180 bhp not enough?

[Tallguy]

I cannot understand why VW expect Scirocco owners with 210 or 220 bhp petrol cars to be happy with 180 bhp when they next change cars? I know the R version exists but this is just too expensive (and not good value) for many people. No problem with having a 180 bhp option but please let's have a higher power (230 bhp?) option too.

[Paradox1]

Remap it

[Tallguy]

That's fine but there are issues around both insurance and warranty. I know there are those that conceal the fact that they have modified their car but they are taking a risk.

[Billc]

I'm with Tallguy, going from 210/220 to 180 isn't going to happen and when one can't justify an R then it leaves (us non-remappers) nowhere to go. Strange decision by VW.

[AlanH]

It's to do with market positioning. The Golf GTi only runs 217 standard. It wouldn't be good form if the Scirocco outgunned their prestigious GTi, hence lowering the Sciroccos power output.
And there's also the emissions issues too (whether that has something to do with it I'm unsure)



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CandyGTS]

Why do you need more than 180BHP as standard, the difference of 30BHP once your off the mark and moving is not that great and when blasting down a country B road you'll hardly notice above 50 mph.

I think a lot of HP figures are pure BS and strictly for the marketing material / pub, it should be about how a car drives not how much power it has if you are referring to ultimate performance.

Please hear me out before you flame me . . . I had a Nissan GTR back in 2009, it was 500BHP plus, very fast, my M3 CSL was almost 150BHP less but way more fun to drive and just as fast around most tracks.

I've just sold a 670BHP Evo IX but my 415BHP Evo X was faster across any B road run that wasn't all straights.

The 170BHP Rocco GTS Diesel we've just bought was a much better drive than the more powerful Merc A245 thing we looked at, it's better balanced, has better steering feedback, the nose is more pointy on turn in and it feels way more stable under hard braking . . . I'm not getting myself at it, I know the Rocco's no sports car, it's just a sporty diesel but for what it is/does, it's excellent.

My point is, power doesn't mean truly fast, it means faster in a straight line - once you're off the mark, the difference wont be that great - also, is the Rocco really a performance car? I don't think so, don't get me wrong the R is no slouch but it's not an out and out performance weapon like a Focus RS or the A Class AMG etc.

If the next Rocco is not fast enough in the package available, maybe it's time to look at a totally different car if you're not prepared to map it.

[Tallguy]

I take your point but the Scirocco will handle more power so why not have it available to those that want it; the TT now has 180 bhp and 230 bhp options?
I think the market positioning comment is relevant; the Scirocco GT can't be seen to have more power than the Golf GTI.

[Grande]

I think you're confusing bhp with PS. The GTI is 220 PS and 230 PS with performance pack added, while a Scirocco GTS is only 220 PS. The real question is, why isn't the GTS version available?

For example, in Turkey they still offered a facelifted Scirocco with the 160 PS Twincharger engine until recently. Now, apparently you can get the newer 150 PS TSI engine from a Golf according to the configurator. But there's neither an option for 180 PS nor 220 PS engines, only: 125 PS TSI, 150 PS TSI and 280 PS R.

http://binekarac.vw.com.tr/fiyat-scirocco.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But obviously this might have something to do with non-EU market regulations. I wonder what is on offer in Asia and Australia?