Make a donation

Author Topic: beetle  (Read 5793 times)

Offline candy turbo

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 5
  • -Receive: 11
  • Posts: 1343
beetle
« on: November 19, 2011, 05:00:35 pm »
mrs candy decided to get cheaper car , put deposit on a 2.0 beetle ant thing i should check before handing over the cash ?
any one after a qashqui 1.5 dci tekna get in touch , cheers

Offline skard

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 5
  • -Receive: 245
  • Posts: 2674
  • My Ride: http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,62636
Re: beetle
« Reply #1 on: November 19, 2011, 05:04:53 pm »
Funny, I was going to put a thread like this up as toying with the idea of getting the mrs an older 'new' beetle, but it's hard giving up the 68mpg and £30 tax from her current HDi runaround.

Is it the 2.0 turbo version you're getting? Would be interested to hear what you think of it after a few weeks.

Will watch this with interest  :smiley:
Used to have Edition 30 - number 009 and a GT TDI 140.
Now have an S4 B8 Avant (stage 2)

Offline andrewparker

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 32
  • -Receive: 78
  • Posts: 1770
Re: beetle
« Reply #2 on: November 19, 2011, 05:09:52 pm »
I had one. Lasted about 5 months. It was terrible.

Offline candy turbo

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 5
  • -Receive: 11
  • Posts: 1343
Re: beetle
« Reply #3 on: November 19, 2011, 05:12:33 pm »
why , i drove it today and was well impressed with the drive, its a 2.0 8v , 02 reg , 1 owner 59 k miles

Offline markymark

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 21
  • -Receive: 55
  • Posts: 2369
Re: beetle
« Reply #4 on: November 19, 2011, 05:52:23 pm »
The 2.slow is a terrible engine, they drink oil and are very thirsty. My first NB was a 2ltr and there is no way I would have another. Check out here www.evvo.co.uk  :happy2:
I went from the 2ltr to the 2.3 V5 and tbh the V5 was probably better on fuel and certainly didn't drink oil.
« Last Edit: November 19, 2011, 06:04:15 pm by markymark »

Offline candy turbo

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 5
  • -Receive: 11
  • Posts: 1343
Re: beetle
« Reply #5 on: November 19, 2011, 05:56:10 pm »
The 2.slow is a terrible engine, they drink oil and are very thirsty. My first NB was a 2ltr and there is no way I would have another. Check out here www.evvo.co.uk  :happy2:
???

Offline candy turbo

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 5
  • -Receive: 11
  • Posts: 1343
Re: beetle
« Reply #6 on: November 19, 2011, 06:57:02 pm »
what are you comparing them to though , oil use varies from engine to engine , did nt feel slow to me and i drive one of the quickest hot hatches on the market

Offline skard

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 5
  • -Receive: 245
  • Posts: 2674
  • My Ride: http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,62636
Re: beetle
« Reply #7 on: November 19, 2011, 10:03:57 pm »
The 2.slow is a terrible engine, they drink oil and are very thirsty. My first NB was a 2ltr and there is no way I would have another. Check out here www.evvo.co.uk  :happy2:
I went from the 2ltr to the 2.3 V5 and tbh the V5 was probably better on fuel and certainly didn't drink oil.

Sorry to thread jack, but you'd rule out the 1.6 and 2.0 8v? I was looking more at the 1.8T, 2.0T and 2.3 - what sort of MPG did you get?
Used to have Edition 30 - number 009 and a GT TDI 140.
Now have an S4 B8 Avant (stage 2)

Offline markymark

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 21
  • -Receive: 55
  • Posts: 2369
Re: beetle
« Reply #8 on: November 19, 2011, 10:11:20 pm »
The 2.slow is a terrible engine, they drink oil and are very thirsty. My first NB was a 2ltr and there is no way I would have another. Check out here www.evvo.co.uk  :happy2:
I went from the 2ltr to the 2.3 V5 and tbh the V5 was probably better on fuel and certainly didn't drink oil.

Sorry to thread jack, but you'd rule out the 1.6 and 2.0 8v? I was looking more at the 1.8T, 2.0T and 2.3 - what sort of MPG did you get?
I think the 1.6 is probably the best of the small engine, the 1.4 is just very under powered for such a heavy car. I know when I had my 1.8T that was thirsty but that's probably cos it was remapped to 220 ish bhp. They didn't do a 2.0T, that will be offered in the latest NB. I cannot remember exactly what mpg I would get from the V5 but I know with the excellent performance and noise it was certainly worthwhile.

Offline Greeners

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 201
  • -Receive: 199
  • Posts: 8812
    • Email
Re: beetle
« Reply #9 on: November 19, 2011, 11:35:55 pm »
Can only echo what Mark has already said, worst engine in the line up by a long way. If it was cheap, you now know why!  :wink:

Ps, you did ask!  :rolleye:

Offline candy turbo

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 5
  • -Receive: 11
  • Posts: 1343
Re: beetle
« Reply #10 on: November 20, 2011, 02:05:04 pm »
thanks for your opinions guys  :scared:but what other vw could i buy for £2500 in immaculate condition 1 owner from new (they must be pretty happy with it )less than 60k miles with full vw s\h and more besides ?

Offline MAT ED30

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 25
  • -Receive: 82
  • Posts: 5728
  • Vwr fan boy
    • Email
Re: beetle
« Reply #11 on: November 20, 2011, 02:14:20 pm »
Don't he the 2.0 it's shocking in the mk4 golf go for the 1.8t. I would never have the 2.0 again it's that bad

Mods yes but way too many to stick in this little box

Offline skard

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 5
  • -Receive: 245
  • Posts: 2674
  • My Ride: http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,62636
Re: beetle
« Reply #12 on: November 20, 2011, 02:21:26 pm »
thanks for your opinions guys  :scared:but what other vw could i buy for £2500 in immaculate condition 1 owner from new (they must be pretty happy with it )less than 60k miles with full vw s\h and more besides ?

This is the opinion I have - could get a boring Polo for the same sort of money.

Surely as an A-B car for the missus the 2.0 would be fine, as she doesn't need/want too much performance?
Used to have Edition 30 - number 009 and a GT TDI 140.
Now have an S4 B8 Avant (stage 2)

Offline candy turbo

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 5
  • -Receive: 11
  • Posts: 1343
Re: beetle
« Reply #13 on: November 20, 2011, 02:53:01 pm »
thanks for your opinions guys  :scared:but what other vw could i buy for £2500 in immaculate condition 1 owner from new (they must be pretty happy with it )less than 60k miles with full vw s\h and more besides ?

This is the opinion I have - could get a boring Polo for the same sort of money.

Surely as an A-B car for the missus the 2.0 would be fine, as she doesn't need/want too much performance?
/quote]
exactly , the idea of the car is to buy some thing for the missus ,. she does about 5 miles a day to nursery and work 3 days a week i looked at loads of cars for this sort of money and its the best car i can buy , didnt want to get it a slagging just probs to look out for , its had the window fix which is the only prob i know about 

Offline candy turbo

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 5
  • -Receive: 11
  • Posts: 1343
Re: beetle
« Reply #14 on: November 20, 2011, 02:56:02 pm »
my first choice was the 1.8t but i know they are not good on petrol , insurance is lots higher and find me one with less than 120k miles for sub £3k