Engine worn in?

[ALBEEEEY]

What would be classed as worn in on a MK2 1.6 driver? I've seen one I like the look of but it's done roughly 120, 000 on the clock.

I'm afraid I'm coming from a MK4 GT TDi so don't have a clue about MK2's

Only one owner from new if that makes it better though

[danny_p]

meany myths about this

engines should be worn in within the first 1000 miles  vw engines have a habbit of not wearing there rings in very quickly. and suffering from high oil consumption for a few 10's of thousands of miles.

a correctly built and run in engine  will be at it's fitest within 1500 miles an incorrectly run in engine may take 30 k  to reach full fitness

ether way past 100k  it's a downward slope but thhe engines are capable of doing a LOT of miles

[ALBEEEEY]

So you would recommend waiting for one with a bit lower mileage?

I'm so impatient, but I guess it will be worth it for the right car   
Although ideally I want a 1.3 so maybe waiting is a blessing in disguise?

[Gambit]

over 100k is fine on them, i seen plenty of 100K+ blocks with little to no wear on the bores. worst case scenario you'll need to stick a set of bearings & rings in it, all which can be done with the engine in situ.

you'll be hard pushed to find a sensible priced under 100k mk2 these days.

rather than worry about the engine worry more about rust. this is the killer on mk2's, everything else is cheap fixes

[ALBEEEEY]

Yeah I have read on here that having little/lower miles is just as bad if not worse than very high miles because it hasn't been driven/used

I know like other VW's they can really rack up the miles but does that come with a lot of expenses compared to something under 100k?

Also probably been asked a lot but 1.3 vs 1.6? Anybody got experience?

[Gambit]

More potential on 1.6. Better spec'd also.

[Diamond Hell]

Engine miles on cars of this age are completely immaterial.

Body condition is all that matters, really.

Engines are simple and re-builds aren't poisonously expensive.  Over 100k genuine miles expect to have the headgasket go at some point, when you should give it a quick skim, get the valve guides replaced and I'd take the opportunity to get the head lightly breathed on.

[VeeDubGTI16v]

More potential on 1.6. Better spec'd also.

and a 5th gear!

[danny_p]

the smaller the engine the more the miles matter.

sub 100K mk2 arn't very common now most are past 150K

a 150k mile 1.3 engine is a hatefull thing the 1.6 will have fared a lot better.  but may well need some TLC

cheep engines to rebuild tho  the bores practicaly don't wear and pistons are nearly always good for reuse. valve guides are an issue around the 100k mark so is headgasket, valves and seats will want reginding to clean them up as well.  with the age and miles on these engines getting now if i had the head off i would proably hone the bores and rering it as a matter of.

but as said buy on body condition  engines are cheep

[ALBEEEEY]

Been reading up on a 1.6 and the tax is the same as a GTi (£220 per year) am I correct?

The insurance will obviously be more on a GTi but is the mpg on a 1.6 really going to be much better than say the 8v GTi?

If bigger engines can handle more miles and have better spec it may be worth looking into a GTi. They can be had for pretty cheap at the moment can't they?