BMW 130i versus VW Golf R32
The protagonists of our comparative are animals caged in a world of radars and speed controls by surprise. They are machines that ensure performance, promises driving fun and can be exploited on a daily basis without problems. Yes, both R32 and 130i have their own character. They are so alike and at the same time so different …
 |
 Watch video |
| ||
 |
| |
|
|
| Watch video |
| ||
|
| |
|
|
| Watch video |
| ||
|
| |
|
Over 250 hp, just over four meters and promise to go very fast. These characteristics are valid for two cars of our comparative, but the differences between them are so great that try to simplify their nature in one sentence seems a strategy to failure mission.
And the mere configuration of each vehicle is different. The Golf uses 4Motion all-wheel drive, which is already known in the range, and in this version is true justification -in other models is recommended, the R32 is compulsorily. This element, in addition to the plus security conferred on asphalts in poor condition or under adverse weather conditions, will come in handy the most powerful Golf, because it “subject” to the ground when we decided to put all the meat on the grill and extract everything you can offer us this R32. As much as we tread the throttle, both straight and support, stability is not compromised and no loss of traction occur, which might seem logical given the enormous number of horses of this compact.
He BMW 130i uses a different configuration and It opts for rear wheel drive, common in the Bavarian brand. With it, ensures the most exciting performance and quality unattainable guided in the category. However, there are many horses behind, which determines their behavior and makes it delicate in certain situations: wet asphalt or bad weather. For the moment, when the back-and insinuates sometimes more than that- and adrenaline shooting, you have to have good hands on the wheel. Definitely, 130i is the best choice for drivers who want sepan- -and bring out the full potential of the vehicle.
Both models present us with firm, but not uncomfortable, and with accurate directions suspensions and snapshots, but in this section, we opted for the compact BMW, because the sensations offered are better: their suspensions are more effective and provide more comfort to the occupants and radiography wheel best asphalt and is faster in driving dynamics. Of course, when maneuvering the car is stationary or at low speed, we felt something hard.
Both BMW and Volkswagen are cars that run a lot. Their engines they promise, but, as in the case of traction differs both mechanical configuration, The propeller 130i is a six-cylinder 265 hp officially delivered and a maximum torque of 32.7 mkg (269.1 hp and 33.3 mkg on our dynamometer); While, R32 is “satisfied” with “only” 250 hp and torque of 32.7 mkg (258 hp and 35 mkg, according to our measurements) and with a mechanical arrangement also comprising six cylinders, although in estes case V
Those extra 15 hp that has the 1 Series are enough for the Bavarian compact is somewhat faster in the measurements you made our Technical Center, even though the maximum torque is favorable to R32. Both acceleration (0-100 km / h and 0-1,000 m) and recoveries (80-120 km / h in fifth and sixth gear), the numbers favor the 130i, although the differences are not definitive by any means. Be round, at most, the second means except recovery 80 to 120 km / h, where this number is exceeded. Both speed is limited to 250 km / h, but, of unintentionally without the limitations of the electronics, far outweigh.
Although the 130i is more powerful, the R32 shows better torque delivery and more power to 5,000 rpm; from this figure, the Bavarian compact is imposed.
The lead we have not been clearly able to discern if one was faster than the other, although we sensed, the sensations generated by us, the 130i would be the victor in this section. However, some expert driver behind the wheel you out and get more for “better times” with the Golf, it is most effective and most noble when you are seeking the limits and does not offer traction loss
When stopping, brakes both are a guarantee of success. We can go very fast and subjecting them to extreme work that will surprise us with snapshots and braking few meters (below 70 meters the Series 1 and ¡bounds near 67! R32).
both engines boast a captivating sound, which helps stop do not feel like stepping on the accelerator. However, in this chapter there are differences of nuance: the Golf is more loud and the quality of that sound can become tiresome over the kilometers. Yes, hear the roar of mechanics when we tread depth is priceless in neither.
It may not matter too much consumption chapter if you buy either of these two "beasts"But it is mandatory to refer to it. Surprising that both Golf and 130i do not have too high a cost, or at least we do not we think if we consider the satisfaction and prestacional level offering. Averages around 11 liters per 100 km in the combined cycle, as measured by our Technical Center, seem to us a "price" worth paying, especially when compared, for example, with fuel costs of a gasoline TT "meh". Here, the victor is the model of BMW, because on tests that we have submitted has declared less than the Volkswagen, around 0.7 liters per 100 km consumption.
|
| Watch video |
| ||
|
| |
|
|
| Watch video |
| ||
|
| |
|
|
| Watch video |
| ||
|
| |
|
Over 250 hp, just over four meters and promise to go very fast. These characteristics are valid for two cars of our comparative, but the differences between them are so great that try to simplify their nature in one sentence seems a strategy to failure mission.
And the mere configuration of each vehicle is different. The Golf uses 4Motion all-wheel drive, which is already known in the range, and in this version is true justification -in other models is recommended, the R32 is compulsorily. This element, in addition to the plus security conferred on asphalts in poor condition or under adverse weather conditions, will come in handy the most powerful Golf, because it “subject” to the ground when we decided to put all the meat on the grill and extract everything you can offer us this R32. As much as we tread the throttle, both straight and support, stability is not compromised and no loss of traction occur, which might seem logical given the enormous number of horses of this compact.
He BMW 130i uses a different configuration and It opts for rear wheel drive, common in the Bavarian brand. With it, ensures the most exciting performance and quality unattainable guided in the category. However, there are many horses behind, which determines their behavior and makes it delicate in certain situations: wet asphalt or bad weather. For the moment, when the back-and insinuates sometimes more than that- and adrenaline shooting, you have to have good hands on the wheel. Definitely, 130i is the best choice for drivers who want sepan- -and bring out the full potential of the vehicle.
Both models present us with firm, but not uncomfortable, and with accurate directions suspensions and snapshots, but in this section, we opted for the compact BMW, because the sensations offered are better: their suspensions are more effective and provide more comfort to the occupants and radiography wheel best asphalt and is faster in driving dynamics. Of course, when maneuvering the car is stationary or at low speed, we felt something hard.
Both BMW and Volkswagen are cars that run a lot. Their engines they promise, but, as in the case of traction differs both mechanical configuration, The propeller 130i is a six-cylinder 265 hp officially delivered and a maximum torque of 32.7 mkg (269.1 hp and 33.3 mkg on our dynamometer); While, R32 is “satisfied” with “only” 250 hp and torque of 32.7 mkg (258 hp and 35 mkg, according to our measurements) and with a mechanical arrangement also comprising six cylinders, although in estes case V
Those extra 15 hp that has the 1 Series are enough for the Bavarian compact is somewhat faster in the measurements you made our Technical Center, even though the maximum torque is favorable to R32. Both acceleration (0-100 km / h and 0-1,000 m) and recoveries (80-120 km / h in fifth and sixth gear), the numbers favor the 130i, although the differences are not definitive by any means. Be round, at most, the second means except recovery 80 to 120 km / h, where this number is exceeded. Both speed is limited to 250 km / h, but, of unintentionally without the limitations of the electronics, far outweigh.
Although the 130i is more powerful, the R32 shows better torque delivery and more power to 5,000 rpm; from this figure, the Bavarian compact is imposed.
The lead we have not been clearly able to discern if one was faster than the other, although we sensed, the sensations generated by us, the 130i would be the victor in this section. However, some expert driver behind the wheel you out and get more for “better times” with the Golf, it is most effective and most noble when you are seeking the limits and does not offer traction loss
When stopping, brakes both are a guarantee of success. We can go very fast and subjecting them to extreme work that will surprise us with snapshots and braking few meters (below 70 meters the Series 1 and ¡bounds near 67! R32).
both engines boast a captivating sound, which helps stop do not feel like stepping on the accelerator. However, in this chapter there are differences of nuance: the Golf is more loud and the quality of that sound can become tiresome over the kilometers. Yes, hear the roar of mechanics when we tread depth is priceless in neither.
It may not matter too much consumption chapter if you buy either of these two "beasts"But it is mandatory to refer to it. Surprising that both Golf and 130i do not have too high a cost, or at least we do not we think if we consider the satisfaction and prestacional level offering. Averages around 11 liters per 100 km in the combined cycle, as measured by our Technical Center, seem to us a "price" worth paying, especially when compared, for example, with fuel costs of a gasoline TT "meh". Here, the victor is the model of BMW, because on tests that we have submitted has declared less than the Volkswagen, around 0.7 liters per 100 km consumption.