Type S vs Golf R

[Teggy24]

Acura directly compares the Type S to the S3, m235i and CLA 35 AMG, but I think a better comparison is the Golf R. They’re both essentially driver-focused hot hatches with similar power, practicality, manual transmission and similar price points (even after their respective absurd ADMs). Realistically, these are the only two vehicles I would cross-shop.

I think there’s a lot of pros and cons between the two (I’ve tried breaking down below based on reviews of each, having driven neither but previously owning a mk7 GTI)

Type S
- Feels like a more special car
- More track capable
- better inputs (transmission, steering, pedal box, tires)
- mechanical lsd seems to have advantages over Golf R’s brake vectoring system
- more unique engine compared to Golf R’s EA888 shared across multiple platforms
-better sound system
-better exhaust sound
-perhaps more reliable?

Golf R
- AWD (which is improved in the mk8 over the prior haldex)
- more creature comforts (sunroof, rear middle seat, rear a/c, power passenger seat, cooled seats, etc.)
- awful touch-only infotainment/steering wheel controls (if the rumors are true and this is fixed in the refresh, it may beat out the Type S’s tacked on infotainment)
- faster straight line speed (low 4s 0-60 vs Type S low 5s)
-availability of a DCT (if that’s your thing…)
-better fit and finish (Type S paint match continues to bother me)

Interested in hearing other’s thoughts on what would make you want one over the other (especially if you have firsthand experience with one or both)

 

[zozi8816]

I kept hearing/reading manual in R is very meh as it is built for DCT and manual is only built for NA..
and ya it is less special due to its toned down look (looks like other golf).. some people want more special (looking) cars for the money they pay (~45k USD/50k+ CAD).

 

[Estoril]

I'd add maybe tunability as an important factor for some people

 

[eculley]

The Mk8 Golf R cannot hit low 4s unless you're running the DCT. I've seen nothing but high 5s for the manual Golf R. As someone who owns a Mk8 GTI currently, and have owned multiple Rs in the past, the shifter is hot garbage and is easily the weak point with the car when comparing it to the Type S. For the money, I love my GTI but I cannot wait for my Type S to get here. I am tired of this shifter and the seating position isn't ideal.

 

[Ricochet48]

The Golf R is a better deal, full stop. The ITS is priced higher due to hype (especially from the CTR) and because it's styled much more aggressively than the Golf R (which has a shape most Americans do not appreciate). Here's my comparison chart that's as apples to apples as I could get across the 3 Acura compared, the Golf R, and the BMW options (of which I think the M240i wins by a long shot if you don't need a stick or as much space):

* Note Premium for the Integra is a heated steering wheel with install estimate.

 

[TheRas900]

I agree these the Golf R is the closest to the Type S in practice. And the VW also seems to be a better deal, although the Honda transmission and steering feel are probably more my speed. I wish the Integra had the feature set and pricing of the Golf R.

 

[6-Speedio]

They don't compare the Golf R to the ITS because it has AWD, whereas the S3, CLA35, M235i don't. Also, from a driving dynamics perspective, the Golf R, although fast, is as boring as it gets. The clutch and manual shifter give no feedback to the driver whatsoever. I wanted a Golf R really badly until I drove one and was flabbergasted as to how much it sucked.

I'm excepting the ITS to be exactly like my FK8. Although the FL5 has a firmer suspension, I get the feeling the ITS suspension will feel pretty similar to the FK8.

 

[Ricochet48]

They don't compare the Golf R to the ITS because it has AWD, whereas the S3, CLA35, M235i don't.

Huh? All of those have AWD... as does the Golf R. It's just the ITS that does not.

A few of the BMW options like the 230i & M240i have xDrive as an option tough.

 

[Teggy24]

I'd add maybe tunability as an important factor for some people

I think the Golf R is still fairly tuneable (historically, APR has made pretty good power gains with just flashes or hardware upgrades, for example) and the cast iron block should be pretty sturdy for additional boost etc.

 

[Teggy24]

I agree these the Golf R is the closest to the Type S in practice. And the VW also seems to be a better deal, although the Honda transmission and steering feel are probably more my speed. I wish the Integra had the feature set and pricing of the Golf R.

My thoughts exactly!

 

[optronix]

Golf R is not a driver's car.

Case closed.

 

[spyder]

Golf R is not a driver's car.

Case closed.

Exactly this!

Golf R has a lot of compelling features but what took it out of the running for me was driver engagement.

 

[Teggy24]

Golf R is not a driver's car.

Case closed.

Respectfully disagree.

The GTI is a historic driver’s car, without which we wouldn’t have the civic type r, integra type r or now the Integra type s.

You’re saying taking that car and adding power and an awd system somehow makes it not a driver’s car? That seems like some arbitrary gatekeeping to me. The only people buying Golf Rs are enthusiasts - that is, drivers.

I can totally agree that by all accounts the Type S has better inputs and feedback, but I’d stop short of disqualifying the Golf R altogether. I think we’re lucky both of these exist in a market jam-packed with CUVs and in light of the EV takeover.

 

[ZeroGSR]

I think the Golf R is still fairly tuneable (historically, APR has made pretty good power gains with just flashes or hardware upgrades, for example) and the cast iron block should be pretty sturdy for additional boost etc.

The VAG 2.0T is pretty comparable tuning wise to the K20C, that said, there are two big differences.
1. Ease of bolt on install is night and day. Downpipe you have to drop the driveshaft and rock the motor, intercooler is a complete nightmare to replace. Now that they reconfigured the engine bay a bit this gen in the Hondas, bolt ons are super simple on this car, assuming you don't break a turbo stud
2. You can tune a Honda without much blowback because they really can't identify it unless you bring it in for a catastrophic failure or neglect to flash to stock. No matter how much tuners will claim they can revert the VAG ECU to stock, it's a lie. VAG will always know if you are or were tuned. They scan as standard procedure for anytime you bring it in. So unless you have a tech you are friendly with and will skip the scan, it goes down in your vehicle records permanently.

That said, AWD means you can actually put that power to the road so it's a trade off. Also, even with the new AWD system, it's still a transverse setup so it's going to mostly handle like a FWD car. If the RS3 had true Quatro I would have gotten one, even without a stick.

The reason I bought the S3 over the Golf R (beyond availability) was because when it was in the shop, at least I would get an Audi. Same applies here, rather drive an Acura than a Jetta And yes, for the first 6 months of ownership I drove the loaner A5 more than I drove my S3

I will say, it is a fun car and is so easy to drive fast. I think that's my main gripe (besides not having a stick) is that it's too easy. After my S2K, the S3 was just boring.

 

[Estoril]

I think the Golf R is still fairly tuneable (historically, APR has made pretty good power gains with just flashes or hardware upgrades, for example) and the cast iron block should be pretty sturdy for additional boost etc.

Correct, you can gain an easy 70hp/tq usually with just a reflash if it's anything like my S4. Can also put the extra power to the ground which is the main benefit of mqb