MK5 Golf Tdi 140/170 worthy successor to the MK4 Tdi 150?

[iworld]

Hi

I am thinking of moving up to a Mk5 Golf Tdi from my Mk4 Gti Tdi 150


I read the 0-60 times and at 9.3 seconds it seems slow from the Mk4's 8.2 seconds

Also What are the benefits of the Mk5 over the Mk 4 - i need a car that handles - while the Mk4 was okaish it did not set your heart racing.

I am considering the 4 motion model as well - although rare

DSG with paddle shifts over the standard 6 speed is another grey area?

Is the 170BHP model significanlty better?

[takksi]

From what I've heard, although the mk4 was more well built than the mk5, the mk5 handles better.

I've got a mk5 GT TDI 140bhp with 6-speed manual transmission. It's quite fast and torquey. However, if you had the mk4 150bhp - go for the 170. Reason being, first of all I think the mk5's heavier, so with the same power, a mk5 would be slower than the mk4, let alone with 10bhp less (should be insignificant - but if you're picky and you're going to compare it's going to bother you probably). so overall, go for a 170 imho. on the other hand, i'd go for a later version, such as 2007/08 as they have lower emissions, thus less road tax.

hope that helps.

[NeilMorey]

We recently got a 2004 MK5 GT TDI 140 to replace my company Civic 2.2 CTDI that came to the end of it's lease. My previous company car was an 2003 A3 TDI 130 Sport and when choosing that I also had a 5 day test drive of a Mk4 Golf GT TDI 150.

In terms of all these cars the Mk5 is the most refined and probably best handling but the slowest of all of them.

My thoughts on the Mk 4GTI 150 was that it was an absolute rocket but the chassis left a bit to be desired, although I'l admit I was driving a bit too fast it was un-nerving when the suspensuion bottomed out and the car shot sideways, thankfully we narrowly avoided a field or VAG would have got their demonstrator back rather bent! The friend I was that with day had a Mk4 Golf V5 which he spun a couple of times so our combined experiences with Mk4 golfs wasn't good.

Because of the handling of the Mk4 I went for the A3 1.9 TDI 130 Sport with 17 inch alloys and it was a brilliant car.

The Mk5 we have now is just 6 years old and has done 50K and feels so much better than the 3 year old Civic it replaces. The handling is also light years ahead of the Civic which somehow combined rock hard suspensuion with loads of body roll- after 12 years of VW and Audi the Civic really was a pile of cr*p!

If I could afford it I'd be tempted by a Mk5 170 GT TDI or just go the whole way and get a GTi- maybe next year?

[Elwick]

I have a 56 GT TDI 170. I can't compare directly with the Mk4, but based on my previous cars I would say the Mk5 170 handling is very very good, but I wouldn't say that it is that quick. Its a good car but I came to the conclusion that the Mk5 must be carrying a lot of extra weight.

Seems obvious, but TBH I would go for the GTI if you are looking for performance and not too worried about economy.

Elwick

[Buzzoff]

I have a Mk5 Gt Tdi 140 with the optional 17" split rim Ronals with 225's and I find it handels very well indeed.

As for the performance yes the 0-60 may not be GTi quick but once up and running the grunt of the engine is fantastic and it pulls like a train (even when you are 4up).

In my opinion this car is the package because it will do 560miles on a tank (before the fuel light comes on) and handels like a gti. Yes the 170 will be quicker but for me this is the best balance of performance to mpg.

To be fair if you want a fast car buy an M3 (been there done it), if you want a pratical fun car but you do a lot of miles buy a Golf Gt Tdi 140.

Cheers,

Dan