Had the loan of a Golf Plus today, as a courtesy car, whilst my MK V Golf 1.6 was being serviced. Whilst I have nothing against the former I cannot, for the life of me, see what it really offers over and above my car. There is more headroom, admittedly but there is sufficient headroom in the standard Golf, is there not? In other respects the car is nice enough but I hear that it is not selling well and that may well be the reason why VW dealerships have a lot of these available for courtesy cars.
Also, there is no more seating room in the Plus over mine although there does seem to be more room around the front passenger and driver seats due to dash layout but what about those ridiculously small glazed triangles of glass just in front of the door mirrors! What use are they?
All in all, then, a fairly useless model which offers little, if any advantages over the standard 5-dr hatchback.
|
|
A 5-seat MPV, except it's a bit smaller. Does seem a bit of an overly-niche idea.
|
|
|
Surely it is the standard Golf that is the pointless car. Exactly the same as a Golf Plus, but with less headroom, less room around the front seats (etc.)
Can't see why anyone would buy one, when for a few hundred pounds more they can get a Golf Plus :-)
(My point being that it is all in the eye of the beholder.
Personally I think that all Saabs are utterly pointless, and I can't quite see the point of coupes either.)
|
|
Coupes are for those who wear toupees, I'm told....
|
|
Luckily I don't wear a toupee, although my hair is waving goodbye, otherwise I wouldn't have enough headroom in either of my two totally impractical coupes. No hatchbacks, no 5 or 7 seats, no configurable luggage space or seating patterns, no skinny latte holders or kiddies' TV screens - and no boredom either.
|
|
|
|
I wondered about this when I was given a Golf Plus as a rental car, especially as I found the weird styling a little offputting. But after a week I found that it has many advantages of a mini MPV such as the Touran but without their disadvantaged driving experience.
It has much more usuable space both in the back seat and in the boot than the normal Golf, along with sliding seats in the back. It easily carries 4 adults plus luggage and the higher driving position affords some of accessibility and visibility advantages in urban driving that you normally only get with an SUV.
If I were in the market for a 5 door hatchback I would consider one.
|
> the higher driving position affords some of accessibility and visibility advantages in urban driving that you normally only get with an SUV.
And so it goes on.
Keep on with this track and cars will be bigger than buses in 30 years time. Everyone wanting a higher driving position just leads to higher and higher cars.
|
Back problems for the 50+ two of us mean the next car after the A4 will need seats a bit higher to ease access and egress. I need the length of the Avant and wouldn't mind a bit more height in the boot area too. I thought the Golf Plus might suit us, but it's no longer i.e in length I mean.
Shame. If they'd added on a bit (18cm) like on the new Seat Altea XL they might have had a customer.
|
|
|
|
|
Had one for a week as a hire car on holiday last month - 1.9 tdi. Quite liked it - plenty of room, drove well & was really economical (did about 700 km on ¾tank). Not sure if I would buy one with my own money but I can understand those who would.
|
|
|
"Keep on with this track and cars will be bigger than buses in 30 years time. Everyone wanting a higher driving position just leads to higher and higher cars."
True, Jase, but they can be shorter, which is useful. My Mercedes B-class is shorter than both its predecessors, a Golf estate and an A4 Avant, but has just as much overall capacity and, strangely, much better rear legroom. It's a good design apart from the appallingly noisy diesel engine, which prevents me recommending one of these wholeheartedly to Dulwich Estate.
I can't see why VW gave us the Golf Plus when a Mark 5 estate would have made more sense. The good thing about the Mark 4 estate was that you could get it in SE trim whereas the hatch was only available as a Sport, for about £2,000 more. The Mark 5 2.0 TDI and 1.4 TSI are again only available in Sport or GT versions -poor value for money I think.
|
|
If you think that's pointless, how about the next variant - the CrossGolf - based on the Plus, but with 20mm higher ground clearance, and roof rails - a pseudo-4x4.
|
What an interesting piece of lateral thinking Tyro.
When the original Golf first went on sale in the early seventies, one road tester said it was such a capable all rounder that it was difficult to understand why anyone would want to buy anything else.
But they did of course.
|
I wonder if the Golf Mk6 will be influenced more by the standard hatchback or the Golf Plus - I can't see VW making both versions next time round.
|
Having said that, I like the look of the Golf Plus - wouldn't mind one.
|
I can see both points of view on this one and think that VW have missed a trick. As was said above, people are getting older and cars which are easier to get into and out of are becoming more popular. It's not a case of getting bigger, just better.
For example, my father bought a Forester precisely because it was that little bit higher (by 2") than most normal cars. My Forester is the same and both are extremely easy to access and egress. By comparison, his previous car, a Honda Accord was getting too low, even for me.
So, if VW had marketed the car, not so much as providing extra space, but providing just that litle bit extra height, to aid access, they would probably have sold more cars.
However, it is proced wrongly and there is no high spec version. If you want all the toys and comfort of my Forester, you have to spend more money on buying a car with an inferior engine and reliability.
|
|
|
|
