What is life like with your car? Let us know and win £500 in John Lewis vouchers | No thanks
VW Mk4 Diesel - B747

Hi all

The Honest John VW Golf Mk4 reviews appears to paint a relatively harrowing picture - and the car receives an extremely poor 2/5 stars.

Yet, when I speak to mechanics, specifically regarding the PD engines, all they have is praise. Can someone perhaps clarify the situation for me please as the 2/5 stars does not appear to match the praise given eleswhere.

Is this an old style overengineered VW or just a lemon?

Appreciate your input.

VW Mk4 Diesel - gfewster

The PD range are very good engines. Excellent performance and economy (55-60mpg in ordinary driving, 60+ on a long run) and much more robust that the latest generation of diesel engines, being as they were without suspect technologies such as common rail injection, diesel particulate filters and dual-mass flywheels. Many people consider them to be the 'high point' of diesel engineering in production cars.

The Mk IV Golf itself however was widely considered disappointing. Although it drove well enough, it had too many random little niggly problems and overall just didn't have the quality people had come to expect of VW. It was around this time that Ford were really upping their game in terms of quality, and the equivalent year Focus was undoubtedly a better car - thus toppling VW's dominance in the hatchback arena. Used residuals on Mk IV Golfs are still relatively high, but because of perceived VW quality rather than actual quality.

Those engines are much better in the Passats of similar vintage. Passats didn't hold their values nearly so much (basically because they're not as 'cool' as a Golf) and hence represent a much better used buy.

Edited by gfewster on 26/01/2011 at 17:03

VW Mk4 Diesel - 659FBE

Skoda Superbs are an even better used buy than the old Passat - about as uncool as it's possible to go. They have more room and equipment per unit cost.

All PDs have dual mass flywheels which are not generally unreliable unless abused or unless you park the thing in gear with locked-in torque in the transmission.

The 1.9 PD was indeed the high point in diesel engine development - avoid the 2.0.

659.

VW Mk4 Diesel - unthrottled

Some of the 2.0 were PD. The 1.9 150 TDI weren't as reliable as the lower powered ones. The 1.9 130 PD seemed to have the best blend of power and durability and are the most sought after.

Don't be too alarmed by the DPF hysteria-DPF is an added complication, but most drivers don't experience problems. The old adage that you need to drive 15-20000 miles a year to warrant a diesel is good advice. A 130hp diesel is not the best tool for pottering down to the shops.

VW Mk4 Diesel - SteveLee

Mk4s are reasonably reliable, but have pretty poor suspension setups by modern standards, a bit like a Mk VI Ford Escort (though not as bad) under damped to the point where they are neither comfortable nor good handlers for a similar reason to the Escort - body rigidity was poor - despite the rather hefty kerb-weight. To reduce squeaks and rattles VW had to soften the damping to reduce "thump" loads to the body. Stodgy to drive and uninpiring, the Focus of the era is much the better car. Indeed most hatches around the time match or better the Golf dynamically. They're not bad cars just an old (chassis) design stretched too far.