2002 Volkswagen Polo Reviews - Page 10 of 13

2002 Volkswagen Polo 1.2e 55bhp petrol from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture2002
First year of ownership2002
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission petrol Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 4 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Dealer Service marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 4 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.2 / 10
Distance when acquired0 miles
Most recent distance13700 miles
Previous carFord Fiesta

Summary:

The British Leyland of Deutchland

Faults:

Crankshaft oil seal replaced at 5000miles.Clutch master cylinder replaced at 11,000 miles. Lots of rattles in the car. Goes back to the days of British Leyland. Well designed cars, but awful quality. The dealer has had to start using a Sharan to ferry the service customers about because of so many problems with the new cars.

General Comments:

My advice is to purchase something Japanese.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 22nd December, 2003

23rd Dec 2003, 09:46

This report is utterly at odds with my experience of Volkswagen. My family has operated VWs since 1950 and have not had one single problem with any of them. The quality has improved massively in recent years and is now to a standard that other manufacturers (especially Japanese) can never attain. I own a Lupo and it has given me faultless service. You obviously have very low standards to recommend people to purchase Jap-Crap.

2002 Volkswagen Polo 1.2 from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture2002
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 1.2 Manual
Performance marks 0 / 10
Reliability marks 3 / 10
Comfort marks 2 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 0 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
1.3 / 10
Distance when acquired6000 miles
Most recent distance6000 miles

Summary:

Do not waste your money on this heap of crap they call a car

Faults:

Nothing.

General Comments:

We got this car as a courtesy car whilst our Peugeot was being repaired. And we counted the days till we could hand this piece of crap back.

First of all, we found that the car was very 'boxy'. Including the interior - everything seemed to have very square edges.

The worst feature about this car was that it drank petrol like you could not believe. We were putting £10 in the car every two days. Now you might think that we were doing long journeys then? Wrong. Our 2.0L Peugeot that was being fixed at the garage was only using £10 a week.

Why anyone would buy one of these pants cars is beyond me. I think that you also find that the Polo is very much a women's car. Come on women, you've got better taste than that.

The gearstick was also very difficult to get my head around. Again, it was very block-ish. If changing gear, you had to be very straight and sharp with your movements as there was no smoothness allowed.

I could understand that people may buy the Polo because of it's price, but all I can say is that there are much better cars out there within the same price range.

We were lucky, it was just a courtesy car.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 10th December, 2003

12th Dec 2003, 06:08

I bought a Polo 1.2 bottom of the range about 5 months ago. I can understand some of your comments as I once owned a 1.9 Peugeot 405. However, you are making the worong comparisons. The Polo 1.2 is a utility car that returns very good petrol consumption if you drive it sedately (I get about 44 mpg). I don't go over 70 on Motorways, and I don't race around (I suppose I sound boring, but my boy-racer days are over, I'm 59!) It is well-engineered, no rattles (I spent a day sticking bits of paper between the plastic trim on my new Peugeot to stop the rattles!) The Polo is a trifle dull, but a very good compromise - you can get 3 largish adults in the back, there is a reasonable boot and it's easy to drive and park. It doesn't compare to a Peugeot saloon, which is all dash and flash, and very enjoyable to drive, but will last half the lifetime of the Polo.

2002 Volkswagen Polo E 1.2 from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture2002
First year of ownership2002
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 1.2 Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 4 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Dealer Service marks 3 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.2 / 10
Distance when acquired10 miles
Most recent distance1800 miles
Previous carVolkswagen Jetta

Summary:

Nice car spoilt by unreliability and bad dealer service

Faults:

Exhaust started blowing after 11,000 miles near the engine block.

It took 5 visits to the dealer to solve this problem. The catalytic converter, Lambda sensor and Exhaust Gas Recirculation valve all required replacement.

The electric door mirror control needed replacement.

General Comments:

I have had the cat 12 months.

Dealer service is poor even though I have purchase a previous vehicle from the same dealer.

Engine is runs at high revs which means acceleration at 50-60 mph is not great.

Seats are nice and comfortable.

View out of the car is good.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 18th September, 2003

Average review marks: 5.0 / 10, based on 34 reviews