2015 VW GTI, one of the best under $30k?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: badtlc
I couldn't justify that much coin for a car that small.

Maybe for someone who buys cars by the pound.

Gti is actually quite spacious and the hatch is very practical. It'll hold larger items than even a full size sedan.


What a stupid reply. You can get larger cars like the Mazda6 or Ford fusion for less money and they get better gas mileage. It is just practicality, not weight. If you wanted something spacious and utilitarian, the GTI is not the choice. If you want the hatch, there are bigger choices out there, too, for less money.

You buy a GTI because it is on the verge of luxury-car nice, power and fun to drive. You don't buy it for any practical reason at all other than maybe you need a smaller car.
 
Originally Posted By: badtlc


What a stupid reply. You can get larger cars like the Mazda6 or Ford fusion for less money and they get better gas mileage.

And neither one of these cars will allow u to load as large of a box as the GTI will.


Quote:


You buy a GTI because it is on the verge of luxury-car nice, power and fun to drive. You don't buy it for any practical reason at all other than maybe you need a smaller car.

I disagree. To me the GTI is a great combination of fun to drive and practicality. And $30k really isnt a whole lot of money for a new non econobox these days.
 
Originally Posted By: badtlc
What a stupid reply. You can get larger cars like the Mazda6 or Ford fusion for less money and they get better gas mileage. It is just practicality, not weight. If you wanted something spacious and utilitarian, the GTI is not the choice. If you want the hatch, there are bigger choices out there, too, for less money.

You buy a GTI because it is on the verge of luxury-car nice, power and fun to drive. You don't buy it for any practical reason at all other than maybe you need a smaller car.


Except practicality still plays into it. For me the appeal of the GTI is that it's good at a lot of things, even if not necessarily the best.

There are faster, more fuel efficient, more reliable, more comfortable, more spacious, more practical, better handling cars available at this price point. But for my use, and desires, in 2009 the GTI was the best choice, and it's practicality relative to other sporty cars in its price range was a consideration.

You can pan the GTI for any number of individual shortcomings it might have, but the point of the car is that it's "good" at a lot of things, not that it's the best at any one thing.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete

And neither one of these cars will allow u to load as large of a box as the GTI will.

I disagree. To me the GTI is a great combination of fun to drive and practicality. And $30k really isnt a whole lot of money for a new non econobox these days.


I can see logic doesn't sit with your decision to buy a GTI and that is fine. Logic isn't what pushes people to buy one.

As for the Mazda6 and Fusion, they have much more passenger room AND cargo room. The trunks hold way more than hatch area and when you lay the seats down they hold way more than the GTI does.

And you obviously ignored the point I made that there are other hatches if you have to have a hatch, with more cargo room than the GTI that are less than the GTI and get better gas mileage. Those are practical cars, too. The GTI is not a practical car. The Golf is a practical car.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: badtlc
I can see logic doesn't sit with your decision to buy a GTI and that is fine. Logic isn't what pushes people to buy one.

As for the Mazda6 and Fusion, they have much more passenger room AND cargo room. The trunks hold way more than hatch area and when you lay the seats down they hold way more than the GTI does.

And you obviously ignored the point I made that there are other hatches if you have to have a hatch, with more cargo room than the GTI that are less than the GTI and get better gas mileage.


Logic always goes into buying a car, just because you don't agree with the conclusion I came to as a result of that doesn't make me wrong.

If anything, what car you choose is an expression of your values (regarding cars). I didn't buy a Fusion/Accord/Mazda6/Traverse/whatever because I didn't like driving them as much, but I didn't buy a Miata/Mustang/Camaro because I wanted more practicality.

I didn't ignore your statement, but do you really want me to give you a rundown of why I personally chose to not buy those other options or could I ask you to accept that for my needs and wants the GTI was the best fit?

You're still picking and choosing specific attributes instead of taking the car for what it is as a whole. I thought I made it pretty clear that I didn't care that there were other cars in the same price range that had specifics that were superior, but I bought my car for its mix of qualities.

Originally Posted By: badtlc
Those are practical cars, too. The GTI is not a practical car. The Golf is a practical car.


Are you reading what you're saying?

The Golf and the GTI are the same basic car. How can two cars with absolutely identical interior and exterior dimensions, same seating layout and cargo space, be different in terms of practicality?
 
badtlc, you don't even have your facts straight about cargo space. The 2015 GTI has 52.7 cubic ft of cargo space with the seats down, and that's one big box.

A Fusion has a small hole between the trunk and the passenger compartment with the seats folded down and a 16 cubic ft sized trunk.

Are you honestly trying to make the argument that a Fusion has better and more usable cargo space than a Golf? The trunk by itself in the Fusion is about 5 cubic ft smaller than the hatch space in the Golf (with the seat folded UP).
 
Originally Posted By: Mykl


The Golf and the GTI are the same basic car. How can two cars with absolutely identical interior and exterior dimensions, same seating layout and cargo space, be different in terms of practicality?


So they are the same price?
 
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: Mykl


The Golf and the GTI are the same basic car. How can two cars with absolutely identical interior and exterior dimensions, same seating layout and cargo space, be different in terms of practicality?


So they are the same price?


and same running cost too? Tire cost/mile, fuel cost/mile, insurance...
 
Originally Posted By: Mykl
badtlc, you don't even have your facts straight about cargo space. The 2015 GTI has 52.7 cubic ft of cargo space with the seats down, and that's one big box.

A Fusion has a small hole between the trunk and the passenger compartment with the seats folded down and a 16 cubic ft sized trunk.

Are you honestly trying to make the argument that a Fusion has better and more usable cargo space than a Golf? The trunk by itself in the Fusion is about 5 cubic ft smaller than the hatch space in the Golf (with the seat folded UP).


With seats down, the Fusion is over 60 cubic feet. I said it has more and if you needed a hatch there were better practical options.

The golf cargo capacity listed for the hatch is if you fill to the roof which is not safe as it obstructs viewing out of the review mirror not to mention it is a bit awkward of a space if you try and fill it with luggage, tailgating gear etc. I can fit more stuff in the trunk of my mazda3 easily than the cargo area of my brothers GTI.
 
Originally Posted By: supton
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: Mykl


The Golf and the GTI are the same basic car. How can two cars with absolutely identical interior and exterior dimensions, same seating layout and cargo space, be different in terms of practicality?


So they are the same price?


and same running cost too? Tire cost/mile, fuel cost/mile, insurance...


Good points. All of those make the Golf a lot more practical than the GTI.
 
What the [censored] does price per mile have to do with practicality?

A cheaper car is automatically more useful simply because it's cheaper?

So 60 cubic feet split between two compartments separated by a small porthole is better than roughly the same amount of space all in one compartment?

I'm going to quote you....

Originally Posted By: badtlc
What a stupid reply.


The Mazda 3 is a fine car and a case can be made for it being more useful in some ways. But I would counter with "I didn't choose a 2010 Mazda 3 because I think it's ugly, doesn't ride as nicely, isn't as fun to drive, and has poorer quality interior materials." All subjected assessments of the car that you probably disagree with if you like the car.

That doesn't make you wrong for choosing a Mazda 3 over a Golf, but it would be incredibly arrogant to assume that everybody should choose their vehicle based on YOUR values and preferences.
 
Originally Posted By: Mykl

That doesn't make you wrong for choosing a Mazda 3 over a Golf, but it would be incredibly arrogant to assume that everybody should choose their vehicle based on YOUR values and preferences.


Agreed- I love my 2007 Mazdaspeed- especially after I tweaked the motor and suspension a bit(shame on me- how impractical!). It returns 26-28 mpg and has more than enough cargo space for my needs. That said, those with a hand-wringing fixation on fuel economy and cargo space should look elsewhere. Me, I'll gladly trade a few miles per gallon in exchange for a 0-60 time in the low five second range and a 1/4 mile run of under 14 seconds. To each his own...
 
Originally Posted By: badtlc


As for the Mazda6 and Fusion, they have much more passenger room AND cargo room.

Compare the size of the trunk opening hole. Try to fit a larger box through the trunk opening of a fusion or mazda6 and let us know how you make out.

And gti/golf has plenty of interior room for me. Im not the size of an average american.
smile.gif


Quote:
And you obviously ignored the point I made that there are other hatches if you have to have a hatch, with more cargo room than the GTI that are less than the GTI and get better gas mileage. Those are practical cars, too. The GTI is not a practical car. The Golf is a practical car.

Both golf and gti get similar mpg and cost similarly to maintain. Gti is more fun to drive, but still practical, at least to me.

My definition of unpractical would be a 2 seater with no trunk space.
 
I've been told the WRX will most likely be more reliable, overall, than the GTI.
 
Originally Posted By: MCompact
Agreed- I love my 2007 Mazdaspeed- especially after I tweaked the motor and suspension a bit(shame on me- how impractical!). It returns 26-28 mpg and has more than enough cargo space for my needs. That said, those with a hand-wringing fixation on fuel economy and cargo space should look elsewhere. Me, I'll gladly trade a few miles per gallon in exchange for a 0-60 time in the low five second range and a 1/4 mile run of under 14 seconds. To each his own...


Did you buy your MS3 new? I think I read in another thread that you've got about 135,000 miles on it? That's awesome, I hope you can squeeze a lot more out of it.

I can't wait to see what Mazda comes up with for the third gen MS3. I love the new styling, I really think they can pull out something special this time around.

Originally Posted By: buster
I've been told the WRX will most likely be more reliable, overall, than the GTI.


Having owned both I would call it a coin flip. Subaru went through the whole "glass transmission" thing with the WRX about ten years ago and has had a fair amount of oil burning issues, and many WRX owners ended up with cars that had bad ringlands and/or blown head gaskets. A friend of mine nuked his WRX's engine because of the old EJ's bad cooling design around one of the cylinders.

Issues I had with my WRX's included bad radiators, timing belt tensioners, and oddly.... the windshield washer pump (I have never heard of this failing on any other car).

Still, they're great cars and I'd buy one without being overly worried about reliability. They generally hold up just fine as long as you look after them and don't abuse them. Some people report struggling with Subaru over warranty claims, but it's hard to separate fact from fiction on forums when at least half the people complaining about their cars not being fixed rolled in with modified vehicles.
 
Originally Posted By: Mykl

Did you buy your MS3 new? I think I read in another thread that you've got about 135,000 miles on it? That's awesome, I hope you can squeeze a lot more out of it.

I can't wait to see what Mazda comes up with for the third gen MS3. I love the new styling, I really think they can pull out something special this time around.


Yes, I bought it new in July 2007; I now have 145k on it. UOAs continue to look good and it still feels extremely solid. My modification strategy has been to increase the power and improve the handling without affecting everyday usability, and I believe I've succeeded.
Like you, I'm hoping the next MS3 makes as big a splash as the 1st Gen cars did when they were introduced. Until then, I'm going to continue to enjoy my 2007...
 
Quote:
and oddly.... the windshield washer pump(I have never heard of this failing on any other car)

My 530i needed a new washer pump last year. While this was the first such issue on any car ive owned, i guess anything can go wrong on an 11 year old vehicle.
 
Originally Posted By: MCompact

Yes, I bought it new in July 2007; I now have 145k on it. UOAs continue to look good and it still feels extremely solid. My modification strategy has been to increase the power and improve the handling without affecting everyday usability, and I believe I've succeeded.
Like you, I'm hoping the next MS3 makes as big a splash as the 1st Gen cars did when they were introduced. Until then, I'm going to continue to enjoy my 2007...


I haven't changed anything on my car aside from tires, but my plan was basically the same as yours. Do some light modifications to increase performance and enhance handling without detracting significantly from what I like about the car. Thankfully, like the Mazdaspeeds, there are plenty of options out there for me to choose from.

Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
My 530i needed a new washer pump last year. While this was the first such issue on any car ive owned, i guess anything can go wrong on an 11 year old vehicle.


What a bizarre thing to have fail. At least in my case the part was really cheap and took about two minutes to swap out.
 
I would not really compare a WRX to a GTI except they are quick decent handling vehicles both fun to drive while costing similar.

IMHO its like picking Coke or Pepsi if Cola were your thing.

I thought reliability was excellent with turbo Subaru but my own experience past 130k has been well below average.
 
why checkered fabric on the seat covers? do buyers of GTI consider that aspect to be high class? personally, that design of the fabric alone will make me not buy the GTI.

I understand VW has been doing that since the first GTI came out in early eighties. I still don't like it after 35 years.

how many of you like that fabric pattern on the seats?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top