Decision time

[Henry A Harper III]

My 88 16v has been a great daily driver for the last 14 years for me, 164k
miles on top of the 100k it had when I got it...I have had a couple
transaxle issues in that time but the upper gears failed and I could at
least get home slowly. Bilsteins, eurolights, stainless exhaust, euro intake
cam, wide-ratio 8v tranny. Just keeps plugging along. My take on the "8v has
more torque" issue is that the 8v SEEMS to have more torque because it's all
there (and that's all you get) down low; the 16v builds more power at the
top end that makes the low end seem weak. Seems like I have seen dyno charts
that show the 16v with same or greater torque everywhere.

Yes, the GTI is noisier than the 200q, obviously. Then again it has gotten
35mpg on the same trip that the 200q recently returned 27mpg on. Maybe I
wouldn't be happy with a 100-mile commute every day in it. But most days
(like today) I ride my bike on my 3-mile commute.

>
> Not sure why you thought your Mk2 sucked as a daily driver (coming from 8V
> experience). What went wrong?
>
> I throughly enjoyed my 8V until I prepped it out fully for SCCA
> Solo2 Stock
> competition, at that point, it became a harsh riding, bouncy,
> twitchy not so
> enjoyable daily driver unless I pushed it everywhere I went (which I did).
>
> LL - NY
>
> On 1/12/09, Max Baker <max at warped.org> wrote:
> >
> > Tony Hoffman wrote:
> > > As for the Passat, it's an A4. If you are looking for lower
> > > maintenance than the A4, that's not it. The guy with the MK2 GTI
> > > suggestion is more along that path. cheap and fun!. However, not quite
> > > as nice as the A4 ;-)
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > Having just sold my MK2 GTI for my CQ, I can say with authority, DON'T
> > GET ONE.   And this is from a die-hard VW guy who's owned a few, and
> > still owns a MK3.     The MK2 really sucked as a daily driver.   (It was
> > a 16v FWIW).
> >
>