Compxpert Posted February 5, 2010 Posted February 5, 2010 '02 Volkswagen GTI 6spd manual, $6900 Oh god thats a good price too. Its hard to get them in my area for that much... i suspect for that much it might have around 80k miles I suppose you'd have to call to get mileage it doesn't say in the listing. The VR6 is pretty fuel efficient for a V6 engine it gets 28-32mpg in the manual. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IVIYTH0S Posted February 5, 2010 Posted February 5, 2010 Oh god thats a good price too. Its hard to get them in my area for that much... i suspect for that much it might have around 80k miles I suppose you'd have to call to get mileage it doesn't say in the listing. The VR6 is pretty fuel efficient for a V6 engine it gets 28-32mpg in the manual. I'd prefer the 1.8 Turbo, considering you are 1.0L bigger and two more cylinders and only pull 20 more horses is a little sad. I'd imagine the 1.8L could handle a bigger/better turbo too, whereas the 2.8L may have to be taken apart and modified to enable forced induction Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Compxpert Posted February 5, 2010 Posted February 5, 2010 (edited) I'd prefer the 1.8 Turbo, considering you are 1.0L bigger and two more cylinders and only pull 20 more horses is a little sad. I'd imagine the 1.8L could handle a bigger/better turbo too, whereas the 2.8L may have to be taken apart and modified to enable forced induction The block its self can take a lot of horses with little modification though. All I need is a turbo kit, head work, and upgraded pistons. Going for turbo charged 4 cylinders I would prefer a 2.0T over a 1.8. Edited February 5, 2010 by Compxpert Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IVIYTH0S Posted February 5, 2010 Posted February 5, 2010 The block its self can take a lot of horses with little modification though. All I need is a turbo kit, head work, and upgraded pistons. Going for turbo charged 4 cylinders I would prefer a 2.0T over a 1.8. I'd hope it could because for a 2.8L, I'd expect alot more from an engine that size. Do you have a VR6?? Isn't upgrading a NA platform to FI a little costly, that's why I figured the 1.8T would be a much more cost effective turbo car. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingdingeling Posted February 5, 2010 Posted February 5, 2010 I'd prefer the 1.8 Turbo, considering you are 1.0L bigger and two more cylinders and only pull 20 more horses is a little sad. I'd imagine the 1.8L could handle a bigger/better turbo too, whereas the 2.8L may have to be taken apart and modified to enable forced induction The 1.8 Turbo is thirstier than the VR6 in the GTI Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IVIYTH0S Posted February 5, 2010 Posted February 5, 2010 The 1.8 Turbo is thirstier than the VR6 in the GTI Touch Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silverfox Posted February 5, 2010 Posted February 5, 2010 A somewhat unrelated note, I'm still quite pissed off that the Mazdaspeed 6 uses the 4cyl from the Mazda3 with a turbo. The car would have been awesome if it was the 6cyl they turbo'd <_< (this sort of reminds me of that). What part of mazda 6, has to do with 4 cylinders. It was an epic fail move imhoIn VW's case they should have had the VR6 NA and VR6 turbo. What part of a Mazda 3 has anything to do with 4 cylinders either? The Mazda 6 is a larger platform than the Mazda 3. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IVIYTH0S Posted February 5, 2010 Posted February 5, 2010 What part of a Mazda 3 has anything to do with 4 cylinders either? The Mazda 6 is a larger platform than the Mazda 3. lol I knew someone'd say that and my poor excuse is the I4 it packs is a 2.3 Why did you say the Mazda6 is a larger platform than the 3? I never said otherwise, and that's my point. Why would they put the same drivetrain in both high end models?? with one weighing ~200-500lbs less?? The Mazdaspeed6 mysteriously disappears off the market and next year the mazdaspeed3 comes out with rather similar power levels (with a no doubt intentional 11hp loss to make the Speed6 look better) '07 MazdaSpeed3 '06 MazdaSpeed6 It should have V6+Turbo or they should not have released it at all Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waco Posted February 5, 2010 Posted February 5, 2010 You don't need a hybrid to average 20 mpg. How about a Ford Fusion? No kidding! My supercharged Cobalt averages 26 MPG in mostly city driving with my lead foot. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
slick2500 Posted February 5, 2010 Posted February 5, 2010 There are quite a few fairly large dudes that hang around here. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silverfox Posted February 5, 2010 Posted February 5, 2010 lol I knew someone'd say that and my poor excuse is the I4 it packs is a 2.3 Why did you say the Mazda6 is a larger platform than the 3? I never said otherwise, and that's my point. Why would they put the same drivetrain in both high end models?? with one weighing ~200-500lbs less?? The Mazdaspeed6 mysteriously disappears off the market and next year the mazdaspeed3 comes out with rather similar power levels (with a no doubt intentional 11hp loss to make the Speed6 look better) '07 MazdaSpeed3 '06 MazdaSpeed6 It should have V6+Turbo or they should not have released it at all I was merely pointing out that the name of the car is irrelevant and that 6 is a bigger number than 3. The M6 is a bigger car than the M3. Nothing to do with engines! The Mazda Speed 3 is based on the Ford Focus underneath; the similar power levels in a smaller and lighter car are what the American public apparently wants, so I would expect that is partly the reason for the 6 to disappear as it were. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IVIYTH0S Posted February 5, 2010 Posted February 5, 2010 I was merely pointing out that the name of the car is irrelevant and that 6 is a bigger number than 3. The M6 is a bigger car than the M3. Nothing to do with engines! The Mazda Speed 3 is based on the Ford Focus underneath; the similar power levels in a smaller and lighter car are what the American public apparently wants, so I would expect that is partly the reason for the 6 to disappear as it were. I wouldn't call an mazda3 a light car Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now