I started a thread a few weeks ago about the best cars for legroom, but I'm wondering about the old shaped Golfs. I am looking at going to see a G reg 1.3 Golf and want to know what they are like for legroom?
It sounds good. I think 100,000 miles on the clock is good for a Golf isn't it?
|
Only ever been the driver or front seat passenger in a Mk2 golf so not sure on rear legroom - if it is a 3dr they can be difficult to gain access to the rear seats though.
whilst 100,000 on a 15 year old golf is lower than average the 1.3 is very underpowered in the golf - if you are planning on regularly having more than just yourself in it you would be better off looking for a more powerful varient. Whilst thinking on it will probably not have power steering either and that will mean the steering is very heavy at slow speeds like when manouvering into parking spaces.
|
They're OK - about the same as other cars of a similar vintage (Escort/Astra etc). It's just that cars have become so much larger - a Mk 2 Golf looks like a different class of car compared to a new Golf.
Agree with the other comments. A 1.3 will be VERY slow. Sturdy old cars if you can find a half-decent one though.
|
I'd a 4 speed 1.3 on loan and it seemed less of a slug than the 1.6 Driver I eventually owned.Lower gearing maybe?
Heavy steering is the main draw back.
--
I wasna fu but just had plenty.
|
Legroom OK for normal sized adults, yes it's slow in comparison to most modern cars but it will do 70 on the motorway and doesn't hold traffic up on other roads.
Steering weight is very sensitive to tyre pressures make sure they are at the top end of normal and you should be OK.
Well put together little cars we have had ours for 17 years, firstly as SWMBO's car and more recently as the kids' practice car & first runabout.
|
|
That confirms what I've heard about them being very slow, but I'm in London and just looking for a runabout. I was even looking at Old 1 litre Polos so it can't be any slower than that. Anyway, I'm a bit longer than your normal adult so I hope my legs won't be up by the steering wheel.
|
|
Taller people who have driven ours over the years haven't complained. Don't know how someone of similar height would do in the back behind a tall driver.
|
My Dad's quite a big man and 6ft 4 to boot. He had a mark 2 GTi and loved it. He's quite intolerant of small spaces so I'm guessing there's enough.
--
Adam
|
|
I am 6ft 2 and have had several mk 2 golf gti's. No problem with leg or headroom for me.
|
As it happened the legroom was fairly cramped for me, but I guess I fell for the car and am prepared to put up with a bit of discomfort. I got it for 250 quid, but it will need an MOT next month. I'm not mechanically minded and forgot to do some of the checks under the wheel arches and for exhaust fumes.
I checked the radiator and oil cap. There was a little bit of white smoke when I opened the oil cap, but I didn't know if this was a danger sign. Maybe it's overheating. (my dad reckons it could be a gasket)
There was certainly no mayonnaise or anything. Maybe I've bought a car that is gonna have problems, but I was never gonna get an AA inspection for an old banger so I suppose it was worth taking a chance.
|
|
Too late now, but I've only just seen this thread. Mark 2 and 4 Golfs were average for rear legroom, but for some reason the Mark 3s were much better. This may help others perhaps.
|
I use to have an F-registered 1.3 four-speed Jetta which had plenty of leg room (I'm six foot) both front and rear, probably because the seats were not as well bolstered as later models.
I bought it in 1992 with 66,500 miles on the clock and part-exchanged it for a 1990 big bumper 1.6 TX in 1995 (with 52,400 miles on the clock) only because I wanted a big more oomph for overtaking.
But the 1.3 engine proved surprising pokey in normal use and the car would happily cruise at an indicated 80mph on the M6...:-)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
I know for a fact I have a disproportionate amount of my height in my legs so that's why people of 6 foot and 6ft 2 seem to say these cars have plenty of room when I find it to be different.
Regarding the 1.3 engines. A lot of people were talking about the 1.3 Golf being sluggish and maybe it is for them, but having owned only a 1.3 Maestro and a Ford Sierra in the past it seemed fine to me today.
I think I broke that golden rule today about falling in love with a car and letting it cloud your judgement. I Just loved the feel of it, what a solid car. Anyway someone just put my mind at rest by telling me the smoke I seen under the oil cap may just be an oil breather problem. I'm a Golf enthusiast already :)
|
Glad to hear you're happy with your Golf, franco.
Are you sure it was smoke you saw coming from the oil filler cap, or was it just steam? If it was just steam, then that?s ok. But even if it was smoke and found to be the breather, then it shouldn't be too expensive to remedy. My '93 Polo had a perished breather, and I had a new one supplied and fitted for less than £50. If you fit it yourself, it would probably save you quite a bundle.
I think the small VW units aren't as slow as people would expect. They often have short gearing which helps. My Polo has the short stroke version of your engine, (1.05) and because it?s mated to a 4 speed 'box, it allows the engine to spin more freely.
Hope you have many happy miles out of it.
|
That's something I'll have to look at Roberson, but I think the smoke, even though there was a small amount, was a bit too white and dense to be steam.
I was reading on the Bangernomics site that the Oil breather can be an awkward job to do, although I think it's worse for Polos. Also I got some advice from a VW Mechanic to just run the car as normal and check the levels once a week. I'm not sure about that though. I suppose it depends if the smoke gets worse, but if I knew there was a problem with the breather I'd rather just get it done straight away.
|
