Caz,
I'm 20 and started off with an old polo 1.0. It was a sturdy little car but seriously slow. I then moved onto a non-turbo diesel 306 which wasn't much quicker but much more flexible and in my opinion looked better (with a decent set of alloys) than the 106 and polo. It was extremely reliable, well within your budget and very cheap to insure. It has a huge amount of room without being too big to park very easily and has great visibility. I wrote the car off recently whilst trying to avoid a deer with a death wish and was extremely impressed with the cars crash performance. I never got less than 40mpg whilst enjoying the excellent stereo and admiring looks from my mates with similarly priced but uglier cars. I really cannot think of a reason for you not to go for a 306 - even the nippy turbo diesels are only group 5 insurance and the whole range has outstanding roadholding/handling characteristics. I really couldn't reccommend it more highly.
I've now moved onto more serious stuff - an old E30 BMW 318IS - which I absolutely love. Avoid the Polo- you're simply paying for a soapdish on wheels with an expensive brand name - I have at least 10 friends with a Polo and they all look unhappy behind the wheel of such a dull and sterile car. This isn't an anti VW rant - I work for VW in the university holidays and the new polo isn't much better!
Good luck persuading mum - I know how it feels!
Matt
|
My ex has a 1.0 Polo, a little newer than the one you're considering, but basically the same car. And it's slow. No, it's slower than you're thinking when I say slow, it's 'overtaken by a granny in an electric wheelchair' slow. Dangerously slow. So slow that, if you ever decide to overtake another car, you'd better hope it's stationary.
For that reason alone, I'd say get the 106. It might not have the grown up perceived quality of the Polo, but so what? It is much more practical in terms of performance, handling, driving pleasure and generally anything other than the most basic, utilitarian, A to B needs. And for that, you can get a National Express :-)
Also, £3500 isn't cheap enough to count as doing your friend a favour, so on the off chance that anything goes wrong with the Polo and you end up falling out with each other, I'd look elsewhere - even if you want that car - and get one from a dealer, with a warranty, for about the same money.
|
The 106 in my view is one of the best you can go for. It has an excellent chassis, better steering and it definitely has a younger image.
The quicksilver is also only a group 5 for insurance and you get all the looks of the GTI with the 1.4 engine. Presuming you are talking about the 1996 onwards Polo, these are the performance figures for the car:
Volkswagen 1.0 (96-)
Engine 4/1043
BHP 50
Max Speed 94
0-60mph 18.5
MPG 47.1
The 106 Quicksilver is as follows:
Engine 4/1360
BHP 75
Max Speed 109
0-60mph 11.2
MPG 44.1
With the 1.4 your getting 25bhp more than the 1.0, significantly better 0-60mph time and only losing 3mpg's in the process.
I reckon your still better off with the 106 even though you may pay slightly more for the insurance.
|
Caz
Just to add my thoughts:
I'm sure the 106 has a more youthful image than the Polo but please consider this: the 106 (and its sister car the Saxo) are very lightly built and there's absolutely no doubt which one I'd rather be driving in a shunt -and it's not the 106! I worked on one a few months back and was quite shocked at how flimsy it was.
I realise that maybe it's not your priority right now to consider crash integrity etc, but please have a think about it. The Polo's not fast nor particularly trendy but it is a very well made car that is unlikely to let you down badly and will still be looking good long after the 106 has met its maker!
A friend of mine is ex traffic cop and told me the local scrapyard they use is full of wrecked Saxos and 106s involved in "fatals" Food for thought....
Baz
|
Have you considered anything else within your budget? A decent car is the Ford Fiesta 1.25 Zetec. You could probably get one of these within your budget and they have an excellent chassis and engine. Its also german built and i can vouch for their amazing build quality after my sister went straight into the back of a.....ahem.....106. The 106 was a write off at the 25mph collision (this was a 1994 car so older shape). The fiesta is still going strong now and my sister escaped with no injuries - where as the other drivers all had neck and spinal injuries.
I would look into this car
|
I agree with you on safety - the Polo is better, there are no two ways about it, if you have an accident. On the other hand, because it's a heavier car, the 1.0 engine is so slow it's *very* easy to be caught out overtaking.
I think possibly a Fiesta Zetec is the best compromise - it'll be cheaper or newer, it's stylish, handles properly, and I suggested it already.
A Polo 16v would also be ideal, but you're not going to get a 5 year old with low mileage for less than £4500+. There is a decent looking one in Amersham (not too far from Hemel) in AutoTrader for £3500 though, P reg with 79k. It's got the important alloys, it's dragon green, a bit high on mileage (but not scarily so) and a good price if it's in good nick and HPI clear. 01494 442428 if you're interested Caz.
|
thanks for all your views guys,
a very interesting mix of opinions. i agree safety is an important factor and for those of you who suggested the zetec, i have been looking out for those too. unfortunately, the money is coming from my grandma, £3000, but this makes my mum think she has complete control even though im sure my grandma wouldnt mind what i get as long as i liked it. I am prepared to pay the excess £1000 to get a quicksilver and pay insurance but theyve trapped me by saying if i get the polo then i dont have to pay a thing.
Im a stubborn person though and i am likely to pay excess to avoid being penned in. ideally i would like to view a variety of cars, but the quicksilver will always have a place in my heart. its not necessarily for speed reasons, i like the way it looks. Girly are'nt I!!
send all quicksilvers this way!
|
|
For the cash you could get a nicer Polo,a 1.4 say, one that looked 'less basic' and that'd then please you and your Mum. My personal choice would be the 106 but it depends how safety/reliability conscious you are and how long it will be kept.
|
Cut the apron strings and buy the car you want. Unless of course your mum is paying for it !!
|
I'm with the other Dave on this one. Polo 16v, safe, secure, fast, stylish and doable on budget if you don't get paranoid about mileage. You shouldn't, either, because long journeys at 2500 revs will be much kinder to a car than short journeys where the car is being revved up to 4500 and the engine never warms up.
(He's the Dave who's also a law student, by the way, though I'm older than him. There's also the taxi driver, the tune up guy, TOTH, Dave_N, Dave_M, and about a million others).
|
|
