Volkswagon Bora 1.4 - Are they good cars?

Greenbaize

Hi all

I am thinking about buying a volkswagon Bora 1.4 around the 00 year. I dont know anyone that has one of these cars but would like to hear from people that know about them or even better own or have owned one. My questions are this - Are they a good reliable car and mostly are they good on petrol?

All answers are much apreciated thanks.;);););)

12gauge dave

Ive heard nothing but bad things about the 1.4 petrol in golfs/boras they are too heavy for the small 1.4 engine making them sluggish and not as good on peteol as people may think! Im not sure why but lots of people have had engine failures and problems with the 1.4 maybe someone else might know why they give these troubles but id recommend the 1.9tdi ovet the 1.4

tuxy

It's a golf with a boot. The 1.4 engine is known to drink lots of oil and just generally give trouble with 90k+ miles on it.

Greenbaize

Oh really, well thats a pity to hear because I had my eye on getting one but wanted to hear first what kind of a car they are. Like you mentioned there i did think that the car is very big for a 1.4 but just dont know anyone that has one so would like to get as much opinion on them from people so I can get a good idea about them. Love the look of them so hope there not all that bad

Greenbaize

wouldnt the 1.9tdi be alot dearer on insurance though?

DrumSteve

Had one myself and never had a problem with it tbh!

bbsrs

Greenbaize wrote: »

wouldnt the 1.9tdi be alot dearer on insurance though?

Depends on who is insuring it really . Tax would be dearer at around 170 for 3 months.

corktina

is a 12 yr old Bora a classic now?:eek:

Max Headroom

corktina wrote: »

is a 12 yr old Bora a classic now?:eek:

A Boring will never be a classic.......seems to be the weapon of choice for the ex-civic brigade, that and Passat's for some reason...

carchaeologist

Boras are like Golfs of the same era. Horrible soulless dogs to drive.

bbsrs

carchaeologist wrote: »

Boras are like Golfs of the same era. Horrible soulless dogs to drive.

Ever driven a Golf MK 4 R 32?

carchaeologist

bbsrs wrote: »

Ever driven a Golf MK 4 R 32?

Not one that fast, TDi and GTi only, but I don't like them regardless. Bland, with no character.
I will say the newer Golf is better though.

bbsrs

carchaeologist wrote: »

bbsrs wrote: »

Ever driven a Golf MK 4 R 32?

Not one that fast, TDi and GTi only, but I don't like them regardless. Bland, with no character.
I will say the newer Golf is better though.

The diesel is a good commuter vehicle , interesting rewarding no but if you want that a mk4 golf R32 won't disappoint , 4WD and 240 bhp.

Greenbaize

I wouldnt call a Bora a classic either but its funny that you say there it seems to be the choice for the ex-civic guys as I used to have one of those myself. I just like the look of the car and dont want anything modified whatsoever.

TestTransmission

corktina wrote: »

is a 12 yr old Bora a classic now?:eek:

Moved to motors

dgt

Greenbaize wrote: »

My questions are this - Are they a good reliable car and mostly are they good on petrol?

Knowing people my age who have or had 1, I can safely say no and no to both your questions.

Get a 1.6 at the very least or if you can get one, an SDI

Tea 1000

dgt wrote: »

Knowing people my age who have or had 1, I can safely say no and no to both your questions.

Get a 1.6 at the very least or if you can get one, an SDI

Oh dear Lord... an SDI? Might as well just walk. The slowest car I think I ever drove was a late 80's 1.1 Fiesta, and I was matching a mate in a brand new Bora SDI for acceleration. Having said that, I was a passenger in a 1.4 petrol Bora recently. I thought there was something wrong with it it was so slow!
Also, you say you like the look of them. Have you actually stopped and looked at it for more than a few miliseconds? They're the modern equivalent of a Lada. Instead of designing two rectangles, one on top of the other, they just chopped the top rectangle at 45 degrees either end to make it a trapezoid, and left it at that. Chronic!
You say you had a Civic, I'd look for another one, cause the Bora will depress you.

keithclancy

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Oh dear Lord... an SDI? Might as well just walk. The slowest car I think I ever drove was a late 80's 1.1 Fiesta, and I was matching a mate in a brand new Bora SDI for acceleration. Having said that, I was a passenger in a 1.4 petrol Bora recently. I thought there was something wrong with it it was so slow!
Also, you say you like the look of them. Have you actually stopped and looked at it for more than a few miliseconds? They're the modern equivalent of a Lada. Instead of designing two rectangles, one on top of the other, they just chopped the top rectangle at 45 degrees either end to make it a trapezoid, and left it at that. Chronic!
You say you had a Civic, I'd look for another one, cause the Bora will depress you.

Ahh the SDI ... where the Volume Knob and the Accelerator pedal had the same function.

bus.driver

personally I think they're ok but the engine 1.4 seems to be underpowered.

BdaraB

We had one, the 1.4 is fine for power not going to set the world alight but it keeps up with traffic and pretty good on petrol well better than my sisters Almera anyways. Ours did drink oil so I had to keep a bottle in the boot. As for reliability nothing went wrong until about 134,000 miles where it blew a timing belt costing about the value of the car to repair.

Chuck_Norris

Had one for six months when I started out in the repping game. Thirsty enough on the combined cycle, can't give accurate figures as I wasn't really paying attention back then.

Mine was a comfort line spec, and to be fair, it was a comfortable enough place to be in. Supportive seats for long journeys, and a reasonably nice cabin, if not a bit somber with acres of black plastic and "wood" trim.

I had no reliability issues in the space of time that I had it, granted that was only 6 months. But i did clock up close to 9,000 miles in that time. It did drink oil though, and fairly early enough in its life too. It was two years old when I got it, with 48,0000 miles on it, and I was goin through a litre of oil every 700- 1000 miles.

Definitely too small an engine forthe weight of the car. Not great for overtaking, unless you planned it in advance.

The only thing I really miss about it was the auto dimming rear view mirror. No car I've had since has had that option, but it's a simple enough fix for me really.

HTH.

dgt

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Oh dear Lord... an SDI? Might as well just walk. The slowest car I think I ever drove was a late 80's 1.1 Fiesta, and I was matching a mate in a brand new Bora SDI for acceleration. Having said that, I was a passenger in a 1.4 petrol Bora recently. I thought there was something wrong with it it was so slow!

I am assuming the OP is circa my age, maybe younger and after their first car. Even if its as slow as a wet week, ever drive a non turbo Transit? SDI now looks much faster. Plus insurance wouldn't go too hard on him with it either. Bonus, its a miiiiiser on dayyyysel, even if it takes an ice age to get anywhere :pac:

SmithySeller

Chuck_Norris wrote: »

Definitely too small an engine forthe weight of the car. Not great for overtaking, unless you planned it in advance.

HTH.

Couldnt agree more, overtaking a cyclist maybe. But overtaking another motor bike/vehicle would require official planning permission, and even then it would be turned down!!

tuxy

Chuck_Norris wrote: »

Definitely too small an engine forthe weight of the car. Not great for overtaking, unless you planned it in advance.


HTH.

Is it really the cc size of the engine that's wrong? Comparable Toyota(1.3) and Nissan (1.4) from the same year both had about 10 bhp more.

SmithySeller

Umm I think the engine was replaced circa 2004 with the FSI model..

tuxy

SmithySeller wrote: »

Umm I think the engine was replaced circa 2004 with the FSI model..

I don't know but we are talking about the model that was sold in 2000.

SmithySeller

yes I know, a bag of rubbish of an engine, that was replaced in 2004 in all other cars...

My wife had a Beetle with the same engine that was in the 00 Bora. 25MPG and litre of oil/month. Very slow, but in fairness it never gave many issues..

keithclancy

dgt wrote: »

I am assuming the OP is circa my age, maybe younger and after their first car. Even if its as slow as a wet week, ever drive a non turbo Transit? SDI now looks much faster. Plus insurance wouldn't go too hard on him with it either. Bonus, its a miiiiiser on dayyyysel, even if it takes an ice age to get anywhere :pac:

I'd rather drive a horse.

meoklmrk91

Friend of mine had one, it gave them a good bit of bother, especially for a car that came with a full service history, nothing major but still, it is woefully underpowered, meaning fuel economy, two heavy for the engine really.

Chuck_Norris

tuxy wrote: »

Is it really the cc size of the engine that's wrong? Comparable Toyota(1.3) and Nissan (1.4) from the same year both had about 10 bhp more.

You're dead right there. Iirc, it had 75bhp. The car I has directly before it was a 1.3 Corolla with 95 bhp.

Chuck_Norris

SmithySeller wrote: »

Umm I think the engine was replaced circa 2004 with the FSI model..

Mine was an 04, granted I don't know what the manufacturing year was, but it definitely wasn't an FSI model.

Chuck_Norris

Edit: double post. Stupid phone.

SJPK

My has a 03 1.4 one... to be honest, with all I've read and heard about them I've always been afraid its gonna break or something everytime I drive it! But 'in fact' its been the complete opposite, he's clocked up over 60,000 miles in about 3-3 1/2 years and it has needed absolutely nothing bar: tyres, brakes, temperature sensor and a patch on the exhaust! Passed every NCT with flying colours. We've always been amazed by how economical it is on long journeys e.g motorway, one time even better than a TDI octavia doing the same journey :pac:
The car has been cared for like a baby though, DIY oil changes nearly every 8,000 miles without fail and isn't drove 'hard' all of the time...

However, we did have 99 1.4 bora which was a complete pile, central locking, coil packs lights and it used to cut out in reverse for some reason??

Oh and the 03 has never burnt a drop of oil... ever! So i suppose its just a case of finding a well maintained one... I'd kinda recommend one but theres just always that awful feeling in the back of my head that somethin's gonna go

bazz26

SmithySeller wrote: »

Umm I think the engine was replaced circa 2004 with the FSI model..

Not here it wasn't, that engine was sold here right up to around 2009 in the MkVI, it was then replaced by the 1.2 TSi. Higher output 1.4 TSi was available in more expensive models from about 2007 onwards.

SmithySeller

bazz26 wrote: »

SmithySeller wrote: »

Umm I think the engine was replaced circa 2004 with the FSI model..

Not here it wasn't, that engine was sold here right up to around 2009 in the MkVI, it was then replaced by the 1.2 TSi. Higher output 1.4 TSi was available in more expensive models from about 2007 onwards.

We were in the market for a Golf or Beetle 1.4 in late 2004. We were offered a 1.4 standard which was around years or a 1.4 FSI at a premium of around 1.5k. We bought the Beetle with the older engine, even though the sales guy tried to talk us into going with the FSI engine and I'm sorry we didn't listen. Doing a quick Google suggests the 1.4 FSI was indeed available in 2004, albeit much more prevalent in the 1.6. Replaced might be the wrong word, but the option was there. TSI came later again..

Tony D

Thère are better '00 small engined cars out there for similar money

tupac_healy

DrumSteve wrote: »

Had one myself and never had a problem with it tbh!

hmmm....

Had (Have) one for over a year now, bar the timing belt (& water pump) needing to be done (wear and tear) there is NOTHING wrong with mine! Starts every single time, its nippy enough for a 1.4 and I fine mine totally and utterly FANTASTIC on juice!!!

Best car I've ever had on petrol to be honest......

Lots of negative reviews here, consider the cost of purchase, the insurance/tax cost, the petrol and its a good car to buy if your on a budget!!!!

Jesus.

OSI wrote: »

You'd be hard pressed to find one that hasn't been molested by a chav or abused by a farmer.

No I won't say it.

dorkacle

I recently bought one, 2003 with less than 50k miles on it. Comfortline spec looks brand spanking new inside and out. I don't think its sluggish at all, but thats conpared to a Mazda 323 1.4...? love it!

tuxy

dorkacle wrote: »

I recently bought one, 2003 with less than 50k miles on it. Comfortline spec looks brand spanking new inside and out. I don't think its sluggish at all, but thats conpared to a Mazda 323 1.4...? love it!

The 323 came with a 1.3 and 1.5 there is no 1.4 that I know of.
The 1.3 has almost identical power, acceleration and speed to the golf.
The 1.5 would be similar to the power of a 1.4 civic or corolla.

dorkacle

tuxy wrote: »

The 323 came with a 1.3 and 1.5 there is no 1.4 that I know of.
The 1.3 has almost identical power, acceleration and speed to the golf.
The 1.5 would be similar to the power of a 1.4 civic or corolla.

Oh right,

I just assumed it was classed as 1.3 on the tax document, ie. it was 1395 cc.

Never really looked tbh!

The bora definitely has more poke in it!

tupac_healy

Ha ha!!!


Spoke too soon, mine is now shoing an oil light, so naturally I topped it up with oil........ Light is still on!!!


Well done Bora for making a fool of me!!!!!

tossy

tupac_healy wrote: »

Ha ha!!!


Spoke too soon, mine is now shoing an oil light, so naturally I topped it up with oil........ Light is still on!!!


Well done Bora for making a fool of me!!!!!

Is the oil light for low level or low pressure?

tupac_healy

tossy wrote: »

Is the oil light for low level or low pressure?

I don't know, I assumed it was for low level, but I topped it up and it is still on so I don't know!


Must bring it to the mechanic to get it checked for sure

Leonard Hofstadter

tupac_healy wrote: »

I don't know, I assumed it was for low level, but I topped it up and it is still on so I don't know!


Must bring it to the mechanic to get it checked for sure

If it's the oil pressure light (red), then don't drive it - it may result in catastrophic failure. If it's the oil level light (amber), I'm sure it will be fine:).

tupac_healy

Its Amber, but I've topped it up so should it not just go away????


Or does it need to be reset?

Leonard Hofstadter

tupac_healy wrote: »

Its Amber, but I've topped it up so should it not just go away????


Or does it need to be reset?

Probably just a sensor gone wrong, so fine to keep driving, but I'd still be getting it looked at just to be sure.

corkgsxr

i found the 1.4 quite slow in the saloon polo. so worse in a presumably heaver car

Leonard Hofstadter

Depending on the model, the 1.4 in most Polos is a different engine to any Golf from 1998 onwards - it's got even less power! Although, the 1.4 60 bhp engine is a hell of a lot more reliable than the 75 bhp lump - the old 8v 1.4 is from the days when Volkswagen used to build engines properly.