Polo 16V future classic ?
Discussion
My brother had a 16v and I drove it many times. I always thought it felt much quicker than expected and what made the car was the engine and gearbox. Such a revvy little thing, combined with stupidly close gear ratios meant bombing it about at lowish speeds was great fun.
The gear ratios were stupid for motorway driving though. I seem to remember it being close to 4k revs at 70mph in 5th.
Still, on any other road, the engine and gearbox were perfectly matched.
The gear ratios were stupid for motorway driving though. I seem to remember it being close to 4k revs at 70mph in 5th.
Still, on any other road, the engine and gearbox were perfectly matched.
Cracking car.
My brother bought a cheap Polo 16v a while ago as a winter car, it must have had a fair bit of money spent on it at some point in it's life and came with colour concept heated leather which was a real bonus. I drove it a few times and whilst it was not quite in the same league as a 106 GTI it was fun to throw about and the engine has a lot of potential.
We ended up stripping it as the sills were falling apart but all was not lost... the engine now lives in a mk2 Bready.
In terms of classic Polos, the mk1s especially Derbys are starting to fetch some good money, mk2 Coupe S are rather rare to and worth a few quid but the real gem will always be the G40.
My brother bought a cheap Polo 16v a while ago as a winter car, it must have had a fair bit of money spent on it at some point in it's life and came with colour concept heated leather which was a real bonus. I drove it a few times and whilst it was not quite in the same league as a 106 GTI it was fun to throw about and the engine has a lot of potential.
We ended up stripping it as the sills were falling apart but all was not lost... the engine now lives in a mk2 Bready.
In terms of classic Polos, the mk1s especially Derbys are starting to fetch some good money, mk2 Coupe S are rather rare to and worth a few quid but the real gem will always be the G40.
These never compared favourably to the competition at the time performance wise I seem to recall, remember a Top Gear test and it was way behind the Saxo VTS and Punto GT, however I'd imagine the build and interior quality of the Polo are better than both the other two.
However as good little cars as they are, I couldn't understand why you'd go for one of these when you could get the exact same car in Seat Ibiza Cupra/GTI form with the 2.0 16v engine from the Golf GTI? Maybe that's what you should be looking at next?
http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyI...
However as good little cars as they are, I couldn't understand why you'd go for one of these when you could get the exact same car in Seat Ibiza Cupra/GTI form with the 2.0 16v engine from the Golf GTI? Maybe that's what you should be looking at next?
http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyI...
Yes the title of the thread was a bit dumb having forgotten about the G40.Also the comment about embarrassing more powerful vehicles was equally full of bravado and dim wittedness.I have taken on more powerful cars in it but only beaten them because the other driver was not prepared to explore what their car could really do.
Your right about the gearing they register about 4k at 80 leptons in 5th so a bit busy
Having said all that im still struggling to think of what to replace it with.I either go full on and buy a cheap barge or stick with the hot hatch.The Ibiza could be a good call but not much else and it would have t be the older one as has been suggested here.I had a Golf Mk4 GTi and it was like a pogo stick when you tried to make progress.I guess changing the suspenders would sort that though.
Your right about the gearing they register about 4k at 80 leptons in 5th so a bit busy
Having said all that im still struggling to think of what to replace it with.I either go full on and buy a cheap barge or stick with the hot hatch.The Ibiza could be a good call but not much else and it would have t be the older one as has been suggested here.I had a Golf Mk4 GTi and it was like a pogo stick when you tried to make progress.I guess changing the suspenders would sort that though.
This thread reminded me of our little Polo. A few years ago now but it was a decent little car. Not really up to parr with the French stuff of that era but did have a solid feel. Reliability for VW around this age was a low point unfortunately, allthough low mileage and FVWSH ours suffered a few common issues with these. Just checked the database and it's been off the road since 2009 so must have been scrapped. Shame as it was absolutely immaculate at 6 years old and 50k when we sold.
rufusgti said:
This thread reminded me of our little Polo. A few years ago now but it was a decent little car. Not really up to parr with the French stuff of that era but did have a solid feel. Reliability for VW around this age was a low point unfortunately, allthough low mileage and FVWSH ours suffered a few common issues with these. Just checked the database and it's been off the road since 2009 so must have been scrapped. Shame as it was absolutely immaculate at 6 years old and 50k when we sold.
The main reason that the Polo wasn't deemed as good as the 106/Saxo was that it was 100hp vs the 120hp of it's competitors which in sub 1 tonne cars will make quite a difference!!
As mentioned above the Ibiza shares a lot of the 6n Polo DNA but has the 2.0 16v ABF with 150hp which can show a Saxo a thing or two and seem to sell for buttons.
As mentioned above the Ibiza shares a lot of the 6n Polo DNA but has the 2.0 16v ABF with 150hp which can show a Saxo a thing or two and seem to sell for buttons.
aka_kerrly said:
The main reason that the Polo wasn't deemed as good as the 106/Saxo was that it was 100hp vs the 120hp of it's competitors which in sub 1 tonne cars will make quite a difference!!
You say that, but a 16v Polo is about 103bhp/tonne and a Saxo VTR about 98. The VTS is certainly faster but my old 16v was a pretty decent match for a VTR.
ManOpener said:
You say that, but a 16v Polo is about 103bhp/tonne and a Saxo VTR about 98.
The VTS is certainly faster but my old 16v was a pretty decent match for a VTR.
The VTS is certainly faster but my old 16v was a pretty decent match for a VTR.
Polo 16v vs VTR is fair comparison, when the Polo was on Top Gear they compared it against the 106 GTI 16v based on price I imagine and gave the polo a hard time as it is well off the pace.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hw2-2AEbOFY
I presume the 1.4 100hp unit was chosen for the lower tax bracket/cheaper insurance which is a shame really as the 1.6 125hp unit used in the later Polo GTI is an improvement.
mk1/2 Polos with 16v is where the real fun is.
Gassing Station | Readers' Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff