Audi dealer query

jase1

motorguy wrote: »

I would also have concerns about the resaleability of a 5 year old Kia with say 125K miles on it, whereas i know the Golf will still sell easily.

This is true -- although it has little to do with the respective quality of the cars, and more to do with perception. That said, I fully agree that if you're buying new, you could do a lot worse than buy a Golf for that very reason.

I take advantage of this phenomenon and always have done. Run-of-the-mill Mitsubishis always struggle on the second-hand market (with near non-existent image being the main problem), but I have found them to be more than capable of racking up the miles.

So I have bought a few of them at 4 or 5 years old and taken advantage of their price-performance ratio. Never been disappointed.

motorguy

jase1 wrote: »

I fully agree that if you're buying new, you could do a lot worse than buy a Golf for that very reason.

Yes. I got this one at 9 months old which compared with a new one is about a £7000 saving over list price (about £5000 cheaper after discounts on a new car)

TradePro

motorguy wrote: »

Yes. I got this one at 9 months old which compared with a new one is about a £7000 saving over list price (about £5000 cheaper after discounts on a new car)

Is this another Golf myth busted - that they hold their money well?

TradePro

motorguy wrote: »

TradePro, how come on another thread you're quite happily advocating someone buying an Alfa Romeo, which by anyones standards are off the mark in terms of "best in class", fuel economy, residuals, part prices and reliability?

You're coming across - and by your own admission - as anti german car, moreso that pro japanese.

Surely thats just as prejudiced as someone being "pro german" in their car choice?

As I say in post #98 Paul, I don't think Fiat products are quite as bad as they are perceived to be, and used Alfa's can be bought very cheap.

It's not prejudice - that word derives from 'pre judging' - AGAIN, I've more direct experience with VW cars than anyone else on here.

TradePro

neilmcl wrote: »

So you decided to take no notice of my post where I stated I couldn't see an engine in Kia's range that matched the ones I was looking at for performance AND economy.

Is there a Kia Ceed engine, for example, that can match the figures of the VAG 1.4 TFSI petrol or the 2.0 (150ps) Tdi?
No, there are no direct equivalents in Kia's range sadly - but you have picked two particularly problematic engines there, it's not all about the performance/economy mix...

You mention the Kia 1.6 (126ps) diesel, does that compare favourably with the performance and economy of the Bluemotion Golfs 1.6 110ps? I don't think so.
Performance will be stronger I think (0-60 on diesels is not really relevant, assuming this is your measure - it's all about mid-range 'overtaking ability'), and there is no way those over-hyped MPG figures will be realised, have a read on some forums for confirmation.

Oh, and yes the Sportage does have a 184ps diesel but whilst the performance is OK, economy isn't and VED is high.
The Sportage is an SUV, and emissions are 158, a 140ps Tiguan is 150, so no train smash for Kia there IMO

I can't be bothered with any more than that ^

neilmcl

TradePro wrote: »

I can't be bothered with any more than that ^

Thats good news.

anotherbaldrick

TradePro wrote: »

I can't be bothered with any more than that ^

WHAT ! No more Trade Pro Kapok /

motorguy

TradePro wrote: »

Is this another Golf myth busted - that they hold their money well?

Most common or garden hatches will take that sort of a bath in the first year.

BUT specifically in my case, the mk7 golf went up in price, discounts arent as readily available on new ones yet and there arent any mk7's back in from the hire / lease companies yet. In a years time the difference will be less - more discount on a new one, and stronger values on the mk7

motorguy

TradePro wrote: »

there is no way those over-hyped MPG figures will be realised, have a read on some forums for confirmation.

My previous 2010 Passat 2.0 Bluemotion 2 averaged between 62-64mpg measured brim to brim, tank after tank (trip computer reading was +2 mpg above this)

My golf averaged 75.5 mpg on my 44 mile commute this morning and is telling me its averaged 64.4 mpg on the 350 miles so far this week since monday. This is from the trip computer, but it'll be v close to that at the weekend when i refill.

Granted, i do long steady runs but i would imagine if mine can do that and its a humble 1.6 105BHP then the bluemotion should be averaging north of 70mpg over the same runs.

TradePro

motorguy wrote: »

My previous 2010 Passat 2.0 Bluemotion 2 averaged between 62-64mpg measured brim to brim, tank after tank (trip computer reading was +2 mpg above this)

Honest John says;
http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/realmpg/volkswagen/passat-2005/20-tdi-bluemotion-technology

My golf averaged 75.5 mpg on my 44 mile commute this morning and is telling me its averaged 64.4 mpg on the 350 miles so far this week since monday. This is from the trip computer, but it'll be v close to that at the weekend when i refill.

Honest John says;
http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/realmpg/volkswagen/golf-vi-2009/16-tdi-105ps

Granted, i do long steady runs but i would imagine if mine can do that and its a humble 1.6 105BHP then the bluemotion should be averaging north of 70mpg over the same runs.

Now, can you please stop spouting sh*te in an attempt to undermine me.

VW/Audi vehicles are unreliable, overpriced cr*p, and EVIDENCE of this can be found all over. You can all try to defend the junk you have bought by creating anecdotes, but when you're sat in the rain on the hard shoulder waiting for the AA, don't forget who predicted it would happen. The day will DEFINITELY come when you will accept my first hand knowledge and experience, I'm moving on.

**waits for ensuing sarcasm**