CALLING ALL BMW/GOLF DRIVERS!!!

smokie78

hey everyone i cant make my mind up what to buy these cars are the same price in cargiant, which is where im gonna get a car next week , but just cant make my mind up, id love some feed back from golf and bmw drivers.....so whats it to be!!!?? 2005 BMW 320I, 2005 BMW 320D, OR 2007 GOLF 1.9TDI??? ALL TIPS ON IMPORTING CARS FROM ENGLAN WOULD ALSO BE GREATLY APPRECIATED!

Brewster

Ill save you the inconvenience of going to UK, ill sell you my 2005 VW Golf TDI Sportsline for peanuts!!:):)

NiSmO

This post has been deleted.

Biro

NiSmO wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

If it's 2007 then it's the mk 5, which is 105bhp in the 1.9. Only other diesels are the 2 litre ones.
Go for the beemer if you get a good one, far better car.

Stevie Dakota

BMW 320D V Golf 1.9? Do you really need to ask!

fletch

2005 BMW 320D for me...

brundle

I think its obvious. 320d. There is simply no comparison between a 1.9 tdi golf and a 320d

groupb

smokie78 wrote: »

hey everyone i cant make my mind up what to buy these cars are the same price in cargiant, which is where im gonna get a car next week , but just cant make my mind up, id love some feed back from golf and bmw drivers.....so whats it to be!!!?? 2005 BMW 320I, 2005 BMW 320D, OR 2007 GOLF 1.9TDI??? ALL TIPS ON IMPORTING CARS FROM ENGLAN WOULD ALSO BE GREATLY APPRECIATED!

A 3 series is widely acknowledged as one of the best compact excutive cars.
The golf is an also -ran in the family car class.
Why are you comparing the two?

joeperry

well if you want to buy the better car,you'll have to buy the bmw.

bazz26

Two totally different cars, light years apart from each other it is almost impossible to compare them.

The VAG 1.9 TDi should be put out to pasture at this stage. A good engine in the 1990s but that was then, this is now. Time for VAG to move on. If you are still infatuated with one then you need to be looking at the 2.0 TDi minimum.

It's still a no brainer decision.

E92

If it were the E46 3 series then it would have to be the petrol 320i every time. 6 cylinder petrol vs 4 cylinder diesel is no contest really, unless you're allergic to petrol or do high mileage. The E90 320i OTOH only has 4 cylinders and has less power(as it is the true replacement for the E46 318i) than the 320d, so diesel every time there.

The 520d is surprisingly capable 163 bhp guise, and the 177 bhp version is better still as well as being extraordinarily economical, so I'm sure in the 320d it is usefully quicker, so it should have plenty of go, though I'd still be having a 6 cylinder 3 series every time if I had the choice;).

As for the Golf Mk V, nobody seems to have noticed that the 1.9 TDI is in fact available with either 90 bhp or 105 bhp. Needless to say the 90 bhp version is a paddy special, as the UK only got the 105 bhp version(OTOH they did get a 2.0 SDI with only 75 bhp which we didn't). The 2.0 TDI is a more modern 16 valve lump, so it should be much better to go into higher rpms than the 1.9 TDI, giving it a more useable power band. The 1.9 is like a dinasour, a truly awful engine that gives all its power in one BIG lump, like a switch, it's either all or nothing, and nothing in between to pardon the pun;).

Zonda999

E92 wrote: »

(OTOH they did get a 2.0 SDI with only 75 bhp which we didn't.)

Oh i think we would have got that if it were'nt for the VRT system we had at the time:rolleyes: I guess it had some advantages:):).Judging by autotrader, that 2.0sdi sold quite well in the uk, Plenty of cheap ones on the go...Are we really the only ones to get the 90bhp version??.Taht engine was never offered in the octavia or leon....

Seth Brundle

For the same price, the OP may find that although the BMW may be the better car to drive, it may have fewer extras in it!

Celtic Mech

A 320d or a vw gold...bit of a no brainer!!!

Zonda999

Speaking of extras in a BMW, from what i've been hearing lately, the VRO will charge you for every single one.As in they will comb your car and.A 320d a few years ago in the uk would have been about 25k£.Big alloys, satnav and leather alone will push that closer to 30k£.Theres a lot more than that you can add too.....

Seth Brundle

Zonda999 wrote: »

Speaking of extras in a BMW, from what i've been hearing lately, the VRO will charge you for every single one.As in they will comb your car and.A 320d a few years ago in the uk would have been about 25k£.Big alloys, satnav and leather alone will push that closer to 30k£.Theres a lot more than that you can add too.....

I think the VRO get the details of BMWs from BMW themselves (and same from Audi, etc.)

Zonda999

kbannon wrote: »

I think the VRO get the details of BMWs from BMW themselves (and same from Audi, etc.)

I guess it would amount to the same thing anyway....They must be sick of the prestige brands these days,though.I'd say half the modern bmws i see these days are clearly imports...

E92

In fairness there are plenty of 320ds around the place here, would it not be a better option to buy local, particularly as what the lads said about the VRO checking BMWs is so true?

@zonda999 - only the Golf had this 90 bhp version of the 1.9 TDI.

This engine is actually the same engine as the Audi 80 from 1993, as it doesn't have PD technology.

Even Volkswagen's website confirms that such a car does exist.

smokie78

well lads thats great input, i know the bmw is a class car, and alot of you have said the 320d..........but why? why the 320d over the 320i?

Seth Brundle

Lower VRT on a diesel!

Zonda999

E92 wrote: »

@zonda999 - only the Golf had this 90 bhp version of the 1.9 TDI.

This engine is actually the same engine as the Audi 80 from 1993, as it doesn't have PD technology.

Even Volkswagen's website confirms that such a car does exist.

My god.I thought the 90bhp TDI in the golf was an underpowered verion of the 105bhp TDI.Thats shocking altogether because i think a 105 is a good bit better than a slightly older 100.Vw certainly make their engines last.Once that awful 1.4 makes its way into the Mk 6 golf, it will have been in the golf since 1991 and the start of the Mk3.What power has it come up in 18 years??20 Fuppin horsepower!!Ridiculous!!!

Biro

kbannon wrote: »

For the same price, the OP may find that although the BMW may be the better car to drive, it may have fewer extras in it!

VW aren't exactly the kings of extras either!

Biro

smokie78 wrote: »

well lads thats great input, i know the bmw is a class car, and alot of you have said the 320d..........but why? why the 320d over the 320i?

You were looking at 2005 BMW's, and you could get both the old model E46 and new model E90 in that year. The 320i in the E46 model is a 2.2 litre 6 cylinder engine, and it's a decent one. Around the 170bhp if memory serves. That'd be my choice over the E46 320d, which had 150bhp.
The E90 BMW 320d had the newer 2 litre diesel with 163bhp at first, then 170bhp later (I thought it was 177, but apparently the 177 version is in the 520d only). The 320i in the E90 was the same 2 litre 4 cylinder engine from the 318i in the E46, and is nothing special. You'd be better off with the diesel in this case.

Zonda999

I think the current 320d is 177bhp alright. It says so here anyway

E92

Biro wrote: »

You were looking at 2005 BMW's, and you could get both the old model E46 and new model E90 in that year. The 320i in the E46 model is a 2.2 litre 6 cylinder engine, and it's a decent one. Around the 170bhp if memory serves. That'd be my choice over the E46 320d, which had 150bhp.
The E90 BMW 320d had the newer 2 litre diesel with 163bhp at first, then 170bhp later (I thought it was 177, but apparently the 177 version is in the 520d only). The 320i in the E90 was the same 2 litre 4 cylinder engine from the 318i in the E46, and is nothing special. You'd be better off with the diesel in this case.

+1, though it should be noted that the E90/E60 3/520d only has 177 bhp if it has EfficientDynamics, otherwise it has 163 bhp;)!

OT but the E39 was also available as a 520d in the continent from 2000, and had just 136 bhp.

Graham_B18C

Think everyone here is sayin go for the beemer, totally different class, but both cars are absolutely crap for extras. I was chattin to a guy a few months ago and he was dricin a 630i, i asked him was it about 99k and he said he ended up payin 115k just for leather seats, blutooth and maybe one more extra, i know its a 6 series but still!

whippet

Grahamo999 wrote: »

Think everyone here is sayin go for the beemer, totally different class, but both cars are absolutely crap for extras. I was chattin to a guy a few months ago and he was dricin a 630i, i asked him was it about 99k and he said he ended up payin 115k just for leather seats, blutooth and maybe one more extra, i know its a 6 series but still!

either he was telling you lies or you didn't quite pick up what he was saying,

Leather comes as standard on the 630 (there is the option to upgrade the leather to 'exclusive' at a cost of about 2K) and the bluetooth phone prep is only about a grand.

gezas

I had 1 golf and 2 BMW cars in my life.
Golf or BMW?
There’s nothing to decide!!! BMW and only BMW! Believe my.
You won fine a driving comfortable in golf as in BMW!
I will never ever will buy a GOLF again.
Good luck!