T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
1545.1 | | COMICS::WEGG | Some hard boiled eggs & some nuts. | Wed Sep 11 1991 12:47 | 6 |
| � Anyone seen pics of the new Astra yet?
There was a picture in the Sunday Times last weekend. Didn't take
much notice though!
I.
|
1545.2 | Report in Autocar and MOtor | YUPPY::ELLAWAY | Martin Ellaway@hhl | Wed Sep 11 1991 12:50 | 4 |
| Yes and the Report for the GSI 16 valve is in Autocar and motor
out today as well as the RS2000 and the golf VR6.
Martin
|
1545.3 | Discussed elsewhere | TIMMII::RDAVIES | An amateur expert | Wed Sep 11 1991 14:37 | 6 |
| .0 is covered by 525.64, the rest is covered by numerous dir/title=golf
topics.
Maybe we should merge the lot together?.
Richard
|
1545.4 | | KERNEL::SHELLEYR | On the bank of brinkruptcy | Thu Sep 12 1991 10:30 | 10 |
| .0 �featured on Thursday in the new season of Top Gear, BEEB 2
I've checked my TV guide (South) and can't find any reference to Top
Gear on Thursday. Are you sure its today or next week ?
Maybe theres a regional variation.
Cheers,
- Roy
|
1545.5 | time to pay Smiths a visit | COMICS::HWILLIAMS | | Thu Sep 12 1991 10:59 | 5 |
| See this weeks Autoexpress
new Escort vs new Golf vs new Astra
Huw.
|
1545.6 | Top Gear starts on the 19th | VOGON::MORGAN | J.F.D.I. | Thu Sep 12 1991 11:02 | 1 |
|
|
1545.7 | More ?? | STRIKR::LINDLEY | Strewth mate..... | Thu Sep 12 1991 13:34 | 6 |
| Re .5
Are they looking at cars from the cooking end of the range or the
performance end ? What do they say ?
John
|
1545.8 | I should be a salesman for A & M | YUPPY::ELLAWAY | Martin Ellaway@hhl | Thu Sep 12 1991 17:18 | 4 |
| Autocar and Motor have performance end autoexpress have the less sedate
models.
martin
|
1545.9 | | KETJE::SHASTA::RUTTER | I'll Be 'Ome Soon | Mon Sep 16 1991 14:19 | 3 |
| CAR has write-ups on the latest range of 'hot hatches'
J.R.
|
1545.11 | | SUBURB::SCREENER | Robert Screene, UK Finance EUC | Tue Oct 08 1991 18:52 | 17 |
| Hi Kieth,
The 115 bhp is for a catalyst 2.0 engine, I don't think the 1.8 8v was
even 100 bhp with the thing. Still, it's certainly no power per cc record
breaker!
Also, there's as much torque at 2200 rpm as the old 1.8 8v's peak at
3800 rpm. Sounds like the GTI is now to really become a grand tourer,
as opposed to a sprinter. Smoother, quieter, but just as agile.
There's no doubt the GTI is maturing, the question is;
Is it still the right badge, as it was for the original VW screamer?
Robbie.
p.s. Can I have my VR6 now?
|
1545.13 | Really interested, not just stirring? | NEWOA::SAXBY | Aye. When I were a lad.... | Wed Oct 09 1991 10:00 | 9 |
|
DO people really buy VW's for their perceived quality statement?
I thought they were basically bought because they were seen (much
as a Mini) as a classless car with a reputation for reliability.
Do VW owners think believe that their cars are sort of mini-BMWs?
Mark
|
1545.14 | I believe they are of good quality, but I wouldn't buy VW | CHEST::RUTTER | Sixteen wheels, sixteen cylinders | Wed Oct 09 1991 10:21 | 14 |
| � DO people really buy VW's for their perceived quality statement?
They are bought in image, which could be perceived quality, or
more often than not 'tis whatever the marketing guys say, coupled
with the general attitude to that particular product brand.
I remember reading the percentage of Golf GTi purchasers that do
NOT try out the competition before buying the VW, it was a lot.
That is all that VAG need to keep on with their sales, so long as
they don't produce a real lemon of a car. Of course, if you do get
a bad reputation, then that is really hard to get rid of, as is shown
by the typical British impression that Lancia=Rot, on new models.
J.R.
|
1545.15 | Slower than a 1.6L Astra ? | JUMBLY::BATTERBEEJ | Kinda lingers..... | Wed Oct 09 1991 11:28 | 6 |
| I think the sort of person who buys a BMW 316 would also buy one of
the new 8V Golf GTi's - for the image first, then for all the other
usual reasons (quality,reliable,gutless etc).
Jerome.
|
1545.16 | VW v BMW? | CRISPY::KINGHORNJ | Born Again Geordie | Wed Oct 09 1991 12:33 | 29 |
|
Well there seems to be quite a few 'armchair experts' out there, so I
thought I'd donate some first hand experience:
I've had 2 Golfs over the last 6 years the first was an 8v mk2
the second is a 16v mk2.
My prime reason for choosing a Golf was reliability. As the other
contractors out there will know, if you don't work, you don't get
paid. Neither car ever let me down on the road, so I think this
factor was justified.
Secondly I wanted something practical, big enough to put a computer, or
a chest of drawers or whatever in the back, both of which have been
carried at one time or another.
Third I wanted something which the performance could be described as
adequate and the running costs not too ridiculous.
As for the boy racer, traffic light dragsters out there, the
difference for the 0-60 between the 8v and the 16v engine is
less than a second, the 16v comes into its own above about
4000 rpm (over 70mph in top gear).
Personally I wouldn't consider a BMW 316, (it couldn't take the chest of
drawers) and I'm amazed by the sweeping generalization of such a statement
- do you know lots of BMW 316 drivers then ?
Jeff K.
|
1545.17 | My GTE is pretty reliable | JUMBLY::BATTERBEEJ | Kinda lingers..... | Wed Oct 09 1991 14:03 | 19 |
| re 1545.16
I am surprised you didn't understand what I was getting at. A BMW 316
is for the money very slow and poorly equiped. For the money you could
buy a Ford or Vauxhall, for instance, that is far superior in terms of
perfomance (not just 0-60 or top whack either) and equipment. Yet
people still choose the BMW. It is likely they want the image that
the BMW has not just the reliability & quality etc. After all, you
could probably find decent cars for the price of a BMW 316 that have
the quality etc but not the image.
I feel that if someone is going to buy the new 8V GTi when there
are other quality hot hatches that are much faster all round, then they
are probably buying it for the image. As with the BMW.
You stated that you bought your cars for the reliability, but there
are cars that are probably more reliable than a VW so why didn't you buy
one of them?
Jerome.
|
1545.18 | You pays your money.... | CRISPY::KINGHORNJ | Born Again Geordie | Wed Oct 09 1991 14:58 | 15 |
|
re .17 - 'More reliable than a VW'? - name two
Are you implying that the Golf is poorly equipped or not as fast as
some other hatches, mine has all sorts of electric gizmos as standard.
Yes there may now be faster hatchbacks around, 'in a straight line',
but most comparative reviews I've read reckoned the Golf was the better
car to drive in normal road conditions than, for example, the equivalent
Vauxhall or Ford.
Jeff K.
|
1545.19 | Golfs are OK (but not exotic) by me. | NSDC::SIMPSON | Sit 'n' Bull | Wed Oct 09 1991 15:12 | 35 |
| For Mark Saxby - no, I don't regard my Golf as a mini-BMW!! It handles well, is
roomy inside, and economical - I am sure that you would agree that puts it
beyond comparison :-)
Secondly, you do not buy a GTI 8V in Switzerland for image. I would say that
20% of the Golfs in Neuch�tel are G60's (including 2 driving school cars), and
another 20% are 16V.
The Golf has been the best selling car in Swiztzerland every year since 1976.
This is because they are seen as well built, reliable and they hold their
value. They are just a utility car. for image, you go for something exotic - a
golf (even a G60) is not regarded as such around these parts (nor by me!)
I've got a Golf GTI 8V.
- It's got 115 bhp (the cat version has 108) - which is plenty enough for me -
even though it is well down on the hot-hatch list.
- It averages 40 mpg - I got 45 pmg this morning going to Zurich and back at
an average speed of 85 mph. All other hatches I know of (including the GTI
16V) will give me 25-35 mpg at this speed - the PUG 205 GTI is particularly
bad in this respect.
- It is reliable. Its covered 85,000 miles. My only problem has been with a
fuel pump - and I managed to get to a garage with that. I don't like spending
money on cars - the Golf helps me to not have to do this!
- I maintain it myself, and never have anything special to do (brakes this
weekend!~)
- It handles extremely well - totally predictable, (and idiot proof!)
Cheers
Steve
|
1545.20 | Slow down! | EEMELI::HAUTALA | To carry VR290 Ya need Guinness, man | Wed Oct 09 1991 15:34 | 15 |
|
For those who are worried about "poor" performance of 8 v GTI:
- you can always buy VR6
- there will be 16 v later
- there is many tuning parts available for older golf and most
probably will be for the new model from OETTINGER for example.
I myself have 1.6 litre 1991 with 75 hp as standard, but with Oettinger
cam and pipe it gives more than 90 hp. Without cat.
Hannu
|
1545.21 | | NEWOA::SAXBY | Aye. When I were a lad.... | Wed Oct 09 1991 15:36 | 22 |
|
Hello Steve,
This is how I'd perceived VWs (funnily enough lowly Mercs seem to be
perceived as reliable workhorses in most of Europe, but as status
symbols in the UK). I've nothing against the Golf (except perhaps
the way VAG market them in the UK), but it isn't a car which inspires
any excitement in me.
Re another note.
Cars more reliable than a VW? Well, I don't have a report to hand, but
seem to recall that a lot of Japanese cars come out ahead of the VW
Golf in GERMAN tests! (Much though it pains me to say!!!). Personally
I had very little complaint with the reliability of my Renault 5GT
Turbo and would buy one again if I was in the market for such a car.
I doubt that many mass produced cars are VERY unreliable these days,
but perhaps I was just lucky with the Renault. Autocar and Motor seem
to concur with my experience (In fact are slightly luckier) with the
Calibra (ie. Total reliabilty albeit for a bit more than a Golf).
Mark
|
1545.22 | | SHIPS::ALFORD_J | an elephant is a mouse with an oper. sys. | Wed Oct 09 1991 15:47 | 14 |
| Re: that other note.
Cars more reliable than a VW ?
Well having owned both Polos and a Golf, both the Polos and the Golf were
less reliable than either the Mini or the Vauxhall Nova I currently use.
In fact, the Golf was the most unreliable car I have ever had the misfortune to
own/use, the Polo 1.1 coming second in the unreliable car stakes.
I would consider Vauxhalls to far exceed VW's in the reliability stakes and
the much-vaunted safety of the VW's is exceeded by the Astra and the Nova !
No, I would never go back to VW's, they are an expensive millstone when they
go wrong. Expensive to buy, and expensive to maintain.
|
1545.23 | Back a few.... | HAMPS::NICHOLLS | I'm off! | Wed Oct 09 1991 16:24 | 4 |
| I didn't think BMW made a 316 any more - just a 316i.
Regards
|
1545.24 | And then there's Statistics... | CRISPY::KINGHORNJ | Born Again Geordie | Wed Oct 09 1991 17:35 | 21 |
|
I have never heard anyone describe Minis as reliable, maybe the
Consumers Association has been lying about Minis for the last 25 years.
There will be good and bad cars of all makes but certain manufacturers
consistently do better than others.
VW (and Toyota, and Mazda etc) do consistently better than average in
reliability surveys.
With regards servicing costs I don't regard an average of �120-140
every 10,000 miles to be excessive. I would recommend Autovolks to
anyone in the Reading area.
Jeff K.
|
1545.25 | VOLKSwagen | EEMELI::HAUTALA | Wind that shakes the barley | Wed Oct 09 1991 19:02 | 11 |
|
I think Golf is, and originally meant to be a reliable, basic car that
is good to handle with reasonable inside space. It is not or has not been
a luxorious car. Maybe not the cheapiest, but there is a value for the
money.
I myself used to have a japanese car and it was a reliable one, but
not very solid and the handling was poor. (Nissan Cherry -84)
Hannu
|
1545.26 | The 1st 100,000 miles are the easiest | NSDC::SIMPSON | Sit 'n' Bull | Thu Oct 10 1991 14:43 | 10 |
| RE: .21
Mark,
When I talk about reliability, I'm talking about something that
will do me for 150-200,000 miles without a major component failing.
I reckon that the Golf will do this for me - we'll know in another
2-3 years!
I agree that other cars are also very reliable these days
- particularly for their first owner.
|
1545.27 | | NEWOA::SAXBY | Aye. When I were a lad.... | Thu Oct 10 1991 15:07 | 5 |
|
Well, fortunately I don't have to worry about cars lasting that
long! :^)
Mark
|
1545.29 | | DUCK::KINGHORNJ | Born Again Geordie | Fri Oct 11 1991 12:48 | 7 |
|
Yes, if I had to say something negative about the Golf, I would
say it is a bit boring.
Fortunately there are other ways to find excitment ;-)
Jeff K.
|
1545.30 | | NSDC::SIMPSON | Sit 'n' Bull | Sun Oct 13 1991 20:51 | 10 |
| RE: .28
Well you've got to be ambitious! I "parked" my last VW van (air cooled) at
135,000 miles - it was still going strong. My current (water cooled) one is on
85,000 miles. The Golf is on 90,000 miles. I'll run it until it drops. I'll let
you know at what mileage this occurs..!
Steve
P.S. Entropy is an unknown phenomenon Switzerland!
|
1545.31 | GTI MKIII | EEMELI::HRA47::hautala | | Tue Feb 04 1992 11:21 | 17 |
|
Anyone knows when MKIII 16V is going to appear? Any specs?
For sure it costs less than VR6, but I suppose it is more
expensive than MKII 16V.
I test drove 1.8 CL and it was a reasonable car for it's
price. (in Finland) Car feels bigger than MKII inside.
With 90 hp it is not a hot hatch, but scores with good
torgue at low rpm.
The doors of the MKIII are so heavy(!
Hannu
|
1545.32 | | SUBURB::TAYLORG | RIP: Freddie Mercury 24-Nov-1991 | Thu Feb 06 1992 11:36 | 7 |
| re-1
VW were having problems with the 2.0Litre 16v 143BHP engine that is
going to be fitted to the GTi 16v. I have not heard anything else
since though.
Grant
|
1545.33 | | SUBURB::SCREENER | Robert Screene, UK Finance EUC | Thu Feb 06 1992 18:36 | 2 |
| But surely the Passat has had that 2.0 16 valve engine for yonks?
|
1545.34 | | BHAJEE::JAERVINEN | Bitte ein Bit? Bitte 64 Bit!! | Mon Jul 06 1992 12:54 | 5 |
| re .33: Sure, I had one for almost 3 years (just gave it back a month ago).
Needed a new cylinder head after a few months (warranty). Consumed a lot of oil.
I now have a Golf VR6. (174 hp DIN).
|
1545.36 | GTI impressions??? | IOSG::DUTT | Nigel Dutt | Wed Jul 29 1992 20:03 | 4 |
| Is there a Mk III Golf GTI review note in here - couldn't find one with
the obvious titles?
Thanks
|
1545.37 | | MAJORS::ALFORD | lying Shipwrecked and comatose... | Thu Jul 30 1992 12:18 | 7 |
|
there's the generic Golf GTI topic, might be best to continue your discussion
there
544 BELFST::G_DOWNEY 12-APR-1989 168 Golf GTI
|
1545.38 | Good, Better, Best | HLFS00::HAANS_E | C-YA AGAIN ... ON MY WAY BACK | Thu Oct 08 1992 15:09 | 12 |
| Already driving my third VW Golf
The best thing about them is that they feel the same after 2 or 3 years
as when you just bought them.
1. Golf GT4 special action model with multipoint injection 1800cc 90BHP
2. Golf GTI 8v 107BHP and a LPG installation (driving on GAZ)
3. Golf VR6 174 BHP. Now this is really moving around.
You can't go faster for less money but it is more comfortable than the
MKII Golf GTI.
C-YA Erik
|
1545.39 | What a shame........ | VOGON::KAPPLER | Dover, Rising more slowly, Good | Thu Oct 08 1992 15:15 | 9 |
| Re: .-1
"......... thing about them is that they feel the same after 2 or 3 years
as when you just bought them."
Never mind, you can't have everything. (-: (-:
JohnK
|