Why are 2nd/3rd/4th hand Golfs so expensive?

godwin

I never owned a golf, and I'm looking for a new 2nd car runaround, while checking out cars I notice that Golf sellers seem to be asking what appears to me to be way more than their cars are worth(age,condition,miles considered)

Am I missing something?

novarock

godwin wrote: »

I never owned a golf, and I'm looking for a new 2nd car runaround, while checking out cars I notice that Golf sellers seem to be asking what appears to me to be way more than their cars are worth(age,condition,miles considered)

Am I missing something?

Its all in the name... Overpriced due to demand in this country!

Bpmull

No your fairly spot on golfs hold their value very well and sell well secondhand as they have a lot of followers so cost more than the competition. Having owned one they are a very nice car in general but it can be difficult to justify the extra cost. Anyway if your looking for a cheap runaround forget about looking at golfs.

Bandit0

novarock wrote: »

Its all in the name... Overpriced due to demand in this country!

..... And the superior build quality, reliability, pedigree, styling, low insurance etc.

EazyD

godwin wrote: »

I never owned a golf, and I'm looking for a new 2nd car runaround, while checking out cars I notice that Golf sellers seem to be asking what appears to me to be way more than their cars are worth(age,condition,miles considered)

Am I missing something?

High level of demand for them, particularly the tdi models. It's not just golfs, yaris is another example that tends to command more than it's equivalents or is seemingly worth.

coolbeans

Bandit0 wrote: »

..... And the superior build quality, reliability, pedigree, styling, low insurance etc.

...we're talking about Golfs here...not sure what you're on about.

Henry Ford III

Despite being Volkswagen the "People's car" they have acquired a slightly prestige status.

They are pretty decent cars overall however.

Wossack

Bandit0 wrote: »

..... And the superior build quality, reliability, pedigree, styling, low insurance etc.

lol

coylemj

Rightly or wrongly, most people who know feck all about cars regard a Golf as a good solid car so they are in big demand right enough which helps maintain the value.

As usual, you'll get the naysayers per a couple of posts above. Of course it's far worse for Fiat more so than Golfs but having owned a Fiat (96 Bravo) and Golf (07 GT) I can say that I got five years excellent service out of both of them without a single problem, the major difference was that the depreciation on the Fiat was criminal but I knew about that before I bought it.

So knock the Golf all you like but they hold their value extremely well.

bazz26

Boras, Passats and more so Golfs have always had an above average appeal to 17 to 24 year olds and their peers. I think the Golf is the car to be seen during the week in the GAA club car park after a training session or cruising around town on a Saturday night with your honey. The more red letters on the boot the better too. :pac:

godwin

I think they look pretty good, I was talking to my mechanic about Golfs he advised me to steer clear of the small petrol engines(1.4 / 1.6) if possible.

Tea 1000

bazz26 wrote: »

Boras, Passats and more so Golfs have always had an above average appeal to 17 to 24 year olds and their peers. I think the Golf is the car to be seen during the week in the GAA club car park after a training session or cruising around town on a Saturday night with your honey. The more red letters on the boot the better too. :pac:

Don't get the Bora love. It's one of VW's crappiest looking cars ever. Horrible to drive, horribly slow, horrible to look at on the outside, horrible to look at on the inside, and not all that reliable. You really are a dunce if you buy one, and as for the numpties who put the pidgeon valve on the diesel ones...

goochy

go for a focus instead cheaper to buy/ run . more modern and better to drive . the mk1 focus has a lovely interior nicer than newer mdls

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

quadrifoglio verde

Patww79 wrote: »

On a Golf? Well maybe the low insurance.

Nah not since young lads started driving them into trees

George Dalton

goochy wrote: »

the mk1 focus has a lovely interior nicer than newer mdls

I'm a big fan of the Mk1 Focus but seriously? The interior is the one area where they dropped the ball IMO.

It was miles behind the Mk4 Golf in that respect when both cars were new and that was over 15 years ago! Sitting into one these days it really is awful, whereas the Mk4 interior is still respectable IMO.

colm_mcm

The mk4 golf was a game changer in terms of perceived quality and interior finish. It might be a bit dull, but the focus interior is shiney hard plastic junk in comparison.

I'm not talking about actual quality, rattles, longevity etc. just materials and design

It's easy to dismiss the mk4 golf and b5 Passat, but they were significant cars at the time, and almost all manufacturers have borrowed from their formula.

goochy

i have always felt the dash in mk1 focus has a quality look to it - nicer than mk2 - i really like the interior of golfs of that age but they went down hill after that.

goochy

i have always felt the dash in mk1 focus has a quality look to it - nicer than mk2 - i really like the interior of golfs of that age but they went down hill after that.

goochy

i have always felt the dash in mk1 focus has a quality look to it - nicer than mk2 - i really like the interior of golfs of that age but they went down hill after that.

goochy

i have always felt the dash in mk1 focus has a quality look to it - nicer than mk2 - i really like the interior of golfs of that age but they went down hill after that.

goochy

i have always felt the dash in mk1 focus has a quality look to it - nicer than mk2 - i really like the interior of golfs of that age but they went down hill after that.

Axel Lamp

A lot of anti golf feelings on here. I've owned 2, both 2l TDi, no major issues to report.

colm_mcm

goochy wrote: »

i have always felt the dash in mk1 focus has a quality look to it - nicer than mk2 - i really like the interior of golfs of that age but they went down hill after that.

goochy wrote: »

i have always felt the dash in mk1 focus has a quality look to it - nicer than mk2 - i really like the interior of golfs of that age but they went down hill after that.

goochy wrote: »

i have always felt the dash in mk1 focus has a quality look to it - nicer than mk2 - i really like the interior of golfs of that age but they went down hill after that.

goochy wrote: »

i have always felt the dash in mk1 focus has a quality look to it - nicer than mk2 - i really like the interior of golfs of that age but they went down hill after that.

goochy wrote: »

i have always felt the dash in mk1 focus has a quality look to it - nicer than mk2 - i really like the interior of golfs of that age but they went down hill after that.

There's something up with your posts, most of them are being duplicated at least.

Foxhole Norman

colm_mcm wrote: »

There's something up with your posts, most of them are being duplicated at least.

Which is odd as Boards normally stops duplicates itself.

This is the reason why OP:

JohnBoy26

goochy wrote: »

go for a focus instead cheaper to buy/ run . more modern and better to drive . the mk1 focus has a lovely interior nicer than newer mdls

I think too much was made of the focus when it came out. If vw had got the 1.4 and 1.6 petrol engines right in the golf and sorted the few interior rattles it would actually be a decent car/ better than the equivalent focus. The diesel version of the mk4 is a very good car.

The focus's interior might of looked well back in 1998 but it defiantly hasn't stood the test of time.

Special Circumstances

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

I think too much was made of the focus when it came out

When was a new Ford ever not hyped by the UK and by extension the irish motoring press :-)

It was like getting in an alien technology from the future compared to the escort it replaced in fairness! :-)

The exterior design has held up relatively well in fairness.

Saw an 82 fiat supermirafiori today. More power and lighter than the 1.4 golf or focus...

James Delaney

Yeah Golfs ave this endearing rep to Ireland. They are no doubt a nice car but certainly 10 yrs ago they came with few bells & whistles -,very basic unless u spent a fortune on options.

While I like them I wud not pay much over the odds for 1.

Might b wise to look at importing 1.

Good Luck -,Let us know how u get on.

billy few mates

I've often wondered about this myself, a few years back my son was looking for one, they were hard to find and very expensive. Eventually we found a decent one, paid the high price asked. Two years of fairly trouble free motoring we sold it for within a few hundred Euro of what he'd originally paid for it. I put the ad on done deal for him as he was away at the time, within five minutes of the ad being posted the phone started ringing, I had people offering me money for it (less than the asking price) sight unseen offering to come and collect it on a trailer etc etc.
Two hours later the car was sold for the full asking price to the first caller, they asked for a discount, I told them I'd let them know in a day or so when the other callers had looked at it, they offered me full asking price there and then. I was snowed under with callers for the next few days looking for the car.
They're expensive because they hold their value and you will have no problems selling it on. After this experience I decided I'd have a look at one myself when I was buying my next car and I ended up buying one myself, prior to this id never really considered them before...

domrush

godwin wrote: »

I think they look pretty good, I was talking to my mechanic about Golfs he advised me to steer clear of the small petrol engines(1.4 / 1.6) if possible.

Bar the timing belt needing replacement I was under the impression the 1.6 was a good solid engine

Colemania

Bought a second hand 05 Golf back around Christmas in 2013 after being warned off Golfs for years by garages and mechanics and have had no problems with it since. Bought from a dealer who traded in a 03 Astra I had for about 10 months which in that space of time cost me about 500 in repairs. Had bought the Astra for 2100 and put it on Done Deal for 1900. Highest offer I got was 1600 but when the guy came to see the car he brought a flashlight and started telling me countless things wrong with the car and revised his offer to 900. Proceeded to go back to the mechanic who checked everything and said he was just trying to con me! So that's when I just chanced a dealer in Cork asking if he'd do a trade in and surely enough he traded it in for what I bought it for and gave me an excellent deal. To be honest, if I sold the car now I'd probably make a 300 loss on it which is unbelievable almost 18 months later.

One thing I will say though is it dents so f**king easily! Young fellas in town sitting on my car and doors banging off the car in car parks the main reason. Also some bitch reversed into my car a week after buying it trying to parallel park. Didn't realise the damage until that evening.

Tea 1000

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

I think too much was made of the focus when it came out. If vw had got the 1.4 and 1.6 petrol engines right in the golf and sorted the few interior rattles it would actually be a decent car/ better than the equivalent focus. The diesel version of the mk4 is a very good car.

The focus's interior might of looked well back in 1998 but it defiantly hasn't stood the test of time.

The interior and perceived quality of the Golf is far ahead of the Focus, but the Focus is on a different planet to the Golf in terms of handling. The Mk4 really has a terribly incompetent chassis. The 1.4 engine in both are terrible, and the 1.6 VW one is terrible. The 2 litre is a joke, 115bhp? That's 70's stuff. The GTi shouldn't have been badged as such.
The best all rounder was the 1.9 TDi range. Grand all round package if you placed zero interest in driving enjoyment.
The funny thing about VW of that time was that they have a good construction and quality to them, but have plenty of reliabiltiy issues. Electrics, rattles, poor engines etc that would normally have been the plague of lesser marques.
The Mk 5 Golf was much nicer to drive, but the interior of that is crap. I sat in a Mk 5 GTi that I was considering buying before and thought "Is this it? A 35k car and this is the crap interior this highly rated manufacturer offers?".
Fords never had nice interiors, and for some reason the motoring press always praise them for their interiors. Ford and BMW are never going to come out second in a comparison test, regardless of the competition. The goalposts get moved to suit!

Noccy_Mondy

goochy wrote: »

i have always felt the dash in mk1 focus has a quality look to it - nicer than mk2 - i really like the interior of golfs of that age but they went down hill after that.

I have a mk1 focus and even I don't particularly like the inside of it! Very alien like!

The fact that these two vents are on different levels sends my OCD into overdrive!



The exterior has held up well over the years to be fair. Still fairly pleasing to look at IMO!

KwackerJack

We in Ireland have a fascination with VW'S for god knows that reasons.

The golf is boring and has bland styling apart from the new model. DaSH and door trims seem very light and the plastic feels cheap.

A neighbor bought a 08 passat a few months back and was raving about the interior. It's was just as cheap as the golf and just didn't feel like like any effort was put into the quality.

I think VW in general are very overrated and most older VW have had the daylights driven out I'd them by boy racers or farmers.

An Avensis has a better quality interior then a passat And cheaper to buy.

Me personally Id go Toyota, Mazda or Lexus if you want to go a bit higher on the scale.

Hachiko

godwin wrote: »

I never owned a golf, and I'm looking for a new 2nd car runaround, while checking out cars I notice that Golf sellers seem to be asking what appears to me to be way more than their cars are worth(age,condition,miles considered)

Am I missing something?

1.4 TDis, chronic over shortage it seems.

ShaunieVW

KwackerJack wrote: »

An Avensis has a better quality interior then a passat And cheaper to buy.

Me personally Id go Toyota, Mazda or Lexus if you want to go a bit higher on the scale.

Couldn't diagree more, at the home place we have a 04 avensis and it is hated by us all in the house to get into as the interior is horrible, cheap and uncomfortable, my mother is gutted that they sold there 04 Passat now, fair enough it was highline so leather etc. but was a much nicer place to sit.

As someone who has had many many cars over the last 8 years I current own a 14 year old a3 for the last 2 of those. It's build quality is fantastic, never gives trouble, interior hasn't a mark on it after 138k miles. Unlike the auld avensis at home that sounds like a tractor (d4d) and everything is worn inside after similar mileage.

I agree that people buy the worst of the vag range, low spec diesels etc. I'd be more into the higher spec performance orientated side. Let's not forget they have make some stonking GTI's, .:r32s, vr6s over the years. Just the Irish market is full of bland vws.

KwackerJack

ShaunieVW wrote: »

Couldn't diagree more, at the home place we have a 04 avensis and it is hated by us all in the house to get into as the interior is horrible, cheap and uncomfortable, my mother is gutted that they sold there 04 Passat now, fair enough it was highline so leather etc. but was a much nicer place to sit.

As someone who has had many many cars over the last 8 years I current own a 14 year old a3 for the last 2 of those. It's build quality is fantastic, never gives trouble, interior hasn't a mark on it after 138k miles. Unlike the auld avensis at home that sounds like a tractor (d4d) and everything is worn inside after similar mileage.

I agree that people buy the worst of the vag range, low spec diesels etc. I'd be more into the higher spec performance orientated side. Let's not forget they have make some stonking GTI's, .:r32s, vr6s over the years. Just the Irish market is full of bland vws.

Id agree with you on the higher spec as I do like the highline passat with cream leather :-) but the standard models are awful. There are better cars out there than a Base golf, bora and as for the sdi engine my electric razor has more power.

I was looking at the GTI and high line passat but in the end I got a 06 Lexus IS250 which is far beyond even the highline passat. Not much difference in the price either

George Dalton

Tea 1000 wrote: »

The interior and perceived quality of the Golf is far ahead of the Focus, but the Focus is on a different planet to the Golf in terms of handling. The Mk4 really has a terribly incompetent chassis. The 1.4 engine in both are terrible, and the 1.6 VW one is terrible. The 2 litre is a joke, 115bhp? That's 70's stuff. The GTi shouldn't have been badged as such.
The best all rounder was the 1.9 TDi range. Grand all round package if you placed zero interest in driving enjoyment.

The only market where the n/a 115bhp 2.0 and 125bhp 1.8 engined Mk4s were badged GTI was in the UK. This was a bit of cynical cashing in on the GTI name by VW UK. Elsewhere in Europe they weren't badged GTI but were simply badged 1.8/2.0 Highline, which is exactly what they were. All Irish GTIs had the 1.8T engine, which is a fantastic engine for its time.

As for the chassis, yes it lags behind the Focus in terms of all out ability but to call it "terribly incompetent" and to imply that only those with "zero interest in driving enjoyment" would be happy do drive one is a total exaggeration.

Mycroft H

People forget how much of a revelation the MK4 Golf was when it was released in 1997. It had everything bet then. 1998 brought the Focus and then there was two excellent cars in the compact segment.

John T Carroll

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Despite being Volkswagen the "People's car" they have acquired a slightly prestige status.

They are pretty decent cars overall however.

The air cooled beetle sold thousands of the subsequent water cooled VWs in Ireland for years afterwards because of the quality of the anti freeze used in those days. I come from a rural background and I remember the anti freeze causing the cooling systems rubber hoses to swell up and burst on cars and causing cooling water leaks on the Standard Major (Ford) tractor which had wet cylinder liners with rubber sealing rings. This caused people to avoid using anti freeze with the subsequent odd horror story of cracked cylinder heads/blocks etc. The air cooled engine was like manna from heaven then so people had a sense of loyalty to the VW brand and it possibly still percolates down to some extent to their families?.

But to the present, I think Henry Ford 111 summed it up perfecty in saying that
"They are pretty decent cars overall however". I have only had three from new since 1963 and they wore well but again I suppose if you buy anything new it will wear reasonably well if you service it properly, a friend of mine is only on his fourth Ford in almost 60 years of driving, another on his fifth Fiat in around 60 years as well. I do think though that VWs in general are overpriced in the used market place.

C0N0R

Bought a mk4 gti last June, 180bhp version. Now it's probably fair enough to say it's not fully deserving of the gti name but it's still a peach of a car. It's 12 years old and the only thing I wish it had that it doesn't is cruise control. It's comfortable, plenty of poke for normal driving conditions and it's not a demon on fuel given an opportunity. Mine has full leather and climate control, the interior is easy on the eye in comparison with some of the other options I considered (focus st) I really can't fault the car. I'd like to think it hasn't lost much of its value in the year I've had it, I bought the best example I could find (climate control, 80000 miles, service history, three door, leather) I paid for it but if I look after it it won't cost me a fortune.

George Dalton

You can get cruse fitted for €225.

C0N0R

George Dalton wrote: »

You can get cruse fitted for €225.

Yea got the same done to my b5.5 highline. Where abouts are you and how long does it take?

Asmooh

get one from 1980 should be cheap

ShaunieVW

Asmooh wrote: »

get one from 1980 should be cheap

A cheap mk1, that's in decent condition? Good luck with that.

Asmooh

ShaunieVW wrote: »

A cheap mk1, that's in decent condition? Good luck with that.

depending on your definition of cheap

Gazzmonkey

colm_mcm wrote: »

There's something up with your posts, most of them are being duplicated at least.

If I'm posting a reply using the standard browser on my S2 and hit back after posting it resends the post, maybe he did the same thing several times in quick succession???

JohnBoy26

Tea 1000 wrote: »

The interior and perceived quality of the Golf is far ahead of the Focus, but the Focus is on a different planet to the Golf in terms of handling. The Mk4 really has a terribly incompetent chassis. The 1.4 engine in both are terrible, and the 1.6 VW one is terrible. The 2 litre is a joke, 115bhp? That's 70's stuff. The GTi shouldn't have been badged as such.
The best all rounder was the 1.9 TDi range. Grand all round package if you placed zero interest in driving enjoyment.
The funny thing about VW of that time was that they have a good construction and quality to them, but have plenty of reliabiltiy issues. Electrics, rattles, poor engines etc that would normally have been the plague of lesser marques.
The Mk 5 Golf was much nicer to drive, but the interior of that is crap. I sat in a Mk 5 GTi that I was considering buying before and thought "Is this it? A 35k car and this is the crap interior this highly rated manufacturer offers?".
Fords never had nice interiors, and for some reason the motoring press always praise them for their interiors. Ford and BMW are never going to come out second in a comparison test, regardless of the competition. The goalposts get moved to suit!

Had 2 focus's, Didn't find the handling anything to write home about tbh in either of them. Certainly in day to day driving it's no better than a golf in that department. Maybe on a track it's handling might prove to be better but whos going to be going on a track

The golf is more comfortable than a focus too, it's interior is a step up. even if the quality is perceived it still looks like better quality than a focus. I found both interiors do have rattles though, especially around the center console.

Henry Ford III

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

Had 2 focus's, Didn't find the handling anything to write home about tbh in either of them. Certainly in day to day driving it's no better than a golf in that department. Maybe on a track it's handling might prove to be better but whos going to be going on a track

If you can't feel and appreciate the difference beween a control blade fully independent rear suspension set up and that of the corresponding Golf of that time you'd have to wonder.

They are totally different and even an average driver at normal speeds should notice the difference.

JohnBoy26

Henry Ford III wrote: »

If you can't feel and appreciate the difference beween a control blade fully independent rear suspension set up and that of the corresponding Golf of that time you'd have to wonder.

They are totally different and even an average driver at normal speeds should notice the difference.

I've owned both cars. The focus's control blade suspensions was massively overhyped by the media imo. In day to day driving it offers nothing over rivals. You'd have to be caning it around a track to appreciate the difference.

Nothing really special about the focus to drive at all on a day to day basis. It's not an exciting car to drive at all and it's steering is no way as sharp as it's made out to be. I found comfort lacking too in them which is suppose to be a quality of the control blade. At the end of the day control blade is only a way of glorifying fords version of IRS. Even some rivals of the time offered more sophisticated setups than this.

Henry Ford III

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

I've owned both cars. The focus's control blade suspensions was massively overhyped by the media imo. In day to day driving it offers nothing over rivals. You'd have to be caning it around a track to appreciate the difference.

Nothing really special about the focus to drive at all on a day to day basis. It's not an exciting car to drive at all and it's steering is no way as sharp as it's made out to be. I found comfort lacking too in them which is suppose to be a quality of the control blade. At the end of the day control blade is only a way of glorifying fords version of IRS. Even some rivals of the time offered more sophisticated setups than this.

Such as?