VW GTI ?

Posted by: MangoMonkey on 15 September 2013

13 cars driving a New Beetle. It's still fine, but started looking at new cars recently.

My heart seems to be set on the VW GTI - All good except for it's reliability ratings - worse than average.

 

Strange thing is: As I go over car's ratings, the VW GTI, in spite of having worse than average reliability ratings, has Perfect owner satisfaction ratings. Various other cars with perfect reliability have average or below average owner satisfaction ratings.

 

I guess the other cars are 'reliable' but no fun. :-)

 

How worried should I be about the car's reliability?

 

The RAV4 I've got is super reliable - not a single issue in the past 3 years - but it's also soul numbingly boring!

The Beetle had various issues during it's life time, but I guess if you can afford to pay through those issues, big deal - as long as it doesn't leave you stranded in the middle of the road at night...

 

The other thing keeping me from pulling the trigger - next year's models are completely redesigned - but will be made in Mexico. Since reliability ratings from Germany aren't stellar, maybe it doesn't matter...

Posted on: 16 September 2013 by Bruce Woodhouse
Originally Posted by SKDriver:

 

I for one would rather drop £23k on a new Octavia vRS than £26k on a new Golf; same engine and more practical.

 If I was looking that would apply to me too. There is a line between 'discreet/understated' and 'dull' and for nigh on £30k the new Golf GTI/GTD sits on the wrong side for me. I rather like the new Skoda Octavia vRS, say in estate form in white (so people think your a a cop) and probably the hot diesel rather than the petrol too.

 

My brother works for Ford. Within the industry VW don't have a great reputation for quality/reliability. For that you really need to go to the Japanese manufacturers; including those assembled in the UK. My wife has had a succession of Hondas over 20 years. We have never (as in never) returned a vehicle to the garage for any problems other than for a routine service.

 

Bruce

 

PS Having bought a succesion of daft cars myself over the years i've become far more sensible recently with a modest Volvo diesel and a Honda hybrid in our household, but it won't last. I'm eyeing up my next purchase currently. It is British, 40 yrs old and has a nice burbling V8....

 

More later!

 

Bruce

Posted on: 16 September 2013 by Steve C
Originally Posted by Bruce Woodhouse:
Originally Posted by SKDriver:

 

I for one would rather drop £23k on a new Octavia vRS than £26k on a new Golf; same engine and more practical.

 If I was looking that would apply to me too. There is a line between 'discreet/understated' and 'dull' and for nigh on £30k the new Golf GTI/GTD sits on the wrong side for me. I rather like the new Skoda Octavia vRS, say in estate form in white (so people think your a a cop) and probably the hot diesel rather than the petrol too.

 

My brother works for Ford. Within the industry VW don't have a great reputation for quality/reliability. For that you really need to go to the Japanese manufacturers; including those assembled in the UK. My wife has had a succession of Hondas over 20 years. We have never (as in never) returned a vehicle to the garage for any problems other than for a routine service.

 

Bruce

 

PS Having bought a succesion of daft cars myself over the years i've become far more sensible recently with a modest Volvo diesel and a Honda hybrid in our household, but it won't last. I'm eyeing up my next purchase currently. It is British, 40 yrs old and has a nice burbling V8....

 

More later!

 

Bruce

I'd agree with Bruce on the reliability of Japanese cars. I've been in the motor trade for nearly 30 years and apart from annual servicing they just don't go wrong.

 

Bruce wouldn't be a Jensen Interceptor by any chance 

Posted on: 16 September 2013 by Bruce Woodhouse

Not a Jensen. Far more unreliable!

 

Bruce

Posted on: 17 September 2013 by living in lancs yearning for yorks

I am pondering this-sort-of-price bracket but will not buy any front wheel drive car. Currently have 4wd Subaru Outback but seriously looking at the Subaru BRZ as replacement in the next few months - tested a GT86 (Toyota equivalent) and enjoyed though it was an auto and I will only consider one of these as a manual.  With some winter tyres on it should be fine in bad weather. And rear wheel drive, so more fun than a Golf.  Don't think it would pass George's double bass test but the folding rear seat means my bass guitar will fit.  The rear seat legroom is, erm, restricted so the four of us won't fit.  However it will work as a three seater - Helen's car will do family stuff for us

 

 I had a Mk2 GTi but think it had been clocked and the suspension was not right - not a happy purchase.  Drove a Mk1 and hated it - didn't compare well with the MX5 I had at the time

Posted on: 17 September 2013 by King Size

I've had four Golfs over the years including a Mk I GTI but think they current generations  are probably the most vanillla-like of all the 'luke-warm'. hatches now.  Recently sold my 1 Series BMW and went back to my roots with a Megane Renaultsport 265.  Seriously quick, handles better than any other hot hatch out there, fun, engaging and looks the part too.  You'd probably have to jump to a Porsche to have a better driving experience.  Not the most practical of cars though and you'd need to be prepared to forego mod cons like DSG gearboxes and active dampers.

Posted on: 17 September 2013 by BigH47

Drove a Mk1 and hated it - didn't compare well with the MX5 I had at the time

 

Hardly like for like?

 

What does amaze is the difference in satisfaction between similar models in the VAG range as the equivalent models are based on the same floor plan, it's surprising what part the assembly line plays?

Posted on: 17 September 2013 by Marky Mark
Originally Posted by Agricola:

The Golf cost me more in 1987 than the Micra in 2013, and the Micra goes better, is better on fuel, is slightly more roomy inside, and has brakes that are impressive. It has not fallen below 50 mpg so far.

OP - MIcra?

Posted on: 17 September 2013 by MangoMonkey

I'm in the USA, so no micra, no scoda.

Posted on: 17 September 2013 by Marky Mark

Have mixed feelings about VW but to be fair some of their new cars even with reasonable 'performance' are returning 65+ mpg combined and low emissions (relative to other combustion engine cars). This is on the pulse these days compared with the old bangers* which we're nostalgic for lets face it.

 

*aside from George's effervescent Micra.

Posted on: 17 September 2013 by Marky Mark
Originally Posted by BigH47:
What does amaze is the difference in satisfaction between similar models in the VAG range as the equivalent models are based on the same floor plan, it's surprising what part the assembly line plays?

Just reading back this thread I think this is a very interesting point.

 

When I think about this I wonder how much driver opinions are based on real vs perceived value. Certainly VW platforms proliferate Audi, VW, Skoda, Seat et al. Often it is just the finishing kit and body work which seems different. However, employing a cheaper plastic finish on the glove compartment can heve a massive effect on the perception of the value of the vehicle. Obviously badge prestige makes a big difference too.

 

When they share platforms is this just the chassis or (as I suspect) the engines and suspension too?

 

What else is going on...is it something extra on the assembly line?

Posted on: 17 September 2013 by BigH47

We (Europecar) used to have vehicles from most of the ranges including Test cars for Audi, it is amazing how many parts are common and the top cars still have "plastic" lids to glove boxes and other parts. Maybe a slow close damper or tailgate lift maybe enough to give a more classy aura.

 

What is interesting is the pricing of these things, we had a case when a customer lost an oil filler cap, I knew it is the same part through out the range and marked as such, it cost £3 in Skoda and £11 at the Audi dealer, they were unimpressed when I told them they were ripping off their customers.

Posted on: 17 September 2013 by Christopher_M
Originally Posted by BigH47:

Maybe a slow close damper or tailgate lift maybe enough to give a more classy aura.

 

I think there's a huge amount in that.

 

To give a for instance, my Gti's immediate predecessor was a Peugeot 205 XS. Fantastic car to drive (heresy, I preferred it to the Golf) great seat and ergonomics, frugal, but the rubber, plastic and fabric bits felt incredibly cheap. With the Golf, the way it was put together and the literal feel of the interior made it feel like it would go on for ever, with a little ordinary maintenance, and even with 149000 miles on the clock. There was just so much feel good there.

 

Chris

 

Edit: How are they today compared with the competition, no idea.

Posted on: 17 September 2013 by tonym

SWMBO had a couple of Audi A3s but then, being told Golfs were pretty well the same car, we went for one. In reality, no way was the Golf as nice as the Audi, the latter being quieter, better put together, with much nicer trim and had better dynamics. Back to Audi...

Posted on: 17 September 2013 by fatcat

Tony

 

You are probably correct, but in my experience there is a downside to an Audi compared to a VW.

 

The Audi's cabin seems smaller to me, with cramped rear seating.

Posted on: 17 September 2013 by fatcat
Originally Posted by Marky Mark:

 When they share platforms is this just the chassis or (as I suspect) the engines and suspension too?

 

What else is going on...is it something extra on the assembly line?

In the days of the Golf Mk3, Seat where producing cars that used the Running Gear of the Golf Mk2. So basically a generation behind.

 

On the other hand, a few years ago Skoda where producing their version of the Polo that had a more advanced chassis than the Polo.

Posted on: 17 September 2013 by Marky Mark
Originally Posted by Christopher_M:
Originally Posted by BigH47:

Maybe a slow close damper or tailgate lift maybe enough to give a more classy aura.

 

I think there's a huge amount in that.

So do I. Given the relative pricing how much real difference can there be after the costs of premium branding and selling?

Posted on: 18 September 2013 by Tony Lockhart
I read a couple of years or so ago that VW were going to reduce the quality and specs of Skodas to create a clearer divide. The engines, gearboxes etc would remain the same, but bodyshells, trim and fittings would be different.
Posted on: 18 September 2013 by Bananahead
Originally Posted by tonym:

SWMBO had a couple of Audi A3s but then, being told Golfs were pretty well the same car, we went for one. In reality, no way was the Golf as nice as the Audi, the latter being quieter, better put together, with much nicer trim and had better dynamics. Back to Audi...

Been there and played that game. I now don't even think too hard about buying anything other than an Audi.

 

People will tell you that the engines and boxes are the same across the VW range simply because they come off of the same production line. However I suspect that quality control directs the engines to each marque. They certainly feel different.

Posted on: 18 September 2013 by Bruce Woodhouse

The economies of scale of the VAG group dictate component sharing for high cost items; floorpans engines and major hardware. Switchgear, electronics etc. The differentiation is canny and largely 'surface' touch and branding although if you look at the specs you'll see Skoda for example get some of the tech of the 'equivalent' VW but not all.

 

I think the branding of 'aspirational' Audi and 'everyday quality' VW are masterful, just look at the whole style of the advertising, the dealerships and brochures and finally the house styles of each range's design inside and out. The surface materials are sometimes different, and some degree of the driving interaction can be cheaply tweaked but at the end of the day your Audi is not actually significantly different from the VW's, the basic hardware definitely is not.

 

I get Skoda as a common sense value brand but Seat is a flop and failing in the market. Just does not seem to have either the benefits of the VAG association not sufficient differentiation as a sporty choice.

 

Bruce

Posted on: 18 September 2013 by BigH47

I wonder how much of the difference in feel of the quality is governed by the badge on the key?

Yes there are differences in some fit an finish. I suspect main differences are the amount of sound proofing and probably suspension settings. 

To buy an Audi would mean dealing with the most ignorant and up themselves salesmen, plus of course there massively increased service costs.

We have areally good local after market VAG service place locally so some of that can be mitigated.

Posted on: 18 September 2013 by tonym

That depends on the dealer Howard. It'd be far more convenient for us to use the local VW dealer than to have to travel to the Audi one, but the latter's rather better!

 

Regarding the similarities between Audi and VW; we recently changed SWMBO's Audi TT for something more practical & once again thought we'd try the VW offering, in this case a Polo. Once again, the Audi A1 so-called equivalent was much better (after a very extensive test drive of both) and with the options we wanted only slightly more expensive. Personally I don't give a monkeys about what badge it's got, the Audi was a far nicer car.

Posted on: 18 September 2013 by Bananahead
Originally Posted by BigH47:

 

To buy an Audi would mean dealing with the most ignorant and up themselves salesmen, plus of course there massively increased service costs.

 

No that would be Mercedes closely followed by BMW. I actually walked out of both dealerships. Audi have been nothing except sweetness and light in all three countries where I have bought them.

 

Audi servicing costs? I have paid nothing for the last five years because it doesn't need much and it is included up to 100k anyway.

Posted on: 18 September 2013 by living in lancs yearning for yorks

In theory I am considering cars in the price bracket of the Golf GTi - don't want to go for the Golf, though, as I am so anti-front wheel drive.  I think my next car is going to be a Subaru BRZ - similar price new as a Golf but more fun, a bit slower in a straight line, comparatively poor interior plastics (but I really couldn't care about that...), rear wheel drive (mmm) and with great handling and pure steering.  Of course if you need to transport adults in the rear seats it won't do (it will only work for me as my wife has an XC90)

 

The arrogant salesperson thing seems to depend on which specific dealer you go to.  In terms of painful experiences, I have had good and bad at BMW (the same dealer), indifferent at Audi and VW, abysmal at Land Rover, good at Subaru (although the nearest one is 50 miles away).  I know people who have had really awful treatment at various BMW, Audi, VW and Merc dealers - I have witnessed conversations where several people agreed that VW dealers were the worst by a very long way

 

In 1998 I got a VW Golf Mk 4, in preference to an Audi A3 on the basis that they were very similar with the Audi just being more expensive (basic cost and extras).  The interior of the Golf was fantastic quality - but the drive was horrid.  My biggest buying mistake.  My other big mistakes have been an A6 (in 2007) that I hated - front wheel drive / horrid steering with lots of tugging in the wet - an A4 in 2003 that was horrid to drive (almost impossible to drive smoothly) and a Land Rover Discovery that had wiring faults that the dealer took two months to fix.  My two Subarus have been the most reliable cars of all (clutch on one and a fuse on another was total sum of failures over combined 90k miles and counting) along with a 1997 Merc C250TD (sold at 180k miles).  A Honda we had flattened batteries but i think that was my wife leaving the lights on...

 

Forgot to say that the most shocking price for any part ever was windscreen wipers for my Subaru (from a Subaru dealer).  £60.

 

Marky Mark - I have had a couple of Caterhams - the superlight with 160bhp was spectacular.   Would love another but would not have the time to drive one, and would have to be a third car

Posted on: 18 September 2013 by Bruce Woodhouse

The nicest dealers I have ever encountered were at Alfa Romeo. You get to know them as friends because you go back so often...

 

Old joke, sadly true in my experience!

 

We bought our first Honda largely on the experience of straightforward, friendly and courteous sales staff. The car was for my wife; the salesman actually spoke to her like an adult human being spent time to see what she was looking for and what she thought of the drive. Hallelujah! Our experience at several other places was that she was totally ignored and they always tried to sell the car to me, not her. She is on her 4th Honda now.

 

It has occurred to me that the pleasantness of the dealership sales experience seems to be inversely proportional to the apparent prestige of the car. In my experience> BMW-horrible, Audi so-so, Volvo v good, Honda excellent!

 

I kinda miss our Caterham but it was just too committing and did not get enough use. A nice old classic is going to fill the fun car role.

 

Bruce 

 

Posted on: 18 September 2013 by BigH47

My experience of Audi garages is via work collecting test cars customers had left at the dealers. On many occasions and branches we ended up chatting to salesmen whilst the car was brought round front.I couldn't believe the crap they came out with and the ignorance of their product. One guy tried to tell me that their were no VW parts in their cars all Auidi only, I did point out his ignorance and told him what VAG stood for, tosser!