need to commute to uni dont really wnat to use my gti as its only got just over 100k on clock and also dont want to be spending loads on petrol neeed to do a 70 mile round trip 4 days a week. want something small and cheap to insure with a good mpg and a VW of course was thinking a 1.0l polo coupe or a 1.3 polo coupe s classic 1986 must be less than 500 to buy. just wanted some advice really wondered if anyoen had a polo as a daily or second car. parents want me to sell the gti and get a diesel pfft what do they know
done exaclty the same thing!!! didnt want to rack up miles on mine, so i bought mk3 1.0 polo, for 350 couple of years back. used to insure 16v alone for about 550, but now cost 300ish (fully comp rest. miles), and 180ish tpft with missus on as provisinal licience. only intended to keep it 2-3 yrs for commuting and teaching missus to drive. but cars being so great that 2yrs later, it looks loads better than when i brought it (i keep it tidy and serviced like the golf but apart from mp3 player, all standard). defo reccomend this move as, (A) loads better mpg (40 - 50 mpg); (B) they tend to keep alot tidier than rivals of same price-mark (fiesta, corsa, etc); (C) this is the best bit, because im now used to the polo, when i take the golf out, i appreciate its performance much more (like when i brought it all over again!!). only thing i reccomend is, if you after mk3, try finding 5spder, more relaxing on m'ways, but dont make this a priority - 4spds are still good!!!
Get a polo to save your self some money but by christ are they horrible to drive. Possibly the most basic form of motoring available but as you say youll save alot of money. Personally id go for a Corsa or peugeot 306 as appose to a Mk2/3 polo, alot more comfortable and so much more modern in comparrison to the Polo. They arnt great cars by any standard but far better than the bread vans.
oh yeah, they are basic inside (mine didnt even have a ciggy lighter!!). 3 main reasons i brought it were, to stop racking up miles on golf, brand loyalty (personally recks vw's are structurally better than the above 2 mentioned), wanted a pure basic car to teach wife in. my philosophy is, if you learn to drive in a basic old car, with no extras, you can adapt more easily with driving more modern cars. whereas if its the other way round (iefrom a new car to old) you tend to find these drivers very fussy about things like no pas etc, so will be more reluctant.
basic = less to go wrong i used to have a saxo after 2 years the exhaust dropped, coilpack went, needed new plugs, new rad it was a joke. 306 aint exactly the small engined non petrol guzzler my best mate has one. not bothered about leccy windows or pas or central locking or ciggy lighter. planning on stripping the rer seats out anyway for gig gear.
Hate to say this but a mate at uni used to drive the really early 106 1.4 diesel he bought for around 500 and have to say it was dirt cheap to run and insure. All he did was put a set of 6x9's and he was happy. From what I can remember all he did was literally put derv in and top up the oil ever now again. Don't think he serviced it in 2-3 years either Yes it felt like it was made for balsa wood, but did the job to be fair.
just got a job pays pretty well so im now thinking i may sell my mk2 and a get a mk4 1.8t im just so confused by the whole thing.
as an alternative i got a rover 214 for the 40mile commute, couldnt do it in the mk1 and i wanted something that wouldn't be so tiring as a 1.0 polo at 80mph for 2hrs every day got it for 700, had it for 3 months - done 7000 miles with only a wiper motor needing changing now i'm moving closer to work ive sold it for 750 - can't go wrong although you do have to put up with the embarrasment of driving a rover and having to check the coolant level almost every journey just incase...... although having said that i do wish i'd got a diesel - even more so now that it seems to be cheaper per litre nowadays Mike
