What is life like with your car? Let us know and win £500 in John Lewis vouchers | No thanks
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - JohnM{P}
Thought some of you be interested in a slightly belated mid-term report on my 2005 1.9TDI SE Golf MkV ? 30 months and 90k miles means I?m getting to know it.

So the immediate reaction from the usual gang will be ?VW ? loads must have gone wrong with it!? Er, sorry to disappoint, but the just the exterior temperature sensor failed (replaced swiftly under warranty), and one sidelight bulb that was working intermittently. That?s it. Nothing too drastic in my opinion, although when the temp sensor?s ever more pessimistic readings finally reached ?42degC, the heater unit computer decided that whatever the interior temp may be, the incoming air surely needed to heated to max? not so welcome in late summer.

The V is a great improvement over the 110 GT Tdi MkIV it replaced; roomier, more refined and quicker, despite it having a claimed 5bhp less. The V whistles round corners, whereas the IV was like wrestling a lazy, squealing pig. Not that either saw many corners compared to motorway miles, but the IV was truly noisy. The V is markedly better, but still not quiet ? not due to the engine, as popularly believed, but due mostly to road noise.

Which brings me to tyres? The oe Continental 2 fronts lasted 43k; they were replaced with Conti(no number)s, which lasted 29k ? same usage. The current Michelins seem to be long lasting, 5mm still left after 18k. The rears? Still original, 4mm of tread left, so will see out 100k plus. There was little difference in road noise between the Michelins and the Contis. According to the ADAC tyre test for my 195/60x15s, the only tyre appreciably quieter than the rest was the Pirelli ? but it was also appreciably the least economical?.

The car is on longlife servicing (it?s a lease car). First service came up as due at 18600 miles, which happens to be 30k km. I had used just the litre of longlife liquid gold that had come with the car ? and it wasn?t on minimum/empty when it was changed, either! 10k miles later, I got a suction unit and changed the (majority of the) oil with more longlife. The result? The service due came up again at 18600 miles?
Events meant that I didn?t do a mid change the next time ? to my amazement the service due did not come at the expected 18,600. Having rtfm, I found that it was forecasting the service due at 23k miles; I got it serviced at the 18,600 nevertheless.
The next service came up at 18,600 miles again.
From this I conclude that the 30k is a dealer-entered limit (and was incorrectly set or just overlooked for the 23k time) and is occurring before the 'oil quality sensor' believes the oil requires changing. As the majority of journeys are 70 (mostly motorway) miles each way and I don?t rev it hard until the engine is fully warm, I guess the oil does have a comparatively easy life.

Why did you go for the 1.9Tdi and not the 2.0TDi, I hear you ask? Cost, both extra leasing charges and benefit in kind, plus the GT Tdi came with 16in wheels and I wanted the quietest ride. (I was given a 2.0Fsi on 18in wheels as a courtesy car once ? the racket they made was heard all too clearly within 100 yards, literally. A lovely fun car ? for 5 miles of bends, then jolly tiring).

Pundits complain about the cheaper quality of the MkV compared to the MkIV ? all I can say is that despite the MkIV having had leather (I didn?t spec that car, I took it over at 20k and took it to 99k), I didn?t feel short changed at all. Although the seats don?t seem so comfy initially, they are much kinder to my poor old back than the leather sports seats were.

There is a trace of turbo lag that was absent in the 110Tdis that I ran, however I now recall that the 90bhp Tdis (Audi80 and old Passat) had a similar slight lag ? I presume that the variable vane turbo in the 110 eliminated this.

Some observations on features and options:
- auto interior mirror: excellent, I only notice it when it?s not working (when the passenger map light foils the sensor)
- auto windscreen wipers: usually quite good, but cannot handle mist or fine spray ? I?d rather have intermittent capability
- auto headlights: very good, they even operate in those ?coming out of the low sun? on bright mornings. Would be very useful in Switzerland to ensure headlights are on in the tunnels?
- foglamps: I got them as emergency illumination in case of headlamp bulb failure (as MkIV bulbs difficult to change, MkV bulbs appear to be easier to change (but have to unbolt rear light clusters to get to bulbs!)), otherwise waste of space.
- rear seats fold without having to remove headrests (MkIV hassle), but squabs are fixed, therefore floor not truly flat when folded
- tailgate no longer lockable (questionable usefulness in a hatch)
- the std semi-automatic aircon does as least a good a job of maintaining a steady interior temperature as the climate control units in the MKIV, ?S? reg Audi A4 and the LagunaII Tourer that I?ve had, so that was money well saved. (The ?97 Passat?s Climatic was pure set?n?forget though ? excellent)
- the RDS Traffic announcements still work when listening to AM; the radio can be set to store the announcements so I can check the state of the M4 before joining it in morning and evening.
- I?m still not sure what the enhanced multi-function computer gave me exactly, although I can alter the auto anti-hijack door locking/unlocking and central locking control of single/all doors and window opening via the menus, instead of having to visit the dealer.
- The sunvisors, having been swivelled to the doors, can be extended to the back of the door for those times when the sun is at 2 to 3 o?clock
- It?s only needed a couple of tiny paint chips touching up on the bonnet (though the windscreen has survived a couple hits from large stones)
- ESP standard, never know when you might need it, but
- Traction control ? that?s what your right foot is for?
- Cambelt and tensioner changed at 80k, as per service schedule.


My only regret is that it hasn?t a 6-speed gearbox; PoloGirl recently reported that she can get over 600 miles on a tank in her Sport, if driven carefully, which is more than I?ve ever managed.

Still, 90k for just 4 tyres, 2 sets of wiper blades and a sidelight bulb, at 52.25mpg (brim to brim over the total distance), I mustn?t grumble?

JohnM

{edit to remove double reference of car make/model in header-DD}

Edited by Dynamic Dave on 04/12/2007 at 00:54

Golf MkV 105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - PoloGirl
" My only regret is that it hasn?t a 6-speed gearbox; PoloGirl recently reported that she can get over 600 miles on a tank in her Sport, if driven carefully, which is more than I?ve ever managed. "

Only once I think! It's normally more like 550, but then, it does get a hammering on the way to work most mornings on the deserted road I travel on. It has been as low as 460 - even I was embarassed at that! Fairs much better on the motorway if I have to go somewhere else.

I hate the MkIV, so you're spot on in my opinion with most of what you say about it. One of the reasons I didn't get the SE was because I wanted the more supportive seats. I recall the SE seats being like armchairs - have they gone squidy over time or are they still ok?

I didn't go for the GT for exactly the same reason as you. Before Gunther's first service (which also came up just before 19000) I was really regretting it, but they did something to the ECU on a recall while he was in, and I'm happy with him now.

You've done better than me on the windscreen and tyres front. My windscreen has an ever growing crack in it thanks to a stone, that can't be fitted in to be fixed until Wednesday, and the front tyres are just about on the limit at 24k. They're Hankook (?) at the moment, but the leasing company has changed hands and now only fits Michelins, so we shall see.

The only fault I've had with mine in 16 months is the top of the gear lever came out, but that was more thanks to me fiddling than anything else. And the small fact that I'm jealous that just after I got mine, they brought out the Golf Match, which came with an ipod kit as standard, whereas I had to pay to get one fitted, and it's rubbish!

In summary, I'd say I'm not in love (nothing could really replace Polo), but it's a decent car. The only issue I have is that the dimpled rubber in the cubby holes and door bins clings to dirt and grime, and makes it look a state within days of being cleaned out... but as the cleaning out doesn't happen very often it's not a huge issue!
Golf MkV 105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - colinh
Have a Golf MkV 2.0 TDi DSG - Aug 2005 - approx. 57,000 kms

Mainly motorway driving on cruise control - long-term average 50.3 mpg but oedometer is 1% over-reading. Regularly do 950 km journey across Spain on less than a tankful
Delivered without adjustable lumbar support to drivers seat - passenger has it
Problem with ignition lock, replaced under warranty - LHD car, therefore there is a tendency to bring the key out at an angle, as the lock on right of steering column is close to central console
Have the random intermittent rear wiper which has been a "feature" of Golfs - not big enough a problem to get it changed
Don't like the "shouldered" dipstick - reading oil levels is inprecise. Grandfather's solution of straight rod with two notches was better
Have 8 tunnels on last 100km of my regular journey, and can confirm usefulness of auto headlights
Foglights waste of space

New Focus with DSG box is going to be very tempting as a replacement
Golf MkV 105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - Mad Maxy
V interesting reports. Thanks!
Golf MkV 105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - Altea Ego
As far as I know, 105 TDis dont have an "oil quality sensor" what they do have is two modes

Longlife and fixed.

Fixed is as it says, and longlife is where it assumes you put longlife oil in, and is supposed to check number of short journeys/cold starts etc and calculate a figure.

It nearly always calculates 18,500, and never knows what oil you put in or what its like.
------
< Ulla>
Golf MkV 105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - ForumNeedsModerating
It nearly always calculates 18,500, and never knows what oil you put in or what its like

Yeah. I used to think there was some super-duper opacity/viscosity sensor doing all sorts to calculate the next service point on the 3 VAG 1.9 PD 'variable service' engined cars I've owned - but was told (independently, by 2 mechanics) that it's a simple consumption/distance calculation with the 'variable service' toggle toggled or not (for simple mileage service)

Are there any genuinely sophisticated mechanical and/or electronic methods for calculating intervals on 'variable service frequency' engines?
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - quizman
JohnM and PG how dare you come onto this site telling us how good your VWs have been. Everone knows only snobs and imbeciles buy such badly made terrible rust bucket cars. You should have bought a Skoda they are much more accepable to the readers of this site. You will be telling us next that you read the Daily Mail.





Just joking of course, I'm delighted that you have had a good time with your Golf and that I am not the only satisfied VW owner. I hope this shuts up the VW knockers, but I doubt it.
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - Pendlebury
You beat me to it quizman.

I am not VAG's biggest fan as some of you may have gathered but it is good to see them giving good service to people.
Reliability is my number 1 requirement when buying a car and I still think they have a long way to go to catch the likes of Honda - BUT I am genuinely please when I read reports such as this as I think VW styling is very good and I also think that the huge improvement in interiors in the Golf class is down to VW. The irony being that they focused too much on perceived quality rather than actual quality. What grates at me is that the VAG group deliberatley make Seats and Skoda's with less quality than a VW inside when if they were left to manage themsleves they could deliver better quality at the same prices - but that would challenge the VW brand too much.
I have to say that if the quality and reliability continues to improve I would consider one myself.
I'm off to lie down now for a couple of hours after saying that.
Excellent feedback by the way.
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - quizman
When Skoda managed themselves I seem to remember the Estelle. Didn't it have a heated rear screen so you didn't get your hands cold when giving it a push start?
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - Pendlebury
I think that was more Skoda being managed by the commies.
When they were managing themselves Skoda were a premium brand - but that is going back a long time.
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - Altea Ego
What grates at me is that the VAG group
deliberatley make Seats and Skoda's with less quality than a VW inside when if they
were left to manage themsleves they could deliver better quality at the same prices -


Thats rubbish pendles. I had a VW touran and a new Skoda Octavia side by side and the interior quality on thye skoda was HIGHER than the Touran, in fit feel and materials
------
< Ulla>
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - Pugugly {P}
Same here, Skoda and VW compare very favourably to Skoda's advantage......
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - ForumNeedsModerating
Same here, Skoda and VW compare very favourably to Skoda's advantage......

My experience also - in fact the Skoda Superb Eleg. I had a couple or so years ago, compared nicely with recent the Audi A4/6's I had - not quite the amount of soft-touch plastic & damped grab handles (I know, I know 'perceived' quality..) but equally nice ambience - less 'stuffy' in a way. The Skoda is/was also miles above my current C-class - I can't wait to see their new Superb in 2008.
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - Pendlebury
So why are people prepared to pay more for a VW or Audi then when they are the same platform and component parts and now Skoda are producing better quality interiors ?
Is it the image which suggests they pay more because they are worried about what people think about them?
Serious question by the way - I don't want this to turn into the usual Skoda VW banter - the statements above add a different dimension to this for me.

Edited by Pendlebury on 04/12/2007 at 20:32

105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - PoloGirl
For me (and I really did agonise between Fabia vRS and the Golf)...

1. The Golf was more value for money (a lot more car for only a little more per month) due to the fact that the leasing company ordered so many Golfs and the residuals were better.

2. Preferred the styling of the Golf (vRS didn't come in a 3 door)

3. The finish and style of the interior (the vRS was MkIV Golf at best, and an old model)

4. The better spec available on the Golf

For sheer driving fun the vRS would have won hands down, but the Golf was the sensible choice (I think...ask me tomorrow and you may get a different answer)!
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - cjehuk
So why are people prepared to pay more for a VW or Audi then when
they are the same platform and component parts and now Skoda are producing better quality
interiors ?

In all honesty I pay the extra for the Audi over the Skoda because:
1. I think the car itself aesthetically looks much nicer
2. The Audi interior and materials feel and look more classy than the Skoda even though the Skoda wears as well and is not bad by any stretch of the imagination
3. The handling is better in the Audi
4. Skoda don't offer the engines I desire. I can't for example get an A4 Avant 3.0TDI equivalent from Skoda
5. Residual values are good. My A3 was bought for £19k and sold 44k and 3.5 years later for £11.5k, that's a pretty small hit for a so called premium car.
6. Call me a snob but I like the Audi image of being quietly understated

If I was buying a car to get from A to B I'd buy a Skoda no question. For me though, parting with that much money (and yes, even Perodua Kelisa money is "that much") the car has to make me feel good and I have to love it. Every time I got out of the A3 or now out of the TT I have a smile on my face and when I get in them and drive I have a smile. When I get out of a work Skoda Fabia hire car I have a feeling that I just travelled but it wasn't a memorable thing, I didn't enjoy the journey.

It's lucky we have choice in the world, I'd hate to be stuck buying a soulless car.
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - quizman
Pendlebury you are in the wrong thread. Go to the VW badge snob one.


105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - Pendlebury
Oh I've been there as well quizman - don't worry :-)

Edited by Pendlebury on 05/12/2007 at 17:49

105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - ForumNeedsModerating
So why are people prepared to pay more for a VW or Audi then when they are the same platform and component parts and now Skoda are producing better quality interiors ?

Well, it's not just about comparable interiors imho - VW/Audi produce a much larger range.
From the ultimate 'Bentley' Phaeton/R8 to the Fox. Seat & Skoda have a more limited repetoire
& a more limited palette to colour their range. If you want a 4l quattro is Audi/VW or nothing. That 'glamour' must rub off on the the lesser types - so an A4 is more desirable than a Passat , which in turn is more desirable than a Superb/Octavia.

For example, I fancied a change from my Merc c-class - I wanted more pace,space, 'build' quality & 4x4 ability , sooo, I've been looking at spec'ed up A6 diesel quattros - if Skoda had an equivalent, I'd certainly be looking at that too - but they don't.
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - Pat L
cjeh - nicely put. For many of us there's more to car ownership than simple reliability, and when we spend £15-20k (or more) we want 'something' in return, some sort of pleasure which we don't get from certain brands/models.

Good old Jeremy Clarkson once said in reference to people choosing bland Japanaese cars because they're reliable "That's like marrying someone because they're punctual!" Says it all IMO!
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - DP
Nice report, and good to see a car giving its owner good service.

Cheers
DP
--
04 Grand Scenic 1.9 dCi Dynamique
00 Mondeo 1.8TD LX
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - cheddar
Nice report and good to see a car giving its owner good service.


Agreed, though interesting contrast with this thread:
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?f=4&t=57...0

Also I have to say that IMO the same mileage in a similar costing Focus 2.0 D would have been much more pleasurable and probably just as reliable. The Focus would be just as entertaining to drive from a handling perspective, almost infinately more refined, much more punchy and just as economical.

Good car the Golf Mk V, though the diesel engines let it down, now a GTi - hmmm.
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - Pendlebury
>>Good old Jeremy Clarkson once said in reference to people choosing bland Japanaese cars because they're reliable "That's like marrying someone because they're punctual!" Says it all IMO! <<


Oh well if Mr Clarkson said it then it must be true and I must be wrong :-)

So does that make buying an unreliable car like marrying someone because you like someone to let you down all the time - or they like hanging around on street corners - much like an unrelaible car might ??

Edited by Pendlebury on 05/12/2007 at 17:55

105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - Pat L
Pendlebury - you seem to be taking this very personally, and I can assure you there's no malicious intent on my part. I just think it's interesting to explore the whole notion of people's perception of quality, reliability and ownership satisfaction in relation to cars (and other consumer goods).

It seems to me that the argument for Japanese cars rests squarely on their reliability, and I don't doubt that they probably are more reliable than other cars, but by what sort of margin? Most cars are very reliable today and I base this on my observation as I drive around. I rarely see a car broken down and awaiting assistance (and the ones I do see almost invariably have punctures). The way some people on this forum go on about 'unreliable '' cars you'd expect the hard shoulders and verges to be littered with cars that have given up the ghost, and the roads to be clogged up with tow trucks and low loaders carrying off these unreliable beasts (obviously most of them of VAG origin).

So yes, if out-and-out reliability is important to you, fair enough, buy Japanese. I just don't think the real differences (in terms of percentages) are that great. And other factors such as build quality, style and (importantly) residuals play a bigger part in our buying decisions.

Incidentally, I've tried to buy Japanese (in both cases Honda) but couldn't do it for various reasons, the main one being not actually liking the car Id been led to believe was so wonderful! And I'm sorry if I appear foolish but when spending £18-20k I would actually prefer to LIKE the car in terms of design, style etc.

As always, each to their own.

Pat
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - Pendlebury
Apologies Pat if it read like I was taking it personally - that was not the case - I was just returning the banter.
I think the thing with reliability is that like most things it is relative.
You stand more chance of being let down by a European brand than you do a Jap brand (although I'm not too sure about Toyota at the mo).
I know you are a fan of the german brands and if you look at the latest reliability survey then it reads as it does every year- Honda 1st in terms of reliability, VW 15th & Audi 20th. So you clearly bought in the knowledge that you would not get the best quality product but as long as you are happy then that is all that matters.
I consider the Accord to be a good car because I get the reliability, if you forget the soft plastic nonsense then I would suggest that build quality is way above the german brands, it has 190bhp and fully independent multi link suspension all round (not even BMW provide that) and it all makes for an excellent driving package.
As you say each to their own and getting back to the OP I think it's great that John has had very good service from his Golf.
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - alfalfa
Reliability surveys may vary from source to source. TUV reports actually show little difference between Honda Accord and VW Golf. The Honda is slightly better but this might not come under the heading of statistically significant. The site allows you to compare different models for reliability www.anusedcar.com. Opel Meriva is current favourite.

alfalfa
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - Avant
VW Golf 2.0 TDI estate - 5,600 very enjoyable miles so far without trouble: I'll report in full whe we get to 10,000. The Mark IV estate that I had between 2001 and 2004 was equally reliable.

Like PoloGirl, I too very nearly had a Skoda: if I'd wanted the hatch rather than the estate, I'd have had an Octavia. For reasons known only to VW, you can have the 2.0 TDI hatch only as a GT Sport, costing nearly £2,000 more than an Octavia Elegance. But the estate comes as an SE at more or less the same price as the Octavia Elegance estate - and I think it'll hold its value a bit better.
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - JohnM{P}
Apologies for so long in replying - my home computer died shortly after my post, only just got around to replacing it. Happy New Year to you all!

PG - the front seats have not gone squidgy (but I won't describe them as armchairs either), still comfy, no signs of wear.

Cheddar - the Focus may well be even better in the handling stakes, but as the copy of WhatCar? in the dentist's waiting room reported that the Golf was easily the best in refinement in the group test, and noting the many posts regarding road noise on Focuses, I'm pleased I chose the Golf, considering the time I spend in it. The 1.9TDi is certainly less refined than the 1.9 Laguna II I had, but I would not describe it as unrefined per se (nor lacking in punch)

In my post, I said the oe tyres were Conti 2s; correction, they were Conti 3s. At its current rate of wear the original rear offside tyre will still be on the car when cockroaches return to rule the world...

I've had to replace the same sidelight again; it's had its first MOT (early) at 98k without problems. After a valet, it could take a 70k haircut and most people would be none the wiser!

The big question will be whether to buy it when the lease expires at the end of the year - I presume it doesn't have the high maintenance front suspension of the Passat - but that decision doesn't have to be made for a while yet (and can be the subject of another post)!
105TDi - the first 30/90 (months/k miles) - boxsterboy
Glad to hear of happy Golf V owners. A mate has the 1.9 with the DSG box that is close to 100k, no problems. I had a test in a 170 DSG and that gearbox would tempt me to buy a VW again, I think.