News: Golf GTD announced

*offshoot related to post on previous page*
We/the industry should definately put more effort into biogas vehicles, VW have their new excellent Passat that puts out 20g CO2/km and Volvo have restarted their biogas initiative which they (*cough* Ford *cough*) shelved back in 2007. It's green and unlike ethanol have a sustainable supply chain, you can make gas out of rubbish instead of having poor people working under unacceptable conditions halfway around the world. The infrastructure for biogas here is excellent as long as you travel between the major cities and used gas Volvos are hard to get hold of. Politics have ruined alot for biogas, but as nearly everyone have seen the failure that is E85, it's making a strong comback.
 
Last edited:
Oh if that came to the US.....reflash it and enjoy more powa.

In truth though, I fully understand the point of it. Low down grunt, high efficiency (even though the normal GTi is not bad at all, but still).
 
Last edited:
Vltros said:
No... just no! :no:

Why the diesel over the petrol and TRUE Gti?

Everytime I see a GTD I can't help asking myself why you want the diesel over the petrol. If the answer is economy, then get a normal Golf with the simple diesel engine (which does more mpg). If you want power, why do you want the diesel then???

I just can't see the point of powerful diesels. I see them as train locomotives. Made to pull, not to turn.
Click to expand...

A GTD would have been ideal for me if they had sold one here when I bought my last car.

I had a 150mile a day commute. So a diesel made huge sense for me. But I also autocross, and the livelier feel and sportier suspension of the GTi is a big plus for competitive driving.

A zestier TDi would have saved me probably $100 a month on fuel and I could still be reasonably competitive and have fun. But the regular Golf Tdi was too soggy (and we didn't get the hotter engines), and I couldn't find one with a manual. So I had to go GTi. Still better economy than the 16mpg 500SEC I was driving.

It's a good little do-it-all car.

Although now I've resolved to own 2 cars from now own so I don't have to worry about the compromise.
 
Vltros said:
I see your point there, but then there's the Golf GT. 180bhp for a 1.4 TFSI isn't bad at all (and not as expensive as the GTI).

Is not that the idea behind the GTD (or any other sporty diesel car) is bad but I still find it hard to "understand". Probably that's due to the fact that I don't like at all how a diesel engine works or performs. I'm a petrolhead and I'll always be.

I like the sensation of power you get accelerating a diesel car but then you get into a petrol one and by the time you changed gears twice in the diesel you are still in the same one. Because you might get more torques than a petrol one. But the petrol one has them avaliable more time. I think they are perfect highway cruisers but when it comes to their sportiness is where I see their problems.

Of course we don't drive (at least I don't) our cars like we were racing everyday. And there's also "that day" that you feel like going a little bit faster and probably if you do that you don't need a petrol one (if you are not going to use it better get a diesel and save money).

But I dunno... of course it's just my opinion and I wouldn't say no to a GTD if I were given one :p
Click to expand...

the 1.4 TFSI is a terrible engine. It sounds good on paper but from every review I read of it, people say it's got the drawbacks of both the supercharger and the turbo, but with none of the benefits...

So we're back to the GTI then. Over here people drive their cars a LOT. A lot means 30k kms/year. Let's just do the math

GTI : 30k kms/year * 8l/100 km * 1.275?/liter = 3060?s worth of fuel

GTD : 30k kms/year * 5,3l/100 km * 0,870?/liter = 1383,30?s worth of fuel

(and that's being generous with both the fuel consumption of the GTI and the price of fuel)

it costs pretty much less than half to run, for 90% of the driving experience. Also, in day to day traffic, torque means more than hp, especially if it's low down in the power band. Because you don't need to wait for 7000 rpms for the car to go, diesels are sometimes quicker off the line (but they do get caught up once the petrol car has revved up)

I have the same issue when driving my wife's car, because it likes revs, and I'm not used to revving that high, I'm used to my lazy, early shifting, "there's torque everywhere so I won't bother to downshift at all" driving style. This does not work in a 16v petrol engine. But on the other hand, there's no point in trying to redline the diesel engine either, because it stops at 4500 rpms... It's all about driving style, and in day to day traffic, diesel torque wins EVERY time.

if money were no object, everyone would have the GTI. But since it is, people will go for the GTD as a substitute.
 
Wouldn't want one myself, but that'll definitley sell in the UK where everyone else loves diesels. But surely the point of a hot hatch is practicality and fun - which comes from revving an engine, not changing up early? And it won't sound like a petrol and i can't see the handling being so good
 
JC4PM said:
Wouldn't want one myself, but that'll definitley sell in the UK where everyone else loves diesels. But surely the point of a hot hatch is practicality and fun - which comes from revving an engine, not changing up early? And it won't sound like a petrol and i can't see the handling being so good
Click to expand...

sure revving is fun. For a couple of minutes. Then it gets boring and loud and annoying.

The whole point of changing up early is that you don't NEED to match the revs perfectly on every shift, hell, you can even skip a gear alltogether and still accelerate

to me fun = able to accelerate quickly. Whether this is high revs or low revs is irrellevant, I like the feeling of being pushed into my seat and going quicker (which is the torque you're feeling, not the hp)

I'm waiting for a comparative test to speak out about the handling, but aside from the engine being a bit heavier, I expect no real difference in handling.
 
NooDle said:
GTI : 30k kms/year * 8l/100 km * 1.275?/liter = 3060?s worth of fuel

GTD : 30k kms/year * 5,3l/100 km * 0,870?/liter = 1383,30?s worth of fuel
Click to expand...

You got weird fuel prices in Belgium... Diesel was just today @ 1.069 and 95 octane (which is enough for newer GTIs) was @1.209

Also: I dare you drive a GTI under 8.5... Can't do it (I couldn't so far). But then, I also doubt the 5.3 L for the diesel... My buddy drives his GolfV Bluemotion around that mark...
 
Polly said:
Jeez, welcome to 2009 guys.

I've got news for you: Diesel is winning races now, not driving tractors.
Click to expand...

Yes, dedicated racing outfits with hundreds of millions in factory backing and access to the best engineers and technicians on the planet are winning races with diesels.

This is not built by the best technicians. This will not win Le Mans.

I don't like diesels and I never will. They stink.


NooDle said:
to me fun = able to accelerate quickly. Whether this is high revs or low revs is irrellevant, I like the feeling of being pushed into my seat and going quicker (which is the torque you're feeling, not the hp)
Click to expand...

Um, torque and horsepower are the same thing. Horsepower is the rating of the torque over a period of time.

Look, if you have two cars, one with high horsepower, like an upper-tier Formula car of some kind, with high revs, and then another car with low horsepower (low revs) and high torque, they will accelerate as it pertains to you basically exactly the same. The difference is just RPM.

An F1 car only has about 200 lbs/ft of torque, but it's not slow off the line is it?
 
Last edited:
AiR said:
Let me guess, they fill the air with black smoke too? :rolleyes:
Not anymore.
Click to expand...

Then explain to me why the smell I'm smelling isn't a smell at all.

What's VW done, put a Febreeze bottle on the end of the exhaust?
 
Last edited:
MadCat360 said:
Um, torque and horsepower are the same thing. Horsepower is the rating of the torque over a period of time.
Click to expand...

I know, but high torque at low revs IMO > high torque at high revs

the idea of not having to downshift and ALWAYS being in the powerband FTW also

in my car, I can go from a standstill to 140 kph in 3rd, then shift directly to 5th for anything up to 230 kph. I'd like to see a GTI try that
 
MadCat360 said:
What's VW done, put a Febreeze bottle on the end of the exhaust?
Click to expand...

no, if it has the Bluemotion badge only baby foxes and happy thoughts come out of the back :p
 
NooDle said:
sure revving is fun. For a couple of minutes. Then it gets boring and loud and annoying.

The whole point of changing up early is that you don't NEED to match the revs perfectly on every shift, hell, you can even skip a gear alltogether and still accelerate

to me fun = able to accelerate quickly. Whether this is high revs or low revs is irrellevant, I like the feeling of being pushed into my seat and going quicker (which is the torque you're feeling, not the hp)

I'm waiting for a comparative test to speak out about the handling, but aside from the engine being a bit heavier, I expect no real difference in handling.
Click to expand...

I agree with you in both of your texts. And I see your point there. But then I prefer revving to brute force. I can see that both cars suit a diferent kind of petrolhead. The ones who love to get pushed into the seat and the ones who love the sound of revs and the progressive acceleration of the car.

It is a shame that people (and us petrolheads) aren't aware of the existence of the Variable Valve Timing engines. Because they fit perfectly between what would be the GTI and the GTD. You've got a simple 1.6 engine which develops 100 bhp, and if you don't get it past 3000 revs (which in everyday driving you don't and don't need to) you'll get really good mpg/l100 (in fact exactly the same as the lowest engine in the range e.g 1.4l --> 70bhp). But if you get past those revs, the valves change and you get 115 bhp (or much more if you mess with the ECU) and lots of torques from low revs to high revs.

As you can see I've given the example of my engine as I also had the problem of fuel consumption vs power when I was going to buy my new car. But then I found out about these engines, asked for a test drive and fell in love. But nobody seems to care or notice their existence. That's the reason why I can't see the point of the GTD. There are petrol engines with good horsepower and fuel consumption ratios but people don't seem to notice them. And, like you said, in everyday driving you don't need 200bhp as you won't use them at all and you'll only get high fuel consumption. Anything between 100 and 150 bhp in a car that weights 1100 kg is more than enough.

AiR said:
Let me guess, they fill the air with black smoke too? :rolleyes:
Not anymore.
Click to expand...

:lol:

Me and my mates use to call them "Squids", because they leave black stuff when they getaway.
 
Last edited:
Vltros said:
As you can see I've given the example of my engine as I also had the problem of fuel consumption vs power when I was going to buy my new car. But then I found out about these engines, asked for a test drive and fell in love. But nobody seems to care or notice their existence. That's the reason why I can't see the point of the GTD. There are petrol engines with good horsepower and fuel consumption ratios but people don't seem to notice them. And, like you said, in everyday driving you don't need 200bhp as you won't use them at all and you'll only get high fuel consumption. Anything between 100 and 150 bhp in a car that weights 1100 kg is more than enough.
Click to expand...


TBH I never considered an engine like the one you mention as a real competitor for something like the GTI. A GTI has 200 hp which is a lot, but it's a lot heavier than 1100 kgs too, I think the new ones are closer to 1400 kgs

Belgium may be a special case because diesel is so cheap here, and everyone just buys the default diesel engine with around 100 hp (used to be 110 hp for VW diesels, now it's 130 or 140)

thing is, even if it drives nicer, no petrol car can beat a diesel on fuel consumption. that's why all the Bluemotion and Blue whatever eco versions are diesels. What people seem to forget is that diesel can give you great mileage as a given, and great hp if you tweak it a little bit. I'm one chip away from having 165 hp myself, a 40 hp increase, which should make my car even more fuel efficient.
 
Considering that diesel I've seen lately has been on par with petrol prices, I'd totally hit this.
 
MadCat360 said:
Then explain to me why the smell I'm smelling isn't a smell at all.
Click to expand...
Of course you can sense a smell, a different smell to combusted petrol but given that a petrol car does not have a particle filter and puts out larger particles, it's reasonable to think that the smell produced by a GTD is less noticeable than the smell produced by a GTI. Arguing that diesel "stinks" implies that it smells more than something else, which is an argument I believe is incorrect. Of course, if you compare a old diesel bus from 1992 to a petrol powered Skoda Fabia, then you'd be correct, but that's apples and oranges :)

If I were to describe diesel smell, I'd say it's got a touch of ginger to it.
Anyway, I rejoice! Petrol is under 11 SEK, I wonder what diesel prices are today, last time it was 10,04 and petrol then was 11,69 or something.
 
AiR said:
Arguing that diesel "stinks" implies that it smells more than something else, which is an argument I believe is incorrect.
Click to expand...

no, it doesn't imply that. The only thing that it implies is that it smells worse.

Similarly, a kitchen full of apple pies has an a lot stronger smell / a lot more smell than a mouse fart.

But I'd still rather smell the apple pies than the mouse fart.

And in the same way, I'd rather smell a Ferrari burning 25 liters of 98Octane petrol per 100km, than some stinky diesel, with any amount of filters.

Petrol just smells awesome, and diesel smells bad. fact.
 
Buba said:
You got weird fuel prices in Belgium... Diesel was just today @ 1.069 and 95 octane (which is enough for newer GTIs) was @1.209
Click to expand...

I agree... Here today diesel is 1.050 euro, petrol is 1.150. More or less.

Also: I dare you drive a GTI under 8.5... Can't do it (I couldn't so far). But then, I also doubt the 5.3 L for the diesel... My buddy drives his GolfV Bluemotion around that mark...
Click to expand...

I think it's possible (though very unlikely). But you don't have to drive around in a city very much. I have managed 5.3l/100 km EDIT which VW says is the average of the diesel GTD version END EDIT average on around 9k km with my own car (which is older but also less powerful), with other people and luggage in it. But I admit the greater part was highway.

-------------------

As for diesel... low-rev torque is great fun. great high-end HP is thrilling. You still have to go for the petrol if you want to feel adrenaline, but you can have a very very good time with diesel, and still go very very fast.
 
Last edited:
with regards to the "diesels not being as efficient as they are claimed to be" : see my sig.
According to Opel, the most efficient my car can get is 6.2l/100 kms. I'm at 6.4 and drive like a maniac at times.
Hell, I managed 5.5 being very careful a while ago...

it may not be fun at all doing 8.5 in a GTI, but that doesn't mean it's impossible :mrgreen:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top