8th Sep 2007, 00:06
106 gti was never tested with 4 passengers 0-60mph. If it was it would have got there in about 12sec. lol.
12th Sep 2007, 10:05
Type R owner here - I haven't owned all the cars I mentioned, but have driven all of them either on extended test drives, or they are cars of friends that I've driven.
The reason I sold my turbo Type R was purely done to money reasons... I had bills to pay LOL. I swapped my turbo for a standard one plus £2500 cash my way.
The Cosworth was a friend's car, as was the Evo 8. My turbo Teg used to blow them all out of the water though; more power than all of them, and easily lighter than them.
The guy I sold it to took it Santa Pod the week after he bought it (something I never got round to), and in his words; "I fluffed the starts and still got low 12's LOL".
Anyway back to subject matter. I really think people are over rating the little Saxo into something it's not... a sports car!
12th Sep 2007, 17:12
Octavia vRS owner here. Sorry for misreading your post about your list of cars Integra owner. However, I don't recall anyone saying the VTS is a sports car. It's sold and bought by teenagers (most of them would sell for mine and your car if they could insure them) as a hot hatch. And I think it's silly not to admit that. It's one of the fastest 1.6's ever made, and makes fools out of a lot of more expensive and higher powered cars, mine included. It's undeniable. I don't think anyone is saying they're the best cars ever made and everyone should buy them; they are what they are, and that's a very quick, cheap, small, light go-kart.
14th Sep 2007, 08:08
Octavia owner here (never thought I'd have to announce myself as that before. Should have bought a Lambo LOL).
As far as I'm aware, the only difference between the VTS, VTR and Furio is disc brakes on the rear of the VTS. Is that true? Not sure what insurance group mine is, but my mate couldn't get a decent quote cos hes got points, so the saxo was his option and he's never looked back. How did you get yours to 160 break? Turbo?
14th Sep 2007, 18:52
You I agree. "real" VTS's are pretty rare. There are only 1 or 2 in my area. The biggest giveaway is the discs instead of drums at the back. VTR's are the same setup, but have different wheels and don't have the 16v badge.. since they are 8. I have a 1895cc 3 series coupe and a VTR. Acceleration is very similar, it would probably be in favour of the VTR to about 80/90. Hard to tell though as they are both very different cars.
16th Sep 2007, 07:58
To the guy who said vtr, s have drums om the back both the vtr and vts have discs all round.just thought I would let you know.
17th Sep 2007, 06:28
Type R owner here- to the vRS owner, if you look at the first few comments on this review you will see a VTS owner stating that in his words "beaten an Integra Type R" on the back roads, just wanted to prove that he was way out on that wild dream LOL.
20th Sep 2007, 06:28
I agree the driver makes a huge difference, but the guy states that its his brother he is racing in the teg and that his brother can really drive well and he STILL reckons he raped the teg... theres just no chance in the world.
20th Sep 2007, 08:55
Navara owner (he he) - the 'Ring' is definitely on the cards! Good choice of vehicle BTW. I think EVO mag have one in their fast fleet line-up and they love it.
I've noticed on this site that there is some very over inflated claims by VTS owners on what cars they have beat in a race etc, which could be the case due to being the better driver, knowing the road better etc. Now in the case of a Integra Type-R versus a Saxo VTS with equal drivers and equally knowing the road/track as well as each other, then there will be only one winner (but not by a massive amount like most people would think!) The teg is arguably the greatest FWD car of all time without a doubt and the VTS is also up there as one of the best little hot hatches around, but often gets overlooked due to it's image.
20th Sep 2007, 16:55
Navara driver here. I was just about to say that, the integra are great cars. I'd love the chance to drive one. My truck is part of a fast fleet? It's not lighting quick, but the quickest pick up except for the American petrol ones. Mines 174bhp rear wheel drive and automatic. Man I love it. Everyone go to Nissan and get a test drive.
21st Sep 2007, 13:00
Integra type R owner here; glad to see some people agreeing with me... vts will not keep up.
22nd Sep 2007, 17:03
I have a VTR which I'm selling. I was taking it to a dealer today to sell it, but they didn't offer me enough.
Now I usually drive it sensibly, but today I thrashed it as I'm not going to have it much longer anyway. I was coming off a roundabout, and I had to go around a tight bend which leads onto a dual carriage way, floored it in 2nd around the bend and got near 60mph on it, wasn't speeding up anymore, if I backed off the throttle the back end would have gone. There was no tyre squeal and no sign off it losing grip. I think it could have handled another 20bhp pretty easily.
It's not that quick in a straight line, but perfectly acceptable for a 1.6. If you enjoy driving then getting a VTR isn't a bad idea, you'll have fun. As for the VTS keeping up on the twisties with the Integra, I don't really think it would have the power to do so. If the road was really very twisty with short straights, then the VTS may stand a chance.
5th Sep 2007, 08:48
Teg Type R owner - The gearing on a 106 GTi is identical to the VTS (they are practically the SAME CAR!). The only reason the 0-60 times for the GTi are slower than the VTS is due to Peugeot testing their cars with 4 passengers and a full tank of fuel, hence the slower 0-60 and group 13 insurance compared to group 14 for the VTS.
And as for there being a flat spot when changing into 2nd... Errrr no, there isn't one!
VTS owner of 6 years - You've either got a Friday afternoon car, some unidentified problem hampering performance, you're confused and actually own a VTR, or you don't own a VTS at all!
Do you ever read car mags like EVO, Autocar etc etc? They have tested VTS/106 GTIs plenty of times with proper timing gear attached to them, and on average they record around 7.6 to 60mph, 0-100 in 22 secs and 1/4 mile sprints around 15.8 seconds at around 88mph. And as for the VTS not being able to keep up with 172s, I suggest you do a bit more research; (cliosport.net would be a good start).
I have an old EVO + Autocar mag in front of me, and the hot hatch test in EVO has the VTS lapping Anglesey a fraction quicker than a 172. The Autocar mag is at Rockingham Raceway and the VTS is 0.5 sec a lap slower than a 172 Cup! There has been loads more tests like this, I could go on all day. There really isn't that much difference in 'real world' performance between the two. Yes, the 172 is a bit quicker in a straight line and would start pulling away when into triple figures, but straight lining isn't what these cars are about. Get two drivers of equal talent behind the wheel of a VTS and 172 down some nice twisty B-roads or on a track, and there'll be nothing in it between the two!