Mk7 Vs Mk8
I suppose we're seeing different things on the interior, it looks good to me. In fact, design wise, it looks better, as more lines meet up in non interrupted fashion. I'll have to see it in person, but honestly, I drove a Z3 M Coupe for fourteen years, so crap interiors aren't really a problem for me if the driving dynamics are there. I do feel like the new tartan seat patterns are a bit weak though, but again, will have to see them in person.
Funny, coming from BMW's, Audi's and even the previously mentioned dumb SLK, all with half a mile of throttle travel, my manual GTI does just fine at getting off the line and is perfectly easy to drive. Perhaps you got a lemon? I've had a 17 and 18 and both were fine stock and of course improved with little changes. I assume you haven't driven a Mazda3?
And of course the manual is slower than the flappy paddle. That's been standard fare since about 2006 for most manufacturers, at least on anything with a modicum of torque. Why is this a bad thing? There are all sorts of options wildly faster than a GTI, driven from the right end, with manuals, floppy paddles or one speed gearboxes.
Eh, I'd say it's a bad thing because it's the slowest car off the line that I've ever owned; and that's not how it's billed at all. It could probably beat a Honda Element through an intersection, but I haven't seen one of those in a while. Once you're where the car lets you loose, it's a rocket ship; absolutely stupid fast for the price, but until then it feels about as quick as the Kubota mower I sold to buy it.
A lot of that comes down to the intervention I mentioned, and the flywheel, but there's that gearing, as well. It's not ideal. This could be the best manual car on the road under $30,000; the hardware is in place, and the car can indeed do it underneath all that, I'm sure of it. It has been cut short before it had a chance to shine, though. Combine that with turbo lag (you really ought to have direct control in a turbocharged vehicle), and it's a bit of a frustrating disappointment. To be fair, that thing spools up quick, but it's let down by everything else.
The performance of my 2019 seems to be par for the course in general. I don't seem to have any manner of lemon, though I certainly thought I did at first. You drive enough stuff, then hop in something that's supposed to be a fun time, and the car just drops anchor. You can tell there's a real car under there, but it's not letting you in to play. That's an issue, from my perspective. I've routinely likened it to coming up a dollar short at a whorehouse.
As I've considered trading it for a Subaru, I've recently wrung out a WRX for the first time in a few years. That has some of the same issues, but it's much more direct. The hangup on the Subaru? VW spoiled me immediately with the MK7.5 interior. How can I go from one to another? I either give up comfort or performance. I can't seem to have both, which I thought was the Golf's party piece to begin with. 
In regard to the interior of the MK8, style is certainly subjective, but subjectivity changes with trends. Right now, the '80s and '90s are back in industrial design; but that's right now. That will change, and when it does, more trendy designs will become tired. The MK8 takes it a step farther into the "digital age" of design, but again caters directly to a demographic that grew up with Facebook and treat the early 2000s as "retro". That doesn't mean other people won't like it, it just means they really, really focused a car that has generally offered a much broader interpretation of aesthetic value.
I've ordered a Cybertruck. That vehicle was aimed specifically at me; a member of the generation growing up with Countach and black-light posters on their walls. It's a car designed specifically to peddle the dreams of my own youth in a financially tolerable package. I know this, and I don't care. He nailed it. I get to have a Lamborghini and the APC from Aliens at the same time.
VW has taken the same tack, but pulled from the early 2000s. The problem is it's a mass-market automobile. It's okay for a Cybertruck to look outdated in a few years; but not a Golf. Older cars that are still on the road sell the brand just as much as newer cars; particularly when they're only a generation or two out of relevance.
Observe the simple interior of every previous Golf. It's not particularly stunning or even aesthetically impressive. It's almost lazy. It's workmanlike; efficient, practical, and basic, but made of high quality materials and rather uninspired in design. That's what holds up over time, though. That's what never looks old, and lasts from a quality perspective; and there's my main concern with the interior of the MK8. It's too low-brow; too "styled" to stand the test of time. That design isn't going to have as long a run as the MK7. There's just no way it can.
The new design language kind of makes sense for the R with a DSG, but for a GTI? With a manual? There's a disconnect between the aesthetic and the reality.
From a transmission perspective, I think a CVT would be a darn good experience in a Golf. The way the turbo comes in would really lean into the benefits, and I feel it would really amplify that slingshot effect. Ain't gonna happen, though. If it did, the entire community would revolt. I'll take a manual without the intervention, but with all that stuff in the way, it makes more sense as a DSG or CVT.
Funny thing is, I read reviews of the Golf praising it's throttle response and directness, and I'm left wondering what the hell those people are smoking.
Source: https://www.golfmk7.com/forums/index.php?threads/mk7-vs-mk8.372256/
