1.2 2007 Polo or 2005 Corolla Hatchback?

Jdmsupra

Hello everyone I was wandering which would be a better car for normal everyday use ,
>>1.2L 2007 Polo<< or , >>2005 1.4L Corolla Hatchback<<? I found both for the same price , same mileage ( the mileage reader odemeter on corolla IS in km right? ). I drove both , and Polo was very smooth and nice with better paintwork , so none of these cars have a huge difference do they? Since the Corolla is one more cylinder and 95ish bhp ( polo is 65bhp I believe) , its more smoother high revs and motorway driving right? But the polo shouldn't suffer at a constant 100kph on the motorway right? Its mainly gonna be stop start city driving , maximum 30-60mins a day. So what would be the better choice for mpg and reliability ? Of course the toyota would last over 250,000miles because im a good care taker but the polo should go up to 200,000 right cause ill change within 3years hopefully? Thanks:)

Jdmsupra

Also I cant go over 1.4 cause to keep insurance low

Atlantic Dawn

Corolla is bigger class of car than Polo, the Polo would be same as a Yaris size. A Golf would compare in size to a Corolla. Do either have service history, how many miles on them? The Corolla has a timing chain, the Polo has a belt so that would need replacing over time unlike the chain.

Toyotafanboi

Having onwed both, the Corolla is ten times the car.

The Polo is gutlessly slow, sounds like a bag of spanners, is actually surprisingly flimsy and much less economical than the Corolla.

You'd honesly be very lucky to get to 100k miles in the Polo without any big bills.

JohnBoy26

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Corolla is bigger class of car than Polo, the Polo would be same as a Yaris size. A Golf would compare in size to a Corolla. Do either have service history, how many miles on them? The Corolla has a timing chain, the Polo has a belt so that would need replacing over time unlike the chain.

I think that model polo has a timing chain, which is troublesome.

Jdmsupra

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Corolla is bigger class of car than Polo, the Polo would be same as a Yaris size. A Golf would compare in size to a Corolla. Do either have service history, how many miles on them? The Corolla has a timing chain, the Polo has a belt so that would need replacing over time unlike the chain.

Corolla said around 170,000 on speedometer in car but idk if its in miles or km but on carzone and their website it said 107,000ish miles , Polo is 102,000miles , so both same , im guessing the belt/chain on corolla has been replaced but forgot to ask , will ring tommorow. Dont the polo have a chain thats what the dealer said?

JohnBoy26

Jdmsupra wrote: »

Hello everyone I was wandering which would be a better car for normal everyday use ,
>>1.2L 2007 Polo<< or , >>2005 1.4L Corolla Hatchback<<? I found both for the same price , same mileage ( the mileage reader odemeter on corolla IS in km right? ). I drove both , and Polo was very smooth and nice with better paintwork , so none of these cars have a huge difference do they? Since the Corolla is one more cylinder and 95ish bhp ( polo is 65bhp I believe) , its more smoother high revs and motorway driving right? But the polo shouldn't suffer at a constant 100kph on the motorway right? Its mainly gonna be stop start city driving , maximum 30-60mins a day. So what would be the better choice for mpg and reliability ? Of course the toyota would last over 250,000miles because im a good care taker but the polo should go up to 200,000 right cause ill change within 3years hopefully? Thanks:)

Get the corolla it's better in everyway to a polo. If buying a corolla get a higher spec strata or Luna model.

Jdmsupra

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

Having onwed both, the Corolla is ten times the car.

The Polo is gutlessly slow, sounds like a bag of spanners, is actually surprisingly flimsy and much less economical than the Corolla.

You'd honesly be very lucky to get to 100k miles in the Polo without any big bills.

Haha serious? But your not biased are you as you chose that username haha:pac:

JohnBoy26

Jdmsupra wrote: »

Haha serious? But your not biased are you as you chose that username haha:pac:

Those polos do give a lot of issues. I actually think Toyota fanboi had one of them at one stage so he is familiar with them.

Jdmsupra

Yeah on motorcheck it says its
2005 Toyota Corolla 1.4 Strata 5DR , so its higher spec yes?

Jdmsupra

Aright thanks everyone

JohnBoy26

Jdmsupra wrote: »

Yeah on motorcheck it says its
2005 Toyota Corolla 1.4 Strata 5DR , so its higher spec yes?

It has the sideskirts which makes the corolla look much better imo. The base spec Terra model doesn't have these.

Toyotafanboi

Jdmsupra wrote: »

Haha serious? But your not biased are you as you chose that username haha:pac:

I had an 04 Corolla for a year, my missus had a 07 Polo for 5 years nearly.

I am a bit biased, but i'm open minded too and the Polo was pathetic.

It really was very slow so you had to thrash it everywhere to make any progress and that killed your mpg's.

Stretched timing chains, burnt valves, runs likes **** at the best of times and ours had a FSH. Needed to buy wishbone bushings in bulk and they aren't cheap or easy to change.

Ours only had 60k miles on it.

Had my Corolla for a year, bought it with 145k miles on it, sold it near 160 I think. Was a fairly painless experience.

Jdmsupra

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

It has the sideskirts which makes the corolla look much better imo. The base spec Terra model doesn't have these.

Yeah it had them and gave it a nice finish.

Jdmsupra

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

I had an 04 Corolla for a year, my missus had a 07 Polo for 5 years nearly.

I am a bit biased, but i'm open minded too and the Polo was pathetic.

It really was very slow so you had to thrash it everywhere to make any progress and that killed your mpg's.

Stretched timing chains, burnt valves, runs likes **** at the best of times and ours had a FSH. Needed to buy wishbone bushings in bulk and they aren't cheap or easy to change.

Ours only had 60k miles on it.

Had my Corolla for a year, bought it with 145k miles on it, sold it near 160 I think. Was a fairly painless experience.

Oh god looks like its an corolla for me then , also is the milage reader on car in miles or km cause it said 170,000 i think but its advertised for 100,000miles. And paintwork had good few scratches and a small dent , but that dont matter unless ur slight ocd right?

Toyotafanboi

If it's an Irish car it'l be km's, it could be a UK import in miles. Do you have a link to the cars?

Jdmsupra

Jdmsupra wrote: »

Corolla

---

http://www.threebridgesmotorsandgarages.com/viewanad.php?ad_id=1425036&r=


Polo

---

http://www.carzone.ie/used-cars/volkswagen/polo/used-2007-volkswagen-polo-comfort-waterford-fpa-200914503631029930

Corolla Reg is 05-D-775

Leonard Hofstadter

Another vote for the 'rolla, that vintage Corolla wasn't like a Toyota at all, it has a well made and quality feeling interior (once you ignore the fact it's all black), is comfortable and quiet, and as the others have alluded to, will offer far superior performance and reliability to the Polo. The 07 onwards Corolla is a pile of poo though and I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole, but the 02-06 models are excellent cars.

Jdmsupra

captainspeed wrote: »

Another vote for the 'rolla, that vintage Corolla wasn't like a Toyota at all, it has a well made and quality feeling interior (once you ignore the fact it's all black), is comfortable and quiet, and as the others have alluded to, will offer far superior performance and reliability to the Polo. The 07 onwards Corolla is a pile of poo though and I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole, but the 02-06 models are excellent cars.

Haha thanks , and why are the newer gen poo? Theres a newer gen like 2016 onwards but I know your on about the 2009-14 type saloon , whats wrong with that?

JohnBoy26

Jdmsupra wrote: »

Haha thanks , and why are the newer gen poo? Theres a newer gen like 2016 onwards but I know your on about the 2009-14 type saloon , whats wrong with that?

Nothing really just that the interior isn't as good as the older model, nor is it as good to drive. The 2010 facelift improved them a lot though and in Luna spec the facelift is a decent enough car.

Jdmsupra

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

Nothing really just that the interior isn't as good as the older model, nor is it as good to drive. The 2010 facelift improved them a lot though and in Luna spec the facelift is a decent enough car.

Aright cool thanks