I've been contimplating getting a VR6 as i've seen a tidy Mulberry one recently, has anyone owned one or got any feedback/reviews on them.

All info would be gratefully received.

thanks

i love them :) never had one but a friend of mine did, they sound awesome when they're accelerating.

and the Mulberry colour looks sick !!

yup, crap mpg,

well over ten years old now, even for the newest ones (mulberry highline)

they are rusting, the sound is immense and I kicked the chops in on mine everywhere.

Lot of wear and tear for an old car, chose wisely.

I was looking hard at them a couple of years ago, then I found out about the economy. 28mpg on a good day

Yeah, it's a 2.8 with the best part of 200bhp, but my Camry's a 2.5 with 158bhp, and it averages 33mpg all the time.

you also pay scene tax on getting a highline.

just get one in an mk2 and have fun with that.

175bhp from a 2.8.....

great noise, fragile engines tho

some smoke, some will need the chains doing. which isnt a cheap job!

very poor mpg. Mk3 is probably the worse looking golf standard. But with some modding they do look pretty sweet

175bhp from a 2.8.....

great noise, fragile engines tho

bullet proof engine if the timing chain tensors are kept on top of, need doing every 100k or so.

but the cars are dog shit, any one that tells you other wise is ether stuck with one there trying to sell or has spent so much on one that they dare dent sell it through fear of losing out... or has never owned one and don't know what they are talking about.

build quality is shocking compared to the mk2 (you can tell this is about the time vw gave up altogether on build quality). they rust like nobody's business although the fuel consumption on mine was exactly the same as my mk2 16v gti, i'd put 25 pounds in every week and do the same to and from work and running around and by pay day both were running on nearly empty (regrettably i swapped the 16v for the vr6 so fuel prices were still the same). although saying that the 16v was a lot quicker, handled so much better stopped better and felt a shit load better to drive. so imo unless you want to pay all that money for the noise (and trust me it's the only reason to buy one) then get a mk2 16v GTI.

VR6's are heavy, lazy revving, poor handling, poorly built rust buckets that look like they have down syndrome... but you get one up to the limiter on an A road late at night with the windows down and you see why people put up with all the down falls. it really is the only thing these cars have going for them, and the reason i'd love to put the engine in a mk2 golf...

wooooooooooooooooooooooooow.

some good points:

THE NOISE

THE TORQUE

galvanised ones (96-on?) dont rot much, rear arches is the main spot to check...

185bhp is more common for a standard 2.8 obd2

golf bits are easy to change

vr bits are common, if not cheap

99% of problems, someone else has had and will know how to fix...

engines aint fragine, just find a good'un... been out with both StueyB and MattyB in their VR's and i'm sold, buying one before end july... look sweet with the right mods and with a decent suspension setup and poly engine mounts and decent tyres the cars handle fantastic compared to standard...

think more muscle hatch than featherweight hot-hatch...

mpg 30 can be done regualrly, Matt drives his hard and still gets 22mpg...

just budget for big running costs, not much mpg and you not needing a stereo once you drill the airbox or get an induction kit...

Edited 29 June, 200917 yr by Jackblack

with a decent suspension setup and poly engine mounts and decent tyres the cars handle fantastic compared to standard...

that's not really saying much tho mate, standard is shocking for a 'performance' hatch, but i agree with the muscle hatch tag rather than some thing like hot hatch. but i'd say owning one is some thing totally different to going out in one

but i fully agree with you on the noise, mine had an induction kit and it was verging on orgasmic, but the torque? it just felt lazy to me, lots of noise but not much else, it pulled well but compared to the car i had swapped it for which had about 30bhp less (and i'd imagine a lot less torque?) it felt gutless, i've been in another since and it was the same, the noise gave you a sense of power but that was it. and any go it had was lost in the bends, when you have a diesel A2 (think that's right? the ugly little Audi) stuck on your arse and at times taking you on the bends its embarrassing, and i was far from driving like a pussy... he did compliment me on the noise tho

there not even proper v6s! id still own one at some point though

I've just avaraged over 30mpg driving over 1200 miles to the isle of Skye and back. The roads up there are awesome and I wasn't hanging around most of the time. I'm sorry butvthere is more to a vr than just the noise. Live with one and learnt to use them properly and they get under your skin. Mines in a corrado though, most people as with anything on this site comment on stuff without ever experiencing it let alone owning one. Go and have a go in one and see what you think.

175bhp from a 2.8.....

You can easily get 200bhp out of them. I had a 100bhp polo 1.4 GT and got plenty of respect for that, so double the power and double the capacity isnt bad going really i don't think. Plus the noise is the stuff of legends! My current project is a VR'd Mk2 and I wouldnt choose any other engine for it. Its all down to personal preference at the end of the day but I can't fault them if you're prepared to pay a bit to own one!

mk2 VR's are a product of satan.

They sound good though, pull well but still they're of satanic build.

175bhp from a 2.8.....

It's not amazing really. VR6's certainly prove why the 1.8T needed inventing.

big engines with n/a power are 10x better to drive than things with boost imo coz the power is always there and you only need to move your toe down about a centimetre to get effortless power

Edited 30 June, 200917 yr by doug

I'm dropping the 2.9 raddo VR lump into my polo soon enough... bring on the ROAR

Jon

I'm dropping the 2.9 raddo VR lump into my polo soon enough... bring on the ROAR

Jon

mk2 VR's are a product of satan.

They sound good though, pull well but still they're of satanic build.

why?

A mate of mine has owned a couple of mk2 golf VR6s now and I love them, it's the chassis the engine deserves. You have to wind them up a fair bit but once they're going they go well and make a beautiful noise. He's also had a mk3 VR and hated it, the weight and poor handling just kills all the fun.

I agree with Sam's comment:

most people as with anything on this site comment on stuff without ever experiencing it let alone owning one. Go and have a go in one and see what you think.

too many people just passing on chinese whispers they've read on the Internet.

p.s. I wasn't saying that your comment was unfounded Rich, I was just interested as to why you think mk2 VRs are no good as I like them! I was more thinking about the "OMG vr6 engines are shiiiiteee LOLLLLL!!!!1111" comments.

I'm sorry butvthere is more to a vr than just the noise.

but your car is basically a mk2 golf isn't it? i've never driven a corrado but i've had a fair few mk2 golfs and they have a very well sort chassis where as in the mk3 its never going to be much good as its a terrible chassis to begin with and i think that's where so many of its faults lay.

maybe i was a little harsh saying the noise was the only thing they had going for them, but in the mk3 it was such an anti climax, i was expecting this legendary car but what i was faced with was this car that was just meh. it was boring and unrewarding to drive and didn't feel sporty at all apart from the noise and a bit of poke, it wasn't quick and it wasn't exactly what you would call fast either and if you get to twisty bits it gets worse, for a car that was pritty much the flag ship 'sporty' car that vw had to offer it's pritty laughable really considering vw's history with small sporty cars.

this is my personal opinion i found from owning a mk3 VR6.

I don't see how people can slag the power output of the VR6s. 190 bhp from the 2.9, BMW only get 193 bhp from the E36 328i of the same period - and that has a 24v head as opposed to the 12v VR6!

I'm sorry butvthere is more to a vr than just the noise.

but your car is basically a mk2 golf isn't it? i've never driven a corrado but i've had a fair few mk2 golfs and they have a very well sort chassis where as in the mk3 its never going to be much good as its a terrible chassis to begin with and i think that's where so many of its faults lay.

maybe i was a little harsh saying the noise was the only thing they had going for them, but in the mk3 it was such an anti climax, i was expecting this legendary car but what i was faced with was this car that was just meh. it was boring and unrewarding to drive and didn't feel sporty at all apart from the noise and a bit of poke, it wasn't quick and it wasn't exactly what you would call fast either and if you get to twisty bits it gets worse, for a car that was pritty much the flag ship 'sporty' car that vw had to offer it's pritty laughable really considering vw's history with small sporty cars.

this is my personal opinion i found from owning a mk3 VR6.

Yeah true about mine being in a Corrado and of course its the 2.9 version, I didnt think there would be that much difference between the 2.9 and the 2.8 though. I was merely saying that they can be genuinely quick if driven properly. When I first got it I was wondering what all the fuss was about as I was trying to drive it like I would the G and of course its a compeltely different engine with a very different character in a completely different car. Once you get to know the lump you can get the best out of them. So many people are quick to slate the VR's because of all the stuff they read on forums rather than experience. Having said that I've never had a go in a Golf Vr so couldnt comment which is why I said for the OP to go and drive one. To me thats that best way of making your mind up!

big engines with n/a power are 10x better to drive than things with boost imo coz the power is always there and you only need to move your toe down about a centimetre to get effortless power

I guess you have never drivern a lader powered mk3 polo then :-D

unfortunatly not, nobody is stupid enough to let me have a go they're G