Volkswagen re-releasing the Scirocco

k3v · 16 Jun 2008 at 11:58

[TW]Fox;11897442 said:
I see and the Corrado was a small hatchback?

I dont understand your point. I assumed you were commenting on the bit where someone said the scirroco would be nicer with the 3.2 engine in it and as the corrado was the predecessor to this car, I was pointing out that the big engine in a small car can be ok.
By todays standards i would say that the corrado is a small hatchback

[TW]Fox · 16 Jun 2008 at 12:00

But the 2.9 in the Corrado was a lightweight narrow angle V6 was it not? Whereas VAG's current 3.2 FSI is a conventional, heavier and larger engine.

k3v · 16 Jun 2008 at 12:03

whats that got to do with me saying the corrado was a good handling small car with a big engine?

Booner! · 16 Jun 2008 at 12:04

I would still have a 3.2l engine in it

[TW]Fox · 16 Jun 2008 at 12:07

k3v said:
whats that got to do with me saying the corrado was a good handling small car with a bigh engine?

How about... everything? Surely it's obvious the point I am making - heavy large capacity engines upset the balance of smaller cars. Therefore the fact that the 2.9 was a light, narrow angle engine is pretty much 'everything' to do with what you said and goes some way towards explaining how the Corrado bucked the trend (If it even did, we all know how fanboylike VAG'ers are, they'd argue the Passat diesel was the best handling car ever if they thought they were in with a chance)

Toker · 16 Jun 2008 at 12:08

2.0T FSI > V6 any day

with a stage 1 map the 2.0T sees 260-270bhp easy

stage 2 would see over 300bhp

Booner! · 16 Jun 2008 at 12:08

Toker said:
2.0T FSI > V6 any day

with a stage 1 map the 2.0T sees 260-270bhp easy

stage 2 would see over 300bhp

How much is stage 1 and stage 2?

k3v · 16 Jun 2008 at 12:12

[TW]Fox;11897669 said:
How about... everything? Surely it's obvious the point I am making - heavy large capacity engines upset the balance of smaller cars. Therefore the fact that the 2.9 was a light, narrow angle engine is pretty much 'everything' to do with what you said and goes some way towards explaining how the Corrado bucked the trend (If it even did, we all know how fanboylike VAG'ers are, they'd argue the Passat diesel was the best handling car ever if they thought they were in with a chance)

Relatively speaking though the 2.9 engine is still heavy compared to the rest of the engines in the corrado range and the corrado is a small car.....

Toker · 16 Jun 2008 at 12:15

Booner! said:
How much is stage 1 and stage 2?

do you mean in terms of money?

if so you are usually around £250-£350 for a stage 1 map, stage 2 you're looking at around £1500 providing it has a FMIC as standard

Dangerous Dave · 16 Jun 2008 at 12:17

[TW]Fox;11897669 said:
How about... everything? Surely it's obvious the point I am making - heavy large capacity engines upset the balance of smaller cars. Therefore the fact that the 2.9 was a light, narrow angle engine is pretty much 'everything' to do with what you said and goes some way towards explaining how the Corrado bucked the trend (If it even did, we all know how fanboylike VAG'ers are, they'd argue the Passat diesel was the best handling car ever if they thought they were in with a chance)

The 2.9/3.2 engines weigh about the same I am sure its within 3-5kg but can't quite remember, the Corrados VR6 was never regarded as light sure it was over 1200kg which is heavy for what was a small car. Its the transmission and 4wd system thats attached to the 3.2 that make the current cars very heavy almost 1600kg for a A3 is crazy.

[TW]Fox · 16 Jun 2008 at 12:19

1600kg thats insane, its about what my 5 weighs, no wonder it felt ungainly.

Toker · 16 Jun 2008 at 12:24

it's closer to 1500 than 1600, and the quattro does add a heap of weight

but it's still a heavy engine, the v6's are aluminium now though so aren't so bad

2.0T FSI - 152kg

3.2 V6 FSI - 169.5kg

Kappa · 16 Jun 2008 at 12:26

[TW]Fox;11897669 said:
(If it even did, we all know how fanboylike VAG'ers are, they'd argue the Passat diesel was the best handling car ever if they thought they were in with a chance)

Passats handle like a dog. Anyone tell I don't like my car?

I now have an unjustified negative view of VWs and am skeptical of everything they make.

pitchfork · 16 Jun 2008 at 12:29

"andy" said:
it was meant to be coming this year but not heard anything about it for ages

looked great too imo. well would in black!

I like that muchly

Begbie · 16 Jun 2008 at 12:47

How much are they going to be released at?

[TW]Fox · 16 Jun 2008 at 12:51

Kappa said:
Passats handle like a dog. Anyone tell I don't like my car? I now have an unjustified negative view of VWs and am skeptical of everything they make.

VAG is a god amonst car manufacturers, you must worship them. And remember you cant just call them VW, it has to be VAG!

Toker · 16 Jun 2008 at 12:56

[TW]Fox;11898076 said:
VAG is a god amonst car manufacturers, you must worship them. And remember you cant just call them VW, it has to be VAG!

I think I've only seen one person on here refer to VW as VAG, everyone else with a clue will refer to the various members of the VAG group as VAG and/or notice people doing this

Dangerous Dave · 16 Jun 2008 at 12:58

Begbie said:
How much are they going to be released at?

Going to come in according to the reviews at £1k under the Golf GTI at around 19k, they also come as standard with the magnetic adjustable dampers from the TT. It also sits lower and has a wider track than the GTI all the reviews I have seen have said it handles superbly and a lot better than the Golf GTI.

[TW]Fox · 16 Jun 2008 at 12:59

UNDER the GTI? Everything I've seen says its a couple of grand more, starts at £23k?

Dangerous Dave · 16 Jun 2008 at 13:03

[TW]Fox;11898161 said:
UNDER the GTI? Everything I've seen says its a couple of grand more, starts at £23k?

The last one I read said cheaper than the Golf GTi, sure it was Auto Car not 100% sure though.