gravelexpress

Prepared for a slanging already but -

I seriously need a replacement for my 15 year old Veedub Golf mk ii Gti 8v.

Saxo VTS - at 3k with 50k miles on a R plate with full history from a dealer seems a very good deal.

They seem to be quite quick and I know build quality may not be "vorsprung durch technic" or whatever. But they seem to be a genuine fast hatch.

I can live with whatever image they portray to others as I am more interested in performance, reliability and an enjoyable drive.

will13

106GTI is better for the same price!

Diablo

But strangely slower

Aside from the image problems, attrocious build quality and don't have a shunt

Pretty good apart from that

will13

Have owned both in years gone bye, and there pretty much exact the same in a straight line but the 106 goes round corners better!

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

Can't argue there. Mate pulled out on a blind bend in his polo and got side swiped by a VTR/S - it almost abliterated the front end whilst the polo suffered a minor ding on the rear arch and rear wing and a loose bumper.

Theres not much difference between the sax and 106 - personal taste if you ask me, both have similar build problems. Saxo is probably better value for money, as last time I looked the 106 Gti's were over-priced in comparison. Certainly both are more chuckable and have more grin factor than the golfs.

I'm not sure if this the same for 106's but I think the later facelift saxo's seemed to be a bit slower than the early ones. May have been dreaming it, or I drove a lemon.

David_Wallis

The gear ratios are, or were different between the cars.. the saxo had different ratios to allow the 0-60 in two gears rather than three.. depends how much you hurt them though...

106 gti is much nicer IMHO.. but saxo's are cheaper iirc..

David

gravelexpress

thanks for the feed back - all of which usefull and informative

Big Col

what size feet have you got?

gravelexpress

yeah I havent sat in one yet - but I have heard about cabin arrangements and the close pedals. I need to see for myself.

Big Col

i test drove a 106 gti about 3 years ago - well when I say test drove i actually just sat in it and then it was quite obvious it was too small. I'm 6'2" with size 11 feet. Didn't even bother going for a drive.

NWMark

if you take/took a look in the pug 106 brochure, its performance figures where trecorded with full fluids and a passenger, where as the saxo's where taken without passenger and possibly less fluids.

and the gearing is different too.

Mark

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

LOL good point, I forgot about that I could press all 3 pedals with one foot

I remember when I first drove one....I couldnt press the acelarator without pressing the brakes at the same time. You get used to it though

Big Col

Saxo VTS : 0-60 - 7.7 : 0-100 - 22.4

106 GTi : 0-60 - 8.2 : 0-100 - 23.9

figures from Autocar roadtest

As mentioned above the Saxo has a longer second gear. The 106 needs an extra gearchange to get to 60.

David_Wallis

I also have size 11's its quite easy to drive regardless of the position of pedals.. you get used to them...

heel and toe whilst applying consistent braking is very easy...as a plus point

allywrx

As much as I like my Golfs and would recommend one over a Saxo any day, I must admit, having worked for Citroen the Saxo is not a bad little car
They are fun, flingable but are extremely flimsy as mentioned, unless you fit a works cage that is
My old gaffer used to run a vts in the scottish tarmac championship and managed to see off many a Scoob, Cossie, Evo and the like on the Tour of Mull.
Wouldn't waste time getting a vtr would keep eye out for vts instead, it's not like the Golfs where the 8v is more drivable than the 16v, the vts is very free revving also. De-cat it, piggyback ecu and a re-map and makes all the difference.
Things to look out for:
Misfires:
Under tank breather pipe can foul on the handbrake cables causing water ingress into fuel system requiring tank draining and new breather pipe.
Coil packs are prone to going, easy to replace but not cheap.
Lambda probes go sometimes causing poor running also.

Knocking noises:
Front droplinks prone to going
Strut topmounts and strut inserts themselves can cause knocking
Front wishbone bushes can come away from the arms

Brakes:
Discs warp easily, fit some decent discs and pads IMHO.

Airbag light:
Usually just the connectors under the front seats needing chopped off and the wires raychemed together again.

Stear clear of any "barryboy" examples and you will have a decent little car that you can play with to your hearts content...
Just don't crash into anything

Hope this is of some assistance to you

jgevers

This year alone we had to get 4 of these piles of s**te jigged. Not for accident damage, just because of potholes and sleeping policemen had thrown the chassis out of alignment. We notice it when they come in for geometry check. Geometry all over the place and 'setback' over 30 mm at the front.

They might be fun to drive, but if you drive them hard they fall apart both mechanically and eletrically. I would havent one.

regards,

job

DarkStar66

How about a Clio 16V? I'm not sure how it compares with the Saxo/106, but they are great to drive and are a little less common. Spray the wheels gold and pretend you've got a Williams! ;-)

talizman

iTrader: (1)

IIRC, the ECU's differ between the siblings contributing to the 0-60 difference.


The suspension set-ups are virtually identical, and in fact, the Saxo is reputed to be more forgiving for those times when you get it out of shape whereas the 106 will bite you on the ***.


I never found any problems with Saxo's and I'm also 6'2 with size 10's. My olny qualm would be that there is no foot rest for your left foot.



Strange......
The shared chassis is reknowned as being a fabulous set-up, and for potholes or sleeping policemen to throw the alignment out, by up to 30mm, the potholes must have been like moon craters, and the sleeping policemen like kerb stones!

jgevers

[
Strange......
The shared chassis is reknowned as being a fabulous set-up, and for potholes or sleeping policemen to throw the alignment out, by up to 30mm, the potholes must have been like moon craters, and the sleeping policemen like kerb stones![/QUOTE]


Welcome to the roads in Fife? Alignment normally out by quite a bit, but it is the setback and SAI that goes awol. As I said, great to drive but bodyshell soft as f**k.

regards,

Job

ScoobyJawa

106 and Saxo so similar its 6 and 2 three's really

Only the 106 looks a million times better

Jamescsti

I'd recommend a Mk5 Fiesta Zetec-s instead, slightly slower 0-60 but handles much better and better build quality, should be able to get an early one i.e W/X reg for around 4k

JDM

The Fiesta Zetec S is a good car but is way slower than than the VTS. My money would go to the cheap n cheerfull Citroen.

MooseRacer

VTS/106gti's are good cars. Surprising as it may sound they are one of the few FWD 'drivers cars' left - corner like a novice and they'll bite, but both reward good driving.

mynickers

Agree with most that has been said, I would be inclined to try and get a really good condition 106 GTI or better a Rallye.

But I think Saxo's are wicked wee cars, as long as you keep yours standard and for f**k sake DO NOT put those Lexus style see through lights on the rear - how can peopel think they look better? for quite a while the VTS was the best hatch on the market IMO (reletive to price of course). Fiesta - do me a favour, tha'ts not even a warm hatch! after a Golf 8v you'd be bored out of your mind.

Do you defo want a frontwheel drive hot hatch though? These days they actually don't represent that good value, the prices hold even though they get the **** ragged out of them, and they're not really designed for it (i.e., they were a shopping trolly before the sports department got their hands on it). And insurances is based on statistics, I bet the Saxo like Novas and all the other popular hatches have the worst records for claims from young men. You end up paying a fair old amount for a sup'd up shopping trolly.

Maybe it's time to move into the way of the east, and get a nice Japanese car with drive to the rear. You should be able to get a Nissan 200sx for £3k odd, powerful, fast, rear wheel drive, ripe for being adapted or enhanced with modifications if that's your bag, and without the council estate image (no offence to VTS owners). £3-4k actually gives you a fair amount of choice, and I wouldn't look just at frontwheel drive hatch's that have been thrashed around for a few years - personally.

Gunn79

I have owned my VTS from new for just over 2 years. It is a fun car to drive, but has one of the worst image labels attached to it IMO. I have only spent money on the performance side, left the styling well alone bar a bit of colour coding. They come with rattles as standard, and the build quality is not great, but the engines are tough, and enjoy being revved hard. There are a few people out there running some impressive spec Saxos, with throttle body conv. and Turbo and Supercharger conv. 200 @ wheels is obtainable and more. Heres mine for all yo to laugh at!!

codek

lol, well the clio 16v will definately beat a saxo vts in a straight line

I've done it REALLY pisses them off. and you really really have to rev the clio, but they love it those 1.8 16v engines...

I'd say the clio is a higher class of car, than the 106/saxo for the same money. but then i would say that

talizman

iTrader: (1)

Give me a break!!!!

Since when were Ford's reknowned for their build quality? lol

As for the comment about handling much better! Jeez!

The Fiesta could not lace the 106/Saxo's boots when it comes to handling.

The frenchie's chassis is widely recognised as fantastic in the handling department.... Its funny, but you don;t hear the Fiesta being raved about in Evo magazine! (They love the 106 btw )

talizman

iTrader: (1)

I agree with the Clio 16v performing better though.

I've owner a Saxo VTR, 2 VTS's and a Clio Williams and although I appreciate that the ***** is up on power and displacement over the standard 16v, it was almost the same, and absolutely rapid. I'd describe the 106/Saxo as "nippy" but great fun, however it is an unfortunate victim of the Max Power generation.

dogboy1

Having owned a vtr/ and a vts i feel i have to comment on some of the replies to this post.

Firstly yep the saxo is a fantastic car for the money. For the record i hit a fully grown deer at 60 mph on my way home from work...Obviously the deer was killed (blood and guts everywhere, and one of the worst days of my life) but guess what i walked away, not one single scratch on me. No doubt that little car saved my life that day, braking brilliantly and yes it did crumple but according to the police that saved my life.

Its fast ...not sti fast ( Common sense) but easily fast enough to bring a smile and see off a lot of cars.

As for the "GTI being a better car",......absolue tosh.....look under my bonnet and look at most of the parts and you will see peugeot on them...ie both cars are exactly the same apart from gear ratios and cabin trim.

I paid £8500 for mine 3 years warranty , free ins, and free servicing. Peugeot wanted 11900...........anyone still wanna but the pug for those different seats and badge????????

As for 0-60 , 0-100 blah blah blah both cars are so closely matched it would take a better driver than me (and i suspect you) to get any difference on a track.

AT the end of the day...both brilliant cars but the saxo is better value.

Rant over

mynickers

PMSL that is the best sound bite I ever heard on that subject - well done Talizman, I might have to steal that from you occationally!

As for french cars, they might ratlle and feel like they're going to fall apart, but they're mechanically not too bad (waits for evidence of nightmares) I know plenty of people over the years myslef included that have had reletively trouble free motoring with Frenchie arfix quality...