Volkswagen Mark IV Forum banner

Who's got the fastest car on here?

5K views 55 replies 31 participants last post by  djhorace 
#1 ·
RULES!!!

- No petty arguing!
- No 'my car is bigger and better than yours' posts
- No talk of stupid, ilegal speeds on public highways.

So, now I got that over and done with as I feel a thread such as this might need it. Who in all seriousness has the fastest car on here? Does not have to be VAG.

Would like to see two different users here.

- Those with a STANDARD car which is the fastest out of all the standard cars.
- Those with MODDED cars which are the fastest out of all modded.

There is no answer to who's is fastest, and not many people hav quarter mile times etc, so bhp I would think would do, though we would have to bear in mind the type of car. A 500bhp truck is great, but not going to be faster than a 200bhp 1.8T hatchback.

I am the judge, along with another 2 posters who shall, no doubt, put themselves forwards.

And remember, it's just a bit of fun!!

Think you got what it takes!?
 
See less See more
#4 ·
Ok

Golf MK4 V6 2MOTION1

214BHP @ 6300 RPM TOP SPEED WITH MOODED GEARBOX 164MPH GERMAN AUTOBAHN A44 DORTMOND TO KASEL[8-|]

hows that for a start

LOL get it on[<:eek:)]
I'll take your 4motion an raise it to 240bhp @ 6300rpm with a top speed of something, not sure, btu just seen a video today of one doing nearly 170mph.

But someone else I know could come and wipe us off the scales with his M3 [;)]
 
#6 ·
There is no way I'm going near this as my car is a slow oil burner but there should be two sub-categories each with two sub-categories as well;

1a, Standing Start 2wd

1b, Standing Start 4wd

2a, Rolling Start (50mph to 120mph) 2wd

3a, Rolling Start (50mph to 120mph) 4wd

Personally I think the 4mo's and R32's will cream it on a standing start but things would be very close on the rolling start from 50mph to 120mph with some exotically tuned TDI's being quite competitive. I do however think that the 1.8t will be the overall fastest in the 50 to 120. Top end I think Dentreform will take some beating !

Saying that there are a few with turbo'd / supercharged R32's out there in which case they'll probably wipe the floor with everything. I don't know how much transmission power losses would effect the top end of the 4wd cars.
 
#7 ·
Colin I don't want to get too technical! Just number of horses relative to the size of the car really. It's only a bit of fun.

Remember though, there are also other cars on here other than VAG stuff. Which is half the reason this post is here.

If for instance someone has a caterham, we can all go home!

As for the 1.8T being faster between 50-120, I wouldnt think so. The R32 is definately faster than my 150bhp 1.8T that I had a 70 after I plonk my foot down. Couldn't comment on the 180 1.8T though, as obviously 6 gears makes a huge difference at this speed. I reckon it might be close then, due to the 1.8T being lighter aswell.
 
#9 ·
Colin I don't want to get too technical! Just number of horses relative to the size of the car really. It's only a bit of fun.

Remember though, there are also other cars on here other than VAG stuff. Which is half the reason this post is here.

If for instance someone has a caterham, we can all go home!

As for the 1.8T being faster between 50-120, I wouldnt think so. The R32 is definately faster than my 150bhp 1.8T that I had a 70 after I plonk my foot down. Couldn't comment on the 180 1.8T though, as obviously 6 gears makes a huge difference at this speed. I reckon it might be close then, due to the 1.8T being lighter aswell.
Ok, point taken.

If thats the case with no other variables, then I'd go for some super tuned (turbo'd / super'd) R32 of which there are one or two on here, or were. You can have a 1.8t with massive horsepower but it is likely to just spin it's wheels at almost any speed.

But as you say, someone might come in with another make wildcard and blow away any VW offering.
 
#14 ·
As for the 1.8T being faster between 50-120, I wouldnt think so. The R32 is definately faster than my 150bhp 1.8T that I had a 70 after I plonk my foot down. Couldn't comment on the 180 1.8T though, as obviously 6 gears makes a huge difference at this speed. I reckon it might be close then, due to the 1.8T being lighter aswell.
Depends if you're talking remapped or not? Acceleration or top end speed?

A 150bhp AUM will map to the same levels as a 180bhp AUQ, both these models will be quicker than a stock R32 (acceleration, not standing start).

A well remapped 1.8T (AUM or AUQ) will match a well remapped R32, again acceleration, not standing start.
Well my Revo'd AUQ certainly matched Tabs' remapped R32, I also know my car is now quicker than it was when we had that little blast (up to 130ish).

EddyH won't be far off with ~450bhp in his 4WD Octy.
 
#15 ·
As for the 1.8T being faster between 50-120, I wouldnt think so. The R32 is definately faster than my 150bhp 1.8T that I had a 70 after I plonk my foot down. Couldn't comment on the 180 1.8T though, as obviously 6 gears makes a huge difference at this speed. I reckon it might be close then, due to the 1.8T being lighter aswell.
Depends if you're talking remapped or not? Acceleration or top end speed?

A 150bhp AUM will map to the same levels as a 180bhp AUQ, both these models will be quicker than a stock R32 (acceleration, not standing start).

A well remapped 1.8T (AUM or AUQ) will match a well remapped R32, again acceleration, not standing start.
Well my Revo'd AUQ certainly matched Tabs' remapped R32, I also know my car is now quicker than it was when we had that little blast (up to 130ish).

EddyH won't be far off with ~450bhp in his 4WD Octy.
Talking standard, both cars. Theres big differences between the 150 1.8T and the 180 1.8T

Hence why I said the R32 is deffo faster at say 70 if I put my foot down than the 150 1.8T was. But, not sure about a 180, though wouldn't expect much in it. Turbo's do a lot for an engine!!
 
#16 ·
Talking standard, both cars. Theres big differences between the 150 1.8T and the 180 1.8T

Hence why I said the R32 is deffo faster at say 70 if I put my foot down than the 150 1.8T was. But, not sure about a 180, though wouldn't expect much in it. Turbo's do a lot for an engine!!
In that case I reckon a stock R32 would be substantially quicker than a stock 180.
 
#18 ·
Talking standard, both cars. Theres big differences between the 150 1.8T and the 180 1.8T

Hence why I said the R32 is deffo faster at say 70 if I put my foot down than the 150 1.8T was. But, not sure about a 180, though wouldn't expect much in it. Turbo's do a lot for an engine!!
In that case I reckon a stock R32 would be substantially quicker than a stock 180.
Substantially? You think? Once rolling I thought there wouldnt be much in it. Ok, 60bhp more, but a heavier car, bigger wheels etc etc
 
#20 ·
Talking standard, both cars. Theres big differences between the 150 1.8T and the 180 1.8T

Hence why I said the R32 is deffo faster at say 70 if I put my foot down than the 150 1.8T was. But, not sure about a 180, though wouldn't expect much in it. Turbo's do a lot for an engine!!
In that case I reckon a stock R32 would be substantially quicker than a stock 180.
Substantially? You think? Once rolling I thought there wouldnt be much in it. Ok, 60bhp more, but a heavier car, bigger wheels etc etc
the R is what , 15 sec's to 100 and the 180 is 18 sec's doesnt sound much but i bet on the road it would tell a different story, the 180 is on a par with the v6 4mo which is also 18 sec's to 100 , i think the dude with the lambo wins anyway [;)]
 
#21 ·
Talking standard, both cars. Theres big differences between the 150 1.8T and the 180 1.8T

Hence why I said the R32 is deffo faster at say 70 if I put my foot down than the 150 1.8T was. But, not sure about a 180, though wouldn't expect much in it. Turbo's do a lot for an engine!!
In that case I reckon a stock R32 would be substantially quicker than a stock 180.
Substantially? You think? Once rolling I thought there wouldnt be much in it. Ok, 60bhp more, but a heavier car, bigger wheels etc etc
The reason I think that is because I could pull on Tabs' R32 when he was stock (me revo'd to around 235bhp) but I certainly couldn't leave him as such. At that point I could manage a 0-100 in around 15 seconds and my car was more than substantially faster than when it was stock and 180bhp.
 
#24 ·
Theres also a chap with a Porsche Cayman S. Mob i think his username. I think that`d wipe the M3 but im not sure on figures. Cool thread :) Shame i cant contend
[:D]

If we were talking track or twisties, I'd say my Cayman would be in with a shout - 0-100 in 12 secs so pretty fast

When the S60 is remapped it should be quicker still, in a straight line that is.............
 
#26 ·
I've a MK Indy with a GSXR 1000 (p.commander and other tweeks) bike engine. It's about 3.6 to 60. If I could loose more weight (both me and the car) and get more out of it!



Anyone else have a Caterham/Lotus 7 type car?
I think this could be a winner!
are you sure [:p]

Posted Image


seriously though those lightweight track cars are awesomely fast , whats the power to weight ratio of that thing, must be capable of extremly high cornering speeds . i actually seen a radical on the motorway about a year ago, ive never seen somethin look so out of place ,lol
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top