud and it doesn't bother me in the least. And in reality, there's nothing stopping me from adding sound deadening if it grows to bother me that much.
-The WRX has a bigger gas tank (15.9 vs 13.2 gallons). This seems petty, but with the amount I drive, this is a nice feature.
-The GTI has a better stereo. <----This is something I can solve with ease.
-Obviously the WRX will be not only better in the snow, but it'll be more fun/enjoyable in the snow as well. It's hard to beat sporty AWD antics in a snowy parking lot!
-I remember coming away being impressed with the WRX's seats. I'm sure the GTI's might be a hint better, but they're pretty damn close and they're both better than the base FoST's seats which lack bolstering IMO.
-While the DSG is a great gearbox, the CVT has gotten great reviews as well, some even saying that it does a better job of keeping the car on boil in S# mode than the DSG does in S mode.
-Real world MPG is comparable.
-The DSG shifts quickly, but many reviewers have said its "clunky" at low-speed bumper-to-bumper driving. I haven't experienced this myself, but I do know that if left in "I" mode, the CVT in the WRX is very smooth.
-Maintenance costs will likely be cheaper on the Subaru. Although the GTI has a lower initial cost, so this would likely make it more of a wash.
-Made in Japan holds a bit more weight than Hencho en Mexico. Probably a bit of a stereotype, but its still something that plays in the back of my mind.
-I've owned 2 of both.... with my VW's I was always paranoid about something being wrong with them or reading uber-expensive horror stories online. My two Subaru's were the two cars that I've owned longer than any others. There's something to be said about that. Especially when I would like to find another car that I can hold onto for a few years.
-The interior of the GTI may be nicer, but to be honest, the "lower rent" interior in my FoST doesn't bother me and I remember thinking the WRX had a nice interior than the FoST.
-I prefer hatches over sedans on principle alone; but the reality is, I only utilize the extra space in a hatch a couple times a year at most. Maybe I'll get lucky and Subaru will solve that problem for me! *Crosses fingers about new WRX hatch*
-Being Colorado, resale value for the WRX will almost undoubtedly be higher. WRX's that are 2+ years old still go for near brand new prices and WRX's that are 12 years old still go for $10k+. The GTI has decent resale, but nothing compared to a WRX in Colorado. As an "investment" (even though they're all depreciating assets), the WRX is the better proposition. This is something that I should probably place more weight on.
-Lastly, and most importantly: I could see myself regretting not getting the car that is AWD and more fun to drive. Whereas with the GTI, while I really like the car, I'm less likely to regret not getting the FWD car with a slightly nicer interior that rides a bit smoother.
So, I've finally voted in my own thread. I'm getting a WRX. I think I've covered every possible aspect of the two vehicles (in more detail than most people care about!), and the WRX just makes more sense to me.
I'll have to test drive them both again in the spring, but until then, I've made up my mind... for now...
AKA- [color="Blue"]arctic_blue83[/color]
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
Even though that means you and your wife will have basically the same car? I like that I drive something different from my wife. Gives some variety, even though her car isn't all that fun to drive (base Impreza).
She wants an SUV next, so I'm laying the groundwork to convincing her to get a Grand Cherokee because that's something I would like and I do drive her car quite a bit when we go places together. Or we might end up with a Santa Fe Sport. Those things look a lot better than they used to and have the same tech/warranty bang for your buck as my Veloster.
She wants an SUV next, so I'm laying the groundwork to convincing her to get a Grand Cherokee because that's something I would like and I do drive her car quite a bit when we go places together. Or we might end up with a Santa Fe Sport. Those things look a lot better than they used to and have the same tech/warranty bang for your buck as my Veloster.
2015 Ironman Silver Veloster Turbo - Bone stock and staying that way
1990 Crystal White Miata - Beater - Bignose 1.6L Swap, Robbins Top w/Glass Window, E-Codes, Air Horns, Brembo Rotors
Former Rides:
2011 Kona Blue Mustang GT 5.0
2009 True Red Mazdaspeed3 GT
2005 Flame Red SRT-4
1990 Crystal White Miata - Beater - Bignose 1.6L Swap, Robbins Top w/Glass Window, E-Codes, Air Horns, Brembo Rotors
Former Rides:
2011 Kona Blue Mustang GT 5.0
2009 True Red Mazdaspeed3 GT
2005 Flame Red SRT-4
-
roninsoldier83
- Posts: 664
- Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:14
- Location: Lakewood, CO
- Contact:
erod550 wrote:Even though that means you and your wife will have basically the same car? I like that I drive something different from my wife. Gives some variety, even though her car isn't all that fun to drive (base Impreza).
She wants an SUV next, so I'm laying the groundwork to convincing her to get a Grand Cherokee because that's something I would like and I do drive her car quite a bit when we go places together. Or we might end up with a Santa Fe Sport. Those things look a lot better than they used to and have the same tech/warranty bang for your buck as my Veloster.
I've driven all chassis of WRX. I owned a 2004 WRX & a 2006 STI and the wife owns a 2013 WRX. I've driven a couple 2015's (one manual & one CVT)... and new 2015 WRX has very little on common with her 2013. In fact, they don't feel very alike at all.
-Different chassis. The new one is supposed to be ~41% stiffer. They don't feel alike at all. Her 2013 feels like very "floppy" in comparison. The 2015 also corners considerably flatter.
-Different motor. The new motor (FA20) is a high compression, direct injection motor, with a twin-scroll turbo that is [finally] mounted off of the exhaust manifold (vs an up-pipe) on the bottom of the motor. Nothing in common with the old EJ25 other than cylinder arrangement. The new motor has essentially no turbo lag and doesn't feel like the older Subie motor- it actually feels more like a European motor. Her motor is very laggy by comparison. The new one also gets better fuel economy.
-2015 has a faster electronic steering rack vs her 2013 that has a hydraulic rack with a slower ratio. Her car actually feels more numb, even if it shouldn't. Either way, they don't feel the same.
-2015 has much nicer interior (even though its still not GTI nice) and far superior seats. Different materials used inside as well. And a nice, thick, flat-bottomed steering wheel. Everything feels different.
-The 2015 looks a bit more "bland" and certainly not as aggressive as her 2013. I actually like the look of her 2013, but I prefer the sleeper look of the 2015, as I think it will attract less attention from sideways hat wearing kids.
-Her 2013 is a manual, whereas this one would be a CVT. So, anytime I needed my "manual fix" I would be free to grab her keys.
Overall, they're both AWD turbo Subaru's, but they really don't feel like the same car at all. Her 2013 feels more like a "tuner car" from several years ago; whereas the 2015 feels like it was made to go after many of the sporty European entry level cars. I think Subaru said that when designing the 2015, their bench mark for what a car should "feel like" was the Porsche 911; which they apparently kept on-hand throughout the design process. Whereas I think the old WRX seemed to take more of an aim at its longtime rival- the EVO; as well as other tuner cars from Japan. Very different feel between the two generations.
My little lady wouldn't drive an SUV to save her life! Not even a crossover!
If its not relatively sporty, she won't even look at it... her previous car was an older Nissan Sentra SE-R Spec V (with LSD). To be honest, she doesn't like hatchbacks either and constantly refers to my hatches as "mini-minivans" ha! She loves her WRX and has said many times that the only car she would consider trading it in on is a new 2015 WRX lol! To which, I would have a problem, as I agree, I wouldn't want her to be driving the same car as me!
But she has a tendency to keep cars much longer than I do, so I think that possibility has been ruled out for a while.
AKA- [color="Blue"]arctic_blue83[/color]
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
-
roninsoldier83
- Posts: 664
- Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:14
- Location: Lakewood, CO
- Contact:
So, today I went back for one more test drive of each car- back to back. I figured a car can look good on paper all day, but that doesn't mean I'm going to like one better than the other. I went into both drives thinking I was going to prefer the GTI. I even went to the VW dealership first. I was wrong. WRX>GTI.
For reference, I drove both the exact same routes (went to dealers on Broadway, down the street from each other). I mixed light to light traffic, with freeway commuting, with a few corners in between. Both drives were about ~25+ minutes long or so.
It should be noted that I didn't drive the GTI with performance pack because it won't hit dealer lots for another few weeks; but for my purposes, it won't really matter. I drove a GTI SE and a WRX CVT Limited, so they were almost identically equipped- leather, moonroofs, ect.
Things I preferred about the WRX:
-Transmission. Yes, I the prefer the CVT over the GTI's DSG. It's much smoother, especially in traffic. And in S# mode, the CVT gets very aggressive and holds your "gears/ratios". I couldn't tell the difference in shifting speed between the two of them. The CVT was that quick. The DSG was much "clunkier" and seemed more confused by nature. In Sport mode, the DSG always seemed to be one gear up from where it should be for sporty driving. I preferred the CVT in every single way. I never thought I would say those words!
-Engine. Both have similar acceleration, but the WRX felt like it had more low-end torque. Maybe VW has limited torque to avoid torque steer? I have no idea. All I know is that the WRX felt like it wanted to move down low, whereas the GTI's transmission just felt confused and the motor had more of an "even pull" to it. I will report that the GTI truly had no torque steer to speak of... but then again, neither did the WRX! Truth be told, I much preferred the Focus ST's motor over the GTI's- by a big margin actually. The FoST's motor was actually pretty similar to the WRX's- both were better than the GTI's.
-Handling. I know I didn't get to drive the Performance Pack's sweet eLSD, but man, the WRX really corners much harder. Car and Driver's Lightning Lap says the WRX laps VIR almost 4 seconds faster than the GTI (3:15.5 vs 3:19.3):
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/lightning-lap-2014-results-and-sector-times-feature
^^^They didn't get to test the undoubtedly faster Performance Pack version, but still, I preferred the way the WRX dove into corners and powered out. C&D even had the Focus ST lapping faster than the GTI (3:17.6). Honestly, I even preferred the way my FoST handled over the GTI. It just wasn't that much fun. If only Ford could figure out a way to get rid of torque steer and add an auto gearbox! The WRX was far more confidence inspiring than both of them.
-The seats. Yep, I was shocked. I felt like the WRX's seats fit my body better.
-The steering wheel. The WRX's steering wheel was smaller and squishier and I preferred it. Again, I was shocked, I even preferred my FoST's steering wheel over the GTI's hardened leather unit.
-The seating position and visibility. I had better visibility in the WRX and it made it easier to drive. Simple as that.
-The "sport" functions on the WRX were on the steering wheel! They're so easy to toggle on and off- it seems like it would make passing people much easier.
-The more aggressive look of the front end. I like the GTI's overall shape, but I must still be a bit of a kid at heart, as I still like the look of the WRX's wide mouthed, baby eating hood scoop!
Overall, I really preferred the WRX and came away from the GTI feeling a bit cold. After driving the GTI again, I felt like my FoST was loads more fun. I'm sure the manual GTI would be a bit different, but the Ford has more character... and so does the WRX.
Things I preferred about the GTI:
-Headroom w/moonroof. There's really not much of a real world difference, likely less than an inch, but its something.
-Hatchback utility. The actual trunk space with the GTI's hatch cover is nearly identical, with an edge going to the WRX (surprisingly), but with the cover removed and the seats folded down there's no question the GTI has a big advantage there.
-Headroom in the back seat. I fit back there comfortably. I also fit in the back of the WRX just fine, but the GTI has more headroom. Obviously it doesn't matter with 2 small children, but if I was transporting adults more often, this might matter.
-Dashboard layout. It made a lot of sense and seemed intuitive, but the WRX's wasn't really that bad at all. Not nearly the gap between them that a magazines might suggest. And truly, in Limited trim, the WRX's interior was legitimately nice. A big step up from WRX's of old.
-Overall exterior looks. I like hatches. I prefer the WRX's front end, but the WRX's rear looks pretty bland. The VW's rear looks cleaner. The GTI also has nicer looking wheels and a slightly better looking stance IMO.
Other areas that I noted, but didn't seem to care about:
-Cabin noise. The WRX was louder, but I carried on conversations with both salesmen, and it didn't bother me in the least.
-Ride comfort. Honestly, I think the WRX might have been a bit stiffer, but it was hard to tell because it really seemed smoother than my FoST and my FoST doesn't bother me in the least. Neither were harsh enough that I would even bat an eye.
-I didn't really test the stereo in either. I turned them on, but never turned them up. I'm sure the VW's would likely be better, but that's still an easy fix if it really bothered me.
-There's probably more tech features in the GTI that I didn't thoroughly play with enough to know the difference. I mostly just focused on how they drove.
Overall, as a car, I preferred the WRX. I know what the magazines say, but I just don't get it, unless they all only drove the manual versions of both- as I've driven the WRX's manual and didn't like it due to extremely abrupt (and heavy) clutch engagement that made it very difficult to drive smoothly. Even after a longer test drive, I never got used to the WRX's clutch, having been driving manuals for ~15 years now. I know the magazines prefer the manual for driver engagement, but it really is a rough setup that would likely make the car seem less refined that it actually is.
I preferred some of the details about the GTI, but the truth is, with almost everything that I interfaced with in order to actually drive the car, I preferred the WRX. It really is that good.
Cliff notes: GTI good. WRX better. Focus ST better than GTI (non-PP) in some ways. End result= buy WRX.
For reference, I drove both the exact same routes (went to dealers on Broadway, down the street from each other). I mixed light to light traffic, with freeway commuting, with a few corners in between. Both drives were about ~25+ minutes long or so.
It should be noted that I didn't drive the GTI with performance pack because it won't hit dealer lots for another few weeks; but for my purposes, it won't really matter. I drove a GTI SE and a WRX CVT Limited, so they were almost identically equipped- leather, moonroofs, ect.
Things I preferred about the WRX:
-Transmission. Yes, I the prefer the CVT over the GTI's DSG. It's much smoother, especially in traffic. And in S# mode, the CVT gets very aggressive and holds your "gears/ratios". I couldn't tell the difference in shifting speed between the two of them. The CVT was that quick. The DSG was much "clunkier" and seemed more confused by nature. In Sport mode, the DSG always seemed to be one gear up from where it should be for sporty driving. I preferred the CVT in every single way. I never thought I would say those words!
-Engine. Both have similar acceleration, but the WRX felt like it had more low-end torque. Maybe VW has limited torque to avoid torque steer? I have no idea. All I know is that the WRX felt like it wanted to move down low, whereas the GTI's transmission just felt confused and the motor had more of an "even pull" to it. I will report that the GTI truly had no torque steer to speak of... but then again, neither did the WRX! Truth be told, I much preferred the Focus ST's motor over the GTI's- by a big margin actually. The FoST's motor was actually pretty similar to the WRX's- both were better than the GTI's.
-Handling. I know I didn't get to drive the Performance Pack's sweet eLSD, but man, the WRX really corners much harder. Car and Driver's Lightning Lap says the WRX laps VIR almost 4 seconds faster than the GTI (3:15.5 vs 3:19.3):
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/lightning-lap-2014-results-and-sector-times-feature
^^^They didn't get to test the undoubtedly faster Performance Pack version, but still, I preferred the way the WRX dove into corners and powered out. C&D even had the Focus ST lapping faster than the GTI (3:17.6). Honestly, I even preferred the way my FoST handled over the GTI. It just wasn't that much fun. If only Ford could figure out a way to get rid of torque steer and add an auto gearbox! The WRX was far more confidence inspiring than both of them.
-The seats. Yep, I was shocked. I felt like the WRX's seats fit my body better.
-The steering wheel. The WRX's steering wheel was smaller and squishier and I preferred it. Again, I was shocked, I even preferred my FoST's steering wheel over the GTI's hardened leather unit.
-The seating position and visibility. I had better visibility in the WRX and it made it easier to drive. Simple as that.
-The "sport" functions on the WRX were on the steering wheel! They're so easy to toggle on and off- it seems like it would make passing people much easier.
-The more aggressive look of the front end. I like the GTI's overall shape, but I must still be a bit of a kid at heart, as I still like the look of the WRX's wide mouthed, baby eating hood scoop!
Overall, I really preferred the WRX and came away from the GTI feeling a bit cold. After driving the GTI again, I felt like my FoST was loads more fun. I'm sure the manual GTI would be a bit different, but the Ford has more character... and so does the WRX.
Things I preferred about the GTI:
-Headroom w/moonroof. There's really not much of a real world difference, likely less than an inch, but its something.
-Hatchback utility. The actual trunk space with the GTI's hatch cover is nearly identical, with an edge going to the WRX (surprisingly), but with the cover removed and the seats folded down there's no question the GTI has a big advantage there.
-Headroom in the back seat. I fit back there comfortably. I also fit in the back of the WRX just fine, but the GTI has more headroom. Obviously it doesn't matter with 2 small children, but if I was transporting adults more often, this might matter.
-Dashboard layout. It made a lot of sense and seemed intuitive, but the WRX's wasn't really that bad at all. Not nearly the gap between them that a magazines might suggest. And truly, in Limited trim, the WRX's interior was legitimately nice. A big step up from WRX's of old.
-Overall exterior looks. I like hatches. I prefer the WRX's front end, but the WRX's rear looks pretty bland. The VW's rear looks cleaner. The GTI also has nicer looking wheels and a slightly better looking stance IMO.
Other areas that I noted, but didn't seem to care about:
-Cabin noise. The WRX was louder, but I carried on conversations with both salesmen, and it didn't bother me in the least.
-Ride comfort. Honestly, I think the WRX might have been a bit stiffer, but it was hard to tell because it really seemed smoother than my FoST and my FoST doesn't bother me in the least. Neither were harsh enough that I would even bat an eye.
-I didn't really test the stereo in either. I turned them on, but never turned them up. I'm sure the VW's would likely be better, but that's still an easy fix if it really bothered me.
-There's probably more tech features in the GTI that I didn't thoroughly play with enough to know the difference. I mostly just focused on how they drove.
Overall, as a car, I preferred the WRX. I know what the magazines say, but I just don't get it, unless they all only drove the manual versions of both- as I've driven the WRX's manual and didn't like it due to extremely abrupt (and heavy) clutch engagement that made it very difficult to drive smoothly. Even after a longer test drive, I never got used to the WRX's clutch, having been driving manuals for ~15 years now. I know the magazines prefer the manual for driver engagement, but it really is a rough setup that would likely make the car seem less refined that it actually is.
I preferred some of the details about the GTI, but the truth is, with almost everything that I interfaced with in order to actually drive the car, I preferred the WRX. It really is that good.
Cliff notes: GTI good. WRX better. Focus ST better than GTI (non-PP) in some ways. End result= buy WRX.
AKA- [color="Blue"]arctic_blue83[/color]
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
Our wives are similar in some aspects (mine hates hatches too), but very different in others. My wife likes the extra pull of a more powerful motor (she liked her 1.8T Jetta's oomph), but that comes secondary. I tried to get her to get a WRX instead of a base Impreza but she couldn't get past the hood scoop. Even though by 2008 the hood scoop was much more subtle than the previous gen, she still hated it and refused to get one with "that ugly thing on the hood."
We've never had an SUV (other than a brief time with a 1985 K5 Blazer) and this SUV talk just started after her best work friend got a Rogue. She started talking about one of those but I shot that crap down real fast cause I have hated Rogues since they first hit the street. So I've tried to steer her toward the few SUVs that I like which are the Grand Cherokee and recently the Santa Fe. The GC might be a bit too big for her liking though but I got her to at least promise to drive one before she rules it out completely.
Either way we won't be getting anything else for a few years as her Impreza only has 61k miles on it and has had no major issues and she still likes it. But it's still fun to talk about that stuff.
We've never had an SUV (other than a brief time with a 1985 K5 Blazer) and this SUV talk just started after her best work friend got a Rogue. She started talking about one of those but I shot that crap down real fast cause I have hated Rogues since they first hit the street. So I've tried to steer her toward the few SUVs that I like which are the Grand Cherokee and recently the Santa Fe. The GC might be a bit too big for her liking though but I got her to at least promise to drive one before she rules it out completely.
Either way we won't be getting anything else for a few years as her Impreza only has 61k miles on it and has had no major issues and she still likes it. But it's still fun to talk about that stuff.
2015 Ironman Silver Veloster Turbo - Bone stock and staying that way
1990 Crystal White Miata - Beater - Bignose 1.6L Swap, Robbins Top w/Glass Window, E-Codes, Air Horns, Brembo Rotors
Former Rides:
2011 Kona Blue Mustang GT 5.0
2009 True Red Mazdaspeed3 GT
2005 Flame Red SRT-4
1990 Crystal White Miata - Beater - Bignose 1.6L Swap, Robbins Top w/Glass Window, E-Codes, Air Horns, Brembo Rotors
Former Rides:
2011 Kona Blue Mustang GT 5.0
2009 True Red Mazdaspeed3 GT
2005 Flame Red SRT-4
-
roninsoldier83
- Posts: 664
- Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:14
- Location: Lakewood, CO
- Contact:
That's funny! My little lady not only loved the hood scoop, but also really likes the super flared fenders on her WRX. But the real seller was the power and handling. I tried to get her to save a few bucks by driving less expensive cars like the brand new (at the time) Mazda 6 and Jetta GLI. She really liked the look of the Mazda 6, but after driving it back to back with the WRX, she wouldn't even consider it haha- even though it was substantially cheaper and had much better fuel economy! She liked the Jetta GLI as well, but her thought process was "for just a little bit more money, I can get the WRX with more power, AWD and better handling".
When she sold her old Spec V, it had 150k miles on it and was leaking more fluids than the Titanic! It had been paid off for years, but it was starting to require bi-monthly repairs and she was worried about not being able to get to work. So, when she got a new, much better paying job, she got the WRX... and she'll probably keep it for several years to come.
The only time she's talked about getting rid of it were on times she was sitting in traffic for 2+ hour stints. She's mentioned getting an automatic for her next car, due to her working and commuting downtown daily, but I don't think that'll happen for quite sometime. She prefers manuals by a large margin (wouldn't consider an auto a few years back), but she also doesn't drive as many miles as I do... and only working downtown and commuting in rush hours has made her consider an auto in the future ha!
If she ever goes to get another new car, I'd like to talk her into getting a CUV... not because I want a CUV, but for much more practical purposes: more ground clearance so she can stop scraping it on curbs/parking blocks! And her having something slower would be nice, so that she can stop getting pulled over so often haha! Her having a backup camera would be a nice feature as well as her backing skills are, ahem, "sub-par".
When she sold her old Spec V, it had 150k miles on it and was leaking more fluids than the Titanic! It had been paid off for years, but it was starting to require bi-monthly repairs and she was worried about not being able to get to work. So, when she got a new, much better paying job, she got the WRX... and she'll probably keep it for several years to come.
The only time she's talked about getting rid of it were on times she was sitting in traffic for 2+ hour stints. She's mentioned getting an automatic for her next car, due to her working and commuting downtown daily, but I don't think that'll happen for quite sometime. She prefers manuals by a large margin (wouldn't consider an auto a few years back), but she also doesn't drive as many miles as I do... and only working downtown and commuting in rush hours has made her consider an auto in the future ha!
If she ever goes to get another new car, I'd like to talk her into getting a CUV... not because I want a CUV, but for much more practical purposes: more ground clearance so she can stop scraping it on curbs/parking blocks! And her having something slower would be nice, so that she can stop getting pulled over so often haha! Her having a backup camera would be a nice feature as well as her backing skills are, ahem, "sub-par".
AKA- [color="Blue"]arctic_blue83[/color]
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
erod550 wrote:Our wives are similar in some aspects (mine hates hatches too), but very different in others. My wife likes the extra pull of a more powerful motor (she liked her 1.8T Jetta's oomph), but that comes secondary. I tried to get her to get a WRX instead of a base Impreza but she couldn't get past the hood scoop. Even though by 2008 the hood scoop was much more subtle than the previous gen, she still hated it and refused to get one with "that ugly thing on the hood."
We've never had an SUV (other than a brief time with a 1985 K5 Blazer) and this SUV talk just started after her best work friend got a Rogue. She started talking about one of those but I shot that crap down real fast cause I have hated Rogues since they first hit the street. So I've tried to steer her toward the few SUVs that I like which are the Grand Cherokee and recently the Santa Fe. The GC might be a bit too big for her liking though but I got her to at least promise to drive one before she rules it out completely.
Either way we won't be getting anything else for a few years as her Impreza only has 61k miles on it and has had no major issues and she still likes it. But it's still fun to talk about that stuff.
Sounds like she was asking for a FMIC with an aftermarket hood to me.
If you go GC, you going to go all in on the SRT8? Those things are unreal.
Ronin, since you've already had WRX and STI, what keeps you from pushing to the STI this time? Price differential?
-
roninsoldier83
- Posts: 664
- Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:14
- Location: Lakewood, CO
- Contact:
Shadowden wrote:Ronin, since you've already had WRX and STI, what keeps you from pushing to the STI this time? Price differential?
A few things:
-Due to the excessive amount of daily commuting I do in traffic, my next daily driver will be an automatic. I'll eventually get another weekend/project car that's a stick, but I want my daily to be an auto. The STI doesn't come in an auto.
-There is a fairly substantial price difference between the two of them that I couldn't really justify.
-The new FA20 motor in the WRX gets substantially better fuel economy than the old EJ25 in the STI. Based on my calculations, the STI about cost at least an extra $50/month more to drive, just in fuel. Not a huge number, but yet again, helping to make the WRX a much cheaper proposition.
-I didn't really find the WRX's ride to be that rough. It was firm, but nothing that would wear me down on my daily commute. The STI is rough. It is considerably firmer, to the point where most of the reviews I've read have said the same thing- it would be hard to live with on a daily basis.
-The foot high wing..... I used to own a 2006 STI when I was younger (I think I sold it around 2008-2009-ish?). I didn't care for the wing then and considered going wingless on a weekly basis. I'm now a 31 year old civil servant with 2 kids and I'm not a big fan of the boy-racer look. I'm hoping that the more "bland" styling of the 2015 WRX will help keep the side-ways hat wearing kids away. Getting revved at by some "mad tyte street racer" who has something to prove, while I'm on my way to take my son to kindergarten, isn't exactly my cup of tea. The new WRX looks more understated and grown up than previous editions, whereas the STI- well, not so much.
Overall, the WRX suits me better than the STI.
AKA- [color="Blue"]arctic_blue83[/color]
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
-
roninsoldier83
- Posts: 664
- Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:14
- Location: Lakewood, CO
- Contact:
VW officially announced pricing for the upcoming Golf R- $35,595 plus $895 destination & delivery for a total of $36,490. Link: http://www.autoblog.com/2014/11/24/2015-volkswagen-golf-r-review-video/
^^^Comes standard with 4-doors and DSG. Apparently it won't come with a manual until 2016. Until then, DSG only.
Either way, a new WRX with Premium Package and CVT (CVT only comes with Premium & Limited packages) stickers for $30,490. Plus, since its not limited production, Subaru dealers are more eager to deal on them, so the real world price will be lower- as VW dealers didn't want to hardly deal at all on previous Golf R's. Either way, I couldn't justify the extra $6000+ for the R over a WRX. Especially when I preferred the WRX's CVT over the GTI's DSG.
Best quote from the Autoblog article in reference to the Golf R and STI: "I'll simply weigh in by saying both are great to drive, and both are outshone overall by the sparkling value offered by their lesser-powered siblings (WRX and GTI)."
^^^Agreed.
EDIT: Scratch the $36k pricing.... on VW's website, they're now stating the upcoming Golf R will start at $39,090! http://www.vw.com/models/golf-r/
^^^Good luck on that one VW. Many people have trouble shelling out $25k for a modified Golf (i.e. GTI). For $39k, well, thanks, but seriously, no thanks.
RE-EDIT: Apparently their own website is incorrect. After reading the press release, the standard "well-equipped" Golf R (with DSG only- initially) will cost $36,595. The "fully equipped" model will start at $39,090 and will also come equipped DCC adaptive damping, Navigation, Fender audio system, 19" wheels (vs 18" standard) and front/rear Park Distance Control. Funny, I saw no mention of a moon-roof; not that it matters much.
^^^Comes standard with 4-doors and DSG. Apparently it won't come with a manual until 2016. Until then, DSG only.
Either way, a new WRX with Premium Package and CVT (CVT only comes with Premium & Limited packages) stickers for $30,490. Plus, since its not limited production, Subaru dealers are more eager to deal on them, so the real world price will be lower- as VW dealers didn't want to hardly deal at all on previous Golf R's. Either way, I couldn't justify the extra $6000+ for the R over a WRX. Especially when I preferred the WRX's CVT over the GTI's DSG.
Best quote from the Autoblog article in reference to the Golf R and STI: "I'll simply weigh in by saying both are great to drive, and both are outshone overall by the sparkling value offered by their lesser-powered siblings (WRX and GTI)."
^^^Agreed.
EDIT: Scratch the $36k pricing.... on VW's website, they're now stating the upcoming Golf R will start at $39,090! http://www.vw.com/models/golf-r/
^^^Good luck on that one VW. Many people have trouble shelling out $25k for a modified Golf (i.e. GTI). For $39k, well, thanks, but seriously, no thanks.
RE-EDIT: Apparently their own website is incorrect. After reading the press release, the standard "well-equipped" Golf R (with DSG only- initially) will cost $36,595. The "fully equipped" model will start at $39,090 and will also come equipped DCC adaptive damping, Navigation, Fender audio system, 19" wheels (vs 18" standard) and front/rear Park Distance Control. Funny, I saw no mention of a moon-roof; not that it matters much.
AKA- [color="Blue"]arctic_blue83[/color]
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
-
roninsoldier83
- Posts: 664
- Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:14
- Location: Lakewood, CO
- Contact:
So, I had a conversation with a buddy of mine the other day about the WRX vs GTI. I mentioned that I liked the WRX better and he asked me a simple question: “when you drove the GTI, did you have it in 'normal', 'sport' or 'individual' mode?”.... I guess I didn't realize you could manually adjust the steering weight, throttle response and transmission aggressiveness with the click of a couple buttons. Apparently, the car will also stay in whatever “driver” mode you set it to every time you get into the car- so its a set it and forget it kind of thing. I had a bit of free time today after I dropped my son off, so I figured why not take the GTI for another spin.
Last time I drove a GTI DSG 2-door SE package (moonroof + leather, ect), even though that wasn't what I had in mind, but I figured they should all drive about the same. To clarify, when I went to purchase one of these cars, I wanted either a GTI S package (plaid cloth seats) or WRX Premium package (also cloth seats). Cloth seats are generally preferable due to the fact that in the summer, I tend to sweat like a whore in church. The fact that the GTI S doesn't come with a moonroof is also a plus (I prefer extra headroom as I have a long torso), whereas the WRX w/CVT has to come with a moonroof.
Today I drove a 2015 GTI 4-door S DSG.... and the first thing I did when I got into the car was set the steering and engine to “Sport” mode. It actually made a very noticeable difference. I drove the car for a very long 45 minute test drive- I almost felt bad for the salesman! Part of my drive was in stop and go traffic and the other part of it we actually managed to find about a 1 mile stretch of extremely windy, unpopulated road. My impressions of this car were much better than they were the last time I drove one.
-With the steering set to Sport, the wheel felt heavier and seemed to offer more feedback. I still prefer the wheels in the WRX and FoST, but the actual steering itself, I preferred in the GTI. Even while pushing the car in corners, or taking off quickly from a stop, the car still exhibited no torque steer whatsoever... other car companies that make sporty FWD cars should really do whatever it is that VW has done to get rid of torque steer.
-The plaid cloth seats felt more comfortable than the leather units I drove in the other day. Very supportive and I slid right in them. They reminded me of my old GTI's cloth seats- they were pretty much perfect. The GTI's seats in cloth feel better than the WRX's seats and much better than my non-Recaro FoST seats.
-With the engine set to Sport and putting the transmission into “S”, this car was very quick! Throttle response was excellent and the car had tons of low-end torque! It actually felt torqueier than my FoST and faster as well. Very smooth motor when its running well. Maybe this car's ECU had just “adjusted” to our altitude & compensated?!? Maybe the Sport button made that much of a difference?!? Maybe there's just that much variance in VW's due to build quality?!? Who knows.. all I know is that it felt stronger and better connected than the GTI I drove the other day. It also felt like it might have been a tick quicker than the WRX CVT I drove the other day.
-The transmission in “S” mode did a MUCH better job of holding gears! Through the windy road I mentioned, I honestly don't think I could have done a better job shifting myself with a manual. I never would have thought one little button would make so much of a difference?!? Putting the tranny in “D” for stop and go traffic, it was fine. There was a slight amount of tranny lag from a dead stop- I'm assuming this might have something to do with the tranny slipping one of its clutches from a dig, but it didn't really bother me. I was fairly relaxed in traffic. In the corners, it shifted faster than I could possibly hope to... I didn't use launch control, even though the salesman mentioned it a couple times. I'm sure it works, but I really don't care.
-I pushed the car in the corners... and it was a riot! Very fun car to pitch around, especially with the tranny keeping it in the meat of its powerband. This car didn't have the Performance Pack (still not available for anything other than ordering directly from the factory). I'm sure the Performance Pack would be better and it would definitely be an option I would want... but even the non-PP version is very fun. The WRX powered out harder (to be expected) and I'm sure its faster in the corners; but the GTI felt very light and fun, while still being rock solid stable on the freeway. In the corners, it feels like a light-weight sports car... on the freeway, it felt like a German car with a much longer wheelbase than it actually has. Very stable and relaxing on the freeway. It was also very quiet at speed. Bravo VW.
Overall, I had a MUCH more favorable impression of this GTI vs the last one I drove. I'm assuming it had a lot to do with the Driver modes and I'm assuming the last car I drove was set to “Normal”. I finally see what all the magazines are talking about. It almost irritated me that the car wasn't automatically set to “Sport” for test drives, as this is the way the car should come from the factory. Although I can see reasons why someone would leave the engine in Normal: fuel economy and possibly lighter throttle response in the snow.
I now partially regret driving the GTI again.... before, I had my mind set on the WRX. Now, things are back in the GTI's favor. I guess I'm back where I started: I'll see how the FWD FoST does throughout the rest of the winter in the snow/ice, and I'll go from there.
Sorry for yet another short novel!
Cheers,
-Brandon
Last time I drove a GTI DSG 2-door SE package (moonroof + leather, ect), even though that wasn't what I had in mind, but I figured they should all drive about the same. To clarify, when I went to purchase one of these cars, I wanted either a GTI S package (plaid cloth seats) or WRX Premium package (also cloth seats). Cloth seats are generally preferable due to the fact that in the summer, I tend to sweat like a whore in church. The fact that the GTI S doesn't come with a moonroof is also a plus (I prefer extra headroom as I have a long torso), whereas the WRX w/CVT has to come with a moonroof.
Today I drove a 2015 GTI 4-door S DSG.... and the first thing I did when I got into the car was set the steering and engine to “Sport” mode. It actually made a very noticeable difference. I drove the car for a very long 45 minute test drive- I almost felt bad for the salesman! Part of my drive was in stop and go traffic and the other part of it we actually managed to find about a 1 mile stretch of extremely windy, unpopulated road. My impressions of this car were much better than they were the last time I drove one.
-With the steering set to Sport, the wheel felt heavier and seemed to offer more feedback. I still prefer the wheels in the WRX and FoST, but the actual steering itself, I preferred in the GTI. Even while pushing the car in corners, or taking off quickly from a stop, the car still exhibited no torque steer whatsoever... other car companies that make sporty FWD cars should really do whatever it is that VW has done to get rid of torque steer.
-The plaid cloth seats felt more comfortable than the leather units I drove in the other day. Very supportive and I slid right in them. They reminded me of my old GTI's cloth seats- they were pretty much perfect. The GTI's seats in cloth feel better than the WRX's seats and much better than my non-Recaro FoST seats.
-With the engine set to Sport and putting the transmission into “S”, this car was very quick! Throttle response was excellent and the car had tons of low-end torque! It actually felt torqueier than my FoST and faster as well. Very smooth motor when its running well. Maybe this car's ECU had just “adjusted” to our altitude & compensated?!? Maybe the Sport button made that much of a difference?!? Maybe there's just that much variance in VW's due to build quality?!? Who knows.. all I know is that it felt stronger and better connected than the GTI I drove the other day. It also felt like it might have been a tick quicker than the WRX CVT I drove the other day.
-The transmission in “S” mode did a MUCH better job of holding gears! Through the windy road I mentioned, I honestly don't think I could have done a better job shifting myself with a manual. I never would have thought one little button would make so much of a difference?!? Putting the tranny in “D” for stop and go traffic, it was fine. There was a slight amount of tranny lag from a dead stop- I'm assuming this might have something to do with the tranny slipping one of its clutches from a dig, but it didn't really bother me. I was fairly relaxed in traffic. In the corners, it shifted faster than I could possibly hope to... I didn't use launch control, even though the salesman mentioned it a couple times. I'm sure it works, but I really don't care.
-I pushed the car in the corners... and it was a riot! Very fun car to pitch around, especially with the tranny keeping it in the meat of its powerband. This car didn't have the Performance Pack (still not available for anything other than ordering directly from the factory). I'm sure the Performance Pack would be better and it would definitely be an option I would want... but even the non-PP version is very fun. The WRX powered out harder (to be expected) and I'm sure its faster in the corners; but the GTI felt very light and fun, while still being rock solid stable on the freeway. In the corners, it feels like a light-weight sports car... on the freeway, it felt like a German car with a much longer wheelbase than it actually has. Very stable and relaxing on the freeway. It was also very quiet at speed. Bravo VW.
Overall, I had a MUCH more favorable impression of this GTI vs the last one I drove. I'm assuming it had a lot to do with the Driver modes and I'm assuming the last car I drove was set to “Normal”. I finally see what all the magazines are talking about. It almost irritated me that the car wasn't automatically set to “Sport” for test drives, as this is the way the car should come from the factory. Although I can see reasons why someone would leave the engine in Normal: fuel economy and possibly lighter throttle response in the snow.
I now partially regret driving the GTI again.... before, I had my mind set on the WRX. Now, things are back in the GTI's favor. I guess I'm back where I started: I'll see how the FWD FoST does throughout the rest of the winter in the snow/ice, and I'll go from there.
Sorry for yet another short novel!
Cheers,
-Brandon
AKA- [color="Blue"]arctic_blue83[/color]
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
-
roninsoldier83
- Posts: 664
- Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:14
- Location: Lakewood, CO
- Contact:
Any thoughts on the transmissions in both cars? Aside from the "common sense" answer: they both suck because they're not manuals! They both have paddle shifters that are very responsive, but aside from that, they couldn't be more different! The Subaru CVT vs Volkswagen DSG (DCT) debate:
CVT Pros:
-They did a pretty good job with this one, as it really mimics a quick shifting auto in S#.
-Infinite gear ratios mean potentially better fuel economy and the S# mode brings 8 "ratios" to the table for sporty driving.
-Allegedly, there's no maintenance needed on Subaru's CVT transmission, or at least not until around the 100k mile mark.
-It has smoother starts from a stop than the DSG due to having a traditional automatic-like torque converter.
-Subaru's CVT chain design is said to be more reliable than other belt type CVT's on the market.
CVT Cons:
-Questionable reliability. CVT's aren't know to last as long as manuals. Adding a torque converter (vs clutch) into the mix doesn't help things.
-Less engaging. It "shifts" quickly, but its not really shifting, just changing ratios. There's no real "thump" when shifting.
-Drivetrain losses. Its not as efficient as a manual or a DSG. As such, its also rated to have a 2-3mph slower trap speed in the 1/4 mile vs its manual counterpart.
-"Launch control". Apparently it has launch control, but its basically just brake torquing around ~2500rpm and is said to be very laggy and not very fun (or fast). Much slower 0-60mph vs manual (4.8 seconds for MT WRX vs 5.5 for CVT WRX according to Car and Driver).
-Rubberband effect. If you use launch control on the WRX it goes into a "maximum acceleration mode" where it acts like a CVT- holding RPM at a steady state (around 6k rpm) as you accelerate. CVT's feel a bit odd when they accelerate like this. Although it might also be the fastest way to accelerate in a CVT...
-The chain (no belt in Subaru's CVT) may not take as much power as a manual/DSG. To date, this is one of the highest powered factory CVT's I've seen (other than a couple of V6 Nissan's). People are very wary of the CVT taking more power than stock if modded (not that I plan on modding it).
-This version of Subaru's CVT is very untested. The CVT's in their naturally aspirated cars have been around for a while and seem to do alright. But they only started making this "higher power" CVT last year with the launch of the new Forester XT.
CVT Pros:
-They did a pretty good job with this one, as it really mimics a quick shifting auto in S#.
-Infinite gear ratios mean potentially better fuel economy and the S# mode brings 8 "ratios" to the table for sporty driving.
-Allegedly, there's no maintenance needed on Subaru's CVT transmission, or at least not until around the 100k mile mark.
-It has smoother starts from a stop than the DSG due to having a traditional automatic-like torque converter.
-Subaru's CVT chain design is said to be more reliable than other belt type CVT's on the market.
CVT Cons:
-Questionable reliability. CVT's aren't know to last as long as manuals. Adding a torque converter (vs clutch) into the mix doesn't help things.
-Less engaging. It "shifts" quickly, but its not really shifting, just changing ratios. There's no real "thump" when shifting.
-Drivetrain losses. Its not as efficient as a manual or a DSG. As such, its also rated to have a 2-3mph slower trap speed in the 1/4 mile vs its manual counterpart.
-"Launch control". Apparently it has launch control, but its basically just brake torquing around ~2500rpm and is said to be very laggy and not very fun (or fast). Much slower 0-60mph vs manual (4.8 seconds for MT WRX vs 5.5 for CVT WRX according to Car and Driver).
-Rubberband effect. If you use launch control on the WRX it goes into a "maximum acceleration mode" where it acts like a CVT- holding RPM at a steady state (around 6k rpm) as you accelerate. CVT's feel a bit odd when they accelerate like this. Although it might also be the fastest way to accelerate in a CVT...
-The chain (no belt in Subaru's CVT) may not take as much power as a manual/DSG. To date, this is one of the highest powered factory CVT's I've seen (other than a couple of V6 Nissan's). People are very wary of the CVT taking more power than stock if modded (not that I plan on modding it).
-This version of Subaru's CVT is very untested. The CVT's in their naturally aspirated cars have been around for a while and seem to do alright. But they only started making this "higher power" CVT last year with the launch of the new Forester XT.
AKA- [color="Blue"]arctic_blue83[/color]
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
Mine: 2015 Subaru WRX
Hers: 2013 Subaru WRX
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 115 guests