Topic: First Drive: 2016 Volkswagen Golf R

[Noto]

Hmm. VW dealers willing to deal on a new R? And it might be my last chance to get one without a sunroof?

Might have to swing by my local dealer to have a chat. But I'd still have a 2010 GTI to get rid of. Resale has probably taken a hit, too, which would offset any savings to be had on a new one. 

...or you could trade in the Yukon and be a dual-VW family

[life851]

To me, the R is a no-brainer over the GTI, but I am disappointed that there's no moonroof in the R...I didn't know that until Johnny pointed it out.

I'm the opposite, very happy about that! Adding weight to the worst spot of a car "that's already heavy".. + one less thing to break/leak lol

life851 - did you happen to get an insurance quote?  The reason I ask is there was a major difference in premium for my Golf R and the WRX STi, we're talking $100 per month difference.

Also the Ford RS's price here in Canada included the winter tires and rims, so you should have factored that into your decision (not sure if you can get a insurance quote).

I took a trip a couple of weekends ago on a 3 hour highway/secondary road (averaged at least 100 km/hr) and the round trip fuel economy was 7.3l/100 km.  Not sure what an STi would get but I'm guessing it would have probably been a couple liters more per 100 kms.  My mostly city driving average is around 8.7l/100 km so that's not too bad either.

The Golf R might not be for everyone, it's not as hard core as the STi, won't be as fast as the Focus RS more than likely, but there's a lot of value when you factor in all expenses.  Plus it's a much better place to be in everyday driving.

Nah, my insurance is dirt cheap... 4 Cars  + House + business + umbrella policy.. No tickets or points, 1 or 2 claims between all of them... over 10 years lol

Actually financially speaking.. the RS is the worst deal... Getting a bit technical here...
7K premium over the golf R... actually in my case since the deal I got 9k premium..
Winter Rims/Tire - 1.5k MAX.. so that leaves me with 7.5k....

You can do a lot to a car for 7.5K, more importantly.. unless your paying cash... you are also financing or leasing those tires at a higher rate

Well I was at the track, a few months met a guy with a 15 sti.. we decided to do a little mileage competition... Obviously this is no way 100% accurate but it gives you an idea..
My car 2900lbs, fwd, 290hp, 320ftlbs .. hankook rs3
sti 3400lbs, awd, 305,290ftlbs.. stock garbage tires Dunlop something or other...sportmaxx? which should be better mileage wise..
At the end of the day.. my car was 13L/100... his car was 27L/100 LOL
He had to fill up at lunch time.. while I had half a tank left

That's the thing.. Golf R is for everyone and every reason... you can drive it in comfort and have all these cool features and crap... and you can also take it to the track...
The sti is hardcore for sure, but in no way is it a track car... If the next gen sti.. puts in a 2.5L DI.. keeps the mechanical diffs.. and can spruce up the interior a tiny bit.. I will jump on board
Ford is saying the RS is 4.7 to 60mph... the Golf R with DSG is around that.. I'm sure the RS is probably more so around 4.5..
From the sounds of that.. the car is either heavy or the gearing is not suited for stoplight drag racing lol.. same with the STI..

Congrats on the awesome deal. I enjoyed reading your purchase story - between discounted Golf R's and $7k off Passat CC's, seems like there's never been a better time to buy a [non-diesel] VW.

Thanks!

To me, the R is a no-brainer over the GTI, but I am disappointed that there's no moonroof in the R...I didn't know that until Johnny pointed it out.

I think the 2017 model will be coming with a sunroof.

This might be true.  There are Golf R's with sunroofs in other countries.  From my understanding our R's are being built beside the Golf E (electric Golf) and stealing those bodies.  Canadians were one of/if not the first country to get 2016 Golf R's so I don't mind them sacrificing a option I don't care about to get them to us a bit early.  Apparently the first 1,200 Golf R's were pre-sold here and some dealers are stating they can't take orders until 2016.  So there's some major demand.

Don't listen to all that demand BS.... it's not a Bugatti... it's just a golf with awd and more power, and a few fancy bits here and there..
Latest update...at least for the Golf R.. since the TDI engine is built same place as the Golf R..
The TDI line has shut down, so they are moving everyone over to other parts.. include the Golf R line

[HeliDriver]

^^ you got 13L/100kms at the track? In the Cobalt?

I had a 2,600lb Civic with a little 1.6L engine, and it would still only get in the high teens at the track. My GTI was low twenties.

[life851]

^^ you got 13L/100kms at the track? In the Cobalt?

I had a 2,600lb Civic with a little 1.6L engine, and it would still only get in the high teens at the track. My GTI was low twenties.

yup
Obviously tracks matter too... this was at Mosport "Canadian tire whatever it's called now"

I get 8L/Mixed, 6L/Highway
lately I have been driving like an idiot so I'm getting 11L, I'm sure running RS-3's aren't helping either LOL
I'm sure stopping for construction doesn't help every 5 mins !!
Love Direct Injection.. but honestly cleaning out carbon sucks..  waste of a Saturday :*(
My car also likes to lean out in the higher rpm range, no idea why?

[johngenx]

^^ you got 13L/100kms at the track? In the Cobalt?

I had a 2,600lb Civic with a little 1.6L engine, and it would still only get in the high teens at the track. My GTI was low twenties.

Track day = mega gas use.  But, smiles per mile?  Excellent!!  (My 190E 2.3-16V didn't use much less fuel at the track than the 911 despite the performance difference...both in the mid 20s or even worse)

[mixmanmash]

^^ you got 13L/100kms at the track? In the Cobalt?

I had a 2,600lb Civic with a little 1.6L engine, and it would still only get in the high teens at the track. My GTI was low twenties.

Track day = mega gas use.  But, smiles per mile?  Excellent!!  (My 190E 2.3-16V didn't use much less fuel at the track than the 911 despite the performance difference...both in the mid 20s or even worse)

I'm in the high 20s / low 30s with my 300ZX TT.  Huge smiles per mile.  I guess that's the price of 547HP to wheels.

[johngenx]

I'm in the high 20s / low 30s with my 300ZX TT.  Huge smiles per mile.  I guess that's the price of 547HP to wheels.

That's not that bad considering I was about the same with my 3.3L engine making 330hp -  you get over 200hp more for the same fuel consumption.

[jyarkony]

The difference between the tech package and base model is the size of the screen and the interface might be slightly different (with slightly improved graphics for the maps on the tech package).  Personally I didn't go for the tech package simply because I didn't really want the added safety features (I find them a bit annoying, let me drive the damn car), and I'm cheap.

Good choice.  I wouldn't want those "features" for free.

Yeah, it sucks when your car tells you you're driving poorly. If you are driving the car, staying in your lane, and not trying to swerve into people in your blind spots, then how would you even notice that the car has these systems?

I've found that in most cases, these systems highlight when I'm driving poorly. The only thing I get annoyed with is myself, for lane wandering, or following too closely (except when I'm intentionally tailgating a slowpoke in the fast lane - yes i do that and yes it's horrible, but damned if i'm going to stop).

The cheapness argument I concur with - I'd never pay for reminders of my own driving inadequacies. but if they were free, I'd have 'em in a heartbeat. 

[jyarkony]

...That small fractional slice where the limits of the GTI are exceeded but those of the R still hold are not likely to be something I frequently (if ever) experience and definitely not on public roads.

Not knocking the R - I think it's cool as hell and I don't doubt its owners are, or will be, well pleased.

For me, stepping up from the GTI would not be about the car at the limits, but more about the extra power, torque and control (AWD) available on a day to day basis.  (At least, that's how I'd justify it to my wife.) Yes, one could rev the GTI a bit longer or drop down two gears instead of one, but you could probably make the same argument for the TSI vs. GTI. Just saying that the difference isn't necessarily just about the tenths of a second at the track.

Now, how about a Golf R vs STI comparison...

That's crazy talk....

 

coming very soon...

[JohnnyMac]

The difference between the tech package and base model is the size of the screen and the interface might be slightly different (with slightly improved graphics for the maps on the tech package).  Personally I didn't go for the tech package simply because I didn't really want the added safety features (I find them a bit annoying, let me drive the damn car), and I'm cheap.

Good choice.  I wouldn't want those "features" for free.

Yeah, it sucks when your car tells you you're driving poorly. If you are driving the car, staying in your lane, and not trying to swerve into people in your blind spots, then how would you even notice that the car has these systems?

I've found that in most cases, these systems highlight when I'm driving poorly. The only thing I get annoyed with is myself, for lane wandering, or following too closely (except when I'm intentionally tailgating a slowpoke in the fast lane - yes i do that and yes it's horrible, but damned if i'm going to stop).

The cheapness argument I concur with - I'd never pay for reminders of my own driving inadequacies. but if they were free, I'd have 'em in a heartbeat.

I'll give you a perfect example of when these features might be annoying on a daily basis.  The roads around Fredericton leave a lot to be desired and in any vehicle, little on one I care deeply about, I try to limit the amount of bumps I put it through.  This often means hugging, if not crossing over road lines (of course not when another vehicle is in the oncoming lane).  This would be setting off safety features constantly.

I know you can turn them off but then why buy them in the first place. 

Plus if the zombie apocalypse happens you need to be able to run over/ram things, pretty hard to do that when your car brakes for itself.

[mlin32]

The difference between the tech package and base model is the size of the screen and the interface might be slightly different (with slightly improved graphics for the maps on the tech package).  Personally I didn't go for the tech package simply because I didn't really want the added safety features (I find them a bit annoying, let me drive the damn car), and I'm cheap.

Good choice.  I wouldn't want those "features" for free.

Yeah, it sucks when your car tells you you're driving poorly. If you are driving the car, staying in your lane, and not trying to swerve into people in your blind spots, then how would you even notice that the car has these systems?

I've found that in most cases, these systems highlight when I'm driving poorly. The only thing I get annoyed with is myself, for lane wandering, or following too closely (except when I'm intentionally tailgating a slowpoke in the fast lane - yes i do that and yes it's horrible, but damned if i'm going to stop).

The cheapness argument I concur with - I'd never pay for reminders of my own driving inadequacies. but if they were free, I'd have 'em in a heartbeat.

I'll give you a perfect example of when these features might be annoying on a daily basis.  The roads around Fredericton leave a lot to be desired and in any vehicle, little on one I care deeply about, I try to limit the amount of bumps I put it through.  This often means hugging, if not crossing over road lines (of course not when another vehicle is in the oncoming lane).  This would be setting off safety features constantly.

I know you can turn them off but then why buy them in the first place. 

Plus if the zombie apocalypse happens you need to be able to run over/ram things, pretty hard to do that when your car brakes for itself.

In the vehicles I've had with things like Lane Departure Warning (Mazda3 and Ford Mondeo), I never found it annoying. If you are driving aggressively in anything more than moderately curvy roads, the system doesn't activate. Similarly, abrupt manoeuvres with the steering wheel (z.B swerving to avoid something) don't trigger an alarm. They essentially function for straighter roads above 70km/h. When I was hammering it down backroads in the Mazda, I left everything on and it never annoyed me. And the Forward Collsion Warning rarely threw a false warning, I think only 3 times over 10 months of ownership because it measured the closing rate more than the actual distance, so that meant I could get right up on the rear bumper of someone plodding at 120km/h in the overtaking lane in the middle of nowhere.

So generally I like these Driver Assistance features as it adds a layer of safety that normally don't intrude on my driving unless I slip up. Like dozing off on some boring stretch of road.

[DriverJeff]

Re: fuel consumption, my brother has noticed an astonishing improvement in fuel efficiency for his Golf R versus his '11 STI (granted, that car was heavily tuned and swilled fuel at a startling rate). 

Because of timing, he ended up with the Tech Pkg on his car and while he also wouldn't necessarily have chosen the nannies, he has admitted that the adaptive cruise control has been nice when he's done a few long trips through the GTA traffic.  He has switched off some of the other things that annoyed him.

The updated infotainment system with the Apple apps is very, very good.

[Noto]

His is a turbo SS

Right you are.  My apologies.

[mixmanmash]

To me, the R is a no-brainer over the GTI, but I am disappointed that there's no moonroof in the R...I didn't know that until Johnny pointed it out.

I'm the opposite, very happy about that! Adding weight to the worst spot of a car "that's already heavy".. + one less thing to break/leak lol

life851 - did you happen to get an insurance quote?  The reason I ask is there was a major difference in premium for my Golf R and the WRX STi, we're talking $100 per month difference.

Also the Ford RS's price here in Canada included the winter tires and rims, so you should have factored that into your decision (not sure if you can get a insurance quote).

I took a trip a couple of weekends ago on a 3 hour highway/secondary road (averaged at least 100 km/hr) and the round trip fuel economy was 7.3l/100 km.  Not sure what an STi would get but I'm guessing it would have probably been a couple liters more per 100 kms.  My mostly city driving average is around 8.7l/100 km so that's not too bad either.

The Golf R might not be for everyone, it's not as hard core as the STi, won't be as fast as the Focus RS more than likely, but there's a lot of value when you factor in all expenses.  Plus it's a much better place to be in everyday driving.

Nah, my insurance is dirt cheap... 4 Cars  + House + business + umbrella policy.. No tickets or points, 1 or 2 claims between all of them... over 10 years lol

Actually financially speaking.. the RS is the worst deal... Getting a bit technical here...
7K premium over the golf R... actually in my case since the deal I got 9k premium..
Winter Rims/Tire - 1.5k MAX.. so that leaves me with 7.5k....

You can do a lot to a car for 7.5K, more importantly.. unless your paying cash... you are also financing or leasing those tires at a higher rate

Well I was at the track, a few months met a guy with a 15 sti.. we decided to do a little mileage competition... Obviously this is no way 100% accurate but it gives you an idea..
My car 2900lbs, fwd, 290hp, 320ftlbs .. hankook rs3
sti 3400lbs, awd, 305,290ftlbs.. stock garbage tires Dunlop something or other...sportmaxx? which should be better mileage wise..
At the end of the day.. my car was 13L/100... his car was 27L/100 LOL
He had to fill up at lunch time.. while I had half a tank left

That's the thing.. Golf R is for everyone and every reason... you can drive it in comfort and have all these cool features and crap... and you can also take it to the track...
The sti is hardcore for sure, but in no way is it a track car... If the next gen sti.. puts in a 2.5L DI.. keeps the mechanical diffs.. and can spruce up the interior a tiny bit.. I will jump on board
Ford is saying the RS is 4.7 to 60mph... the Golf R with DSG is around that.. I'm sure the RS is probably more so around 4.5..
From the sounds of that.. the car is either heavy or the gearing is not suited for stoplight drag racing lol.. same with the STI..

Congrats on the awesome deal. I enjoyed reading your purchase story - between discounted Golf R's and $7k off Passat CC's, seems like there's never been a better time to buy a [non-diesel] VW.

Thanks!

To me, the R is a no-brainer over the GTI, but I am disappointed that there's no moonroof in the R...I didn't know that until Johnny pointed it out.

I think the 2017 model will be coming with a sunroof.

This might be true.  There are Golf R's with sunroofs in other countries.  From my understanding our R's are being built beside the Golf E (electric Golf) and stealing those bodies.  Canadians were one of/if not the first country to get 2016 Golf R's so I don't mind them sacrificing a option I don't care about to get them to us a bit early.  Apparently the first 1,200 Golf R's were pre-sold here and some dealers are stating they can't take orders until 2016.  So there's some major demand.

Don't listen to all that demand BS.... it's not a Bugatti... it's just a golf with awd and more power, and a few fancy bits here and there..
Latest update...at least for the Golf R.. since the TDI engine is built same place as the Golf R..
The TDI line has shut down, so they are moving everyone over to other parts.. include the Golf R line

BS on the fuel mileage.  My brother is getting 12.7 in mixed driving and blasts to redline daily in the STI.  Have a look at Fuelly.com before you spew such crap.

The 27L/100km is on the track (I.e. road course).

I get about 30L/100km on our local road course in my heavily modded 300ZX.  Around the city with a lead foot, I get about 17L/100km.  On the highway at 120ish, I get about 9L-10L/100km.  Not too shabby for a car putting out 547hp to the rear wheels on pump 94.

That said, I can't see the Golf R getting 13L/100km on a road course and maintain similar laptimes to the STI.  Maybe if he was -footing it around the track like a Prius.

[mixmanmash]

To me, the R is a no-brainer over the GTI, but I am disappointed that there's no moonroof in the R...I didn't know that until Johnny pointed it out.

I'm the opposite, very happy about that! Adding weight to the worst spot of a car "that's already heavy".. + one less thing to break/leak lol

life851 - did you happen to get an insurance quote?  The reason I ask is there was a major difference in premium for my Golf R and the WRX STi, we're talking $100 per month difference.

Also the Ford RS's price here in Canada included the winter tires and rims, so you should have factored that into your decision (not sure if you can get a insurance quote).

I took a trip a couple of weekends ago on a 3 hour highway/secondary road (averaged at least 100 km/hr) and the round trip fuel economy was 7.3l/100 km.  Not sure what an STi would get but I'm guessing it would have probably been a couple liters more per 100 kms.  My mostly city driving average is around 8.7l/100 km so that's not too bad either.

The Golf R might not be for everyone, it's not as hard core as the STi, won't be as fast as the Focus RS more than likely, but there's a lot of value when you factor in all expenses.  Plus it's a much better place to be in everyday driving.

Nah, my insurance is dirt cheap... 4 Cars  + House + business + umbrella policy.. No tickets or points, 1 or 2 claims between all of them... over 10 years lol

Actually financially speaking.. the RS is the worst deal... Getting a bit technical here...
7K premium over the golf R... actually in my case since the deal I got 9k premium..
Winter Rims/Tire - 1.5k MAX.. so that leaves me with 7.5k....

You can do a lot to a car for 7.5K, more importantly.. unless your paying cash... you are also financing or leasing those tires at a higher rate

Well I was at the track, a few months met a guy with a 15 sti.. we decided to do a little mileage competition... Obviously this is no way 100% accurate but it gives you an idea..
My car 2900lbs, fwd, 290hp, 320ftlbs .. hankook rs3
sti 3400lbs, awd, 305,290ftlbs.. stock garbage tires Dunlop something or other...sportmaxx? which should be better mileage wise..
At the end of the day.. my car was 13L/100... his car was 27L/100 LOL
He had to fill up at lunch time.. while I had half a tank left

That's the thing.. Golf R is for everyone and every reason... you can drive it in comfort and have all these cool features and crap... and you can also take it to the track...
The sti is hardcore for sure, but in no way is it a track car... If the next gen sti.. puts in a 2.5L DI.. keeps the mechanical diffs.. and can spruce up the interior a tiny bit.. I will jump on board
Ford is saying the RS is 4.7 to 60mph... the Golf R with DSG is around that.. I'm sure the RS is probably more so around 4.5..
From the sounds of that.. the car is either heavy or the gearing is not suited for stoplight drag racing lol.. same with the STI..

Congrats on the awesome deal. I enjoyed reading your purchase story - between discounted Golf R's and $7k off Passat CC's, seems like there's never been a better time to buy a [non-diesel] VW.

Thanks!

To me, the R is a no-brainer over the GTI, but I am disappointed that there's no moonroof in the R...I didn't know that until Johnny pointed it out.

I think the 2017 model will be coming with a sunroof.

This might be true.  There are Golf R's with sunroofs in other countries.  From my understanding our R's are being built beside the Golf E (electric Golf) and stealing those bodies.  Canadians were one of/if not the first country to get 2016 Golf R's so I don't mind them sacrificing a option I don't care about to get them to us a bit early.  Apparently the first 1,200 Golf R's were pre-sold here and some dealers are stating they can't take orders until 2016.  So there's some major demand.

Don't listen to all that demand BS.... it's not a Bugatti... it's just a golf with awd and more power, and a few fancy bits here and there..
Latest update...at least for the Golf R.. since the TDI engine is built same place as the Golf R..
The TDI line has shut down, so they are moving everyone over to other parts.. include the Golf R line

BS on the fuel mileage.  My brother is getting 12.7 in mixed driving and blasts to redline daily in the STI.  Have a look at Fuelly.com before you spew such crap.

The 27L/100km is on the track (I.e. road course).

I get about 30L/100km on our local road course in my heavily modded 300ZX.  Around the city with a lead foot, I get about 17L/100km.  On the highway at 120ish, I get about 9L-10L/100km.  Not too shabby for a car putting out 547hp to the rear wheels on pump 94.

That said, I can't see the Golf R getting 13L/100km on a road course and maintain similar laptimes to the STI.  Maybe if he was -footing it around the track like a Prius.

547 hp.....

I should have worded it the way you did - on the track, 13L is simply not going to happen.

I bet the STI doesn't get better than 11 or so on the highway because the gearing is so, so short (3000 rpm at 100 kmh).

The gearing in my 300ZX puts me at around 2800RPM at 120km/h in 5th gear.