To be honest I've never been that struck on the looks of any Golf. Some are nicer than others but it's never been a particularly good looking car. Of course these things are a matter of opinion, and one guy's bland samey-looking Mk5 is probably another man's great looking car.
The question, I guess, is whether the quality and equipment level of a Mk5 Golf is high enough to justify the high cost. I think the answer is a bit of yes and no. The point is that although their reputation for reliability is perhaps more a victory in marketing than engineering, you can't argue that their build quality is pretty good. As a quick test I challenge you to go out and count how many pre-1990 Vauxhalls and how many pre-1990 Volkswagens you see on the road today, bearing in mind that more Vauxhalls would have been sold in the first place.
If, as someone asked before, the car had a Daewoo badge on it, I would imagine the motoring press would say "we can't believe Daewoo have made a car this good, but why spend 18 grand on a Daewoo when you could get a Focus for a few grand less, and a higher brand image thrown in?"
So effectively, yes a Volkswagen is better quality than a Ford or a Vauxhall so expect it to cost a bit more, but there is also the scope for Volkswagen to knock the price up a bit higher because a lot of people are prepared to pay a bit more to buy a percieved "prestige" brand. It's possible that the high price tag offered for a Golf actually helps enhance the image of VW being a quality brand. I have heard stories of brands of cheap cologne increasing sales by magnitudes simply by doubling the price. Make something expensive and it becomes exclusive, regardless of whether or not it's any good.
|
>>..also the scope for Volkswagen to knock the price up a bit higher >>
I respectfully suggest you read the following:
www.vwvortex.com/artman/publish/vortex_news/printe...l
There's also the tale of Top Gear magazine's Richard Dredge, who somehow contrived to hit a Citroen Belingo at 70mph that had been "parked" in the outside lane of the M42 in a MkIV Golf V6 4Motion one night.
He wrote in the April 2003 issue: "Being a fairly calm sort I didn't think think I was going to die, but did wonder how much it was going to hurt?
"The incredible thing was that it didn't hurt at all. The first thing I felt was the pre-tensioned seatbelts reining me in, but the overwhelming sensation was the smell of the explosive charge used to inflate the airbags.
"Because the airbags inflate then deflate so quickly, they only hit yokur face with the force of a carrier bag blowing in the wind and, other than that, there was an amazing lack of drama.
"The Belingo was pretty cruched but the Golf's doors all opened the the windscreen was still undamaged. Given what I'd just been through, the lack of damage was nothing short of miraculous.
"It might look bad from the front, but the cabin was completely intact and I was unhurt apart from a bit of whiplash for a couple of days.
"Even the electric windows still moved smoothly up and down and everything still worked - although the driver's heated seat was a bit temperamental."
He said that the hybrid gas generators used to inflate the airbags quicker but without the heat associated with most systems certainly did the job.
So did the steering column crumple zone, subframe attachments which deflected the engine downwards and ultra-efficient bulkhead design minimising deformation of the passenger cell.
The seatbelts and crumple zones had saved his skin, but the reality was that there are dozens of other unsung bits of engineering hidden in the Golf's structure that saved his bacon.
Significantly, he said: "After thinking that the Golf might be very nice but just a teensy bit overpriced, I can now see the benefits of finding a bit more cash when buying."
Footnote: During the 17,000 miles over eight months with the magazine, when the Golf was being used by various drivers (the crash occured just an hour into Dredge's first outing in it) the only thing that went wrong was the CD player, replaced under warranty.
That will put some of VW's critics' noses out of joint...:-))
|
|
Doesn't alter the fact that the latest Golf is dire to drive though. The Focus may be tin plate (reliable tin plate mind you) but it does have the saving grace of being a decent drive.
|
Strange that, most of the car mags raved about the vastly improved ride and handling.....:-)
I've nothing against the ride and handling of the Focus (in fact my son has the Zetec 1.8 TDCI); it's up there with the best.
|
|
Stuartli, to be honest, I don't think the crash story we've heard several times means a lot, unless he's performed the same crash in some competitors cars?
|
>>.. don't think....we've heard several times means a lot..>
Somehow I don't think a still much alive Mr Dredge would happen to agree with you...:-))
Any way, let's face it, if everyone liked exactly the same cars; drank nothing but Guinness and Aussie Shiraz and all married young, nubile, nymphomanic blondes life would be utterly boring wouldn't it?
Think I'll opt for Guinness and Aussie Shiraz.
|
|
I'm sure he's very glad to be alive, my point is that there is no proof he wouldn't be in any other car.
|
Quite true.
My own choice, to cover virtually all eventualities, would be a Hummer or a Centurion.
|
|
|
|
Doesn't alter the fact that the latest Golf is dire to drive though. The Focus may be tin plate (reliable tin plate mind you) but it does have the saving grace of being a decent drive.
Eh, the mkV Golf IS a decent drive, no-one who has tested it has said it is not good to drive. Agreed some prefer the drive of a Focus but that is a credit to the Focus, not a slur on the mkV.
Media bias or not it has just won a group test against 1-series BMW, Volvo S40 & An Audi A3 in Waht Car - I fail to see though why there would be media bias towards the VW over the BMW or Audi!!!
|
To be fair to the 1-series... its Bangle styling is so universally hated that even if the poor thing could travel through time it'd still get a bad review.
Anyway, I don't think anyone here is trying to suggest that the Golf is a bad car. I think we all acknowledge that VW make good cars of which the Golf is one. The question is... is it good enough to warrant the extra money? The answer depends on what you look for in a car.
The backroom will never agree on this because we have so many members who view cars differently. Some are keen to get value for money, some are keen on the driving experience, some are keen on the image, others are keen on comfort and equipment levels. The majority, I'd imagine, value a car by all of these factors and more, but in varying proportions.
So if you're the kind of person who values build quality and badge-snobbery then you're likely to see the Golf as a good buy. Equally, if you're most interested in getting the most for your money then you probably won't. Couldn't comment on driving experience here.
The fact is that you don't buy a Ford to own a car with a blue oval on the front. People do buy Volkswagens to own a car with the VW badge on the front. So there must be an element of badge-snobbery supporting the Golf's sales. A lot of people couldn't care less what "What Car" makes of the Golf, but if the Joneses next door have a VW then they can't just have an Astra.
|
|
I've whinged many a time about Golfs and their poor reliability so I find all of the above very interesting. Regretfully, I am one of those who over three Golfs has been duped into thinking I'm buying a superior product because of how expensive it was amd its supposed image. Subsequently, when you have so many electrical and build quality faults on all three cars (mechanically they have been good, though) your patience begins to run out. As for the crash story, loads of cars now have 5 star safety and don't cost the unbelievable amount VW are charging so that argument in their favour doesn't wash with me. I think VWs and German cars in general are overrated and certainly overpriced and only do well in this country because we are obsessed with image and class. Suffice to say, I've got rid of my last Golf and will never buy another.
|
|
And you now drive a...????
|
Does it matter what AKR drives now? This is a thread on the pros and cons of the Golf, not a \"Ooooh, look at him! He drives something I wouldn\'t have!\" thread.
Regardless of what AKR has chosen, the sole relevance here is that it isn\'t a VW, based on personal experience of three different cars with build issues.
No Dosh - Backroom Moderator
mailto:moderators@honestjohn.co.uk
|
|
YES, it does matter, I for one would like to know which car he has chosen after the problems he has had with VW. I myself have not had a blemish free relationship with VW either, so would like to know the views of others. Get down of your high horse and take a chill pill Mr moderator.
|
Get down of your high horse and take a chill pill Mr moderator.
Lose the attitude, or lose your account. Your choice.
DD.
|
I'm surprised so many people on here consider a VW to be an 'upmarket' car. I don't (and I used to sell a lot of them s/hand a few years ago). VW is certainly not considered an upmarket brand in Germany - where the Golf battles against the Opel Astra. Audi is the VAG premium brand. Anyone who thinks VW is a premium brand has been duped by a big marketing budget.
The older VAG cars were great - esp. the 1.8 N-series engine that appeared in so many Golfs and A80's - simple, relable and durable. The newer ones don't 'cut the mustard though' - and I reckon the dealers have started to believe the marketing too....
|
I'm completely with you on that Aprilia and have made this point on the BR before. I do realise that time has moved on since WWII and the "people's car" etc. VW are not and never have been a premium brand like Mercedes, BMW or even Audi - whom they know own. They have attempted to invent themselves into one ever since that mid 80s ad for the Golf MkII and the yuppie woman with the engagement ring. And all because the MkI Golf happened to be a good car that didn't rust as badly as a Ford Escort...
Their latest ad campaigns along the lines of "you'll want to keep it that way" and "I think you undercharged us" are positively cringeworthy - pass the sick bag please.
And who are they kidding with the "now with free air con" nonsense on the MkIV Golf? Did they actually think that punters today would buy without just because of a VW badge.
This kind of arrogance from a manufacturer just turns me right off personally.
For the record I have owned Ford, Volvo, Renault, Mercedes and Vauxhall cars. I have been in VW cars and I think they are nicely put together if a little slow. In reality however, with the advent of user chooser company car schemes, there are no really exlusive cars on the road anymore are there?
|
Audi - whom they know own >>
You make it sound a recent event...:-)
The VAG group's extensive marque choice of Audi, VW, Seat and Skoda are all intended to serve different types of buyers, with the common engines, platforms etc providing economy of scale.
That's why I find it somewhat amusing so many seem to perceive a VW as a "premium" brand in the mould of BMW, Lexus and M-B - that role belongs to the Audi - and it's certainly not a reason why I buy VWs.
In fact, to be honest, because of the vast strides VW has ensured with the quality of Seat and Skoda models, I would be equally happy to drive one of these marques.
The Skoda Octavia or Seat Toledo would be the choice as both are very similar to my Bora.
Certainly where I live the Octavia seems to be the choice of local taxi drivers in seven cases out of 10 and they all rave about the car. Many buy them at special prices in the Glasgow area, pick them up and use the return journey as part of the bedding-in period.
|
well i dont think No Dosh was being to heavy handed but i do agree with Shoei - i'd like to see what AKR bought now as an alternative and how he's getting on with it?
AKR - what are you driving mate, and how does it compare to the VW's?
Personally i drive a MK3 Golf and just think the latest Golf is so dull and way overpriced. I dont think its a bad car, i just think it gets slated for the cost. If it was the same price generally as a Focus no one would complain. I am eagerly anticipating the new Golf GTI as the engine is supposed to be peachy. However, i feel it may be overrated before it begins.
My MK3 has been the only car i have owned to have gone through an MOT first time no problems, and its a similar age car to the other ones i've had. Its solid and keeps its value well!
|
|
In case anybody's fussed I bought a Saab 9-3 - one of the new fangled "sport saloon" jobbies. Now, before anybody says it, I know it's a "posh Vectra" (the fact that I can now get a discount off one with my GM Card confirms that) but my experience of it so far is entirely positive. I and the wife have also had seven Vauxhalls (largely due to the fact that I can get them cheap with the aforementioned credit card) and my experiences of them are also entirely positive - the wife's Astra convertible is our 7th Vauxhall and it's great. No dodgy electrics or build quality faults. The discounts I get offset the poorer (compared to VW) residuals. But like I said before, it's all about image - just look at Jeremy Clarkson's attitude to anything (other than the VX220) Vauxhall make. I've been stung by the image thing with the VWs and never will again which is why I thought Aprilla's comment made so much sense. And before anyone has a go about the Saab being a so called "image" car, it cost the same as a VW Golf GT TDi and looks and drives fantastically. Since it's a Vauxhall in disguise it'll no doubt be marvellous.
|
|
|
|
