# VW Golf 1.6 vs 1.4



## Sagairt (15 Nov 2007)

VW Golf 1.6 vs 1.4 
Going to buy one or other of these in the new year.
Can anyone tell me if there is significant difference in the 1.6 for poke/power etc
Have driven the 1.4 and have found it sluggish for its size.


----------



## Caveat (15 Nov 2007)

I believe the 1.6 provides a noticeable difference in acceleration.

Think 1.4 is only 75bhp (Micra is better!) but 1.6 might be 115? Not completely sure though


----------



## bacchus (15 Nov 2007)

Anything usefull in this thread ?


----------



## Sagairt (15 Nov 2007)

thanks for the reminder.

looked at the 1.4 turbo already. too expensive (4k more than 1.4) and im not quite looking for the strong acceleartion power of the turbo either
just a decision between 1.4 or 1.6 now and just need advice from someone who has driven both.


----------



## sinbadsailor (15 Nov 2007)

I'd go for the 1.6 as the 1.4 engine in a car as heavey as the golf means there is no real performance at all. To overtake safely etc you need a moderate amount of acceleration without having to chang gears etc an the 1.4 Golf just doesn't have it. BHp comparisions in cars with these engines can not really be used IMHO.

1.6 all the way


----------



## RS2K (15 Nov 2007)

1.6 always. 

p.s. Focus Zetec is a better car, and better value too.


----------



## MalMc (15 Nov 2007)

1.6 might be a lot harder to shift when you want to sell it on though. Its something worth keeping in mind. Plus with the new taxation rates affecting 1.6 upwards, that could affect it too.


----------



## kennyFTB (15 Nov 2007)

Would rec 1.6 as well m8. Drove both in relation to the focus Zetec and 1.4 wasa bit sluggish all right


----------



## Guest120 (15 Nov 2007)

MalMc said:


> 1.6 might be a lot harder to shift when you want to sell it on though. Its something worth keeping in mind. Plus with the new taxation rates affecting 1.6 upwards, that could affect it too.


The '1.6' is < 1600cc though.


----------



## Caveat (15 Nov 2007)

Bluetonic said:


> The '1.6' is < 1600cc though.


 
What do you mean - is it 1590 or something?


----------



## Guest120 (15 Nov 2007)

Caveat said:


> What do you mean - is it 1590 or something?


I think it's [SIZE=-1]1598.

The 1.4 is [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]1390.[/SIZE]


----------



## mollser (15 Nov 2007)

I read this all the time about the 1.4golf, as recently as yesterday in the IT - I've a 3 door sportline and I think it goes pretty quickly actually, when driven on your own. 

I actually think at main road/motorway speeds it accelerates pretty quickly making overtaking a breeze.

I will qualify that by saying I do most of my driving with max 1 passenger in the car - I suspect if you will be regularly driving a family/full boot etc you may well need the 1.6l.

Anyway, top choice on the Golf, you won't be dissapointed, especially with resale values


----------



## Stephenkelly (15 Nov 2007)

Have driven doth and 1.4 is a dog - 1.6 moves nicely


----------



## werner (16 Nov 2007)

mollser said:


> I read this all the time about the 1.4golf, as recently as yesterday in the IT - I've a 3 door sportline and I think it goes pretty quickly actually, when driven on your own.
> 
> I actually think at main road/motorway speeds it accelerates pretty quickly making overtaking a breeze.
> 
> ...


 
1.4 is far too slow with very poor torque, you will probably get better mpg from the 1.6 as well

If you can hold out try the new (in Ireland) turbocharged 1.4 varients


----------



## RS2K (16 Nov 2007)

mollser said:


> I read this all the time about the 1.4golf, as recently as yesterday in the IT - I've a 3 door sportline and I think it goes pretty quickly actually, when driven on your own.
> 
> I actually think at main road/motorway speeds it accelerates pretty quickly making overtaking a breeze.
> 
> ...



1.4 Golf (or Focus) are pretty slow. Genuinely. The slightly bigger engine really helps in overtaking particularly. Loading makes little odds.

Golfs (and all VW's) are overpriced, and are not particularly reliable either. Service costs are horrific too.


----------



## RMCF (17 Nov 2007)

Wife drives a 1.4 Golf and to be honest it wouldn't pull you out of bed.


----------



## Guest125 (18 Nov 2007)

Maybe you're a heavy sleeper!! I wouldn't touch the 1.4 either unless you were needing the small engine to get teenagers as named drivers otherwise I'd go with the 1.6


----------



## Tedward (18 Nov 2007)

I drive a 2005 1.6 golf (102 bhp - not FSI) - very happy with it - good acceleration and great economy (700-750km per tank). Good solid car. My wife drives a 1.6 focus zetec. For a comparison - the golf has more go (especially acceleration between 90-100km acceleration) - and I think better economy. Ford spec is probably slightly better but VW are catching up. Golf is much better build quality and will hold value better. Never driven a 1.4 golf but suspect that would be sluggish, and you would need to be dropping gears to overtake - where as in 1.6 5th is lively.


----------



## SOM42 (18 Nov 2007)

I don't think there is any argument for the 1.4.  The wife has one and to be honest its not a bad car but the 1.6 would be so much better.  There is absolutley no power for overtaking and fuel economy is not great.  1.6 everytime!


----------



## RMCF (18 Nov 2007)

I hope my post didn't suggest I didn't like the Golf 1.4.

It is a great car, well built and plenty of extras. Totally reliable too.

But I just think its too heavy for a 1.4 engine and definitely would not recommend this engine size. The car, definitely.

Once you get up to speed its a very comfortable cruiser, but as many have said a poor overtaker.


----------



## mollser (20 Nov 2007)

RS2K said:


> Golfs (and all VW's) are overpriced, and are not particularly reliable either. Service costs are horrific too.



Agreed, however their resale values more than make for it...


----------



## Sagairt (20 Nov 2007)

Great response. Decision made 1.6 it is. thanks for the advice.


----------



## RS2K (20 Nov 2007)

mollser said:


> Agreed, however their resale values more than make for it...



I don't agree.


----------

