It was 1995 when Volkswagen started dropping narrow-angle V-6 engines into its venerable Golf two-door hatch, and it wasn't long after that BMW ditched its four-bangers altogether for the US market. For the past decade or so the two German companies have scrapped for the same buyers — young, affluent males with a passion for driving — with hotted-up GTIs and entry-level 3-series coupes. But while VW has stayed pretty close to its roots, BMW seems to have taken its bread-and-butter coupe to a new level, making it more of a luxury grand tourer than a pure driver's car. Enter the all-new 1-series, a 7/8th scale version of the 3-series in coupe and convertible form makes BMW ownership somewhat accessible. We've taken the most powerful, most expensive Golf, the V-6-powered R32, and put it up against the least expensive and least powerful BMW, the new 128i coupe, to see which offers the best of German motoring for just around $30,000....
Good review, but I'd choose an R32, pocket the difference and wouldn't give a flip about what my boss thinks as I'd be buying the company from under him soon enough.
Seriously Motive didn't do its own instrument testing? 6.5 secs is VWs numbers for the R32
C & D got 5.5. R & T got 6.0. MT got a 5.8 out of the Euro spec.
not that it matters much, 0-60 is a time to speed not time to distance measurement....
Good read though.
2004 Blue .:R32It's just a Golf... 2002 337....sold Listening to The New Order right now... "Do not taunt GolfballDefender of the GOLF R32 Baa weep grana weep nini Bong...
I don't like that I have to look up how much a 328i weighs to determine how much the 128i weighs, so that I can figure out how much the R32 weighs.
Sigh.
BMW has the 1-series Coupe's weight on their website, for both engines with both transmissions. And it says how much the R32 weighs in that article, as well as on VW's website.
Personally I think the new R32 is a pale shadow of the old one. I realize that it's quicker around a track thanks to its improved suspension but the added weight, the DSG-only configuration (for North America), and the fishing lure aluminum trim kills it. I much prefer the old MkIV.
"having a mind of your own and bad taste are two different things" - VarLordahl "Wait a minute...that's not the wallet inspector!" - Homer Simpson
The information about DSG and its decreased effectiveness when coupled to an engine without DI is disappointing. All the more reason VW should have offered a manual version here (I might have one if they did).
"What you are, is by accident of birth. What I am, I created myself. There are, and have been, thousands of princes; there is only one Beethoven." -- Beethoven
BMW has the 1-series Coupe's weight on their website, for both engines with both transmissions. And it says how much the R32 weighs in that article, as well as on VW's website.
Personally I think the new R32 is a pale shadow of the old one. I realize that it's quicker around a track thanks to its improved suspension but the added weight, the DSG-only configuration (for North America), and the fishing lure aluminum trim kills it. I much prefer the old MkIV.
The article also states how much the 128i weighs:
Quote, originally posted by MotiveMag »
Connected to the six-speed manual, the 230-hp straight six propels the 3252-pound coupe to sixty in just 6.1 seconds.
It was a tough call on this one. If the R32 had been offered with a manual transmission it would have probably swayed the other way. That version of DSG really kills that car's buzz. And for me (since I wrote it), I prefer a little more toned-down styling. Tough call though.
$35,430 and $38,829 are "just around $30,000" these days?
The R32 starts at $32,990 and my guess is dealers are negotiating on them. The 128i starts under $30k and can be had in the low $30s with sport package. Both of these examples were pretty loaded. The point was to look at the top performance VW against the entry-level BMW more than a $30,000 shootout.
MWERKS.com the online magazine for BMW Enthusiasts
$35,430 and $38,829 are "just around $30,000" these days?
The article likely refers to the base price of both cars. If Motive gets their cars like every other auto journalist, they have no control over how the cars get delivered to them. Just because the cars come loaded from BMW and VW, doesn;t mean you can't purchase one with fewer options for less money.
I think that was a decent article and I liked the overall comparison idea. I also liked the tidbit about the DSG, which is something I didn't know before. It's details like those which I think are valuable in any article, so hope you keep inserting such things into the articles. So were the acceleration values from the manufacturer or your own figures? I'll be interested to see how the 128 does in real instrumented tests if you didn't run your own numbers.
I may just go to the BMW website and see how much a 128 costs the way I want it. I wasn't initially interested in the 128, so your article has definitely peaked my interest in the car. You didn't mention anything about the understeer that seems to plague the 135 (or what is reported by those who have driven one). How does the handling compare between the 135 and 128? I am guessing that the engine in the 128 weighs a fair amount less than the 135 motor.
I think the R32 also looks the sharpest out of the two. It's definitely a much more exciting car to look at, both inside and out. At the right price, I could see really falling for it. If not for the damn DSG. Then again, for the right price, I might just be able to deal with it! I liked the R32 when I drove it, but simply wasn't blown away. It was an improvement over my GTI, but just not enough for the price.
Tom Current: 94 SLC; 08 XF LTD-6 spd Previous:06 GTI, 99.5 Jetta, 85 jetta coupe (x2), 93 Fox
It was a tough call on this one. If the R32 had been offered with a manual transmission it would have probably swayed the other way. That version of DSG really kills that car's buzz. And for me (since I wrote it), I prefer a little more toned-down styling. Tough call though.
Might as well throw a 135i in the mix at $35,675... who needs options when you can blow the doors off the other two?
I get the point of saying "around $30k" especially with VW dealers around here practically giving R32s away, it just read a little weird IMO. But either one of those cars priced as tested just isn't worth it (to me) considering the alternatives.
I thought it was a good write up but it might have been i little bias towards the BMW. Not really sure because i haven't drive either of them even though i want to really really baddly!!
None the less thanks for sharing the write up
"I know what I want to accomplish and I know how to get there. The ultimate goal is to be the best. Whether that’s the best ever, who knows? I hope so." - Eldrick Tiger Woods
Somewhat surprised to see no mention of utility. I realize the coupe and vert 1er are the logical choices for the NA market, but the R32's hatch makes it more attractive if it's your only car.
Fox News: “The sky is green.” ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN: “Is the sky green? Our team of experts investigates.” Local news: “Is the sky green? We hit the street to find out what YOU think!” Online media/blogosphere: “It is well known that Al Gore and Dick Cheney conspired in 1998 to turn the sky red.”
So were the acceleration values from the manufacturer or your own figures? I'll be interested to see how the 128 does in real instrumented tests if you didn't run your own numbers.
When i arrived in Monterey with the R32 it was early evening and we had a bout 2 hours to photograph the cars. It left no time to get outside of town for instrument testing. We went there with plans to do so, but the day disappeared before we had the chance. The figures are manufacturer's specs.
Quote, originally posted by 6cylVWguy »
You didn't mention anything about the understeer that seems to plague the 135 (or what is reported by those who have driven one).
The 135i runs larger tires in the rear than in front, contributing to understeer at the limit. In normal driving on the street, it's not noticeable, but at the limits (on a track or autocross course) it's more of an issue. The 128i runs 205/50-17 tires both front and rear.
Quote, originally posted by 6cylVWguy »
I think the R32 also looks the sharpest out of the two. It's definitely a much more exciting car to look at, both inside and out. At the right price, I could see really falling for it. If not for the damn DSG. Then again, for the right price, I might just be able to deal with it! I liked the R32 when I drove it, but simply wasn't blown away. It was an improvement over my GTI, but just not enough for the price.
The trans really ruins the experience for the R32, otherwise it would have been a much different outcome. I also really prefer the BMW's seats. I'm not sure why, but none of the Mk V sport seats hit me in the right places at all. The BMW seats are pretty much perfect for a daily car.
Nice article Bryan. I haven't driven either car but based on looks alone I happen to prefer the R32 inside and out, I just don't know if I could live with DSG everyday. Mike
"Ferraris are serious cars for serious people who drive around wearing a serious expression. The Gallardo can do serious, too. It has Audi electrics and Audi engineering. But as you careen towards the next bend on a wave of extraordinary sound, half blinded by your own upholstery, you’ll be making the noise of a howler monkey and wishing you were naked" The one and only Jeremy Clarkson
When i arrived in Monterey with the R32 it was early evening and we had a bout 2 hours to photograph the cars. It left no time to get outside of town for instrument testing. We went there with plans to do so, but the day disappeared before we had the chance. The figures are manufacturer's specs.
That makes sense. I wasn't calling you guys out, I was just curious as to the source is all.
Quote »
The 135i runs larger tires in the rear than in front, contributing to oversteer at the limit. In normal driving on the street, it's not noticeable, but at the limits (on a track or autocross course) it's more of an issue. The 128i runs 205/50-17 tires both front and rear.
So does that mean the 128 has better balance than the 135?
Quote »
The trans really ruins the experience for the R32, otherwise it would have been a much different outcome. I also really prefer the BMW's seats. I'm not sure why, but none of the Mk V sport seats hit me in the right places at all. The BMW seats are pretty much perfect for a daily car.
I can't speak for the 1 series at all, but I did like the R32 seats quite a bit. I'm not sure I would have a problem daily driving the R32 as I do ok with the GTI and that's a pretty bumpy ride. I ended up pricing a 128 with the options I would want and got a price of 32k and change (including destination). It had the sport package, HIDs, the premium stereo, and I think heated leatherette seats. That matches the R32 a bit better on equipment and has a similar MSRP. That's not a bad price, but I think it will depend on how the 128 performs compared with what I have now.
I'm sure the CL collective brain would think this is a horrible idea, but would you guys consider doing a 128 vs GTI comparison? I'd be interested in knowing how they compare dynamically speaking. I think the GTI is a bit more raw than the R32. With less weight overall and less weight over the front wheels, I would think the GTI would feel a bit sharper. Not to mention the availability of a real manual tranny. For me personally, I would consider getting the 128 if it felt dramatically better than the GTI. And I'm not talking 10/10's driving but normal to spirited driving. I'm not one who thinks that RWD automatically conquers all like many unnamed people around here feel.
Modified by 6cylVWguy at 10:35 AM 2-21-2008
Tom Current: 94 SLC; 08 XF LTD-6 spd Previous:06 GTI, 99.5 Jetta, 85 jetta coupe (x2), 93 Fox
BMW has the 1-series Coupe's weight on their website, for both engines with both transmissions. And it says how much the R32 weighs in that article, as well as on VW's website.
Personally I think the new R32 is a pale shadow of the old one. I realize that it's quicker around a track thanks to its improved suspension but the added weight, the DSG-only configuration (for North America), and the fishing lure aluminum trim kills it. I much prefer the old MkIV.
wow, reading comprehension is >me!
I missed these whole paragraphs:
Quote »
Anyone concerned that the lowliest model in BMW's lineup is somehow not a real BMW need only to push the start button to put that notion to rest. From the moment the luscious six-cylinder roars to life, there is no doubt about the 128i's pedigree. The exhaust note, even at idle, is deep and purposeful. Connected to the six-speed manual, the 230-hp straight six propels the 3252-pound coupe to sixty in just 6.1 seconds. Traction is the limiting factor in breaking the six-second mark, as the open differential can easily transfer all the torque to just one wheel on a hot launch.
On the open road the 128i's engine loves to rev. Peak torque comes on at 2750 rpm, and from there all the way to redline it pulls strongly and smoothly. Third gear is a delightful wave to ride on the winding back roads around Monterey, where the chassis and engine find a natural rhythm with the asphalt. The sport suspension strikes the perfect balance between real-world comfort and performance, especially on the 17-inch wheels. Even with standard run-flat tires, the 128i feels light on its feet and exceptionally agile. That's perhaps because the front wheels' only job is to steer the car. Without torque being blasted through the front axles the steering feels natural, even with the 128i's electrically assisted steering rack.
For advertising information Click Here
Defender of the GOLF R32 
The article likely refers to the base price of both cars. If Motive gets their cars like every other auto journalist, they have no control over how the cars get delivered to them. Just because the cars come loaded from BMW and VW, doesn;t mean you can't purchase one with fewer options for less money.
