Re: A5 Golf

The Subaru's don't seem to be having any problems related to the AWD system. I know that my father's Audi was really reliable, as are the 4Motion Passats. But this is beside the point.

But the non-Shelby GLH still had more power, better brakes, more features, better tires, better handling, and a compreable warranty for the same money as a GTi.

More than a 2003 Golf...

Most reasonably powerful FWD cars suffer from torque steer. Only a few of the more expensive cars are any exception.

VW has been in this position far too many times throughout their history. Less power, more cost, but build quality no one could match. It happened with the Beetle, and many other of their models. They fixed their problems, and set new sales records. I beleive they are at the point where they need to do a little overhaul again, make a new engine or two, and improve cost efficiency of new models.

I'm sure a balancer shaft, hydraulic mounts, and a 16

Having driven the 9A 2.0l 16V, I would have to say that it is a good little engine, and would have been a better replacement for the 1.8L 8V, than the

2.0L 8V. The 9A is quite refined, as engines for that time frame go, and it's power output (134 hp) would make it a modern day competitor for the Civics 130 hp...

- Peter

Yes it did, but like I said when you would actually drive the car all the pieces that looked good on paper, or in theory, didn't add up to a fun car to drive.

Absolutely, and like the person in the link I posted said "the torque steer nearly ripped the steering wheel out of your hand". The different length axles that Chrysler pioneered (I think?) to offset torque steer didn't stand a chance with this beast! If I remember correctly, and this is from memory, the 84 GTI did .78 on the skid pad and the GLH did .81.

Yep.

True, but once you have driven one of those beasts you would never forget it. It was truly an experience. The only thing I could compare it to was a

72 Plymouth Duster with a 340 big block in it. The chassis and especially the front end was not up to the task of handling all that power and it actually made the car somewhat dangerous in the hands of unskilled drivers.

Again, this was not your average tight sports car, it was punishing and the body and interior items were not up to the task of all that power. Shelby made many improvements that tightened things up in the chassis from what I recall.

Back then the GTI was one of the first, if not the first, pocket rocket and having owned an 84 GTI and driven my friends GLH many times I would take the GTI any day over the GLH. Not as fast and not as good on the skid pad, but the GTI felt like an inexpensive Porsche to drive and the Omni felt like a Chrysler with a big motor and fat tires bolted on as an afterthought.

Psycho

I agree. If I remember right, there were some 4-cylinder A3 GTIs in Europe that had a 2.0L 16V engine with about 150hp and I'm guessing it was some variant on the 9A 2.0L 134hp engine. Wish we had gotten it over here.

And the old 1.8L 8V is quite strong for what it is. Mine still feels pretty strong, doesn't feel like it has 166K miles on it at all, and most of all it's smooth and very quiet under acceleration...no growl at all. The only thing I hear is my TT exhaust. Even the current 1.8T has a bit of a growl (and not a particularly nice one) to it.

VW also had a non-turbo version of the 1.8 20V engine with 125hp a few years ago in the first A4 G/J overseas. Not sure why we didn't get that engine. They eventually dropped it and replaced it with the 2.0L 8V 115hp engine, which I don't care for. A friend had one in a '95 Jetta and it was noisy and "grouchy" (that's as best as I could describe it), and rather slow (it was an automatic too). The 2.0L 115hp 8V doesn't like to rev as much as the older 1.8L 8V for some reason either. However, the 2.0L 8V is a tough engine...nothing really goes wrong with them. They're just unremarkable.

-Matt

Are you talking Canadian bucks? In the States the only way you can reach the "high $30K bracket" is with the W8. A fully loaded GLX is more like US$30-32K.

-- Mike Smith

: Are you talking Canadian bucks? In the States the only way you can : reach the "high $30K bracket" is with the W8. A fully loaded GLX is : more like US$30-32K.

Cars and computers are the same... you can spend as much or as little as you like. :)

No, but I'm talking MSRP, not neccesarily what you'd *actually* pay for the car. I seem to remember loaded GLX V6s, especially the 4Motion, reaching over $32k. I love the W8, but $39-41k is to much for a Passat. Especially when the G35 has comperable performance, and can be had loaded for $35k or less.

Ever sit in a G35? It's *cramped* (less roomy than a Golf or Jetta even), and the interior is cheesy compared to a Passat's. Before I bought my GLX, I went to an Infiniti dealer and tried a new G35 and a year-old I35. (Actually, I only drove the I35 - just sitting in the G35 was a showstopper for me.) The I35 was certainly big enough, but after only a year it creaked and rattled even worse than the 2-year-old Saturn I was dumping. The G35 is a different (and newer) model, of course, but that I35 might be some indication of what the G would be like after a year...

-- Mike Smith

Huh? I just rode in one today. Might be tight for five, but it is a RWD car (as in there's a significant driveshaft tunnel making the center-rear seat occasional only) and for four people it's heaven. Yes, I was sitting in the back seat. How much space to you *need?*

Actually, after round two of the window fiasco the G35 is looking appealing. I mean, yeah, I have a new car, but with a weekly trip to the dealer (seriously, three trips in less than a month, all dropoffs) this is seriously cutting into my productivity at work and my free time. A cow orker got an almost-affordable deal on a G35, as opposed to the 350Z which I really want. G35 is really more car than I need, but the Mini kinda leaves me cold and I'm just not into the RSX. Might just buy same cow orkers old G20 and trade off between that and the Scirocco and forget about having a "nice" car.

nate

ObWhatever: Cow orker's G35 was actually in the shop today, we were taking his loaner car (obviously another G35) to lunch. Passenger side power window regulator failed on the way to the restaurant. Deja vu? Perhaps I should just not touch cars. Ever. I think I'm cursed. Either that or the boys at Nissan have been taking notes of VW's advanced engineering practices.

This is a dealer problem, not a car problem. It seems that most of the window regulator failures were fixed after 1 trip. If yours is requiring regular visits, something else is wrong.

The 350Z is a pig, the G35 is it's even pigier half-brother. Just get a TT 3.2 or an R32!

The S is a fun weekend car for entry level execs or a great first-sports car for young women.

Exactly. Hence the appeal of an Infiniti since I remember a friend in college having a G20 and getting near-ass-kiss levels of service from the dealer. Once he missed a shift on the highway and grabbed second instead of fourth, they rebuilt the head for him for free and gave him a loaner car while they were at it. I don't see a VW dealer doing that for me. In fact, when he traded "up" to a 300ZX the dealer was less nice to him because of the "Nissan" badge on it, as opposed to "Infiniti."

There's a problem with that plan, and it begins in my wallet :(

I think it would be a great commuter and closer in size to the original GTI than the new GTI. Only problem is it's been infected with the disease of "retro" which is even more annoying to me than "rice." If I want something that looks like an old car, I'll buy an old car. (oh, wait, I did.)

Well this is an *old* G20. I think he'd take $2500 for it and that is eminently doable.

nate

Infiniti's always about service. My uncle had one and always got a loaner when it was in for service. They also did stuff like if they had to disconnect the battery for whatever they'd even do stuff like write down your radio presets and they'd reset them for you.

I've always liked the older G20s (1996 (?) and earlier). They're nice looking (looks like a BMW from the back and the front reminded me of an 80s Peugeot for some reason) and supposedly they handled very well. The late

1990s redesign wasn't quite as harmonious (something went wrong with the styling...something didn't look right to be about it) although it still looked like a G20 and you could tell it was definitely an evolution of the previous one. The interiors on the restyled ones was kinda disappointing though...it started looking too much like a cheap Nissan inside. Overall I like the earlier ones better.

The base Sentra has a 1.8L with 126HP. There are higher-level versions with a 2.5L that makes either 165 or 175HP, depending on the model. Weight is around 2600-2700 pounds.

I don't know where you live, but if you're in North America, this is innaccurate. The Sentra's base engine for several years was Nissan's SR20DE, a

2.0 litre DOHC, 16 valve I4 that made about 130 horsepower when Nissan finally plucked it from the lineup a year or two ago. The SR20 was renowned for it's stout build (it reportedly could handle up to near-400 horspower on stock internals), and powered many of Nissan's most populat cars, including the 200SX SE-R and Inifiniti badged (but Sentra based) G20 and the less popular Pulsar NX2000. However, the NX1800 was powered by the 1.8 litre you're talking about, and early Sentra's and 180SXs were as well. The SR20 also appeared as the SR20DET in several Japanese models, which added a single turbo to the mix, bringing horsepower into the 220+ level. As of approx. a year ago, Nissan dropped the SR20DE as the base engine for the Sentra, and replaced it with a "de-tuned" version of the QR25 2.5 litre I4 that powers the Sentra SE-R and SE-R Spec V in 165 and 175 horsepower trim. The base version, powering the normal Sentra, makes around 140 horsepower.

Oh well, than Canada's lineup includes an engine no longer avaliable in American cars. This probably has to do with the higher cost of buying a car in Canada.

In 2002, the base Sentra (XE, GXE) had a 1.8L rated at 126HP. As of that year, the SE-R and Spec-V versions became available. These had the 2.5L engine from the Altima, and were rated at 165HP and 175HP, respectively. Prior to 2002, the Sentra SE models had the 2.0L SR20 engine rated at 140HP.

In 2003, the XE and GXE versions still had the 1.8L, and the SE-R and Spec-V still had the 2.5L. There was a Limited Edition version of the GXE that came with the 2.5L added in 2003. Presumably, this was for people who thought the ride was too harsh in the SE-R. In any case, the 2.5L in the Limited Edition was still rated at 165HP.

In 2004, the XE, GXE, and Limited Edition were changed to "1.8", "1.8S", and "2.5S". The SE-R and Spec-V kept their same names.

This information can be verified at any number of auto websites, including