Golf V5: thoughts?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ill, possibly but doubt it, it only had 30k on it if I remember rightly and was bought from a main VW dealer

Weight difference, again possibly, I thought the Golf felt heavy to drive and my civic was modified, suspension and breathing

Pics of what? I have a pic of my old civic, might get a pic of his Golf off FB or something
 
The V5 is a nice engine - test drove a couple and they've got a nice wide band of oomph and make a nice noise.

On the downside they are thirsty and not that fast.

Of the alternatives the V6 is even thirstier and makes the front of the car feel very heavy. Again it makes a nice noise.

I ended up going for 1.8T in 180bhp trim (in a Bora - I think the only model Golf it was offered on was the anniversary MK4, the standard MK4 GTIs only got the 150) which is quicker and gives better consumption than the V5, although it does sound like a bag of bolts when revved. :)
 
Last edited:
i do like the sound of a v5 though :)







personally i prefer the 6pot

my old one :)



and a 1.8 20vt this just sounds meh even with a tasty exhaust( single box piper system with magnex decat)

 
Last edited:
Von Luck said:
I ended up going for 1.8T in 180bhp trim (in a Bora - I think the only model Golf it was offered on was the anniversary MK4, the standard MK4 GTIs only got the 150) which is quicker and gives better consumption than the V5, although it does sound like a bag of bolts when revved. :)
Click to expand...

Cool they are quite rare, bigger turbo and 6 speed box. Get a carbonio for it, it will sound like Darth Vader with the flu
 
A mate of mine had a V5 golf, it was a cracking car, sounded the nuts, plenty of grunt and a fantastic cruiser. the down side like a lot of people have said is that it was quite thursty and not as fast as you would think. My mate only got rid of it as he wanted to start doing more trackdays and there arnt many aftermarket parts avalibull for them and thouse that are tend to be expensive.
 
I ran a 170 Bhp Golf V5 for 3 years, personally I found it to be an excellent engine, nice raspy exhaust note, a little bit thirsty, the only problem I had in 3 years was a faulty coil.
 
A workmate had a V5 Golf, nice car, sounds good but he had endless problems with coils failing which seems to be a common issue with them.

Also, he could not keep up with my 328i Auto (1996) when we had a blast, which surprised me more than him!

he changed it for an e60 525i of all things!
 
Biohazard said:
170 for a v5?

not that brilliant really is it?
Click to expand...

What has the power output got to do with it being a V5? It's a fairly respectable power output for a 2.3 litre normaly aspirated engine compared to other similar engines e.g. the 2.5L V6 Duratec is only 170bhp, the Vauxhall 2.5L V6 used in e.g. the Vectra was 167bhp.
 
Morba said:
Does that make it a bad car?
Click to expand...

No not really on the face of it, I can't comment on that I've only driven along with them not been in one. Also quite subjective, as it depends on what it was designed for with driving and engine characterstics. And what you yourself are looking for.

But, on paper to me, it seems a bit pointless or odd as a 'design' or 'class' of golf.
 
What about the BMW 323? That was a 6 pot 2.5 with 170bhp.
You make it sound like it's a ridiculous bhp for what it is!
 
What the e36? I thought it was a bit more than that, but no you are right in that sort of comparison. A lot of BMW's were also restricted from factory also though. But again that's delivery of power on those cars.

Just the comparisons I make 170 from a v-anything or any decent sized 6pot is pretty poor when the early 90's was giving you not far from that with 2 litre 4pots in hot hatches etc. Especially when you look at newer ones now, an extra cylinder and you'll still be slower than some kid in a clio or megane..

Does it matter if that isn't your consideration? No.

Didn't mean to upset you personally, I realise your obvious tracked onto buying one, I just feel the costs incurred alone for this v5 is not really worth it. Its thirsty, and not brilliantly fast for it. But thats me.

Plus mentally I would hate having an odd number of cylinders, it would feel wrong but I also have some sort of OCD :p
 
It's a relatively (for the car) big, lazy engine. It's more about torque than bhp.
Our 2005 V50 2.4 produces a whopping 140bhp. But the torque from the 5 cylinder engine is actually quite decent so it's not that slow once on the move.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom