Opinions on VW Bora ?

TempestSabre

Off the top of my head theres a fiat 1.2 8v, Opel 1.6i 8v, Peugeot 1.1 8V.

BrianD3

TempestSabre wrote:

Off the top of my head theres a fiat 1.2 8v, Opel 1.6i 8v, Peugeot 1.1 8V.

Also the Ford Ka. AFAIK the engine fitted to this is no longer the ancient old pushrod unit that they've been using up until very recently. But it's still an 8 valve.

The Ford Focus 1.4 is just as much of a dog as the Golf 1.4. I drive a Focus regularly and you need to rev it to the limiter to overtake safely. The Focus also comes in a 100 PS 1.6 16v which is a poor output for a modern engine

As for VW being innovators when it comes to TDi engines, I suppose this is true but they still lagged behind PSA who were producing a 1.8 litre 90 bhp turbodiesel as far back as 1988.

Big Balls

I can't believe you lads are even arguing over 1.4 engines... they're not worth a w**k!!! The new 1.4 Turbo in the Golf might change all that but until then... I owned a 1.4 Focus BTW.

As for "petrol is better than diesel" man. :rolleyes:

You pull up to a set of lights in your 1.4 petrol car and I'll give you a 1/2 mile head start before starting the ignition in a 3.0 VAG TDI engine or a BMW 535D and we'll see how much petrol is better (in the way you have claimed anyway).

:v: :v: :v: :v: :v:

Turner

pontovic wrote:

Hi
Im thinking of getting a VW bora soon enough as the new year comes in. I have a few questions though:

VW Bora...

Dont you mean VW Boring.

BrianD3

Big Balls wrote:

I can't believe you lads are even arguing over 1.4 engines... they're not worth a w**k!!! The new 1.4 Turbo in the Golf might change all that but until then... I owned a 1.4 Focus BTW.

As for "petrol is better than diesel" man. :rolleyes:

You pull up to a set of lights in your 1.4 petrol car and I'll give you a 1/2 mile head start before starting the ignition in a 3.0 VAG TDI engine or a BMW 535D and we'll see how much petrol is better (in the way you have claimed anyway).

Well now that's stupid comparing a 1.4 petrol to a diesel over twice the capacity. However I'd still take you up on your race if I can use one of these

20+ years old, 160 bhp from a 1.4 pushrod engine in a car that weighed about the same as a bicycle. And people are talking about the new VW turbo 1.4 as if its some big deal. It really shows how pathetic and behind the times VW are. So much for "German Engineering" :rolleyes:

Big Balls

BrianD3 wrote:

Well now that's stupid comparing a 1.4 petrol to a diesel over twice the capacity

Yeh, a bit like saying bhp and torque doesn't matter and petrol is better than diesel 'because it is'.

colm_mcm

BrianD3 wrote:

people are talking about the new VW turbo 1.4 as if its some big deal.

Nissan used a similar system to the one VW are shouting about about 20 years ago in the old Nissan March (micra)

As for the Almera Van 2.2, It's a very fast van, 136(-/+?) bhp and 6 speed gearbox, they can really move.

The reality is that in Ireland it makes sense to go for the small engined option, as the costs of an extra 200cc can be ridiculous, and as resale is trickier with large engines, it often isn't worth it

TempestSabre

Tax and insurance and servicing easily eat up the savings of a diesel unless you are doing mega miles.

colm_mcm

depends on what car you drive, big cars like 5 series and E class always do brilliantly second hand, as do small engined mid sized cars, eg Focus 1.6 TDCI or Corolla 1.4 D-4D

maidhc

It depends on what you are used to.

If you buy a TDI/D4D you get a poweful car that is cheaper to run than a miserable 1.4/1.6 Petrol. Servicing differences are negligible nowadays, they are invariably worth a lot more secondhand, and imo are a more sensible option than a 1.8/2.0 petrol (in an avensis say). Ultimately though if all people were worried about was spending the least amount possible on transportation they wouldnt be buying a car.

I have been driving diesel cars since I was 10 (not on the road!!!), and couldnt imagine myself buying a petrol. I like them, I like the noise they make, I like the pulling power.

No manufacturer is getting 160bhp out of a 1.4 I know of at present, nor will they in the future. There are plenty of reasons for this and none of them are a lack of technical ability.

@colm_mcm
I should have mentioned that Nissan have the 2.2D in the Van almera, but NO diesel option for the car. I know this is down to Irish tax law, but still, no one really wants a 2.2 in a small car...

Rudolph Claus

VW do innovate though. I would love to see the state of Diesel cars if it was not for the TDI, or even the Mk1 Golf Diesel before it. The TDI 90bhp was so far ahead of eveything else when it was launched in ...1992?... (i.e. Toyota and Nissan had 2.0 normally aspirated lumps, etc. Toyota didnt cop on with diesels until 2000, and Nissan still put a 2.2 Diesel in the Almera Van!!)

Ehhhh, Peugeot were making a class Dturbo engine way before VW made over-expensive Tdi`s. And the Pug diesel engines are more reliable than VW`s, and more easily tuneable.
Also, Peugeot helped Toyota make the class new 1.4 diesel turbo engine in the corolla. VW didnt innovate anything, the sooner people cop on that their cars are over-rated boring ould man cras the better. They`re stuck in the 80`s and you have to laugh everytime you hear some spa talking about his golf 1.4L. As alreayd pointed out, they`re not worth a ****. Despite VW claiming all this safety crap, the 1.4`s are desperately dangerous in overtaking anything goping at more than a snails pace. The best 1.4car and only 1 i`d even consider buying are the civics. 90bhp and nice and light and gadgets and reliability and look class no matter what you do to them. Unlike a boxy pensioners golf. :rolleyes: I know a young lad that bought a brand new 1.4mark5 golf(The worst looking golf ever) last year for E23000 with extras. How sad can you get like.

The sooner ppl stop paying way over the odds for not so reliable ould Vw`s which are dead as fook, the better. WW will actually start to innovate some decent engines.

TempestSabre

This thread illustrates well the national obsession with speed.

maidhc wrote:

...
No manufacturer is getting 160bhp out of a 1.4 I know of at present, nor will they in the future. There are plenty of reasons for this and none of them are a lack of technical ability....

True. In F1 they got 1.0-1.5 cars up to 1000-1500bhp before the rules were changed.

colm_mcm

Nuttzy wrote:

They`re stuck in the 80`s and you have to laugh everytime you hear some spa talking about his golf 1.4L. As alreayd pointed out, they`re not worth a ****. the 1.4`s are desperately dangerous in overtaking anything goping at more than a snails pace. The best 1.4car and only 1 i`d even consider buying are the civics. 90bhp and nice and light

2006 Civic 1.4i-DSI 88PS 6-speed manual: 0-60 14.3 seconds; top speed 106mph; combined mpg 47.9

2004 Civic 1.4i petrol manual: 0-60 12.1 seconds; top speed 108mph; combined mpg: 44.1

2005 Golf 1.4 (75bhp) 5-speed manual: 0-60 14.4 seconds; top speed 102 mph; combined mpg: 40.4;

2005 Golf 1.4 FSI 6 speed manual: 0-60 12.6 seconds; top speed 108 mph; combined mpg: 43.5

I think you need to actually drive a civic

TempestSabre

The Golf interior is a nicer place to be. While thats of no interest to speed merchants some of us like that.

lomb

volkswagens 1.6 fsi is a good car, 115 bhp, in a classy body shell and nice interior. their 1.4 is a good engine also, my own car is a 1.4 i bought new in 2003 and ive no real complaints, its a sweet motor.

as briand3 said, the old 8valve in the mark 3, was a rotter, my mum had a new one in 97, that was a BAD engine, the A3 with the 8valve 1.6 reminded me of that, but that A3 was brand new and not a 9 year old car!

colm_mcm

wrote:

VW do innovate though. I would love to see the state of Diesel cars if it was not for the TDI, or even the Mk1 Golf Diesel before it. The TDI 90bhp was so far ahead of eveything else when it was launched in ...1992?...

anyone remember the tempra 1.9TD (1990) from the people who brought us common rail Diesels????

Big Balls

Nuttzy wrote:

Ehhhh, Peugeot were making a class Dturbo engine way before VW made over-expensive Tdi`s. And the Pug diesel engines are more reliable than VW`s, and more easily tuneable.
Also, Peugeot helped Toyota make the class new 1.4 diesel turbo engine in the corolla. VW didnt innovate anything, the sooner people cop on that their cars are over-rated boring ould man cras the better. They`re stuck in the 80`s and you have to laugh everytime you hear some spa talking about his golf 1.4L. As alreayd pointed out, they`re not worth a ****. Despite VW claiming all this safety crap, the 1.4`s are desperately dangerous in overtaking anything goping at more than a snails pace. The best 1.4car and only 1 i`d even consider buying are the civics. 90bhp and nice and light and gadgets and reliability and look class no matter what you do to them. Unlike a boxy pensioners golf. :rolleyes: I know a young lad that bought a brand new 1.4mark5 golf(The worst looking golf ever) last year for E23000 with extras. How sad can you get like.

The sooner ppl stop paying way over the odds for not so reliable ould Vw`s which are dead as fook, the better. WW will actually start to innovate some decent engines.

How is a Pug diesel engine any easier to tune than a VAG one? You can get them remapped for the same money in the same space of time. Just one way to tune them... so what exactly are you on about??

And I suppose the 1.9 150bhp TDI is rubbish... and the 1.8T petrol and the current 2.0T... all rubbish... ??

You go and drive your Pug and see how long it takes for the electrics to fail in it!!!

There's a reason why you see VWs with 500,000 miles on them and another reason why you don't with Pugs.

Rudolph Claus

There's a reason why you see VWs with 500,000 miles on them and another reason why you don't with Pugs.

The only vw diesel engines you see with 500,000miles on them are the old non-yurbo ones. I didnt say the newer Tdi`s were rubbish (my uncle has the 130hp 6speed passat with no trouble) i just said they are very expensive compared to other brands of similar diesel engine power. They`re a great engine but stupidly expensive.

And theres just as many pug 405`s and 406`s and 306`s diesel cars with 200k miles on them as there are vw`s. At least the pugs had a bit of power in them not heavy dead boring yokes.

colm_mcm

so, the general idea is. If VW ditched the low powered engines and dropped their prices a bit more people would buy them. but would VW make as much money or retain their exclusivity

maidhc

Nuttzy wrote:

The only vw diesel engines you see with 500,000miles on them are the old non-yurbo ones.

There is a lot of driving in 500k miles! Wait a few more years!

Nuttzy wrote:

I didnt say the newer Tdi`s were rubbish (my uncle has the 130hp 6speed passat with no trouble) i just said they are very expensive compared to other brands of similar diesel engine power. They`re a great engine but stupidly expensive.

Not really, Skodas are quite competitive, even VWs aren't that bad. A 1.9 Octavia isnt much more than a 1.4 Corolla.

Nuttzy wrote:

And theres just as many pug 405`s and 406`s and 306`s diesel cars with 200k miles on them as there are vw`s. At least the pugs had a bit of power in them not heavy dead boring yokes.

I dont know much about Pugs tbh, but a guy I know with a Citroen said they are a fine engine but the cars themselves fall to pieces. Also, the Pugs were not direct injection, so would never have had the economy of a TDI.

colm_mcm

wrote:

Not really, Skodas are quite competitive, even VWs aren't that bad. A 1.9 Octavia isnt much more than a 1.4 Corolla.

€23,145 for a base 1.9TD Classic Octavia 5dr or €22,525 for a 1.4 D-4D Corolla. the Corolla is gonna hold its money much better

maidhc

colm_mcm wrote:

€23,145 for a base 1.9TD Classic Octavia 5dr or €22,525 for a 1.4 D-4D Corolla. the Corolla is gonna hold its money much better

I dont doubt it for a second, but the Octavia is a bigger car (and for the purposes of this argument has a 1.9 TDI PD engine!! )

unkel

colm_mcm wrote:

€23,145 for a base 1.9TD Classic Octavia 5dr or €22,525 for a 1.4 D-4D Corolla

So only €600 more for an Octavia that is:

- a much bigger car with a huge boot
- has 105bhp compared to 90bhp
- crucially has 250NM torque @1900rpm instead of just 190NM @ a very unfavourable 3000rpm
- 0-100km/h acceleration of 11.8 seconds compared to the sluggish 13.3 seconds
- same fuel consumption (combined)
- €219 more per year in tax for the Octavia
- and yes the Octavia would depreciate more

All in all, the Octavia diesel seems good value for money

pontovic

thanks for all the replies

i've also been looking at getting a passat or an audi a4. any opinions on them cars ?