Not the VW we need, the VW we deserve

"Snuze: Needs another Swede" (markg)
05/06/2015 at 09:20 • Filed to: None

I made a comment yesterday on the VW Golf GTI article, asking if the new GTI costs 20% more, do you really getting 20% more car? I think the overwhelming answer is yes. Sure, you have to take a 50% weight hike, but you also gain more than double the power and benefit from 30 years of chassis and suspension development. Not to mention better construction and materials, more creature comforts, etc.

But one thing that I noticed, and was pointed out to me multiple times, is that the new Golf GTI is a behemoth compared to it’s older sibling. Many people suggested that the Polo GTI is a more apt comparison, so I went ahead and did it. I don’t have fancy Photoshop skills, just Excel and an internet connection, so behold, the true successor to the 1985 Golf GTI’s kingdom:

A few things to note - I couldn’t find much information on the Polo GTI suspension beyond what’s shown. Additionally, the Polo GTI isn’t offered in the US, so it’s hard to get a price. To estimate one, I took the ratio of the US Golf GTI price ($24,785) to it’s UK price (Ł27,500) and multiplied that times the Polo GTI UK Price (Ł18,900). This probably isn’t the best way to do this, but it’s a good ballpark.

DISCUSSION (17)

SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie > Snuze: Needs another Swede
05/06/2015 at 09:30

Pretty sure this is the modern GTI we need

Kinja'd!!!

Snuze: Needs another Swede > SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie
05/06/2015 at 09:33

Pretty sure that’s a Ford, bro.

Seriously though, the Fiesta ST is a great little car. And definitely in the same league as the Polo GTI.

SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie > Snuze: Needs another Swede
05/06/2015 at 09:35

Yep, I know. The GTIs have just gotten so far from what they were. If there’s a modern equivalent to the GTI being made today, this is it.

Snuze: Needs another Swede > SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie
05/06/2015 at 09:40

A quick glance at the specs shows the Polo GTI and FiST are very similar in terms of overall size, though the ST is about 100lbs lighter, but otherwise they are close. You are right, the new Golf GTI is so far from what it was. But the Fiesta and FiST do so well, I think it makes a good case for VW to bring the Polo GTI here to the US.

njp1589 > SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie
05/06/2015 at 09:46

I wish the price didn’t creep so close to this one though;

Kinja'd!!!

LongbowMkII > Snuze: Needs another Swede
05/06/2015 at 09:46

are those imperial mpgs for the polo? yay conversions!

SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie > njp1589
05/06/2015 at 09:47

I prefer the FiST ;). I think it’s more fun.

njp1589 > SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie
05/06/2015 at 09:53

I agree with you wholeheartedly. The problem right now is that a new FiST is about $21k here, and a FoST is about $22k. That’s hard for me to argue with.

SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie > njp1589
05/06/2015 at 09:54

Wow, that’s bizarre. They having trouble moving the FoSTs?

Snuze: Needs another Swede > LongbowMkII
05/06/2015 at 09:58

No, those figures are in US units. Should have also made a note of that.

LongbowMkII > Snuze: Needs another Swede
05/06/2015 at 10:01

those are amazing mpg numbers!

Snuze: Needs another Swede > LongbowMkII
05/06/2015 at 10:05

Agreed. The 50mpg highway figure in particular jumps out at me in particular. I wonder if there’s a correction between the Euro-cycle and the EPA cycle, like a way to estimate one if you know the other?

LongbowMkII > Snuze: Needs another Swede
05/06/2015 at 10:17

looking at the UK media reporting on the 6spd polo GTI, the 47.1 is in miles per imperial gallons even then its still over 39 miles per US gallon. But European testing seems to really favor turbos. so who really knows. C+D made an ‘estimate’ of 32-36 hwy mpg, seems feasible.

still 190hp and ~35mpg. I’m on board.

Snuze: Needs another Swede > LongbowMkII
05/06/2015 at 10:29

I pulled my info from the VW UK Polo brochure PDF file. I didn’t want to screw up US/Imperial units so I converted from L/100km. The figures, in case you’re wondering are Manual - 7.6/5.1 and DSG 7.2/4.7

njp1589 > SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie
05/06/2015 at 10:31

They must be... either that or it’s incentives. Even a brand new one has a bunch of incentives right now.

LongbowMkII > Snuze: Needs another Swede
05/06/2015 at 10:36

ahh, l/km confuses my poor American mind. metric AND inverted? my brain says no.

Snuze: Needs another Swede > LongbowMkII
05/06/2015 at 10:46

Maybe it’s an engineering thing. I’m so used to doing unit conversions, but your right, L/100km is a weird one because its inverted, volume over distance instead of the usual opposite.