Login | Register
SearchMy Stuff
My ProfileMy PreferencesMy Mates RSS Feed
Reply to Topic
Author Discussion

white_goodman

Original Poster:

1,325 posts

76 months

[news] 
Friday 13th July 2012 quote quote all
My wife and I have just had a baby and have decided to keep my Impreza WRX Wagon as the family car for my wife to use (nothing better quite frankly for the money) which leaves me with my wife's Fiat 500. A great little car but not really my style!

I'm a big hot hatch fan - fast, light, cheap(ish) to run yet practical, yet I haven't owned a proper hot hatch for about 10 years (my last and only hot hatch being a laser green 205 1.6 GTi). I keep trying to persuade myself that for my budget (2000-3000 pounds) that I would be better off with a more modern Clio 172/182 or 306 Rallye/GTi or something retro but more grown-up like an E30 318iS or a Saab 900 Turbo but I keep coming back to a 205 1.9 or a big-bumper Golf GTi 16v (two cars that I have dreamt of owning since I was a boy).

I'm a bit of a perfectionist and want something cosmetically and mechanically tidy and I like everything to work if possible. I know from my previous ownership experience that this would be unreasonable on a 205 and probably any car of this age. The 205 was such a blast to drive though and I definitely want the 1.9 this time for the wheels, part-leather interior and big engine in a small car experience. However, I remember the heater being a bit crap and it being difficult to drive smoothly in traffic. However, 205s seem to resist rust really well which is a positive, as it would be kept outside.

I have owned a Golf GTi but it was a mk4 2.0, so not really a proper one. The Golf has a nice look and feel about it and I would expect it would be the easier car to live with and also a bit more substantial. I wrote off my 205 in a 20mph shunt! My only experience of a mk2 Golf GTi was a short drive in a late 8 valver. It was nice enough but to be honest felt a bit slow and unresponsive compared to my 1.6 GTi. Is the 16v noticeably quicker? Also, I have heard reports of 28mpg being typical. It's not a biggie, as my daily commute isn't that far but this seems low for a NA 1.8. I'm sure I used to regularly get 35-40mpg out of my 205.

So which would make the nicest daily driver, the 205 or the Golf?

Aphex

821 posts

85 months

[news] 
Friday 13th July 2012 quote quote all
used to get 44 mpg out of my old 16v when trying.

i'm a big fan of them both but seeing as though I've owned a few mk2 golfs now, I'd be looking at a 205.

if i was in your shoes I'd get myself a mk2 golf, decide whether or not its for me and then either sell it for a 205 or keep it. Its a minefield out there though so happy hunting

Hoygo

724 posts

46 months

[news] 
Friday 13th July 2012 quote quote all
Id say Golf is the best for daily driving,owning 2 they really were brilliant,but based on peoples experiences the 1.9 205 was the better drivers car by a margin.

SWoll

4,947 posts

143 months

[news] 
Friday 13th July 2012 quote quote all
The Golf.

The 16v engine is a lot better than the 8v and the build quality is light years ahead of the Pug.

Had a 205 1.6 GTi followed my a Mk2 16v back in my youth and although the Pug was more fun, as an overall package it cant compete with the Golf.

Hoygo said:
Id say Golf is the best for daily driving,owning 2 they really were brilliant,but based on peoples experiences the 1.9 205 was the better drivers car by a margin.
I didn't think the gap was that huge personally. Now the MK3 GTi was another story...

And if you do go for the Pug the 1.6 is still the better of the 2 IMO.

Edited by SWoll on Friday 13th July 16:38

Cheib

9,007 posts

60 months

[news] 
Friday 13th July 2012 quote quote all
Both great cars. For that budget I think I'd go with the Golf, build quality has got to be a consideration with 20 year old cars!


Advertisement

SWoll

4,947 posts

143 months

[news] 
Friday 13th July 2012 quote quote all
Cheib said:
Both great cars. For that budget I think I'd go with the Golf, build quality has got to be a consideration with 20 year old cars!
My thoughts exactly. My 205 was only 5 years old when I bought it and in the 2 years I had it it was and already falling apart/rattling/bubbling with rust on arches etc. Hate to think how bad one would be nowadays.

gforceg

1,629 posts

64 months

[news] 
Friday 13th July 2012 quote quote all
As a daily driver and weekend fun car combined I'd go for another Golf. No question.

I love the 205 too but I wouldn't hang my hat on it the way I will with Golfs.

mr hat

68 posts

58 months

[news] 
Friday 13th July 2012 quote quote all
id go for the 205, i love them, and one day i would like to own one, they just look great even today and even though iv never driven one or even been in one the hype cant all be wrong can it. my friend owns a mk2 golf 16v, really nice cars with a cracking engine, his ran 147bhp on a recent rr day with a panel filter and a magnex system and its on 130k so strong engines. i just prefer the looks and lightweight nature of the pug.

Garvin

986 posts

62 months

[news] 
Friday 13th July 2012 quote quote all
For driving, the Pug without a shadow of a doubt - more smiles per mile and all that. 8V Golfs feel a bit pedestrian along side and a 16Ver would be the way to go. However, you describe yourself as a bit of a perfectionist - this really doesn't equate with the Pug - the interior falls to bits whilst you drive along!

AClownsPocket

364 posts

44 months

[news] 
Friday 13th July 2012 quote quote all
Golf every time. I had an 8V and loved it. Drove a 16V too and it was quicker, but the 8V was so easy to work on. Probably one of only 2 cars I've owned I was truly gutted at selling. Just loved driving it.

  • *sigh***

Mouse1903

720 posts

38 months

[news] 
Friday 13th July 2012 quote quote all
Both cars I'd love to own or drive. The Golf is better built and slightly more practical but I suspect the 205 is a little more fun, and it also doesn't look too dated inside considering its age

TROOPER88

1,117 posts

64 months

[news] 
Friday 13th July 2012 quote quote all
Have owned a few of both.
Very, very different cars. The Golf is a million times more refined but I think feels a lot more slugish.

The 205 is like a rally car, every journey is like a stage, noisy with rattles.

As an every day car I would get the Golf; as a weekend toy definately the 205 1.9 GTi in Sorento Green.

Motorrad

5,102 posts

72 months

[news] 
Friday 13th July 2012 quote quote all
I'd go for whichever was in the best condition at the price point given the age of the cars we're talking about.

The 205 is the better drivers car.


white_goodman

Original Poster:

1,325 posts

76 months

[news] 
Saturday 14th July 2012 quote quote all
SWoll said:
My thoughts exactly. My 205 was only 5 years old when I bought it and in the 2 years I had it it was and already falling apart/rattling/bubbling with rust on arches etc. Hate to think how bad one would be nowadays.
You must have been unlucky. My 205 was over 10 years old when I got it and had no rust whatsoever. 205s don't seem to rust much, I believe the body design doesn't have many (if any) rust traps.
Reply to Topic