Anyone got the new Golf (Mk VI) yet?

Participant

Participant

Participant

Caporegime
Joined
13 May 2003
Posts
34,621
Location
Warwickshire
Hello

Are there any owners of the latest generation Golf on the forum? I'm buying one soon (1.4 TSi 160PS petrol 5dr DSG in black or grey) and was hoping to get some tips on which extras to bother with and which not to, as well as other things you've found out about it since ownership.

It's going to be our next family runaround. I should probably point out, to save the inevitable debate, that this has absolutely nothing to do with the scrappage scheme; we just wanted one. ALL thoughts welcome, I know how lively OcUK car threads can get so I fully anticipate some frank thoughts on the VW Golf!

Thanks.
 
1.4 and near enough to 150ish BHP? That's quite nice for a small engine. Since it's a new mark, why not buy the previous one at a rock bottom price? I'm sure a lot of dealers would want to get rid of their mk5's by now.
 
Saw one on the road the other day, they do actually look great, think it was in GT Sport trim.

As for options? Depends on how much you will spend. I would choose the Dynaudio Pack with iPod function, full Leather, and Sat Nav is pretty damn pricy so would give that a miss.

Are they still charging for armrests?
 
Ricochet J said:
1.4 and near enough to 150ish BHP? That's quite nice for a small engine. Since it's a new mark, why not buy the previous one at a rock bottom price? I'm sure a lot of dealers would want to get rid of their mk5's by now.
Click to expand...

it's turbo charged and supercharged
 
The Mk5 wasn't rubbish - its a good car and the GTI is a cracker.

Mk6 is supposed to be noticeably better though, particularly in the area of refinement and ride quality. Car Magazine reckons its the best all round hatchback out there at the moment.
 
[TW]Fox;13971813 said:
No, the Mk4 Golf was a fundamentally decent car with a crap GTI. The Mk5 Golf was a sub-par car with a good GTI. The Mk6 Golf,zz.zzzzzzzzzzz
Click to expand...

No, the Mk4 wasn't a fundamentally decent car. It was dull and wodden to to drive but appealed to the 'perceived build quality, decent interior, buy into the brand' brigade.

The Mk5 IS a fundamentally good car, let down with some poor engine choices eg. 1.6, SDi etc, but a good all round car when you start reaching the decent engines in the range eg. GTi, 170bhp GT etc

As for 'zzzzzz'ing a Mk6 which you've never driven or owned, that just shows that you're talking out of your backside.
 
Last edited:
The mk4 did have decent build quality. The mk5 doesn't have decent build quality, ergonomics or value. I drove one, and hated it. The mk2 Focus is a much better car IMHO.

The mk6 however is meant to be improved, going back to, and improving upon, the mk4's quality. It looks nice too, a lot nicer than the bulbous mk5.

None of them handle particularly well, I'll grant you that.
 
Never found any of the MK5's to fall apart tbh and i driven quite a few, build quality seems fine to me for this sector in the market, they also seem to use better quality materials in the Mk5 vs the Mk4.

Don't see the problem personally, the mk5 dash is easy to understand and use.

We've had a Mk6 recently it was all in black and it didn't look right, dash seemed better but i need to drive one myself for a period before i make my mind up.
 
MarkDavis said:
No, the Mk4 wasn't a fundamentally decent car. It was dull and wodden to to drive but appealed to the 'perceived build quality, decent interior, buy into the brand' brigade.

The Mk5 IS a fundamentally good car, let down with some poor engine choices eg. 1.6, SDi etc, but a good all round car when you start reaching the decent engines in the range eg. GTi, 170bhp GT etc

As for 'zzzzzz'ing a Mk6 which you've never driven or owned, that just shows that you're talking out of your backside.
Click to expand...

You don't have to own a car to know that it is dull. The new Golf is pleasant and neat but nothing massively exciting.
 
Howard said:
The mk4 did have decent build quality. The mk5 doesn't have decent build quality, ergonomics or value. I drove one, and hated it. The mk2 Focus is a much better car IMHO.
Click to expand...

Eh? You only have to look at any of the reliability surveys from the time or the VW forums to know that the Mk4 build and reliability was distinctly average. The Mk5 isn't known for build quality or ergonomic problems. If by 'value' you mean the likely dealer price, then yes, its more expensive and you get less toys. But then again the Golf will hold its value (even if used Golfs are overpriced) whereas the Astra/Focus will be worth about 2p in 5 years' time.

Janesy B said:
You don't have to own a car to know that it is dull. The new Golf is pleasant and neat but nothing massively exciting.
Click to expand...

What's your definition of massively exciting? Audi R8? Caterham? This is the mid range hatchback market we're talking about. No mid range hatchback is going to be "massively exciting" - its just got to be good within its class of Astra SXis and Focus 1.6s.
 
Last edited:
MarkDavis said:
Eh? You only have to look at any of the reliability surveys from the time or the VW forums to know that the Mk4 build and reliability was very average. The Mk5 isn't known for build quality or ergonomic problems.
Click to expand...

He's talking about perceived quality - ie, the stuff you touch. There is no doubt in most peoples minds that VW nailed the perceived quality thing on the Mk4 and dropped the ball a bit with it on the Mk5, hence the big effort to get it back for the Mk6 and the very short period of time the Mk5 remained in production.
 
errr, the reason for shorting the life of the mk5 is because it was to costly to build.
There have been numerous articles on the web to this effect.

I certainly haven't found any flimsy cheap plastics etc or anything along those lines to make me think the Mk5 has poor build quality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom