GolfGTIforum.co.uk
General => General discussion => Topic started by: Britman on 08 July 2007, 23:32
-
it seam silly to me to put such a low power engine in a heavy golf, no offense to 1.4 owners but seams to me the 1.4 is a waste of time
I only say this as its group 6 insurance vs group 1 for fiat, th enewer 1.1 is even faster 0-60 14.6 in same group
i had ago in my mums 0.9 fiat seicento the other day i saw a mate who has a 1.4 cl golf and he couldnt lose me,
0-60 17.4 fiat seicento 0.9 litre
0-60 golf 1.4 8v 16.8
i had a 1.6 mk2 driver once that was quite nippy and lighter than a mk3 so i expect even th e1.6 struggle sin the mk3, so it seams the 1.4 is way to underpowered to be put into a golf mk3, i wonder if this hits resale and popularity of it, bet you can pick up the 1.4;s well cheap
i know the golf has much better image build interior etc, but im on about the performance its whey of the mark
i knowtice dthey sorted out the 1.4 in the mk4 as it has a 0-60 of 13.4 much improved
-
not everyone wants a road ripper, 1.4 has cheap insurance, cheap tax, cheap running costs, cheap purchase price and with a bit work doesnt look like its just a base model.
the fiat may be a bit quicker but i know hich of the 2 id rather drive, ive never heard a good word from any fiat owners i know
-
at least the golf wont blow away in a strong breeeze!
-
or break with a strong breeze
-
or fall apart if you raise your voice
-
agreed with all above :laugh: , i was just stating performance wise
-
Or bits of the inside of the car fall off and break when you touch them.
You have started something now mate .... :grin:
-
look at the mess this smart car made of one! :laugh:
http://thefilter.blogs.com/thefilter/2004/01/smart_vs_seicen.html
-
oh the seicneto didnt come off to well in that test, acully my mums seicento had been reliable had it 2 years and nothing gone wrong or fell off, may its as its only done 28k on a w plate and done 2k a year since shes had it
it cant be any worse than the ax citroen i crahed into the back of a land rover 1 month afte ri passed it had had new brakes and wa smonsoon rain and teh didnt work too well, teh ax was written of quite badly but i was fine that was at 30 mph too, so the seicento is hopefully at least equal to th eax
-
I used to have a 1.4cl and tbh it was a decent enough car if you disregard performance! As a first car or someone not interested in speed I reckon it is a fairly solid. Nothing ever went wrong with it and I never did any maintenance at all, never even had the oil changed! My mum ended up with it and got £900px (1998 R reg) on it 6 months ago which I thought was very good considering the paintwork wasn't in good condition at all. I was expecting to get about half that.
-
The 1.4 in that is ok better performer as its a lighter car, same engine as in the golf so think 0-6 is 14 sec in the polo, yer the polos alway fetch a lot there in demand cheap small quality superminis even if there tatty
its the 1.0 which is gutless, the 1.0 polo however is slow!! someone in my village has one but it doent pretend not to be it is what it is id still rather have one than my mums car, there good first cars i had a ibiza that was basicly the same and had the vw 1.6 75 bhp engine in that is in the polo and golf
-
i had a 1.0 arosa for a bit and yes it was very gutless with its 50 bhp engine, but dont let it fool you, in town it was the best car ive had, low weight meant it just jumped off the line, ok it was only in front for a fraction of a second but it was very lively
-
my mrs has just bought her first car. its a 1.7 uno diesel. we were looking for a 1.2 polo coupe but when this little beastie popped up for £30 we had no choice!! i tell you something its ok too. it uses hardly any diesel ripps along the motorway at an easy 80 (with a bit more is reserve - ok that is speedo speed so maybe only doing 50!). it is butt ugly but she loves it, its not rotten. fiats have their place!