Hmmm, I dunno.
I get the whole driver error and all that for sure. But I'm sure a lot who are complaining of clutch slip here have not launched the car.
A GTI clutch in an R running 30% more power? Something has to give and it's the clutch it seems. Sucks and it's kinda bull that VW are just putting this down to wear item when they know it's a POS.
And they blame their wives for the worn clutch - because the men are all excellent drivers.
People need to stop letting their wives drive then, since ya know there legs work differently and all all jokes aside maybe this just isn't an "enthusiasts" car. I too got dsg, mainly cause I knew of the clutch failures and didn't want to do the work in my driveway, my clutch packs will probably fail but then I'll just get upgraded ones
Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
I don't know what the first owner of my WRX did, but the clutch died early. I had it replaced with another stock WRX clutch, and it held strong for over 110k miles, which is when I sold the car. The car was making 150+hp over stock the entire time and I'd assume 60+% over stock and Subaru AWD fits your high power (in terms of the stock clutch) AWD platform that you say is asking for trouble. I doubt anyone believes an R clutch could do the same. Add in the clutch delay valve that only increases the amount of clutch slip every single time you release the pedal or the pressure plate failures people have seen when they pull their slipping clutch and it's not hard to see the reasoning why people are pointing at, what seems to be, an under engineered clutch.
Owning an early model WRX, I was scared ****less of launching the car hard. It had a reputation for a glass tranny, and I did not have the funds to repair a tranny from dicking around launching. I drive my R in a similar fashion to my old WRX. I'm still scared of launching hard, just because it's ingrained in my brain hard launch + AWD = no tire spin and massive driveline shock. Something has to give. That being said, I still have very little faith in this stock clutch and already have purchased an aftermarket clutch for the day my clutch starts to slip and I have less than 11k miles on my car.
However, back to the original intention of this thread, there's so many posts saying the clutch is the weak point of the car (regardless of whether or not it actually is), to complain the stock clutch is slipping so early just shows lack of research and effort prior to purchasing a car. For most people, a car purchase is probably in the top 5 expenses in life, after a house, raising a kid, and maybe college tuition. The severe lack of time people put into such a significant purchase is pretty ridiculous to me. To complain about being massively overcharged for maintenance and complain about a commonly noted issues sounds like pure laziness and whining by calling your dealer an ass. OP has a join date of 2007, so he knew about this forum and could have easily spent less than an hour browsing the forum and found people reporting early clutch slip. As further evidence of pure laziness, there's clearly a local VW shop who charges less than the dealer, since that's who is putting in your TT-RS clutch, so why did you get massively overcharged for maintenance? If you're only at 16k miles, that maintenance was a 10k mile service? That consists of rotating tires and an oil change? If you felt you were being overcharged, why didn't you shop around?
Early and unexpected clutch failure is a topic in Europe too, and it's hardly likely that R drivers there have somehow forgotten how to properly drive a stick.
me thinks you dudes / this thread scared away the OP
I got nothing but anecdote - My 1999 B5 A4, got rid of it in 2017 @ 242k miles. Honestly, I do not recall a clutch service ever.
If you are going at a speed that causes you to run off the road before ESC can provide any assistance, you may not experience the benefits of ESC
It’s the selection bias issue of who buys and drives an R. All the folks complaining about the clutch drive more aggressively than they are truly capable of driving and more aggressively than they think they drive. That’s it. Nothing else. If I gave a bunch of Rs to old French women who were in the market for a 103 HP Opal, the clutches would all be fine.
Folks can’t buy the cheapest ‘race car’ made and ignore the fact that every part was designed to save weight and costs, then drive it at the edge of its design specs and expect it to last forever. That’s not how it works. Drive hard and you wear stuff out.
And I don’t believe you when you say you don’t drive hard.
So, let me get this straight. By your logic, it's now no longer about not being able to drive stick. Instead, don't drive a 300hp car like it has 300hp car, because it's not a race car, or in your terms it's the "cheapest race car". And, to make the R clutch have a similar service life to other performance oriented "cheapest race car" type vehicles, the R should be driven like a 103 HP Opal.
You say this is selection bias because the R specifically targets performance oriented drivers who drive more aggressively. Of course it will have selection bias, because that's what a target audience is. Wouldn't you think the clutch should be designed for the target market? If VW does not expect anyone shopping for a 103HP Opal to buy the R, why is there a clutch that requires someone to drive like a 103 HP Opal to get a decent service life from the clutch? How does that not point to an under engineered part?
And, because you had to add it in at the end, I don't believe you when you say you would drive the stock clutch past warranty if you had a 6MT.
I don’t care at all about any of this.
It seems clear to me R drivers beat the crap of their clutches. I ordered an R because it seems like a reasonably fun car that is mostly practical - a Golf + a little fun but still a Golf. I also ordered a DSG. Computers are better at shifting than I am.
I considered an STI, a Stinger, 340i, and a couple others. What I learned in my research was don’t buy a used entry-level performance car. The previous owner tried to kill it from day one.