Old Polo 1.2l variants

[ph9]

I'm going to see a 2006 Polo tomorrow. I know the seller, but very little about the car, and I'm not sure how much he knows either. He said it's a 3 cylinder, so it must be one of the 1.2l engines. It looks like these were available in 55PS and 64PS variants for the 2006 model year.

Is there any way to differentiate between the different engines?

Also, what did VW do to gain the extra 9PS of the 64PS versions?

I can't believe a 1.2 litre engine is only mustering 54PS! I had a 1.0l Yaris which put out around 69bhp, and that car probably weighed 100kg less than a Polo. Official performance figures for the 55PS Polo are 95mph and 0-60mph in 17.5 seconds! Am I being optimistic in thinking that it should be fine with 'normal' driving on A-roads, dual carriageways and motorways? I don't usually do standing starts, but I'm wondering if it might feel a bit lethargic in normal driving, and when...ahem...overtaking...!

Are there any things to look out for with these engines - eg timing chain servicing - and with the 2006 model year Polos in general?

[bristolracer]

There will be a lot of people who will tell you that you will die in a fireball unless you have at least 200hp in your car.

My wife has an Aygo, it has 71hp, it will cruise at 75/80 on the motorway with little fuss, and I have even managed to overtake in it, you just have to think ahead and wind the car up to overtake.
The upside is that you will use little fuel, and it will cost buttons to insure.

I have no knowledge of the car you refer to, I have had Polos before and always found them to competent cars, generally solid and reliable.

[Sheepshanks]

We had a 54 ref Ibiza 1.2S in the family with that engine - I don't know which power but would guess, being SEAT, it might have been the 'higher' one. Somewhat counter-intuitively, I recall it being fine on the open road but it struggled a bit to get going around town.

Ours always felt like it had an engine mount missing, but I think that's unusual - funnily enough same driver now has a 3cyl 1 litre Ateca and that's absolutely fine.

There was some issue at the time with timing chain guides but I think even by 2004 they's sorted that. However we had it from new to 7yrs old - the one you're looking at is already 14 - so things may have changed!

It suffered coil pack failure several times - always the same one, number 1. As there's then only two cyls the car couldn't be sensibly driven. I bought a spare and it never failed again!

[ph9]

Thanks very much.

I don't need a lot of power/speed much of the time, so I'm keeping an open mind. I suppose I.m more concerned about the condition of the car, and the ride, rather than performance.

[Sheepshanks]

Do you do your own work on cars? The Ibiza (it was a pretty new platform when we got it so I'm assuming an 06 Polo would be same mechanically) was a bit of a pain for going through front console rubber bushes - that's a regular thing on all VW/SEAT/Skoda models - and I recall the rear drum brakes needed to be stripped and cleaned to get it through MOTs, even in our ownership.

[Dunk130TC]

My son has a 2005 1.4 Polo, it's a great car that has been a perfect learner and first car. The default is for parents to chase the 1.2 for cheaper insurance costs. The reality is that the 1.2 is often more expensive to buy than the 1.4 for this reason, yet the insurance increase for the 80bhp 1.4 is minimal.