The Mk. 4 Volkswagen Golf

O

ne of my ex-bosses is a bit of a Muppet. When his company car was up for renewal, he wanted something that would keep him young, would be a bit sporty, but reasonably good on fuel so he didn’t have to worry about dropping his P11D fuel benefit.

So instead, he chose a Golf V5 - the original 10 valve, 150 PS version. Let me just clarify this for the readers: he decided to get himself a sporty Golf because he wanted to remain young.

He shouldn’t have gone for a Golf, but the Seat Leon, but if he had to get the VW, he should have taken the GT-TDI version.

I didn’t understand the appeal of the 2·3 V5 on paper. Yes, it was quick, having the 150 PS engine, but it wasn’t as quick as the GTI-T. Yes, it had slightly firmer suspension than the 1·4 and 1·6 litre petrol models, but not as firm or controlled as the GTI-T nor as supple as the lesser models: basically, it wallowed quicker. It also guzzled petrol with a Euromix figure of 30 mpg, and whilst the engine offered lots of low down heave, it had less than the more powerful TDI models. It was well specified, but cost more than a similarly specified TDI model and didn’t come with a leather interior as standard.

After the first time I drove the V5, I still didn’t understand the appeal over the other models. Sure, the climate control was nice, but drive it with any sort of enthusiasm and economy dropped to around 22 mpg (according the onboard computer). On a long run at the speed limit, I managed 36 mpg (my boss never managed better than 30 mpg because he cannot cruise, he has to be either accelerating or braking). Compared to the Mondeo TD I had at the time, the Golf was no quieter at a cruise of 70 mph, which is rather damming of the Golf.

I did like the interior ambience, and the blue dash lights do look clever, but the daft centre arm rest intrudes too much, and given that I was on target for my own car I had a few extended test drives at the Norwich Volkswagen dealership. The base 1·4 petrol has the same interior ambience.

This base model 1·4E, which comes with ABS but precious little else. To my surprise, the engine didn’t feel as bad as I was expecting. Sure, it’s just a 1·4, but it is surprisingly tractable. I also tried the SDI model, with a 1·9 litre “atmo” diesel. I was disappointed: it was somewhat rough and noisy at idle, and on the move didn’t really seem to settle down. Very economical, though, just not very refined. The dealership noted my disappointment and let me take a TDI90 out for a spin - a big improvement on the SDI - but disagreed with the price tag, and the way it drove: too much roll on the twisty stuff.

I’ve also tried the TDI 115 engine, but in the Bora rather than the Golf. I preferred the Bora to the Golf, since it feels quite a bit tidier in the bends, and thought that this six speed TDI was the version to have. Unfortunately, the price tag made it appear especially poor value.

The new Golf TDI 130 isn’t as economical as the TDI 115 and the chassis struggles to cope with the power. I’d expect the TDI 150 to be worse, although apparently it’s the best handling Golf. That’s not too difficult!

I really wanted to like the Golf. On a brief test drive, you appreciate the quality of the car and it’s true that if you have one for a while, you appreciate this aspect more and more. It’s just that the quality of the drive is second rate. Of the class, the Golf is easily out-driven by the Astra and the Focus. I admit that for most people, this probably won’t be an issue, but if I were buying a three year old car, I could spend a lot less on a Focus compared to a Golf.

I like the 1·4 litre engine, the TDIs, the strong residual values, interior space and standard ABS.

I dislike the stodgy handling, the V5’s fuel economy, the pointless centre arm rest, the price when new and the middle aged image.