Print

[MileHighAssassin]

Sweet! 

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=10&article_id=8010

[formulanerd]

nice!

i cant wait for the .:R20

[gump1119]

R20 is gay.  I'll buy another R when they put a VR6 and a 6-speed back together again.  But to each his own...

[.:Reaper]

R20 is gay.  I'll buy another R when they put a VR6 and a 6-speed back together again.  But to each his own...

  X2

every tom dic and harry has a goddamned 4 banger turbo.....and not to mention the R20 WONT BE AWD.....

[RSR32]

nice!

i cant wait for the .:R20

 

[RSR32]

R20 is gay.  I'll buy another R when they put a VR6 and a 6-speed back together again.  But to each his own...

Man, we agree.

A first!

and is it just me or is it looking even MORE like a honda SI?

I mean seriously.   Every time a new car comes out, makes me like my mk4 even more.....

[Smokestack]

R20 is gay.  I'll buy another R when they put a VR6 and a 6-speed back together again.  But to each his own...

  X2

every tom dic and harry has a goddamned 4 banger turbo.....and not to mention the R20 WONT BE AWD.....

Where does that come from? The R20 is an AWD turbo four. Basically a Volkswagen badged S3.

The VR6 is being ditched like any manufacturer does with engines that have run their life. It's far from a bad engine, but it's old and newer tech is easily available in other engines that get better mileage. In today's market of fuel efficiency, designing a 6 cylinder motor for a compact car is stupid, especially just for one model. Any car that requires the displacement of a 6 cylinder has the engine bay room to accommodate a typical v6, which is cheaper to design and make. You can think of the VR in the Golf/Jettas as being replaced by the 2.5 I5, which is a hell of a motor for just a base engine with its own sexy, unique exhaust note. I expect to see that motor evolve much like the 2.8 VR did.

[scurvy_bandit]

R20 is gay.  I'll buy another R when they put a VR6 and a 6-speed back together again.  But to each his own...

  X2

every tom dic and harry has a goddamned 4 banger turbo.....and not to mention the R20 WONT BE AWD.....

Where does that come from? The R20 is an AWD turbo four. Basically a Volkswagen badged S3.

The VR6 is being ditched like any manufacturer does with engines that have run their life. It's far from a bad engine, but it's old and newer tech is easily available in other engines that get better mileage. In today's market of fuel efficiency, designing a 6 cylinder motor for a compact car is stupid, especially just for one model. Any car that requires the displacement of a 6 cylinder has the engine bay room to accommodate a typical v6, which is cheaper to design and make. You can think of the VR in the Golf/Jettas as being replaced by the 2.5 I5, which is a hell of a motor for just a base engine with its own sexy, unique exhaust note. I expect to see that motor evolve much like the 2.8 VR did.

Imagine what the muscle car guys felt like when their mustang got the 4 cyl turbo. 

[Barry]

Yeah... but the Mustang took a shitty dive in the 70's WAY before the SVO 4cyl turbo came out... plus, the 5.0L in the early 80's was still way underpowered due to the continuing recovery from the oil crisis and then new emission laws that were kicking out... The turbo 4cyl was a fresh start, and those muscle car guys new it...

[formulanerd]

Where does that come from? The R20 is an AWD turbo four. Basically a Volkswagen badged S3.

The VR6 is being ditched like any manufacturer does with engines that have run their life. It's far from a bad engine, but it's old and newer tech is easily available in other engines that get better mileage. In today's market of fuel efficiency, designing a 6 cylinder motor for a compact car is stupid, especially just for one model. Any car that requires the displacement of a 6 cylinder has the engine bay room to accommodate a typical v6, which is cheaper to design and make. You can think of the VR in the Golf/Jettas as being replaced by the 2.5 I5, which is a hell of a motor for just a base engine with its own sexy, unique exhaust note. I expect to see that motor evolve much like the 2.8 VR did.

finally, a post that makes sense.


and yes, the 2.5l is crazy.... just look @ the TTRS

there is also an R42 (dumb name) which is an R20 with the turbo 2.5..... i dont know what the pricing will be, but i'm guessing its more than anyone wants to pay for a golf.... it's going to be insane, 340+ hp (though i'm 99% positive it wont be stateside)

and i dont know why people keep saying the r20 isn't all wheel drive... of course it is. and theres no way in hell they'll make the mistake of DSG only again..... only thing i hope for is the 5 door... but i'd almost guarantee that the US only gets the 3 door.

[Smokestack]

Imagine what the muscle car guys felt like when their mustang got the 4 cyl turbo. 

That little 2.3 turbo 4 popper still surprises GT mustangs. During its production time it was faster than the 5.0 GTs that were being made. It's downfall was the fact that people couldn't wrap their head around the idea of a 4 cylinder being faster than a V8. Most peoples experiences with 4 cylinders were with the anemic pintos and vegas and the fast cars were the cameros, 442s, GTOs and mustangs with big block v8s.

[VWO4L]

R20 is gay.  I'll buy another R when they put a VR6 and a 6-speed back together again.  But to each his own...

  X2

every tom dic and harry has a goddamned 4 banger turbo.....and not to mention the R20 WONT BE AWD.....

Where does that come from? The R20 is an AWD turbo four. Basically a Volkswagen badged S3.

The VR6 is being ditched like any manufacturer does with engines that have run their life. It's far from a bad engine, but it's old and newer tech is easily available in other engines that get better mileage. In today's market of fuel efficiency, designing a 6 cylinder motor for a compact car is stupid, especially just for one model. Any car that requires the displacement of a 6 cylinder has the engine bay room to accommodate a typical v6, which is cheaper to design and make. You can think of the VR in the Golf/Jettas as being replaced by the 2.5 I5, which is a hell of a motor for just a base engine with its own sexy, unique exhaust note. I expect to see that motor evolve much like the 2.8 VR did.

I agree with your comments on the VR6.  it's a cool-ass engine, but just doesn't make sense in a compact car in today's climate.  With the 3.6L VR6 being the only one left in production, I doubt well see any more VR6 powered Golfs or Jettas from VW for a while, if ever again.

As far as the AWD vs. FWD R20, the jury is still out on that one.  At least autoblog thinks so anyhow.
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/04/01/spy-shots-volkswagen-golf-r20-snapped-on-the-ring/

Those ponies should be funneled to the front tires (not through all four contact patches as with the R32) through either a standard six-speed manual or VW's excellent DSG dual-clutch gearbox.

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/02/09/rendered-speculation-volkswagen-r20t-details-emerge-ahead-of-ge/

It would make the R20 a lot cheaper than the R32's ever were and would drop it into the market occupied by the MS3 and Cobalt SS which both have FWD and are simialrly powered.  But, that makes you wonder what the 200HP GTI would be there for?  Considering though that the links above also claim a 0-60 time of around 5 seconds, I think it would have to be AWD to pull that off with 270hp, especially if FWD would be the alternative.  We'll just have to see what happens.

Why not just bump the GTI up to the 270HP and then offer the R20 with AWD and maybe 300HP?  Keep the GTI price similar just with a more powerful engine and have the R20 to fight the WRX and Rallisport Lancer with a price under $30K.

[formulanerd]

Why not just bump the GTI up to the 270HP and then offer the R20 with AWD and maybe 300HP?  Keep the GTI price similar just with a more powerful engine and have the R20 to fight the WRX and Rallisport Lancer with a price under $30K.

you have to look at the big picture, they have too many models and other brands, they all have to fit in there respective places in the lineup.

the R20 WILL be AWD.... it's basically a TTS or an S3..... it's the same reason we'll never see the S3...... the R42 is the same way, it'll be a golf based TTRS, same turbo 2.5, same hp...

[VWO4L]

Why not just bump the GTI up to the 270HP and then offer the R20 with AWD and maybe 300HP?  Keep the GTI price similar just with a more powerful engine and have the R20 to fight the WRX and Rallisport Lancer with a price under $30K.

you have to look at the big picture, they have too many models and other brands, they all have to fit in there respective places in the lineup.

the R20 WILL be AWD.... it's basically a TTS or an S3..... it's the same reason we'll never see the S3...... the R42 is the same way, it'll be a golf based TTRS, same turbo 2.5, same hp...

I agree with you.  In context with the whole paragraph above it, you see my point.  I'm saying IF they do decide to make the R20 FWD(which I don't think is true despite what autoblog says) then that makes the GTI pointless since a FWD R20 would basically just be a chipped GTI, with admitedly even a bit more power than that, but you get the idea.  Without AWD to set it apart, what makes it different than a GTI, especially enough to warrant a different name?  That's a main reason why I think the R20 will be AWD.

As far as the MK6 GTI though, I am a bit confused that they haven't bumped up the power on the 2.0T.  For the Mk4's(and even the Audi 1.8T's) the power was bumped up over time.  We started with the 150hp 1.8T in the GTI and then moved up to the 180hp version.  Seems that for the Mk6, we'd have seen a similar increase in power I would have hoped.  They did bump it to 210hp, but I hear the US isn't going to get that increase and we'll still have the 200hp version.  Maybe it will still happen before they are actually released, but I'm just not seeing it so far.  200hp just really isn't competitive in the segment any longer, it was barely competitive when the Mk5's were released, but it's even less so now.

[RSR32]

of course it is. and theres no way in hell they'll make the mistake of DSG only again.....

hmm...actually, dont be so sure of that.

[MileHighAssassin]

R20 will not be AWD... too bad.

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/news/erlkoenig-vw-golf-r20-der-top-golf-r20-mit-270-ps-kommt-2009-1092568.html

Or for those that can't read German:

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.auto-motor-und-sport.de%2Fnews%2Ferlkoenig-vw-golf-r20-der-top-golf-r20-mit-270-ps-kommt-2009-1092568.html&sl=de&tl=en&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

VOLKSWAGEN gulf R20: All wheel adé Contrary to its predecessor, the VOLKSWAGEN gulf R32 with the 3,2-Liter-V6-Motor, the R20 is to be content with clearly fewer gasolines. The two-litre aggregate with a manual six-course transmission, a DSG is coupled is possible as option. However the gulf R20 will be only offered as Fronttriebler. The all wheel configuration well-known from the gulf R32 is too heavy. However the electronic XDS Sperrdifferent ial is to provide as in the gulf GTI for an adequate traction.

[VWO4L]

Well then, I want to see them pull off a 5sec 0-60 run with that 270hp FWD car then.  The 263hp MS3 barely cracks 6sec with similar power.

[.:Reaper]

yeah the R20 is being produced at a plant where they dont do the AWD set ups

[Smokestack]

Ok, that makes no sense. WTF is the point of the GTI then? The GTI is the performance FWD over the Golf/Rabbit. Why give it a 60hp bump and call it a different model while still keeping the GTI around?

yeah the R20 is being produced at a plant where they dont do the AWD set ups

The AWD setup isn't that special in the mkv, and since the mk6 is a different looking mk5 it should be the same. The AWD setup is a different rear subframe and a different transmission connected with a drive shaft and an extra wire going to the ABS controller and CAN bus. The body/frame is the same.

[RSR32]

best thing about this i  wont have to hear or read anymore R20 r20 R20 r20 r20

from formulanerd dood.

lol

[formulanerd]

lol, i refuse to believe, 1 or 2 single shitty sources that don't know what they're writing about.... i can pull up 20 other sources that show differently.

the fact of the matter is, nobody will really know till may.

[MileHighAssassin]

I would love to see a few of these 20 sources you have... dated after the article  I posted.


Not trying to hate, I would love AWD and turbo but I don't think they will do it.

[Luckyy]

I get 40mpg highway with my vr6. Better than any of this new crap.  mkv was maybe aesthetically acceptable but this mkvi looks horrid. The auto really is being un pimped!

[Barry]

I wouldnt trust the trip computer on a boosted VR, much less even a mildly modified VR... the trip comuter in my mkII turbo VR used to say I was getting 40 MPG too, but for some reason I only got 200 miles to a tank 

[Luckyy]

Meh thats based on odometer + gas receipts, it has more to do with a quaifed custom 02j/a hybrid than anything else. 2100 rpm @ 80mph 

I agree that 5.0 V8's aren't exactly economical, but there is something about having a big fat vr6 in a little r32 that really makes it an .:R.

[Barry]

Meh thats based on odometer + gas receipts, it has more to do with a quaifed custom 02j/a hybrid than anything else. 2100 rpm @ 80mph 

That would explain it then... I wonder... what does your trip computer say you are getting, like 70 MPG? LOL

I agree that 5.0 V8's aren't exactly economical, but there is something about having a big fat vr6 in a little r32 that really makes it an .:R.

That must be referencing something from the very begining of this thread... the 5.0L's that came in the Mustangs were no way what so ever economical... The motors that came in the LTD's, Crown Vic's, Bronco's, etc etc were borderline economical... I refuse to recognize any Ford that was made in between the years of 1969 and 1982 with a running horse logo as a Mustang