GolfGTIforum.co.uk
Model specific boards => Golf mk2 => Topic started by: mr burns on 27 October 2010, 07:39
-
Hi all
I,m getting 300 miles a tank can anyone tell me is this about average and because of this I,m toying with swapping my mk2 gti with a Skoda vRS Tdi yes I did say Skoda, now apart from looks wise they are as dull as a nun on a night out the tempting part is 130 bhp only group 8-9 unlike the gti group 14 , £125 tax a yr not £220 and the big one is 550 miles a tank not 300 miles my golf is looking and running brilliantly having lots spent please someone talk me out of this dark place :laugh:
-
the skoda that was quicker round the top gear test track than a mini thingy. :lipsrsealed:
NOWT boring about TDi these days. :grin:
Enjoy the dark pump.
-
Hi mate
Around town i get upto 280 from a tank in a 1.8 16v which is better than my mk4 gti turbo :grin:, for you i suppose it depends on how many miles you do per week/ month, I always look on it another way, a newer car will lose value where as the long term future of a gti is hopefully an investment which is going up in value, I know what your saying about cheaper tax,insurance, fuel costs but how much depreciation will the VRS lose per year??
tough decision mate I know but plenty to look at and check up on :rolleyes:
-
the other thing to consider with modern diesels is the cost to fix when they go wrong
-
the other thing to consider with modern diesels is the cost to fix when they go wrong
This is really not a consideration, as with any newer car they will be expensive to fix. So it's proportional to every car from 2002+.
I would say go for it, and if you can, keep hold of the mk2. They are fast becoming weekend cars, as the economy of them is not brilliant, and they need almost constant attention.
The VRS is by no means a dull car to drive. The interior is typical VAG bland, but it's very well made and not slow in any sense.
-
This is really not a consideration, as with any newer car they will be expensive to fix. So it's proportional to every car from 2002+.
I would say go for it, and if you can, keep hold of the mk2. They are fast becoming weekend cars, as the economy of them is not brilliant, and they need almost constant attention.
The VRS is by no means a dull car to drive. The interior is typical VAG bland, but it's very well made and not slow in any sense.
I second this.
Mate has one with a hybrid turbo, intercooler etc etc putting out 215bhp and 310lb-ft and still gets 50mpg.
Makes them a fun car to drive while still being economical
-
http://www.tdisport.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=125&t=6149
Click on the op's links in his sigs. Once you've had a sorted diesel you'll never look back, but as said before, if you can, keep your Mk2. I wouldn't be without mine.
-
Not My Cuppa - But I understand the reasoning behind it... :wink:
I would carefully weigh up the extra cost of the Car (Depreciation, spares etc), cost of Diesel, extra cost of Servicing etc etc - before taking the plunge...
Extra MPG is great but at what cost!! I know your not buying a new one, but a few reviews of modern Diesels I have read seem to reach the conclusion that unless you are doing BIG mileage the extra costs outweigh the MPG bonus!!
Other Thing; MK2 Golf 100 points Street Cred, Skoda -10 Points... :laugh: :laugh:
-
Except for the costs are not all they are made out to be. Service periods are longer, there is less to go wrong ignition wise, the engines are over-engineered for what they are made to do.
Oh and the fact that diesels now share 50% of the market tends to put down the theory that they are not worth the cost.
I.E. 1.4TDI polo = 550miles to a tank ave.
1.2 seat ibiza = 340miles to a tank ave.
The only way a diesel can be classed as non beneficial is to use a large engined diesel against a medium engine petrol as a comparison.
-
Despite what the numbers say, there is always the perseption that diesel are cheaper to run (not necessarely (sp?) own) than petrols, therefore they will retain a higher residual value which you will see back when you come to sell it.
I don't do a huge mileage, but have 2 diesel cars. My Passat does around 14k a year and my wifes 307 about 10k. Neither have cost a great deal to maintain, and fuel costs have been minimal. As a daily I wouldn't have anything other than a diesel regardless of what mileage I did.
There's something about the effortless torque that just makes the mundane journeys that bit more relaxing.
-
The only good thing about petrol is that you can rag them around :laugh:
-
Technically, the only good thing about petrol from a manufacturing point of view is thus.
a) power from small engines
b) no after treatment is required
c) smaller engines = less cost to manufacture.
-
and are cheaper to fix when something goes wrong!!
My sister in law HAD a Focus 1.8TDCI with 90K on it, that the fuel system went down... Turned out to be the fuel pump which in turn knacked the injectors - £2K to fix... We had to sell it as a non runner on Ebay...
I know this is a one off but still has to be taken into account when thinking about changing...
£2K buys you another Good MK2 and you still have one for spares.... :laugh:
-
and are cheaper to fix when something goes wrong!!
Like I said earlier in the thread, you cannot use this as an arguement. As cars get newer of course they are going to get more expensive to repair. You cannot say, don't get the VRS as the mk2 will be cheaper to repair, as they are worlds apart in terms of technology.
I.E. EGR valves, commonly go in both petrol and diesels. cost to replace £30-60 each for a oem part.
The example you have given is possibly the most expensive in the entire system (short of an engine failure)
The point here is that, sure it can be expensive to repair a modern car, but no more than is to be expected. What a diesel may cost for more serious repairs it more than makes up for in economies of scale re mpg and cost per mile.
-
ur just a dark pump freak slick :tongue:
-
Don't get the Skoda - they have too much weight over the front axle and it knackers the handling when you get enthusiastic.
It really isn't nice.
We had a Fabia vRS for about 6 months, but didn't rate the quality of the finish - nothing wrong with it per se, but it just felt cheap.
We have the same PD130 motor in our current Passat - a nice, big family car, which is where a diseasal motor belongs.
If you really don't mind driving something that feels cheap and drives like a lump hammer, go for it - it'll be cheap motoring.
-
Oh yes, forgot to mention that they do torque steer like a bastid. Interesting on roundabouts. Still ace little cars though.
-
I Agree with you to a point....
But like I posted earlier it depends on the mileage that you are doing... If it's only 5K a year then a diesel cost more overall if you do 50K then a diesel will save you bags of money...
Hence why I said do the sums...
and are cheaper to fix when something goes wrong!!
What a diesel may cost for more serious repairs it more than makes up for in economies of scale re mpg and cost per mile.
-
Some of use prefer diesels regardless of running costs. :smiley:
My Golf is fun for a B road blast now and again, but I wouldn't want to drive it every day.
-
I Agree with you to a point....
But like I posted earlier it depends on the mileage that you are doing... If it's only 5K a year then a diesel cost more overall if you do 50K then a diesel will save you bags of money...
Hence why I said do the sums...
and are cheaper to fix when something goes wrong!!
What a diesel may cost for more serious repairs it more than makes up for in economies of scale re mpg and cost per mile.
Milage is not an consideration, as it's usage dependent. Using milage as a basis as per your reasoning, the only reason I can see a petrol winning over a diesel is when it is shorter stop start journeys and inner city driving (in which your point is completely valid). However, even then the only way a petrol benefits is when it is a tiny engine pisspot i.e. aygo or similar.
Looking hypothetically:
5k miles a year, of which lets say 50% is motorway, (now with current mpg ratings you could go down as low as 30% of motorway usage) and the diesel is still going to be more cost effective to run, to the point of breaking even with a similar petrol.
I can understand your point completely, but the op is after something to benefit him long term from what I have read, and the diesel will tick all of the boxes, with little compromise. BUT if he can afford it, keep the petrol for some fun and back road blasts, as a free revving engine is always a good crack.
I have done my sums by the way fella, I work in a tier 1 OEM diesel supplier as an applications engineer, so this is kinda my job. :smiley: I do however have all the time in the world to discuss things like this. :cool:
-
One image to sum up my views on diesel, not that I have anything against it
(http://www.caradvice.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/dieselfumes.jpg)
-
I have done my sums by the way fella, I work in a tier 1 OEM diesel supplier as an applications engineer, so this is kinda my job. :smiley: I do however have all the time in the world to discuss things like this. :cool:
PWNage if ever I saw it :grin:
Diesel just doesn't have the rev-range to make it properly huge fun to drive.
Excellent as a day to day punt about in it barge, but for real, proper fun on the road? I think not.
-
I have done my sums by the way fella, I work in a tier 1 OEM diesel supplier as an applications engineer, so this is kinda my job. :smiley: I do however have all the time in the world to discuss things like this. :cool:
PWNage if ever I saw it :grin:
:grin: :grin: :grin: :grin: :grin:
-
I could always convert it to LPG for the weeks commuting still having the petrol for the weekend blasts :grin:
-
I work in a tier 1 OEM diesel supplier as an applications engineer
on or off highway engines?
-
Mixture of both.
Primarily the latter though.
-
I generally get about 70 miles out of a tenner in my gti 16v,,