THE INEVITABLE COMPARISON
We spent $859 on the APR programming, $818 on suspension, and $150 on installation for a total of about $1800. For that money, you get a GTI whose 252-hp power output is remarkably close to the R32's 250-hp rating. (Of course, the GTI's 303 lb-ft destroys the R32's relatively soft 236 lb-ft.) The key differences are that the R32 has all-wheel drive, six cylinders, and much better brakes (along with another few upgrades) - but it also commands about another $5000. So the question is - is the R32 worth the extra money?
In terms of acceleration, there is a clear winner: the chipped GTI. The R32 managed the 0-to-60 mph sprint in 6.2 seconds, but the GTI cleared the same hurdle in only 6.0 - 0.2 seconds faster. That may not seem like a significant difference, but the front-wheel drive GTI is severely traction limited. So, as speeds increase, so too does the GTI's advantage: it beats the R32 to 130 mph by an astonishing 7.1 seconds. And while both the stock GTI and R32 are limited to around 130 mph, the chipped car continued pulling until 147 mph.
Full-out acceleration numbers show only part of the GTI's advantages - it's in the midrange where the GTI's torque blows the R32 off the road. Full-throttle fifth-gear passing acceleration from 50-70 mph is a massive 0.6 seconds faster in the GTI.
Straight-line speeds don't tell the full story, of course - so we swapped the GTI's wheels and summer tires over to the R32 (which arrived at our editorial offices with All-Season tires) and performed braking and cornering tests. The R32's all-wheel drive and better weight distribution helped lateral grip, beating the lowered GTI's 0.89g by pulling 0.92g. Braking distances from 70 mph were comparable.
The biggest test came when we took both cars to Chrysler Proving Ground's tight road course. After driving the cars back to back (again with the same wheels and tires) I wrote in my logbook, "I bet my slowest lap in the R32 was still faster than my best lap in the GTI." And my seat-of-the-pants impression was correct.
Laps in the R32 were, on average, 1.3 seconds faster than the GTI, despite the GTI's significant acceleration advantage. While the R32's lateral grip was a contributor to the faster laptimes, its ability to put down power was no doubt the biggest help. The GTI scrambled out of turns, spinning its front tires - at times even in third gear. The R32 simply rocketed out of the corners with no drama.
After driving an R32 at the Streets of Willow race course in California, I commented that the R32 was a terminal understeerer. This particular R32, however, behaved quite differently. The rear half of the car played an active role in the corners, rotating willingly, especially under trail-braking. Under throttle, the Haldex all-wheel drive system transfers enough power forward to pull the R32 back in line. Compared with the razor-sharp R32, the GTI fumbled around the track - and its brakes faded horribly after a few laps. Neither the aroma of cooked brakes nor the long, squishy pedal travel was to be found on the R32.
So while the GTI is very quick in a straight line, and the Koni FSD / Eibach Pro suspension kit makes it look and ride great, the R32 is still the MkV to beat when the roads turn twisty. In terms of straight-line performance only, the R32 is probably not worth the price premium, but you can't put a price tag on its much more civilized demeanor. Unlike the GTI, the R32 doesn't accidentally light up its front tires pulling away from every stoplight, and its brake pedal doesn't feel like mushy oatmeal.
This is one comparison that's too close to call - it comes down to a matter of taste. Around town, the GTI is our choice, but for back-road blasts and track days, we'd spend the extra money for the R32. ...next page >>