VW Golf R versus Audi RS4 - comparison

So the surprise is that the Golf motor competes at all. VW’s engineers deserve respect not for prising so much power from such a small capacity, for they could have done that 20 years ago, but for making the engine not merely flexible and responsive but also positively urbane in character.

You only know it’s turbocharged because there’s no other plausible explanation for almost 300bhp at just 5500rpm from just 2.0 litres. There is no lag and its sound is so clean and cultured that you’d think there was nothing interrupting the flow of its gases from combustion chamber to outside world. Despite the notable fall in revs from one gear to the next necessitated by the wide ratios of its six-speed dual-clutch automatic transmission, the wall of torque maintains thrust regardless. True, it lacks the Audi’s slightly deranged pace, soul-stirring soundtrack and yet more slick seven-speed transmission, but the Golf is closer in all these areas than the apparent disparity in specification suggests.

I question only VW’s decision not to make the same manual gearbox used in the Golf R hatch available in the estate. Clearly, there’s no engineering imperative behind it, suggesting the decision emanated from some confounded focus group. If there is a choice to be made, why not let your customers make it?

Playing catch-up (successfully)

Whatever little the Golf might lose to the RS4 in a straight line, it more than regains the moment you need to use the steering wheel. The Audi puts a huge amount of rubber on the road – a 265-section tyre even at the front on the optional 20in rims on the test car – whereas the VW’s tyres are fully four sizes smaller. And despite their extra workload, I’d not be surprised if it was the RS4 that was ultimately capable of generating greater lateral acceleration. But up here in the hills, g-force is not what matters: it’s confidence, and very few cars of any price inspire more of it than this Volkswagen.

The Golf is so damn quick on roads such as these partly because it is compact, has all-wheel-drive traction and offers proper chassis feel, but mainly because it is so damn accurate. You don’t have to set an approximate trajectory and fine-tune thereafter. You aim; it goes. You never use an inch more road than expected.

And yet there is something missing here, and it’s the last thing I expected: unlike most estates, the Golf R notices its extra bulk. It weighs 79kg more than the hatch and because it’s all hanging out the back, you might think the car would be more balanced and feel all the better for it. But it doesn’t. It runs a stiffer rear spring, too, and although all the hatch’s stability and accuracy remain, some of its gorgeous throttle-sensitive adjustability has gone. I doubt the car is significantly slower point to point, but it is less chuckable and less fun as a result.

Mind you, it still makes the Audi feel its age. At a fundamental level, the RS4 feels less structurally rigid than the Golf, providing a floppier platform for its suspension to work upon. There is little steering feel, but the Audi’s main issue is that it is less precise everywhere, which means more effort for you and less reward from it. There’s no questioning the entertainment on offer but it’s never quite the precision instrument you might hope or indeed feel the rightto expect a car of this specification and price to be.

Where it does beat the Golf, and hands down at that, is in braking performance. The VW’s left pedal does the job required of it, but the RS4’s anchors are simply superb. Carbon-ceramics are an option, but with a standard iron set-up as good as this, you’d only want them for prolonged track work, or showing off to your mates.

The practical touches

As estate cars, there’s not much between them. For passenger space, they are similar, even in the back, where the RS4’s leg room potential is eaten away by its vast, superbly supportive front seats. Extended estate rooflines mean that head room is generous in both. Look at the stats box and you’ll convince yourself that the Golf has a far greater carrying capacity, too, and I’m sure it does. That said, if you park them side by side and flip the seats up and down, the two actually appear to provide similarly proportioned luggage areas.

But there is no questioning the Golf’s superior ride quality, the cleaner and more cohesive layout of its instruments and controls and its superior refinement, especially on coarse and concrete surfaces, where the RS4’s seven-league boots make a frightful racket.