trading in for R32?
Originally posted by AWDTurbo4
and whats wrong with that?
and whats wrong with that?
Newbie
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Not sure if anyone has mentioned this yet, but I've seen a lot of people posting the fact that it has AWD. Not all AWD is created equal, and in my opinion this version (Haldex) isn't truly AWD. It is FWD with traction control, meaning if the front tires slip then the back ones kick in.
As long as I'm posting, I agree with the people who say get a regular GTI instead of the R32. VWs are huge ripoffs, and the R32 is the biggest ripoff in the lineup (and I used to own a 2000 V6 GTI). They are extremely unreliable, and poor performers in general. The customer service at the average VW dealer is **** poor. They have at least as bad a rep as Mitsu, but it's even worse because their cars have ridiculous problems.
So anyways, if you get a 20th AE GTI, you save almost 10 grand, and with that money you could easily surpass the R32 in performance if you wanted to (and you probably won't). And you'll still get the nice interior and stuff.
As long as I'm posting, I agree with the people who say get a regular GTI instead of the R32. VWs are huge ripoffs, and the R32 is the biggest ripoff in the lineup (and I used to own a 2000 V6 GTI). They are extremely unreliable, and poor performers in general. The customer service at the average VW dealer is **** poor. They have at least as bad a rep as Mitsu, but it's even worse because their cars have ridiculous problems.
So anyways, if you get a 20th AE GTI, you save almost 10 grand, and with that money you could easily surpass the R32 in performance if you wanted to (and you probably won't). And you'll still get the nice interior and stuff.
Newbie
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
From: Cambridge, MA
Originally posted by mitsumichael7
It still is a little VW hatchback Golf! Period. You can go on and on about the engine and tranny and differences in the car as w whole, but the fact is it will always look like a Golf and the Evo will always look like an Evo. And once more time, this Golf is nearly $5K more than you can get an Evo for. And for the record, I would take my $16K Lancer Ralliart over the $32K VW R32.
It still is a little VW hatchback Golf! Period. You can go on and on about the engine and tranny and differences in the car as w whole, but the fact is it will always look like a Golf and the Evo will always look like an Evo. And once more time, this Golf is nearly $5K more than you can get an Evo for. And for the record, I would take my $16K Lancer Ralliart over the $32K VW R32.
If you can defend your statement with reasoning other than "I am biased against the R32 for an unknown reason" then please do so. Remember, looks are subjective. Personally, I think that the Evo and R32 are pretty much even as far as looks go, but I don't expect everyone to agree with me. Ugliness is not a reason to bash a car because there are plenty of other people who would disagree with you, regardless of the car it is (with the Aztek as a possible exception 
).Going by MSRP, both cars are rather close in pricing. Starting price on the R32 is $29,100, while the Evo starts at $28,987. As you can see, the price difference between the cars is almost neglible. Of course, if you pay sticker for any car under $100k you've got issues. Give the R32 a couple of months and you will be able to bargain down to as low, if not lower, than you can bargain an Evo down to. Out of curiosity, where can you get an Evo (not an RS, a standard Evo) for $24k?
The money you spend on an Evo goes more towards performance than the money you would spend on the R32, but the R32 has an edge in luxury. Which ever one you value over the other is all a matter of personal opinion. I seriously doubt that, if you had the money but could not get an Evo for whatever reason, you would still keep your RalliArt rather than buy the better performing, more luxurious R32. I mean, for the combination of the performance and luxury upgrades you get it's a no brainer, and it definitely doesn't point toward the
. Don't let your preconceptions of other marques blind you toward the true potential and value of other cars besides Mitsubishis, regardless of who makes them. Judging a car by its name is just as pointless and ignorant as judging a book by its cover.
Originally posted by AWDTurbo4
just 99.9% of the dash
just 99.9% of the dash
Last edited by PoorCollegeKid; Mar 31, 2004 at 06:50 PM.
Originally posted by PoorCollegeKid
So you're saying that, for you, looks are more important than performance? Just trying to clarify what your position is here... Again, if you can call the R32 "just a little VW hatchback Golf", then why do you consider the Evo to be more than "just a little four door Lancer"? By your reasoning, the Evo is just a Lancer, the WRX/STi are just Imprezas, and a 1LE WS6 is just a little Firebird. I mean, the only differences between these cars and the base models from which they were derived are engine, tranny, and suspension differences. In some cases, the frame may be strengthened, but these really don't change them enough from the base model to warrant a classification as a different type of car, right? If you can defend your statement with reasoning other than "I am biased against the R32 for an unknown reason" then please do so. Remember, looks are subjective. Personally, I think that the Evo and R32 are pretty much even as far as looks go, but I don't expect everyone to agree with me. Ugliness is not a reason to bash a car because there are plenty of other people who would disagree with you, regardless of the car it is (with the Aztek as a possible exception ).
Going by MSRP, both cars are rather close in pricing. Starting price on the R32 is $29,100, while the Evo starts at $28,987. As you can see, the price difference between the cars is almost neglible. Of course, if you pay sticker for any car under $100k you've got issues. Give the R32 a couple of months and you will be able to bargain down to as low, if not lower, than you can bargain an Evo down to. Out of curiosity, where can you get an Evo (not an RS, a standard Evo) for $24k?
The money you spend on an Evo goes more towards performance than the money you would spend on the R32, but the R32 has an edge in luxury. Which ever one you value over the other is all a matter of personal opinion. I seriously doubt that, if you had the money but could not get an Evo for whatever reason, you would still keep your RalliArt rather than buy the better performing, more luxurious R32. I mean, for the combination of the performance and luxury upgrades you get it's a no brainer, and it definitely doesn't point toward the. Don't let your preconceptions of other marques blind you toward the true potential and value of other cars besides Mitsubishis, regardless of who makes them. Judging a car by its name is just as pointless and ignorant as judging a book by its cover.
So you're saying that, for you, looks are more important than performance? Just trying to clarify what your position is here... Again, if you can call the R32 "just a little VW hatchback Golf", then why do you consider the Evo to be more than "just a little four door Lancer"? By your reasoning, the Evo is just a Lancer, the WRX/STi are just Imprezas, and a 1LE WS6 is just a little Firebird. I mean, the only differences between these cars and the base models from which they were derived are engine, tranny, and suspension differences. In some cases, the frame may be strengthened, but these really don't change them enough from the base model to warrant a classification as a different type of car, right?
If you can defend your statement with reasoning other than "I am biased against the R32 for an unknown reason" then please do so. Remember, looks are subjective. Personally, I think that the Evo and R32 are pretty much even as far as looks go, but I don't expect everyone to agree with me. Ugliness is not a reason to bash a car because there are plenty of other people who would disagree with you, regardless of the car it is (with the Aztek as a possible exception ).Going by MSRP, both cars are rather close in pricing. Starting price on the R32 is $29,100, while the Evo starts at $28,987. As you can see, the price difference between the cars is almost neglible. Of course, if you pay sticker for any car under $100k you've got issues. Give the R32 a couple of months and you will be able to bargain down to as low, if not lower, than you can bargain an Evo down to. Out of curiosity, where can you get an Evo (not an RS, a standard Evo) for $24k?
The money you spend on an Evo goes more towards performance than the money you would spend on the R32, but the R32 has an edge in luxury. Which ever one you value over the other is all a matter of personal opinion. I seriously doubt that, if you had the money but could not get an Evo for whatever reason, you would still keep your RalliArt rather than buy the better performing, more luxurious R32. I mean, for the combination of the performance and luxury upgrades you get it's a no brainer, and it definitely doesn't point toward the
. Don't let your preconceptions of other marques blind you toward the true potential and value of other cars besides Mitsubishis, regardless of who makes them. Judging a car by its name is just as pointless and ignorant as judging a book by its cover.
Newbie
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
From: Cambridge, MA
Originally posted by mitsumichael7
I like your train of thought, just disagree with the choice in car. I agree that you cant totally say that all lancers are the same, and all Imprezas are the same, etc, etc, etc. BUT you also claim that the R32 gives you the added "luxury" that you dont get in an Evo. I Disagree with you COMPLETELY here. I am sorry but I can NEVER look at a VW hatchback and think "luxury"...EVER! I am also trying to stay objective, and I will admit that the Passat has some "luxury", the Audi has some "luxury", but the Golf...nah. Infinity, Lexus...totally...Golf...NOPE. So the defense of my statement is simple, not that I need to defend it at all, but its this. The cars performance does not make up for the fact that it is a nearly $31K hatchback. You guys use the "well its fast defense", but SO WHAT. Lots of cars are fast for that much $$$. Lots of cars are classy and fast for that money and the VW R32 is REALLY REALLY low on the list of cars IMO. My cars for $30K that are fast and have the "luxury" quality you are speaking of are something like this...Infinity G35 coupe, Maxima, IS300, Subaru WRX or STi, Evo ( I know those 2 are a little more performance than luxury but I love the way both look), Passat, Solara, Acura TL (which is sick as F*@K), BMW 323...all those cars are about $30K give or take. All bring a lot to the table and the VW R32 IN NO WAY comes in the same catagory IMO. And yeah I would keep my car rather than get the R32. I paid $16K for mine and I LOVE IT!!
I like your train of thought, just disagree with the choice in car. I agree that you cant totally say that all lancers are the same, and all Imprezas are the same, etc, etc, etc. BUT you also claim that the R32 gives you the added "luxury" that you dont get in an Evo. I Disagree with you COMPLETELY here. I am sorry but I can NEVER look at a VW hatchback and think "luxury"...EVER! I am also trying to stay objective, and I will admit that the Passat has some "luxury", the Audi has some "luxury", but the Golf...nah. Infinity, Lexus...totally...Golf...NOPE. So the defense of my statement is simple, not that I need to defend it at all, but its this. The cars performance does not make up for the fact that it is a nearly $31K hatchback. You guys use the "well its fast defense", but SO WHAT. Lots of cars are fast for that much $$$. Lots of cars are classy and fast for that money and the VW R32 is REALLY REALLY low on the list of cars IMO. My cars for $30K that are fast and have the "luxury" quality you are speaking of are something like this...Infinity G35 coupe, Maxima, IS300, Subaru WRX or STi, Evo ( I know those 2 are a little more performance than luxury but I love the way both look), Passat, Solara, Acura TL (which is sick as F*@K), BMW 323...all those cars are about $30K give or take. All bring a lot to the table and the VW R32 IN NO WAY comes in the same catagory IMO. And yeah I would keep my car rather than get the R32. I paid $16K for mine and I LOVE IT!!
on the post.
Originally posted by mitsumichael7
Nothing is wrong with that if you want an ugly car for $30K
Nothing is wrong with that if you want an ugly car for $30K
Originally posted by mitsumichael7
I like your train of thought, just disagree with the choice in car. I agree that you cant totally say that all lancers are the same, and all Imprezas are the same, etc, etc, etc. BUT you also claim that the R32 gives you the added "luxury" that you dont get in an Evo. I Disagree with you COMPLETELY here. I am sorry but I can NEVER look at a VW hatchback and think "luxury"...EVER! I am also trying to stay objective, and I will admit that the Passat has some "luxury", the Audi has some "luxury", but the Golf...nah. Infinity, Lexus...totally...Golf...NOPE. So the defense of my statement is simple, not that I need to defend it at all, but its this. The cars performance does not make up for the fact that it is a nearly $31K hatchback. You guys use the "well its fast defense", but SO WHAT. Lots of cars are fast for that much $$$. Lots of cars are classy and fast for that money and the VW R32 is REALLY REALLY low on the list of cars IMO. My cars for $30K that are fast and have the "luxury" quality you are speaking of are something like this...Infinity G35 coupe, Maxima, IS300, Subaru WRX or STi, Evo ( I know those 2 are a little more performance than luxury but I love the way both look), Passat, Solara, Acura TL (which is sick as F*@K), BMW 323...all those cars are about $30K give or take. All bring a lot to the table and the VW R32 IN NO WAY comes in the same catagory IMO. And yeah I would keep my car rather than get the R32. I paid $16K for mine and I LOVE IT!!
I like your train of thought, just disagree with the choice in car. I agree that you cant totally say that all lancers are the same, and all Imprezas are the same, etc, etc, etc. BUT you also claim that the R32 gives you the added "luxury" that you dont get in an Evo. I Disagree with you COMPLETELY here. I am sorry but I can NEVER look at a VW hatchback and think "luxury"...EVER! I am also trying to stay objective, and I will admit that the Passat has some "luxury", the Audi has some "luxury", but the Golf...nah. Infinity, Lexus...totally...Golf...NOPE. So the defense of my statement is simple, not that I need to defend it at all, but its this. The cars performance does not make up for the fact that it is a nearly $31K hatchback. You guys use the "well its fast defense", but SO WHAT. Lots of cars are fast for that much $$$. Lots of cars are classy and fast for that money and the VW R32 is REALLY REALLY low on the list of cars IMO. My cars for $30K that are fast and have the "luxury" quality you are speaking of are something like this...Infinity G35 coupe, Maxima, IS300, Subaru WRX or STi, Evo ( I know those 2 are a little more performance than luxury but I love the way both look), Passat, Solara, Acura TL (which is sick as F*@K), BMW 323...all those cars are about $30K give or take. All bring a lot to the table and the VW R32 IN NO WAY comes in the same catagory IMO. And yeah I would keep my car rather than get the R32. I paid $16K for mine and I LOVE IT!!
i do agree with you on the luxury factory, there is no way a Golf is luxury, nor did i ever think it was, and nor do i want it to be. If i wanted luxury for 30k i would get a BMW or an A4. I personally happen to love the Golf, I think its really good looking.
hey if you want to pay $30K for that...to each his own. But for me, if I am looking to spend $30K and I didnt want to develop power from a turbo (for some odd reason I dont really know or care), I would still be looking at an Infinity G35 coupe, or Acura TL. Both have all the power you will need and something awesome to look at every day. What you have here is a Golf, with a little power. I personally dont see it, but once again...to each his own.
