Cayman R. V. Golf R - Page 5 - Boxster/Cayman - PistonHeads UK

Couldn't believe it today the Golf R out performed the Cayman R up the Furka pass. It was a little wet though

Wow !

ditch the N spec tyres

You're driving a Porsche, their driving a glorified hatchback on finance. I wouldnt worry about

SkinnyP said: You're driving a Porsche, their driving a glorified hatchback on finance. I wouldnt worry about Wow, and that on Shedheads.com........

Not that surprising, is it? AWD vs RWD in the wet, 300 vs 330 hp and the Golf R has a wider powerband. I’m pretty sure the person in the Cayman had a lot more fun so that makes up for it.

SkinnyP said: You're driving a Porsche, their driving a glorified hatchback on finance. I wouldnt worry about I was in the glorified hatch back on finance a very surprising drive and enjoyable one. Well worth a look!

All sorts of variables here... You'd expect cayman to be faster. Less power and heavier!.. Did 4wd and it being a little wet make the difference? Better driver in golf? Less capable driver in Cayman?

Being a little wet and 4wd made the difference. The Golf has so much grip and DSG box made it so quick out of the tight hair pins. Big smile. A lot of Porsches are on finance aswell

ebbwboy said: Couldn't believe it today the Golf R out performed the Cayman R up the Furka pass. It was a little wet though Much slower cars "out performing" hypercars is the norm rather than the exception at the Nurburgring. Driver is about 4 times more important than car.

Just had my Golf R "lease special" delivered a few days ago. Bearing in mind that the engine is still tight, it feels very close in the performance stakes as our 981s, therefore not sure how different an CR is to my s. Have bought it as the family hack for 2 years, pretty impressive for a Golf! I have heard that some of them are making more than the 300hp quoted.. A bit of fun, when you need more passengers!!

Gio - am curious which do you find yourself driving - or wanting to drive - more?

I have a Cayman R and a BMW i3. I have no difficulty deciding which to drive But Golf R v Cayman R --- yes you have made life hard by choosing two similar cars. If 200 BHP per tonne is the same as 250 BHP per tonne ...

ChrisW. said: I have a Cayman R and a BMW i3. I have no difficulty deciding which to drive But Golf R v Cayman R --- yes you have made life hard by choosing two similar cars. If 200 BHP per tonne is the same as 250 BHP per tonne ... Sorry to go completely off Porsche topic. The i3 really intrigues me with the tech and great cabin. What is like to own and use in the real world?

It's a daft thread, my old TTRS would kill anything A to B even GTR's My mini jcw beats most things. I drive my R for pure enjoyment and I am off to the super car meet in my Spyder today in Bedford. The jcw is staying firm on the drive.

mrdemon said: It's a daft thread, my old TTRS would kill anything A to B even GTR's My mini jcw beats most things. I drive my R for pure enjoyment and I am off to the super car meet in my Spyder today in Bedford. The jcw is staying firm on the drive. Oh dear. No. No. No. Your old TT was not faster than a GTR. You have some kind of rare mental condition when it comes to that car.

Or any car not owned or previously owned!

the laws of physics would suggest the mid engine car to be better on corners, fact, so comes down to the drivers

A 2010 Cayman R is 8 seconds a lap quicker around the Nurburgring than a Mk7 Golf R,read into that what you will

mrdemon said: It's a daft thread, my old TTRS would kill anything A to B even GTR's My mini jcw beats most things. I drive my R for pure enjoyment and I am off to the super car meet in my Spyder today in Bedford. The jcw is staying firm on the drive. What isn't mummy lending you the keys today? Have you not done your homework !?

BMCG said: Gio - am curious which do you find yourself driving - or wanting to drive - more? As I have only had the R a few days, of course it is like a new toy, so using it a lot more. Putting it into race mode is quite interesting, however keep getting comments about the number of exhausts, if I could change anything, it would be that, as it does look a bit max power! The R will be a family cart with a bit of zip, the Cayman IMHO is a thing a beauty and a real sense of occasion when you drive it. If you are looking for the ultimate modern pound for performance car Golf R does take some beating, overall seems like a good product.. G

Lovely pair there Gio.

Good mix of ability and practicality. 4wd will serve you well in winter too. Having a boxster spyder and audi rs3 work really well for me, although intrigued by the golf r and how you'll get on w it in the longer run. Enjoy them both!

ebbwboy said: What isn't mummy lending you the keys today? Have you not done your homework !? As she passed away early in life from a heart attack ,and I am 45, not sure how to answer a stupid comment.

Sorry no offence intended Edited by ebbwboy on Monday 8th September 07:06

mrdemon said: My mini jcw beats most things. Really?

dunc_sx said: mrdemon said: My mini jcw beats most things. Really? If you look at the average car on the road, then he has a point.

VladD said: dunc_sx said: mrdemon said: My mini jcw beats most things. Really? If you look at the average car on the road, then he has a point. I've seen one driven quickly, and they do shift. Not as good in corners as you might expect (although that could have been the driver's fault), but pretty fast.

Hot hatches out performing Sports/Super cars on twisty roads is nothing new... http://youtu.be/BTTI-aMKn60 Harry Metcalf on his Clio Trophy vs various sports/supercars

Nurburgsingh said: Hot hatches out performing Sports/Super cars on twisty roads is nothing new... http://youtu.be/BTTI-aMKn60 Harry Metcalf on his Clio Trophy vs various sports/supercars I always think the difference is that the guy in the hot hatch takes more risk and gets closer to (or over) the limits of grip. People just don't go so close to the limits in supercars.

Mine arrived last week and i've just got back from a 800 mile run down to the roads that I cut my driving teeth on as a lad. It's great being back in a hot hatch, it's quite an impressive piece of kit. The way it bites into and follows corners is quite something. I'll be looking to add a stage 1 Revo kit to take it to 365BHP once I have completed a few more miles.

rudester said: Mine arrived last week and i've just got back from a 800 mile run down to the roads that I cut my driving teeth on as a lad. It's great being back in a hot hatch, it's quite an impressive piece of kit. The way it bites into and follows corners is quite something. I'll be looking to add a stage 1 Revo kit to take it to 365BHP once I have completed a few more miles. O/T but what does that do to VW's approach to warranty claims?

Why are you adding more power straight away as well?

DS240 said: Sorry to go completely off Porsche topic. The i3 really intrigues me with the tech and great cabin. What is like to own and use in the real world? Fab --- had a test drive in an i8 on Friday and around town I prefer the i3 ... by a long long way. The best point is playing economy games --- 102.4 miles of a single charge is the best so far. The second best is cruising silently with the windows down. And the third is answering questions from everyday car enthusiasts .... Yes it's a steep learning curve, but it is very very clever with few downsides other than total range ...

ChrisW. said: Fab --- had a test drive in an i8 on Friday and around town I prefer the i3 ... by a long long way. The best point is playing economy games --- 102.4 miles of a single charge is the best so far. The second best is cruising silently with the windows down. And the third is answering questions from everyday car enthusiasts .... Yes it's a steep learning curve, but it is very very clever with few downsides other than total range ... I like the i3 too but it does have plenty of downsides. No engine note; bugger all range; slow as hell outside of town; etc. Electric cars still aren't quite credible for most people. I could use one because I have a central London commute, but it would have to be a third car, which isn't usually sensible in London.

truck71 said: O/T but what does that do to VW's approach to warranty claims? I guess that's the risk you take. I'm only running it for 2 years 20k. So i'll just keep my fingers crossed!

lemmingjames said: Why are you adding more power straight away as well? It feels like it can handle it, so why not. An extra 65BHP is some what of a bargain IMO.

I gave some thought to a Golf R, especially given the deals they're offering at the moment. But given how well my current hot hatch has held its value - probably the least depreciation I've ever seen in a car I've owned from new - I decided I'd hold onto it for a while. It's booked into Mountune at the end of the month for an MR375 upgrade, which should make it even more fun :-) Real world, most roads, there's probably very little between this and my Cayman R. Different story on track or the very best roads though.

MDT48 said: I gave some thought to a Golf R, especially given the deals they're offering at the moment. But given how well my current hot hatch has held its value - probably the least depreciation I've ever seen in a car I've owned from new - I decided I'd hold onto it for a while. It's booked into Mountune at the end of the month for an MR375 upgrade, which should make it even more fun :-) Real world, most roads, there's probably very little between this and my Cayman R. Different story on track or the very best roads though. Real world, as in with traffic jams? Thats the only way a Focus is keeping up with a Cayman.

SkinnyP said: Real world, as in with traffic jams? Thats the only way a Focus is keeping up with a Cayman. No, real world where having a swell of torque on tap whenever you need it is more usable than having to ring out a high revving naturally aspirated engine in most on-road instances. Don't get me wrong, I love a high revving NA lump over forced induction in the right circumstances, but if you think that a Focus RS wouldn't stick with a Cayman on most British roads, you're sorely mistaken. And given that I own both cars, I have no bias towards either.

I have been head to head with a RS of about 400bhp the Focus never seem that fast imo nice cars though and hold value great, great car to partner a R but even with 400BHP my car pulls away from one and at higher speeds really starts to pull away. I noticed this with my OLD TTRS with 430BHP a Focus would need 500BHP to keep any where near my old car and still lost by a big margin at the 30-130 events. RS 205bhp/ton 0-124mph in >21 seconds, Cayman R 0-124 in 15.5 seconds , it's not even close. basic mountune with 345bhp is still only 0-124 in 19.5 seconds. the golf R is about 18seconds to 124mph so quicker than a Mountune RS. (stage1) Edited by mrdemon on Tuesday 9th September 20:49

mrdemon said: I have been head to head with a RS of about 400bhp the Focus never seem that fast imo nice cars though and hold value great, great car to partner a R but even with 400BHP my car pulls away from one and at higher speeds really starts to pull away. I noticed this with my OLD TTRS with 430BHP a Focus would need 500BHP to keep any where near my old car and still lost by a big margin at the 30-130 events. RS 205bhp/ton 0-124mph in >21 seconds, Cayman R 0-124 in 15.5 seconds , it's not even close. basic mountune with 345bhp is still only 0-124 in 19.5 seconds. the golf R is about 18seconds to 124mph so quicker than a Mountune RS. (stage1) Edited by mrdemon on Tuesday 9th September 20:49 Porsche must be very conservative with their power figures then? (I have a Cayman R)

Porsche always do what Porsche say, most other brands never meet target, Porsche always give you more :-)

SkinnyP said: You're driving a Porsche, their driving a glorified hatchback on finance. I wouldnt worry about Well, that's a pretty bigoted statement there. I had a previous generation Mk6 R. The Mk7 seems to have moved the game on considerably and i've been very impressed by the reviews. I had it up to 360bhp and it kept the Turbo S honest up to three figures! Round corners, you can just lean on them without fear and it's for that reason it will be quicker than more exotic cars on your average B road.

hondansx said: SkinnyP said: You're driving a Porsche, their driving a glorified hatchback on finance. I wouldnt worry about Well, that's a pretty bigoted statement there. I had a previous generation Mk6 R. The Mk7 seems to have moved the game on considerably and i've been very impressed by the reviews. I had it up to 360bhp and it kept the Turbo S honest up to three figures! Round corners, you can just lean on them without fear and it's for that reason it will be quicker than more exotic cars on your average B road. Fair point in general, but if a Golf kept up with my Turbo S, I would want a new Turbo S. The whole point of a Turbo S is to be faster than anything else in precisely that kind of comparison. If it's not, why on Earth buy one over an AWD shopping car?! Engine note is barely any better and it's less practical.

mrdemon said: I have been head to head with a RS of about 400bhp the Focus never seem that fast imo nice cars though and hold value great, great car to partner a R but even with 400BHP my car pulls away from one and at higher speeds really starts to pull away. I noticed this with my OLD TTRS with 430BHP a Focus would need 500BHP to keep any where near my old car and still lost by a big margin at the 30-130 events. RS 205bhp/ton 0-124mph in >21 seconds, Cayman R 0-124 in 15.5 seconds , it's not even close. basic mountune with 345bhp is still only 0-124 in 19.5 seconds. the golf R is about 18seconds to 124mph so quicker than a Mountune RS. (stage1) Edited by mrdemon on Tuesday 9th September 20:49 To be honest 0-60, 0-100, etc are of no interest to me at all. I definitely don't care about something as arbitrary as 0-124mph times - yes I know it's the equivalent of 0-200kph. I'm far more interested in how quickly a car picks up in third, which is what I'll be using when I overtake most of the time. You could argue 0-124mph times when comparing, say, a Ferrari 430 against a Cayman S - whereby on paper the Ferrari would leave it for dead, on public British roads, the Cayman S would do a good job of hanging on until a long, wide straight opened up. 0-xxx times and lap times don't really equate to car a versus car b on the road. Likewise, bhp figures are completely misleading especially when a peak figure comes up in the stratosphere on one car, and is achieved far lower down in another. And then there's the issue of torque and its accessibility and usability - and while I'll always prefer a high revving NA engine when I'm on track, or have great roads with no traffic in front of me, it's great to ride that torque when you're having to overtake regularly. The fact is that a decent hot hatch, whether it be an FRS, Megane 265, Golf R, etc, can hold its own against far more exotic metal on British roads. It would be very different on track or on the right roads (probably not in Britain though, given how appalling most of our roads are). So, returning to the OP's original point. No, I wouldn't be that surprised if a Golf R, or any other high powered hot hatch gave my Cayman R a run for its money in many on-road situations. But if the road was smooth, sweeping, and empty, so that you could use all the revs and wind up the engine to heights it enjoys, things would be different.

MDT48 said: To be honest 0-60, 0-100, etc are of no interest to me at all. I definitely don't care about something as arbitrary as 0-124mph tiemes - yes I know it's the equivalent of 0-200kph. I'm far more interested in how quickly a car picks up in third, which is what I'll be using when I overtake most of the time. You could argue 0-124mph times when comparing, say, a Ferrari 430 against a Cayman S - whereby on paper the Ferrari would leave it for dead, on public British roads, the Cayman S would do a good job of hanging on until a long, wide straight opened up. 0-xxx times and lap times don't really equate to car a versus car b on the road. Likewise, bhp figures are completely misleading especially when a peak figure comes up in the stratosphere on one car, and is achieved far lower down in another. And then there's the issue of torque and its accessibility and usability - and while I'll always prefer a high revving NA engine when I'm on track, or have great roads with no traffic in front of me, it's great to ride that torque when you're having to overtake regularly. The fact is that a decent hot hatch, whether it be an FRS, Megane 265, Golf R, etc, can hold its own against far more exotic metal on British roads. It would be very different on track or on the right roads (probably not in Britain though, given how appalling most of our roads are). So, returning to the OP's original point. No, I wouldn't be that surprised if a Golf R, or any other high powered hot hatch gave my Cayman R a run for its money in many on-road situations. But if the road was smooth, sweeping, and empty, so that you could use all the revs and wind up the engine to heights it enjoys, things would be different. I'd agree with all that. A few years ago I had my first alpine trip and was heading over the col d isran in my then tuscan. I was giving everything I could and stuck to my tail was a Peugeot 106 being hustled by a local Nicole. I wouldn't dare go any faster given the road surface, the nature of the car on the limit and my average pedalling skills, she ddidn't seem troubled. However, the next day pulling away from an autostrada toll booth outside turin it took apart an mc stradale. Horses for courses.

I agree that it could keep up on a B road, you have to change gear at 7k on a Cayman and be on the boil, people change to early. I said I can keep up with most cars with my JCW MINI @:-) I'll go on and state this was why I sold my GT3 and why my TTRS was the quickest car on the road full stop A to B I could not get the GT3 to rev out on B roads as the ratios were so long. If you want the fastest A to B car the TTRS(chipped) is it. 430lbs torque to pull you out the corners. crazy how fast you can pedal hot hatches. Edited by mrdemon on Wednesday 10th September 08:37

Intriguing car the TTRS, do most get tuned and become cut price 911 turbos? Is the 5 pot heavy up front?

truck71 said: Intriguing car the TTRS, do most get tuned and become cut price 911 turbos? Is the 5 pot heavy up front? every one I met had tuned ones, 430bhp but the torque made it fast 430lbs/ft at low revs just looked at some times 30-70 mph about 3 seconds in my TTRS. side by side with other cars 40-60 mph was fun 1.2 seconds nothing could really match it. I know the DSG cars were doing the ton in low 7 seconds. and 0-62mph in 3.1 seconds !!!!!! So a lot faster than a 997 turbo :-) 5 pot is a bit heavy but geo and a proper set of ARB really sorted the car, it was just a weapon. super car performance 2nd hand for £30k Spend 15k on one and have 650BHP think it does the ton in the 5's Edited by mrdemon on Wednesday 10th September 09:02

A TT that could crack the ton in under 8 seconds would amuse me no end I must admit. As to the Golf R, I have one now, having come from my 987 Cayman S. The Cayman was without doubt more fun by a small,but noticeable, margin. However the Golf is so easy to drive quickly it's untrue. Loads of torque and power from low revs with 4WD traction make it very rapid point-to-point, and on a damp surface even more so. The MQB based cars are very impressive IMHO and this will be an ideal companion day-to-day. I do still fancy a fun car to go with it, but i'm coming around to the idea that less is more, so may even look at the likes of MX5 and S2000 - as Mr D says, Porsche are geared so damn long, i routinely found myself doing over 100mph on local B-roads, which was just silly...

Actus Reus said: A TT that could crack the ton in under 8 seconds would amuse me no end I must admit. As to the Golf R, I have one now, having come from my 987 Cayman S. The Cayman was without doubt more fun by a small,but noticeable, margin. However the Golf is so easy to drive quickly it's untrue. Loads of torque and power from low revs with 4WD traction make it very rapid point-to-point, and on a damp surface even more so. The MQB based cars are very impressive IMHO and this will be an ideal companion day-to-day. I do still fancy a fun car to go with it, but i'm coming around to the idea that less is more, so may even look at the likes of MX5 and S2000 - as Mr D says, Porsche are geared so damn long, i routinely found myself doing over 100mph on local B-roads, which was just silly... And there's the crux, modern cars can have you pedalling at indecent speeds all over the place. Even my boggo 2.7 Cayman is travelling at jailable velocity on decent A roads. I agree, a tuned TT would be hilarious but for how long? One thought I had was to change the final drive ratio in mine and reduce in gear speeds by 10mph or so. The high 7th gear would still deliver decent cruising and the engine would rev out at lower speeds.

IF they have got the weight down more in the mk3 TT (which they have) and the new TTRS is launched with 370/380bhp it's going to take the A to B awards I think the outgoing Plus had 360BHP. It's going to make Caymans look stupid slow. I bet the GOlF R make a lot of cars look stupid esp once it gets a bit wet. the TTS inside looks great

I quite regularly go out with a diverse group of cars/drivers on a weekend on primarily B road/twisties and I would say the real life differences between the actual performance of anything from Mr Demons MINI upwards is increasingly small on public roads. the fact is that a Golf R (Especially in slippery conditions ) or a Megane 265 would both easily match cars with twice their power on most roads of that type and even on faster A Road /Dual carriageway blasts you will need to be driving the more powerful car at highly illegal and inappropriate speeds to gain any "real world" advantage. And that means 600bhp GTRs , 458s, 12Cs But ALL of this is less important than the driver by some way. One of the aforementioned regulars is as fast in a MINI Diesel Cab as most in Porsche Turbos

so if we all go out and do cira 85mph on our B roads for thrills, the key issue is then what fun are we all having :-) should we all go and buy the new MX5 ? the TTRS was never a fun drive, the fun was bating super cars esp 911's (more the point them trying to blow you away and then failing big time), B roads were just a way to get from A to B with nicer views. I would not go out and drive a Golf R or a TTRS for fun as they are not fun cars to drive. Auto box's, ride the torque etc the fun of driving has then gone. MY JCW is my day to day car 1/2 the week and it's nice to have a turbo and a lightweight car. the reason my Spyder has stayed with me for 2.5 years is the fact that it's a fun car to drive. I get to mix it up a lot R about 3 days a week, JCW about 3 days a week and the Spyder 1 day a week. but I would rather drive the R over the JCW, it's just to keep the miles off it a bit. I could say buy a golf GTD and keep the Spyder but where is the fun in that. I would be board s tless only owning a Golf R, it's neither fun for the weekends or gives you the Golf GTD mpg in the week. just a nice car to own if you are not into cars, but that's how I see the 981 Porsche now, just nice cars to own, so you may as well own a Golf R over a 981 you could say and save £30k :-) Edited by mrdemon on Wednesday 10th September 09:56

I sort of agree with that and I sort of don't - the Golf R is fun I think, though granted not as much as a Cayman R. I don't think you can dismiss cars as either 'fun' or 'no fun' - there's a sliding scale, and I'd take a Golf R over a Gold GTD for fun. That said, yes, modern cars don't seem to be as much fun as their, even recent, predecessors. Fast, certainly - 300bhp in a Golf just sounds daft, given that the GTi's of my youth had only slightly more than 1/3rd of the power - but fun? I need to buy something slow, but pure, and probably old, and see how I get on. I can't help but want a GT3, but if I'm doing 110mph on a given road to wring out a Cayman S, how quickly would the GT3 be going - 120? 130? That's insane, and suitable for tracks only, and I never have the time for track days... Sort of a catch 22 I seem to be stuck in here. Will be interesting to report back, hopefully early next year - the question is, where do I spend my few grand on a fun car? MX5, S2000, Clio Trophy or MR2?

Interesting topic, I too find myself yearning for a slower more involving car. When I think about the assortment of s te and less so cars I've had the ones that were the most fun were certainly years ago. The Mk1 Golf Gti was probably the one that stands out, followed bizarrely by my old dear's 2CV..

I lust after another Porsche, but I know that the reality is that I probably won't get to enjoy it properly - so found myself looking a a decent size diesel for family duties, and a little sports car for weekends. If and when my budget increases I'd like to get something for use on the track, but given the usage I wonder if I'd end up resenting it - as it was I found myself not using the Cayman properly for about 4 or 5 months of the year, and I began to wonder if I was wasting my money... Lots of factors at play, but the shed of the week MX5 for £900 seems to make enormous sense to me at the moment.

MDT48 said: The fact is that a decent hot hatch, whether it be an FRS, Megane 265, Golf R, etc, can hold its own against far more exotic metal on British roads. Totally disagree. I went out for a long backroad blast with someone in a tuned up Megane 265 to see how it compared to my gen 1 Cayman S. The megane had track tyres, brakes and an engine tune up. My Cayman only has an exhaust and different springs. Both pilots have track experience (the megane driver lots in that car, zero track time in the cayman for me). They were matched in a straight line but everywhere else the Cayman was noticeably faster, you can't compare a mid engined car with a front engined car when it comes down to it. The conditions were dry, damp and finally wet - at all times the result was the same. Can't see any of the other hot hatches being night and day faster either? In addition the Cayman should be better fun too, I've had my fair share of hot hatches but you can't compare with a MR car imo. Rgds, Dunc. Edited by dunc_sx on Wednesday 10th September 13:03

I have a Golf GTD mk7 and it was bought with the hope it would offer a suitable compromise between the Golf 2.0TDi and Renault Megane Trophy I was running before. One car to do both. But in truth although the Golf is a fine car , as a drivers car its still miles behind the Renault and although a lot of that is the nature of its engine the big difference is the Renault makes it feel like its on tranquillisers.I've not tried the R and I've read all the rave reviews of its chassis and drivetrain but still up against the Megane its second best in most tests in Handling terms. Phrases being bandied about like its a better all rounder and more refined with more toys all suggest to me that the more focussed Renault is still the daddy on the twisty bits. Even with a GT3RS in the garage I'd still take the Megane as a car to just go and have a drive with down a favourite road.Not sure the Golf R is quite that good although I'm sure a Cayman is. New Trophy with Ohlins will be better still I am sure, Liquid Yellow peril on order, be here in October and I cant wait.

evojam said: A 2010 Cayman R is 8 seconds a lap quicker around the Nurburgring than a Mk7 Golf R,read into that what you will Well given that the lap is about 550 secs that makes the Cayman 8 seconds doesn't seem significantly quicker, that is assuming equally capable drivers, the road in the same condition, same weather and wind were the same, same traffic problems etc etc. in other words not enough to make a judgment

aelord said: www.porsche.com/microsite/ipad/assets/downloads/..... Cayman R - 330 hp Not sure what sites I checked, but that makes more sense!

5 pages comparing a 4 cylinder economy car to a Porsche Cayman, jesus.

anonymous said: [redacted] I have been a bit preoccupied when posting earlier. So, more background on my decision: I test drove the new F-Type, then the Boxster S. I found the Boxster a level above in nimble handling, and less of a contrived exhaust note. Look; I prefer the F-Type, but I had one more go in the Boxster and it gave me the bigger smile while driving. The F-Type also gave me the impression of being bigger/heavier with a less positive feel at the front end. The new chassis on the Boxster also felt more communicative than the R I had but that is probably a bit unfair given I sold the R a couple of years back, and memory is never that reliable. So, the Boxster S (without some extra BHP) gave me the impression of a sports car with enough umph when going uphill, and nimble handling around corners, and I need all the confidence I can get out of a chassis! So, adding the styling of the GTS, some more BHP, a more enhanced exhaust note, the wonderful DCT of the PDK, the sports chassis and so on I am happy with MY choice, though, of course, I have not driven it yet. That said, the Boxster S made me smile big time!

mrdemon said: wtf is MR Car geek talk FF = F ront engined F ront wheel drive FR = F ront engined R ear wheel drive MR = M id engined R ear wheel drive 4wd = 4 wheel drive

I don't believe that MrD didn't know that. He was trying to sound like a non-nerd.

anonymous said: [redacted] Its where the c.o.g is that counts. But technically an F12 is certainly mid engined just as are the majority of front engined cars with the exception of things like olderAudis

ORD said: I don't believe that MrD didn't know that. He was trying to sound like a non-nerd. I agree. Front-mid-engined is obscure/new enough that "mid-engined" is always thought to be to be rear-mid-engined unless otherwise specified. Not sure what else MR is supposed to refer to in the context. Extra irony points for asking "wtf is MR" "lol" IDL TLAs. I don't like three letter acronyms. Note: My comments have nothing to do with GT3s and gear ratios.

anonymous said: [redacted] You mean , and I agree , the bias is clearly to the front half of the car but a front engined BMW has a near 50:50 weight distribution for example as most BMWs do and they aren't alone. The Mid rear typical weight distribution is nearer 40:60 front to rear

Sport Auto published their supertest of the Golf R manual. Nordschleife in 8:15 (15°C track temperature). Hockenheim in 1:16,0 (23°C). Cayman R PDK did it in 8:10 (22°C track temperature). 8:06 with Conti Force Contact tyres. Hockenheim in 1:12,4 (16°C). Braking from 200-0 km/h: Cayman R 4,8 sec Golf R 5,2 sec as expected the Golf got very good marks all around and they rated it equal to the M135i (both 63 points total).

EricE said: Sport Auto published their supertest of the Golf R manual. Nordschleife in 8:15 (15°C track temperature). Hockenheim in 1:16,0 (23°C). Cayman R PDK did it in 8:10 (22°C track temperature). 8:06 with Conti Force Contact tyres. Hockenheim in 1:12,4 (16°C). Braking from 200-0 km/h: Cayman R 4,8 sec Golf R 5,2 sec as expected the Golf got very good marks all around and they rated it equal to the M135i (both 63 points total). Which is 7 secs slower than the old Megane Trophy did round there (On RE050A Bridgestones) in 2011. New Trophy hasn't recorded a time but on Ohlins and MPSC2s Renault reckon around 8:03. No 4WD, no DSG and less power..........

So the Megane is quicker than the Cayman R on road rubber? ETA: and didn't SEAT do it in under 8mins in a slightly breathed on Ibiza? Also, having never driven the 'Ring, what's the v-max you see down the straight? On videogames it seems like a hell of a straight - the hatchbacks would surely be slaughtered down there if you can get anywhere past 150mph (especially given that they're limited)? Edited by Actus Reus on Monday 15th September 10:44

Actus Reus said: ETA: and didn't SEAT do it in under 8mins in a slightly breathed on Ibiza? Well yes but that was with a professional racing driver. The point of those sport auto supertests is that its always the same guy driving the laps. He does one warm-up lap to heat up the tires and get a feel for the car and the second lap is the time that counts. He always drives as fast as he is comfortable driving the car. I like that philosophy because it's about as close to an Apple-to-Apple comparison as you'll get in my eyes. If you take the 8:15 sportauto time and compare it to the sub-8 minute time the seat did then you throw the whole concept out of the window, because Seat published the single fastest time after dozens of laps with mechanics tinkering on the car all the time. Here’s a great PH article on the person who does these comparisons for sport auto: http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyI... and here are some laptimes: http://www.sportauto.de/rundenzeiten-nuerburgring-...

Interesting info - cheers. I speak a bit of German so read the German reviews now and again, and paid particular attention to the Golf R reviews when they came out.

True the Sport Auto test results are always of interest. The SEAT time was impressive and although it was far from standard it would interesting to see how fast VW could get the R around the ring in similar conditions. Close to the record holding Renault perhaps (7 min 54s ) which whilst still a "hatchback" is of course a stripped out special.

Actus Reus said: So the Megane is quicker than the Cayman R on road rubber? Pretty extreme road rubber, but yes.

hondansx said: Actus Reus said: So the Megane is quicker than the Cayman R on road rubber? Pretty extreme road rubber, but yes. The old Trophy's Bridgestones were genuine road tyres, the new record was set on pilot Sport Cup2s

I think Cayman GT4 vs Golf R400 would be a surprisingly close matchup if VW allows the Golf R boys a go at it. Obviously the GT4 would be on a different level as a "driver’s car".

EricE said: I think Cayman GT4 vs Golf R400 would be a surprisingly close matchup if VW allows the Golf R boys a go at it. Obviously the GT4 would be on a different level as a "driver’s car". It would go like this:- R400 gets off the mark faster thanks to its AWD. R400 blows up. GT4 wins.

If the GT4 ends up running 4-cylinder turbo, mightn't the Cayman and Golf be quite closely related? The base Macan is a VW/Audi lump isn't it?

Ha, indeed. I didn't think it would put me off a GT4, but on closer thought, it would. I don't mind a 4-cyl in my Golf as that is how it's always been, but in a Porsche? Wouldn't seem right. However, I shall be greatly amused as PH Porsche forum implodes when a Golf beats a Porsche around the 'ring. Already I sense beards flexing in indignation that some oik in a 'shopping car on finance' might not only have spent less, but be able to go quicker too. Whatever next? Electrically assisted steering? Ye gads!

It's a Golf R ergo on lease, therefore not to be risked on a track as outside of the lease agreement! However yes, I've seen enough B2G videos to know how quick the locals are!

You'll be having great fun in your spanking new Golf R at the Ring thinking your king of the hill until some crazy German local in a stripped and caged Golf Mk2 16V running on slicks blows you into the weeds! Edited by evojam on Monday 15th September 22:50

ORD said: Oh dear. No. No. No. Your old TT was not faster than a GTR. You have some kind of rare mental condition when it comes to that car. I can see what he's saying here though, you'd be able to squeeze the tt down some b roads -the gtr you'd get wedged in !

PorkRind said: ORD said: Oh dear. No. No. No. Your old TT was not faster than a GTR. You have some kind of rare mental condition when it comes to that car. I can see what he's saying here though, you'd be able to squeeze the tt down some b roads -the gtr you'd get wedged in ! True. And the GTR mings. That said, have you seen the new TT? It looks like a boat. I don't know whether or not it is actually much bigger than the last generation, but it certainly looks it.

PorkRind said: I can see what he's saying here though, you'd be able to squeeze the tt down some b roads -the gtr you'd get wedged in ! In fairness I used to have a remapped TTRS (circa 400bhp) and it did have an R35 by a whisker in a straight line run - I've no idea what model year the R35 was though, it could quite easily have been one of the early ones.

n17ves said: In fairness I used to have a remapped TTRS (circa 400bhp) and it did have an R35 by a whisker in a straight line run - I've no idea what model year the R35 was though, it could quite easily have been one of the early ones. Yeah but a remapped 335D will murder a 458 Speciale in a straight line...

n17ves said: In fairness I used to have a remapped TTRS (circa 400bhp) and it did have an R35 by a whisker in a straight line run - I've no idea what model year the R35 was though, it could quite easily have been one of the early ones. people won't believe it :-) but the TTRS remapped would out run a mk1 GTR that's just a fact ;-) the gen 2's ect or any after that were a lot faster and of course they keep getting faster. but not as fast as a base model 911 turbo cab :-) not sure why there are so many doubters, we did enough 30-130 and drag race events in them.

cibble10 said: I owned a Cayman R before a Vantage v12. The v12 sounded fantastic but on occasion struggled to the get the power down with wheel spin on anything but warm tyres and bone dry road (and it could still wheel spin in 1st to 3rd!). The Cayman was if anything very slightly underpowered but gave me far more confidence and was more 'fun' to drive. According to the EVO mag the Cayman R was also a few seconds quicker around the Bedford Aerodrome.I have ordered the Boxster GTS which I feel will give me the right power level and fun all in one package, plus some sunshine in the cabin :-) More BHP doesn't necessarily equate to more fun and speed! agree. V12v british hot rod really. On give or take roads, the CR would and should be faster as would any boxster tbh. But I think it's something that with time, the driver can be more comfortable. I hope the v12vs is a better drive. Not in the same market but imo, 981 caymans and boxsters are so well balanced, they are ridiculously good for the price. Here's hoping the new miata lives up to the hype.

braddo said: ORD said: I don't believe that MrD didn't know that. He was trying to sound like a non-nerd. I agree. Front-mid-engined is obscure/new enough that "mid-engined" is always thought to be to be rear-mid-engined unless otherwise specified. Not sure what else MR is supposed to refer to in the context. Extra irony points for asking "wtf is MR" "lol" IDL TLAs. I don't like three letter acronyms. Note: My comments have nothing to do with GT3s and gear ratios. I didn't know what MR meant ... Lots Of Love ... Chris.

Having both to play with helps the comparison. The golf is very good fun to drive, simply because it is quick, can be thrown about, grips like a very grippy thing, and pulls hard meaning most cars would not get away from it around B roads and as others have said this type of performance leveller applies to a number of tasty hot hatches as well. Vs the CaymanR if you get on the gas a bit quicker (avoiding any lag) the Golf will hang with it until near triple digit speeds and the Cayman then pulls steadily away. Off the line the Golf performs well being 4wd and there's not a lot in it, just depends on the particular car drag start result. Round a track or on similar type of series of roads though the Cayman will eat it. The Cayman is a completely different fun proposition too. Both actually great cars imo for different reasons.

Shelsleyf2 said: evojam said: A 2010 Cayman R is 8 seconds a lap quicker around the Nurburgring than a Mk7 Golf R,read into that what you will Well given that the lap is about 550 secs that makes the Cayman 8 seconds doesn't seem significantly quicker, that is assuming equally capable drivers, the road in the same condition, same weather and wind were the same, same traffic problems etc etc. in other words not enough to make a judgment I don't believe that time from fastestlaps at all. The Cayman R is significantly faster than an Cayman S on all other tracks, yet is identical time on the ring - don't think so. We've an R and an S and whilst straight line there's not a lot in it the R is quicker round track type roads and corners - no doubt. The Cayman will beat the golf on all tracks convincingly. Edited by OldBob on Thursday 2nd October 17:16

OldBob said: I don't believe that time from fastestlaps at all. The Cayman R is significantly faster than an Cayman S on all other tracks, yet is identical time on the ring - don't think so. We've an R and an S and whilst straight line there's not a lot in it the R is quicker round track type roads and corners - no doubt. The Cayman will beat the golf on all tracks convincingly. Edited by OldBob on Thursday 2nd October 17:16 That's a nice pair too have on the driveway do we have a reliable Ring time for the Cayman R then? You could always tune the Golf up a bit http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdHVjYM9WsM

evojam said: ..do we have a reliable Ring time for the Cayman R then? You could always tune the Golf up a bit http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdHVjYM9WsM I haven't seen anything for R ring times other than on fastest laps, must say it's a bit surprising/suspicious that they are identical for an R and S. I can certainly recognise the faster times on all the other tracks and from our personal experiences, and whilst the ring suits certain setups differently I can't believe the R advantages wouldn't also transfer to the ring to some extent. http://fastestlaps.com/comparisons/porsche_cayman_... Re tuning the golf, then that is clearly something that is going to be attractive for some and why not. Tweaking, power and geo/handling could imo make it very competitive.

ORD said: Yeah but a remapped 335D will murder a 458 Speciale in a straight line... So a remapped 335D gets to 60 in low 3's... Had my fair share of mapped Oiliers over the years and they are great but that is bo**ox.

PHOENIXUK said: So a remapped 335D gets to 60 in low 3's... Had my fair share of mapped Oiliers over the years and they are great but that is bo**ox. Whoosh.

I wanted to get a posh Golf R recently (AKA Audi S3) but the Audi dealer steered me in the direction of BMW (nice of him, really). Anyway, so we now have an M235i, which is a great little car and the CR (which is just amazing). Interestingly, my Mrs believes the BMW is faster than my car and I have to say that in SPort mode intially it feels it too but once you've got the crescendo building in the CR, it's definitely quicker. On a track, I don't think the BMW would see which way the CR went but on the road, they are very evenly matched - if anything the BMW is probably quicker as the low down torque is epic - even in the dry the Michelin PSS struggle to contain it and mated to the ZF gearbox, it really is a formidable combination. It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to discover that a Golf R is quicker than a CR on the road. I mean even a Trophy R would spank a CR around the 'ring!

J-P said: I mean even a Trophy R would spank a CR around the 'ring! Said as if the Renault was inferior to a Golf R or M235i around the ring or indeed down a decent B Road. Rather than quite a bit faster than either.;)

Dblue said: J-P said: I mean even a Trophy R would spank a CR around the 'ring! Said as if the Renault was inferior to a Golf R or M235i around the ring or indeed down a decent B Road. Rather than quite a bit faster than either.;) Not at all - in terms of outright pace on track it's clearly superior to all of the cars mentioned. It has an image issue for some but not me - I love the things. I'd happily have one (if the Mrs would allow it) but she won't - she's not a big fan of French cars and her experience of the Clio Trophy wasn't great sadly, because as a passenger she hated it although I thought it was absolutely incredible!

ORD said: Whoosh. So is that a chipped 335 Diesel of Nissan noise your making.....?