Jump to content

R32 TOP GEAR TEST!!!!!!!! SOLVES THE QUESTION!!


ashleywater
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[ QUOTE ]

Red Have you tried pulling away in manual yet and letting the gearbox change up on it own ??

[/ QUOTE ]

....Yes, but only once and I instinctively changed gear as she got close to the red zone because the car wasn't showing any sign of suddenly becoming automatic!! Then I forgot to try it again. Will try again in the next few days if the roads aren't icey/snowy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

Mr F**king Know all

What were the actual times?

Instead of being sarcastic give me some actual figures

Ryan w states in his post theime was 1.33.7 on 18's

I thought the R 32 was not that far away then it beat the M3 did it not.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've a better idea. Instead of him serving you up the times you want, in light of your attitude.....why don't you feck off and find them yourself. 169144-ok.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

" Also was the M3 quicker than the GTI ? "

I Should have said "was the 130i quicker than the GTI"

Times I could find:-

M3 1.28.0

MK V R32 1.30.4

MK V GTI 1.33.7

130 i ______ Can anyone fill this gap ?

[/ QUOTE ]

130 i 1.31.9

All the times can be found here. The R32 is listed twice, but is the R32 quoted at 133.2 a misprint and should actually be the 'GTi'? Or is it the other way round. FIREdevil.gifwink.giflaugh.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a bit of an anomaly with these results.

It's being discussed in the reviews section right now....

It would appear Top Gear tested a 130i SE with the M Sport pack.

They didn't test a fully fledged 130i M Sport (it's a completely different model to the SE)....and that means that when they added the M Sport pack there was one major thing they didn't get the benefit of....the M developed suspension.

EVO's test saw the 130i M Sport get the nod over the R32 - but note that it was the full M Sport version they tested, and not the SE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would that be the Evo Test,with the immortal quote:

The R32 would have finished further up the leader board, but for the presence of a car, that was'nt even on the test!

the gti.

One of the reasons for posting this topic, I personally would'nt compare the two cars, having owned both, as they are different animals, but I got thoroughly p*ss*d off with everybody else, including the motoring journo's comparing them at every opportunity.

And guess what? Top gear never mentioned the gti at all, how frigging refreshing is that??????????//

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

There's a bit of an anomaly with these results.

It's being discussed in the reviews section right now....

It would appear Top Gear tested a 130i SE with the M Sport pack.

They didn't test a fully fledged 130i M Sport (it's a completely different model to the SE)....and that means that when they added the M Sport pack there was one major thing they didn't get the benefit of....the M developed suspension.

EVO's test saw the 130i M Sport get the nod over the R32 - but note that it was the full M Sport version they tested, and not the SE.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was under the impression that all the cars were the SE versions and the “M Sport pack” was exactly that – an additional package that you could add on which gave you suspension, bodywork styling, etc.

Even though Evo Magazine gave the nod to the 130i, it was still slower on the track in their test, with the R32 being apparently way down on power (according to the rolling road)!!

Also, every other motoring magazine (Car Magazine, Autocar, etc) has agreed with Top Gear and given the nod to the R32.

I originally looked at the 130i and almost had a deposit down on one until I tested the R32. For me the Golf was far the better car at a far better price! laugh.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Top Gear also touched on another reason that the R32 beats the 130 - like all 1 series, its not a useful hatchback. I'm only 5'8" and I couldn't fit in the back seats, they are usless for all but small children and the boot is also very small. For my money and purposes you cannot compare the 1 series and the Golf, the Golf is a far more practical car than the 1.

Oh and the R32's looks may be a bit understated, but the 1 series is just ugly. tongue.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[ QUOTE ]

Top Gear also touched on another reason that the R32 beats the 130 - like all 1 series, its not a useful hatchback. I'm only 5'8" and I couldn't fit in the back seats, they are usless for all but small children and the boot is also very small. For my money and purposes you cannot compare the 1 series and the Golf, the Golf is a far more practical car than the 1.

[/ QUOTE ]

I simply cannot agree with that. What Clarkson did with the seats was a disgrace. They were pushed well back.

I've sat in the back of a 120d and a 130i M Sport with no problems at all. If you ask anyone that has met me, that means there is enough room for most people!

The R32 won for other reasons, but the exaggerated Clarksoneque opinion on the rear legroom was appalling. It was an ouright lie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...