Hi all,
Quick comparison: Pug 206 GTi vs VW GTi, assuming both are 2.0 2000 models.
Any thoughts appreciated, including performance, economy, cost of care/parts, what's likely to go wrong/be wrong. One of these may be next car after my Mk IV astra suffered a head gasket gone awry (which is now on the market if anyone wants to pick up some cheap bits...!)
DSt.
VW never made a 2000 2.0 GTi that would be a highline rebadged by the UK dealer network.
Eh........so what engines did they do for Golf GTi's in the year 2000?
DSt.
Currently looking at a VR6, though not so sure i can afford it...
1.8 Turbo.
Lardy Golf or less lardy Peugeot?
It's a hot hatch FFS. Get a diesel if you want to worry about economy.
The only Golf to merit a GTI badge back in 2000 is the 1.8 turbo, where you'll see mid to high thirties on a run and high twenties to low thirties under most conditions.
You'll see about the same from the Peugeot.
Too many variables here.
The mark four Golf doesn't work as a GTI. The six pot variants are nose heavy. All are lardy.
Think: Seat Ibiza / Leon, Skoda Octavia if you really *must* have VAG technology.
Think: Honda Civic Type R if you want something quick and reliable.
After the hassle we've had at work recently with Honda's, I'd remove the reliable bit.
Depends on the year certainly, some people think buying a Honda means it
*wont* fail, whereas it's actually the case that statistically it's less *likely* to fail than an equivelant french/british car.
VR6 means MK3 doesn't it? They seem to rot worse than MK2s that are 10 years older. The only options for Golf GTis that make any sense are these: MK2, MK4 1.8t (preferably the 180) or Seat Cupra, or a MK5. MK1s are all rusted away, and MK3s are shit.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.