Jump to content

andy_r

Members
  • Content Count

    309
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

andy_r last won the day on October 4 2016

andy_r had the most liked content!

About andy_r

  • Rank
    Serious R Addict

Recent Profile Visitors

1,050 profile views
  1. The Golf's a lovely car, but having moved within walking distance of the office, it feels wasteful to have it sat on the drive as much as it is. I don't want to drop to a beater, but I'm looking into swapping for a S/H Fiesta ST (the new 3cyl one) or Hyundai i30N towards the back end of this year.
  2. No different to the 7R which sends 10-15% of the torque through the rears virtually all the time anyway.
  3. I don't think the S3 has that option. Mechnically it works the same as the Golf, but as I said, launching in either car will lock the rears to the fronts at least initially, rather than waiting for slip.
  4. I stand to be corrected, but I'd be amazed if you'd managed to permanently lock the 'diff' 100%. You may have increased the bias / strength of it, but 100% is a really, really bad idea on a road car. EDIT: Consider me amazed then. It does look like you can force it in software but the first result I found was a guy who did thes and destroyed his haldex system, presumably for the reasons outlined previously.
  5. As I understand it, it wouldn't be wonderful, it'd be terrible. Locking the fronts to the rears at all speeds would cause all kinds of issues as the wheels wouldn't cover exactly the same distance and you get all manner of flex in the chassi and poor handling at the wheels. IIRC when you launch, it looks everything 100% together up to 30mph but reverts to normal behaviour after that speed (i.e. only clutching in the rears when it either senses slip, or expects slip).
  6. It's a pain in the arse, but it's not comparable to the Mondeo. The Mondeo (I'm guessing) literally only uses the rear brakes when you press the brake pedal. The Golf uses the rear brakes constantly under hard driving, even when you're not braking to trim the line of the car. It means they can get a hell of a lot more wear than you'd expect.
  7. Very interesting video comparing the PS4, PS4S and Cup 2s: I was all set to get PS4Ss to replace my OE tyres but given that I won't be on track any time soon I might go with the PS4s as the difference is so marginal.
  8. Ah yes, car forums.... OP: My wife doesn't like the seats, are there other options we could choose? Everyone: The seats are comfortable. FWIW I don't think there are any options on the shape / size, only materials.
  9. My front and rear discs and pads were 100% worn within about 10,000 miles though that included two track days. IIRC it's not just about how heavy a braker you are, but also how quickly / aggressively you corner. I believe the XDS system will brake individual wheels quite a lot in order to prevent understeer and this is a pretty heavy car.
  10. Which is better for VW's bottom line: Running in hard - All cars make at least 300bhp, 0% of cars burn oil, 1% of cars go pop or Running in as per the manual - All cars make 290bhp, 100% of cars burn oil, 0% of cars go pop FIgures are obviously made up for the example, but the cost of a warrantied engine replacement for VW is huge so it's in their interests to minimise it as much as possible. Oil burning is a non-event for them so the second option basically costs them nothing extra, the former costs them a fair number of replacement engines. As the end user though, would you rather follow the manual for maximum safety or take the risk of ending up your engine going pop for reduced oil consumption and a tiny bit more power? Fundamentally have you ever heard of anyone having a warranty claim refused due to not running it in properly (not counting exotica)? A lot of people here seem to think that manufacturer's guidance is what's best for the consumer when their guidance is in their own best interest. Usually that coincides, but not always. Sure, the engineers probably know 'better' than most of us, but they are writing the manual to help VW's bottom line, not to ensure you get every last bhp out of your car.
  11. People in large numbers are essentially idiots and accounting for these idiots, and demonstrators / staff cars etc., a huge number of Rs will be hammered from day one. If running in were that important, failure to run in properly would cause mechanical issues and warranty claims galore, costing VW lots of money. If that were the case, given the level of computing power in the car, they'd surely implement a fixed running-in map that had a hard rev limit and a hard boost limit to ensure that you couldn't bork the car. This could then be gradually relaxed over the first 1000 miles. With the digital dash they could even have a dynamic rev limit shown on the display that gradually increased over time. The fact that they don't do any of this trivial work suggests that they really don't consider this to be an issue in any way.
  12. Mine was run round the dial as soon as the oil reached temperature (about 5 miles IIRC) and then given several hours of hard driving up and down the gears. In nearly 20k miles and two track days it hasn't burnt a drop of oil or had any mechanical issues.
  13. But is the GTI tuned, out of the factory, to make full use of super unleaded? If it isn't, then I wouldn't expect to feel a difference. The R is designed to be run on super so using anything less will necessarily affect the performance.
  14. IIRC the Haldex doesn't engage if you have huge steering lock on (e.g. making a very sharp low speed turn), though I stand to be corrected.
  15. Prior to the R I had an Audi A3 184 TDI, which is basically the GTD with a different badge. I've clocked both cars on the same bit of private road for some in gear times: 30-50 R (1.6s), 184 (2.9s) 40-60 R (2.0s), 184 (3.5s) 50-70 R (2.4s), 184 (3.7s) 60-80 R (2.8s), 184 (5.1s) So it's not even close on in-gear times either with the GTD taking at least 50% longer to gain speed.
×
×
  • Create New...