Mk3 Golf 1.4
- Thread starter Alu_ATC
- Start date
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Soldato
Well i beg to differ my MK3 2.0 8v goes wellenergy said:
Iceman said:
If you're happy with the performance then great, but its by no means fast. One would expect a Golf GTi to be reasonably fast - the mk1 & 2 were good in their time, but the mk3 was slower than either and even for its day, not fast by any description.
Many manufacturers at the time made hot hatches which were comprehensively faster and better handling than the 8v GTi.
danza said:
IIRC the C14 series was initially available in carburettored form with adequate power (~75hp?), I think this was the C14NV.
They then slapped a cat and single point injection on it which was called C14NZ, this strangled the output (<60hp).
They also made another version with multipoint injection (C14SE?) which gave 82 or 83hp.
Last edited:
Iceman said:
Must be something wrong with my GTI then, as its slow as pig ****
I put it down to the fact that it only has 100bhp/tonne, and has a book time of a whopping 9.5 seconds to hit 60mph, guess that wasnt the reason and mine infact must be broken
Soldato
Yup, that's the one. Just had my head under the bonnet. Scraped away a layer of gunk and there it was!
GL is much better, same insurance group too. You want a 95+ model where there were lots of improvements, easy way of checking is if the side repeaters are oval='95+.
Dont buy a red one, especially the cherry red ones, the paint turns to pink really easily. Dragon green or purple are the desireable colours.
Dont buy a red one, especially the cherry red ones, the paint turns to pink really easily. Dragon green or purple are the desireable colours.
Suspended
172gus said:
Tosh, my M reg is a red golf and its as red now as it ever was.
energy said:
yea thats the one ive got, althought its no rocket, it will go if you give some beans.
to the op, maybe you could look into an MPI astra 1.4? cheap to buy, run and fix. 0-60 ~11seconds which should be better than a golf?
*edit* oh old thread :| but if you buy a 1.6 you dont get cheap road tax!
Last edited:
Soldato
A 1.8 that takes 12 secs to 60, thats as bad as the 1.25 Fiesta I had. 
172gus said:
Thanks for the reply, aiming for a Dragon Green or Dark Blue. I am going to be getting a 95+ anyway, power steering & 5 gears are important to me.
One last question though, what are the spec differences?
e.g. between CL and L, or CL and GL
Im not too sure tbh, if you could send me to a website that'd be good, or if you can explain. Its just that I have seen some CL's with optional CD player, sunroof etc... is this just a CL specced up, or are there other differences I am not aware of. Also, do you know what was the stanard equippment for some specs?
chopchop said:
Buying a 1.6 does put the price up in lots of ways, but having been given all the advice I have, I think I will steer well clear of the 1.4.
Soldato
My 16 year old 1.6 MR2 managed to get 118bhp at the RR day.[TW]Fox said:
Engine size isnt that important.
They might produce low power for the size but they are produced for a market who buy it.
The GTi's of old (115bhp etc) were not quick in anyway ill give you that... but we could go on and on in 40 threads about power outputs from engine sizes. 1.8's can generate anything from 50bhp to 250bhp and more either way.
Still no reason to mock... i mean BMW make a fair few modern engines of 1.8/1.9 that produce lame power compared to others yet they are not mentioned. They are however reasonable engines. Same goes for the 1.4/1.6/1.8 in the mk3 golf. Not quick, but reliable with low down grunt.
They might produce low power for the size but they are produced for a market who buy it.
The GTi's of old (115bhp etc) were not quick in anyway ill give you that... but we could go on and on in 40 threads about power outputs from engine sizes. 1.8's can generate anything from 50bhp to 250bhp and more either way.
Still no reason to mock... i mean BMW make a fair few modern engines of 1.8/1.9 that produce lame power compared to others yet they are not mentioned. They are however reasonable engines. Same goes for the 1.4/1.6/1.8 in the mk3 golf. Not quick, but reliable with low down grunt.
energy said:
Speed isn't everything. A lot of those cars won't survive the same mileage as the Golf. For example the uno's would have dissolved in rust very quickly. The french cars will be all sorts of electrical problems. The only real alternative is a Japanese car. Which if they are not crashed will go forever.
As for the 2.0 (8v) 115bhp GTI's these are great comfy cuisers and will do mega miles. The 2.0 (16v) was 150 bhp. Some people prefer the easy character of 8v's over 16v's. That goes for both the Mrk2 and 3. However this is all off topic. If someones looking for a sturdy runabout with low insurance and running costs, taking about V6's and Turbos is taking the mike.
Last edited:
Thanks for the posts guys.
I just looked on VW though and apparently L spec is lower than CL, it then goes GL etc...
See this link, click me
Anyone know the spec difference?
I just looked on VW though and apparently L spec is lower than CL, it then goes GL etc...
See this link, click me
Anyone know the spec difference?
ooo, your looking at a 1.6CL !
apparently theres 2 different ones... theres the single point and multi point injection so im led to believe ?!?!!
single point i think has something like 75bhp
multi point has something around 95bhp ???
done abit more digging
guess im just fortunate that mine is one of the 100bhp 1.6's with a higher compression ratio
theres something to look out for i guess !
apparently theres 2 different ones... theres the single point and multi point injection so im led to believe ?!?!!
single point i think has something like 75bhp
multi point has something around 95bhp ???
done abit more digging
guess im just fortunate that mine is one of the 100bhp 1.6's with a higher compression ratio
theres something to look out for i guess !
Last edited: