Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

VW Golf vs Honda Civic



  • only1harryonly1harry NYPosts: 1,140
    I agree that the VWs have better road feel & better handling than your average Accord & Civic (excluding Si) but lets not forget that the Accord is a mid-size sedan and your '92 Jetta was and I think still is a compact (not subcompact but compact) sedan. The Accord is the same size as a Camry and it's a family car. It has also be getting bigger & bigger over the years. My friend owned a '92 Accord EX and now a '98 one. His '92 handled much better and it was more fun to drive because it was 250lbs lighter and felt almost sporty like. The Golf is not a mid-size sedan, nor considered an average family car.. You cannot expect the Accord to handle as good or have the same road feel as a Golf.
    Test drive a Civic EX 5sp. (which is what you should be comparing the Golf or Jetta to) and you 'll see a difference between it and the Accord.
    Anyway, I like VWs in general, especially the GTI VR6 but 2 of my friends had an '89 and a '91 Jetta and they both had a lot of problems. The '89 Jetta blew a head gasket at around 110K miles so he paid a lot of money to have it fixed. About a year later the engine ceased at 135K mi.
    But it's not just that. Both of them were having a lot of other problems after 70-80K mi. it seemed. The other guy with the '91 sold it with just under 100K mi. just after he fixed a leaky power steering pump and a long list of other things that I remember cost him $1,100! (this was in late '97). He bought a new Prelude VTEC and he loves it but that's in a different class.
    I guess you could say I have VW-phobia now although I 'm sure a lot of the problems in earlier models would not be inherent in the new ones.. but..then I visited the Beetle topic a few days ago and there are many new GLX owners whose cars are in the shop after only a few days of ownership! Some just died or the service engine light came on and experience performance loss (due to the alarm..) I know the turbo Beetles are new models but there seems to be quite enough of them. How many others are there that don't participate in this forum? Anyway I 'm not trying to put them down. I 'm just scared to buy one you could say. I wouldn't mind getting my hands on a GTI VR6 but my Acura Integra GSR gives me plenty of satisfaction for now and my Civic.. well that's just basic transportation that was well worth the $12.5K I paid and so far in 3yrs it has rewarded me with 87K trouble free miles and will continue to do so up to around 200K mi. (that's when my friend sold his '92 Civic and the buyer still has it a year later) when I 'll sell it - and still get a few bucks for it.
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • mznmzn Posts: 727
    I've owned two Golfs (I'm on my second one now) and I can't tell you how often I'm told, "I bet it's really fun to drive!" And that comment, 'fun to drive' is one that VW Golf owners hear again and again and has been repeated in many posts in this conference.

  • I'm in the market for a new car in the next 9 to 12 months, and I want a hatchback. My first choice would have been a 2001 civic hatchback, but I keep hearing that they're going to be discontinued. My next choice is a 2000 or 2001 golf gl, but I've been told that vw's are expensive to maintain - at least compared to honda's. Any truth to that?
  • Who really thinks 100,000 is a lot of miles these days. If your car only lasts that long then you've been cheated. I now drive a '99 Honda Civic Coupe. I wanted the hatchback but there weren't any in stock. My previous car was an '89 Dodge Colt (same as a Mitsubishi Mirage) and lasted 244,000 miles, still had the original clutch and had not started slipping yet. It needed a major brake job but had very few problems the 9 years I had it. My '82 Colt lasted 190,000 miles. I've heard Hondas also last a good long time with little maintenance. Since I wasn't looking for a car to "speak" to me, I went with the Honda, plus I have a budget. I guess it depends on if you're looking for feel-good performance go for the VW Golf, but if you want longevity performance get a Honda.
  • qwordqword Posts: 20
    Or for that matter get a Mitsubishi Mirage or maybe even a Chevy Metro. To me it seems that those are the types of cars the Honda Civic should be compared to, because the people who drive them, "in my opinion", really don't care or just don't think about the ride quality. They just want an okay little car that's cheap on gas to get them from point A to point B without costing them hardly anything in repair bills. I have yet to hear a Honda Civic owner call their car fun to drive. They all just say, "yes sir it sure is reliable and cheap". No mention what so ever as to the actual driving experience. While on the other hand you and I both have heard VW Golf owners talk about how fun and reliable the cars are. They may cost a couple of thousand dollars more than the Civic's, Mirage's, and Metro's but it's because the Golf is a more solid car than any of those, "in my opinion". I once owned a 1987 VW Scriocco that I had for seven years. When I purchased the car it had a little over 87k miles on it. When I sold the car it had over 220k miles on it. I gave the car one tune up, a new clutch, and a new battery. The previous owner had just replaced the brakes as well as the fuel pump and that was it. Now, because of my Scriocco's awesome feel on the road and it's, "longevity performance ", I now own a Y2K Golf GLS TDI that I know I'll get good use out of.
  • only1harryonly1harry NYPosts: 1,140
    Well now you 've heard it here: My Civic is fun to drive! and a lot faster than your Golf Turbo-diesel.
    I have a '97 Civic DX htcbk 5-sp. and in 0-60 acceleration & 1/4 mi. it's faster than your 10s turbo diesel Golf. The Civics are light cars and are not slow. My car weights 2250lbs (compared to 2700-2800lb Golfs) and it's been tested at 8.7sec 0-60. I 've put slightly wider alloy wheels on it with bigger higher performance tires, 14x6" alloys and 195-60 Dunlops D60's HR rated tires and the car is now a lot more fun to drive. The ride is still comfortable because I stayed with 14" diameter (but 1" wider) and handles much better.
    I will occasionally do 115mph (when I 'm in the racing mood) and I still get 32-33mpg after I 've been racing it all day long. Normal driving I average 35mpg mixed city & hway.
    I have 88K mi. on it now and only had a blown speed sensor (speedometer stopped working) replaced which was covered by the warranty.
    All I 've done is a front brake job and a tune-up: plugs, wires, distrib. cap & rotor & air filter. All for $200.
    Civics can be fun to drive. They can be revved high and with some better tires will outhandle a Golf. Look at the skidpad #s. The Golf is only
    .01g better! Nothing good tires can't fix..
    I 'm not saying the Civic handles as good as the GTI but it's comparable to the average or base Golf.
    Overall the Golf may have better road feel but look at the price difference too.
    I would not compare the Civic with the Geo Metro because I don't think the Metro can go much faster than 90mph.. and the Civic has a lot more room than a Metro! The Metro is a true econo-box and gets in excess of 40mpg.
    Mitsubishi Mirage? yes, that's a better comparison.
    But for the price of a base Golf ($15-16K, forget GLS that's $17K & up) I 'd get the Civic EX coupe that comes nicely loaded, has antiroll bars for better handling and 127hp compared to 115hp in the Golf and still weighs 300lbs less than a Golf, not to mention gas mileage and resale value.. but it's not a htbk, so for now I 'll stay with my DX hbk (and my Integra GSR which more fun than even GTI VR6).
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • qwordqword Posts: 20
    Well let me tell you Harry you are the first, and really it shouldn't count because you were basically prompted to say that but that's cool. Yeah your Honda is faster than my Golf (for now) but it should be considering my cars a diesel with only 90hp. In my opinion your car should spank my car in acceleration times, but realistically it doesn't thanks to Honda's whimpy torque rating. The Civic EX has 127hp yes, but at only 107 ft/lbs. of torque. The VW Golf 2.0 has 115hp @ 122 ft/lbs. of torque. The torque difference is probable one of the reasons why the 1.8 liter Turbo Golf out accelerates the Honda Si, which has more horses under it's hood compared to the V-Dub, and that torque difference is also why I strongly favor the GTI over your Integra GSR. Sure the GSR supposedly out handles the GTI, but here in Dallas there aren't to many slalom courses open to the public. It's all big open highways on which about every other single day when a buddy of mine is driving to work in his 96 GTI he humiliates Civic and Integra owners alike that dare to race him down Central Expressway. Also I've never really been one to base my opinions on how fast a car is just by reading a magazine. Those times are usually done by professional drivers who spend about two hours trying to get the times lower and lower. I'm one of those knuckleheads who you'll find at the local
    street races where I have yet to see a Honda of any sorts beat a VW with a 2.0 or the all mighty VR6 under it's hood. Please let me reassure you that I'm not trying to knock down Honda's, my girlfriend is trying to buy a 99 model EX, (which has no antiroll bar on it), that I plan to do some aftermarket work on just as soon as I finish with mine, which basically consist of a computer upgrade that will boost my horsepower and torque up to around 30-40 percent. I'm actually tickled to death that she's getting a Civic, because this fun and harmless dispute will continue at our home. Actually it has already began!!!! :)
  • only1harryonly1harry NYPosts: 1,140
    I hope you didn't mean that a Golf TDI can outrun a Civic Si.. Maybe you mean the turbo Beetle?
    Diesel engines are not meant to be fast but reliable and get good gas mileage. And don't believe everything aftermarket manufacturers advertise. No chip can give you 30-40% more HP unless you supercharge your motor or go with turbo, but you already have one!
    The fact remains that a Golf TDI weighs almost 2800lbs and needs every one of those 155ft-lbs to get it moving! The Si weighs 2600 has 77% more HP and it's in the low 7's 0-60. Your car could never do that given that it's turbo charged already. The one roadtest I saw on the TDI it went to 60 in 10.1sec, about the same as the regular 115hp Golfs. Both Civic Si and Golf TDI cost the same, about $17.9-18K. I 'd take the Si any day because it handles a lot better and it's much faster, not to mention reliability and resale value..
    I beat regular Golfs at the light all the time so I don't know what you mean by you 've never seen any Hondas beat the 2.0L VWs at street races.. What are you saying that they 're faster than a 140hp Integra or 160hp Si, or 170hp GSRs? give us a break! The VW VR6 maybe. It's a fast car but a GSR is very very close to it. With some sipmle bolt-on mods like headers & exhaust and a cold air intake a GSR can beat the V6.
    Look at the recent Car & Driver article where they compared 7 coupes/hatchbacks and the GSR came in 4th ahead of the GTI V6.
    My Civic hatchback weighs 2250lbs and at 8.7s 0-60 it's 1.4 sec. faster in 0-60 than a '99-00 Golf
    That's a big difference! I had a '90 Geo Storm w/95hp that was a 10sec car to 60 and it was a lot slower than my Civic htbk.
    As far as mods, sure you can make the Golfs faster but there is a huge market for Honda performace parts too..
    You 're wife is making a very wise choice to buy a Civic EX. I hope she won't get an automatic because it does the car a lot injustice and robs it of power.
    Why did you buy a 90hp car if you were looking for performance? I bought a GSR for performance. I wouldn't waste my money on mods if I were you unless the car feels unbearably slow to you. I 'd upgrade the suspension first. It's still a diesel and not the same as gasoline engines.
    If you do get 30-40% more power out that diesel engine (which I doubt very highly) you will run into serious reliability problems, warped head, camshafts and even bent lifters, etc. You cannot give an engine 30-40% more power without doing some engine mods to reliably handle the extra power. Even GSRs with superchargers start having engine problems after a year or two if no other mods were done to the motor.
    240hp (40% power increase from SC) I think is a little too much even for a VTEC engine to handle, it's still a 1.8L motor..
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • qwordqword Posts: 20
    No I did not mean that the TDI Golf is faster than the Civic Si. I meant to say that yes the 1.8t Beetle is faster than the Civic Si in acceleration times. However; there will be 1.8t gas powered Golf/Jetta here in the States in a year or so, and they to will be faster than the Si while having less horsepower but more torque. I bought my TDI from a VW/Jeep dealership, but that was after I went to Rusty Wallace here in Dallas which is a VW/Honda dealership. I knew I wanted a VW to begin with but I wanted to drive the Si to see what all the hype was about. From the inside the only difference between it and the EX from what I could tell was the Si's leather wrapped steering wheel and the orange color of the Si's instrumentation lighting. When I drove the car I started off shifting as though I was in my VW which caused the car to feel very weak down low. The sales rep informed me on the cars VTEC engine which in his opinion I wasn't getting into because I was shifting to soon. He told me to rev it until around 7k and 8k which at the point the car sounded as if it were going to explode. Completely opposite of VW's where the power is available much much much sooner like 2500rpm to about 5000 or 6000rpm. That is why I think the acceleration times in magazines for the VW's are slower, because the drivers are driving them like every other Japanese car. I once saw a road test in which a Honda EX with an automatic transmission beat a VW Jetta with a manual transmission by two seconds which going by their numbers, puts that EX with the automatic transmission in the Si's ball park when considering acceleration. Yeah right!!!!!!!!!
    My girlfriend currently drives a 1997 Dodge Neon that has 130 or 132hp 2.0 16 valve engine. Sure it has more hp than the Golf but it still wont out run one. In regards to the TDI and aftermarket part, check out AutoBahn Designs web site at Take a look at the 1999 TDI golf they did which has 130hp and over 180 ft/lbs. of torque that to this day is still very reliable and still gets around 47-50mpg. The hp rating does include an intake and exhaust combo which with out it the Golf would be at 115hp. That's enough to still beat any Civic. I'll find you the dyno chart which supports those figures or actually if can read German check out Over there diesels with monster hp and torque are an everyday thing. Volkswagen uses a diesel Golf they call Demon to race with. It has 275hp and 325 ft/lbs of torque. I'm sure they spent a pretty penny on it but it's still the base platform TDI engine! Also I honestly HAVE NOT SEEN A CIVIC OR INTEGRA BEAT A VW at the races, and you can hear why when your there. Those guys in the Civic's and Integras are still in second gear by the time the VW folks are hitting the top of third. Back in 98 at the Ennis Nopi drag wars it was a normally aspirated GTI that took home first place beating everything in it's class which included TURBO HONDA'S and TURBO ACURA'S.
  • Could someone explain the difference in the VW golf models for me? I am considering buying a 1996 VW Golf III or Golf GTI --- OR a 1996 Honda Civic Hatchback.

    I don't really care about performance, but do care about a "fun" drive and a stylish look. My main concerns are price, maintenance and mileage. I can drive a manual or automatic, but prefer an automatic. : )

    Any advice appreciated!
  • only1harryonly1harry NYPosts: 1,140
    Well, now you 're talking about modded VWs. I was talking about stock.
    I 've been to the track several times and stock VWs or with just a cold air intake run 15.3 - 17sec. in the 1/4 and this includes V6s.
    There are modded Civics & Integras (turbo plus nitrus) with 400hp+ that do the 1/4 in 11sec!
    You can't talk about sooped up cars because every car is different depending how much money they 've put in it.
    We 're talking about stock here. And the 115hp Golfs & Jettas don't hold a candle to a Civic or Integras. The VW VR6 is the only one that can stand up to a stock Integra GSR but then again a base Prelude (200hp) or a Type-R will have it for breakfast.
    I 've beaten plenty of Passats V6 & Jettas V6 in street races (at the light and on the hway) but I have yet to race the slightly lighter GTI VR6.
    Good luck with your mods and if you drop your 0-60 times by 3 sec. to match a Civic Si I 'll be very surpised. The performace air intake & exhaust all makes sense. You probably forgot to mention a different header too. You must improve the overall breathing of the car.
    I 'm doing some suspension mods on my GSR. I 'd rather have more control than more acceleration (I already have that). You can have all the speed you want but if your suspension can't handle it what good is it? There is nothing more exhilerating than quickly changing lanes or quick switchbacks at 120mph. Gives you a lot of confidence..
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • tomcat630tomcat630 Posts: 854
    Here is what I know about Golfs. In '96, the GTI was either a 4 cyl or VR6 powered 2 door. The 4 doors were GL's only.

    The Golf "III" designation was from 1994-1995 only, refering to the 3rd generation Golf model.
  • rae52rae52 Posts: 103
    I own a '99 dx hatch; does anybody else experiencing a rattle and/or plastic rubbing noise from either the right rear or left rear of their car?

    I'm bringing my car to the dealer (Clinton Honda,Annandale, NJ for their tech to road test it
  • if you driven the 00 model of the golf glx please give me your feelings on the cars suspension and handling
  • only1harryonly1harry NYPosts: 1,140
    I own a '97 DX htbk and get this noise sometimes on very cold mornings but after a mile or 2 of driving, it goes away.
    From what I hear there seems to be a lot of Civics with this rattle which normally comes from the rear right (behind the passenger).
    Just a week ago a guy wrote that the dealer finally fixed it!
    From what I can understand, it was the molding on the outside of the car that was rattling or something inside it. Or maybe molding inside the car? I don't remember exactly now.. I read this in the Civic EX topic in the convertible/sports forum. Go back about 2 weeks and you should be able to find it..
    Anyway, this noise started last year on my car but it's only there once in a while and then it goes away. I have 88K mi. on the car and it doesn't really bother me. BTW, it seems to be in all the Civics not just hatchbacks.
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • rae52rae52 Posts: 103
    Thank you only1Harry for the help locating the post for my "problem". I'll see what the dealer finds and recommends.
  • rae52rae52 Posts: 103
    Hi folks, just wanted anybody who has the rattle in the back of their hatch to be aware of fix for that noise.

    I brought my car to Clinton Honda (see my earlier post). The tech "adjusted the rear hatch latch(made it flusher w/ the body) and adjusted the rubber stoppers. END OF NOISE!
    This tech first went on a road test with me; we stopped halfway, then he road in the back and understood where the problem was, adjusted those two items road tested again and that was it. All the time spent on my car was 30 min.
  • my '95 Civic DX 5sp has been a blast to drive, akin to a superfast gocart driven on a milk crate. I've never added the aftermarket products that make this car really fun because I didn't consider it safe over 100mph. The faster I went the smaller I felt. I told my wife, the car would be the end of me so now it's for sale.

    I bought a new 2000 Golf GLS 4 door two days ago. The Golf is more comfortable, better handling and I feel much safer now at the same speed. I'd consider the Golf a driver's car and the Civic a tuner's quickie.

    My Golf has a 2 liter 115hp engine, too little for the bulk of the car. It's disappointing off the line but between 60 and 90 it's a rock steady and confident cruiser. I'm already dreaming about 300 horses under the hood of this car. I think it could take it and I'd have a lot of fun getting it there.

    Dependability? Don't give me a lecture on this. I've got a '73 camper in my driveway on it's fourth engine. I didn't by a Volks for dependability.

    I used to think the Hondas were cookie cutters and as I've read here termed 'appliances' but I was surprised by the fun factor in my little car. I bought my civic for dependability and fuel economy and got both. Now with 86,000 miles, I feel like it's just getting broken in and I'm confident the next owner will drive the wheels off it and have just as much fun for as many miles as I did.
  • only1harryonly1harry NYPosts: 1,140
    You 're right. I just hit 90k mi. on my '97 DX hatch and I think it's still getting faster & faster and still braking in. Civics are fun to drive unlike what most VW owners have said here. With a set of a little bigger wheels and tires they handle much better but unfortunately like you I often find myself doing 100 & 110mph and that's not good. Believe it or not it feels a lot more stable at those speeds with better tires (& wider wheels) but it doesn't have the braking capabilities and refinement of the VW (or my Integra GSR's). Afterall should a $13K Civic drive better than a $17-18K GLS? It shouldn't and it doesn't. Like you said you feel safer in the VW and it gives you more confidence at higher speeds and handles better.
    The main reason for this is because the Golf GLS is 400-500lbs heavier but along with the weight VW has done a good job stiffening the chassis and improving the suspension of the Golf. It's really all relative to price I think. You get what you pay for. The Civic is supposed to be affordable but on the other hand it's hard to kill their engines and are are very reliable which is why they sell so well.
    The Golf is not an econo-box anymore. Starting at $16K with the GLS reaching $18K it has graduated to a slightly higher class but rightfully so. It offers more (except HP) as far as amenities, good all around solid body and road feel, ABS, etc.
    Civic & Golf have grown apart. We really cannot compare them anymore.
    I think the '01 Civics will be more in the Golf's class because Honda realized people want something more than just reliable transportation, like some excitement and a more solid road feel and with VW sales reaching new heights in the US, and elsewhere, they have to take a very careful approach on how they build their cars. Afterall, they are still competing with all the compacts such as Golfs, Jettas, Echos, Neons, Corollas & Sentras.
    VW so far has done an excellent job improving their cars and increasing sales but a new motor to replace the 115hp one (underpowered for the cars' weight) is way overdue!
    People like me would never buy a car with such a power to weight ratio. The VR6? sure now that's just right, but I don't want a V6 and don't have $23K to spent. Why not a $16-17K 135hp 4cyl. Golf? now if VW could just add another 20 horses to at least beat the Civic EX (127hp), imagine how many more they 'd sell. A couple of my friend's didn't buy a Golf because they were disappointed with the acceleration. One bought a Civic EX and the other an Integra LS, both were my recommendations. I think the underpowered 2.0L engine is it's only drawback.
    I mean the S2000 gets 240hp out of its 2.0L engine! that's over twice as much.. I 'm only asking for 20 more. Sure they will have the turbo here soon with 150hp or more, but who wants to pay the higher insurance for the turbo?
    My brother owns a Type-R with 195hp which is a true sports car, and only pays about $50 more than my GS-R. Turbos are out of the question. They should be able to achieve 150hp or more with naturally aspirated engines like Honda & Toyota and everyone else. N/A keeps insurance costs down and longer engine life. sorry for the long note..
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • kevinckevinc Posts: 51
    That was WEAK!!
  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 19,816
    But, then, so was the VW!
  • mznmzn Posts: 727
    Re: Stirring The Pot

    In the fifteen years we've owned VWs, we've NEVER had a dead battery. Our block has about 6 VWs on it. I took an informal poll and none of them had ever had a dead battery. You hear the exceptions of course by virtue of the fact that these folks are at a Honda dealership. The other 99% of us are very happy drivers!

  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 19,816
    I think it happens when they sit for several days or something.

    And, my comments are based strictly on my experiences. Any other salesperson here will agree with me. They quickly learn that VW's have their quirks.

    Engines seem to run OK. It's the little things, mostly electrical that cause trouble. Switches, door handles, stuff like that. These same items rarely cause trouble on a Japanese car. Even domestic models are better.

    In my younger years, I owned many a Volkswagen. I loved my '62 Bug dearly.

    I'm glad your luck has been good. They are very high on my list of cars that make me cringe when we take one in as a trade in.

    Maybe we just get the bad ones?
  • scomoscomo Posts: 39
    I'm looking at a Golf GL and was wondering how $$$ everyone paid? THanks...
  • qwordqword Posts: 20
    Hey Volksnut , congratulations on your recent purchase of the Golf. I know that you'll be able to enjoy it for a long time.
    Before my last purchase of my Y2K Golf TDI, I had a 1994 Golf GL that basically had the same 2.0 engine as yours. Knowing what I do now about aftermarket VW Tuning, I wish that I had kept the car. Before I got rid of it I sank about $425 into it which improved the hp to 140 from 115. That was a P-Chip by Neuspeed, a Weapon R cold air intake w/ a Eurosport heat shield, a Dianichi Turbo Muffler (had plans on forced induction), and a set of Eurosport plugs and plug wires. The car already had EiBach sport springs when I bought it. I also added 16' inch GTR's to improve the looks of the car. After that the car was a total blast to drive, and it didn't sound like a pissed off weed eater like most Honda's, Neons, and other compacts with aftermarket exhaust it had a very deep and strong sound to it.
    The 2.0 is a great engine to build on and I know for a fact that it could easily handle 300 horses. Check out, for information on that.
  • qwordqword Posts: 20
    I've owned three Volkswagens and have never experienced any type of interior problems. Like my current Golf, my 94 Golf didn't have a switch to activate the rear defrost it had a button located next to the radio and it never just fell apart on me. My Scriocco had a switch but it never fell apart. I wouldn't call those typical problems of VW's.
    I know a handful of people with Civics, and Accords that have experienced problems with their Honda's interior features as well. Such things like the buttons for the horns popping off due to big bumps in the roads, rear mirrors flying off due to bumps in the road, and the middle console latch not working properly. Not to mention car paint fading when the car isn't even a year old. ARE THOSE TYPICAL PROBLEMS OF HONDAS??? Must be because all of the above mentioned cars are 1998's and above.
    Also Honda's have tons of road noise compared to VW's, that alone should tell you that VW's are built better. I mean take a ride in a loaded Accord, and then jump right into a base model Golf and go for a ride down that same street.
    Maybe Honda should put more thought into the ride quality of a car and not so much it's looks and prices.
    Like you however; that's just my opinion backed by different experiences with Honda's so it doesn't mean much, because people will still buy both types of cars for a long long time.
  • I am not bragging, in fact I am not really proud of this, but I have owned over 17 new cars in the last 12 years. Including a 95 GTI, a 96 Accord, a 97 Covette, a 97 Camary, a 98 Maxima, a 2000 Vovlo V70 and a 2000 GTI (VR6). The bottom line is that I am not brand loyal, I buy what I like and the best car I have ever owned has been this 2000 GTI (VR6).

    Each of the other cars had plenty of quircks of their own, including the 95 GTI, and the almighty Honda! Yes, folks the Honda, mine was a boring car with problems with the electrical system. So when I went shopping last month I dove everything all over again and read everything I could find. I came back to the GTI car for one reason... For the money there is nothing even close. That is if you want performance, durability, fun, stable, and the list goes on and on.

    VW has packed so much into these cars for a remarkable value and the reason is some of the problems they had in the early 90's. They are out to win back the hearts of driver's and they did it with me. I can afford almost any car I want, and I drove everything before buying this GTI, from the BMW 3 series, to the new Celica GTS, and the hopped up Integra. I even drove the new Eclipse (save some time and skip that one) nothing had the solid, sporty feel and best of all you won't see yourself driving everywhere you go. I have not seen another new GTI since buying mine and that's a great feeling, It's always turning heads and I highly recommend this car. Check out the Road and Track 2000 road tests, the GTI ourperforms all the [non-permissible content removed], but especially the civic.

    As for dealer service, well that's another story. I have never had a car where I actually liked the dealer with the exception of Volvo, they are first class.

    Vvrroomm and have fun!
  • I dunno about what some others may have experienced....and I am kinda biased, sort of, but there's been a few things that have been irritating me throughout all of these posts...

    The one main thing is the "Fun" factor of honda verses VW... and this is where I may be biased.

    For VW...I will does seem to have a little more "creature comforts" that, although nice, aren't really needed! Up here in Canada, it doesn't normally get as hot as it does down south, so personally, I think A/C is overrated, heck...what's the use of a/c when an open window will do! But from my experience, (4 years driving, 5 cars) VW IS the more expensive one for every aspect, (mileage, repairs, etc) so it kinda makes sence that it would have to make up for those factors by being a little more "sportier" than a civic!
    On the performance side of things, I'm not too sure if I can really say that the VW is much better than the civics...the last few VW's that I've been in and drivin,(both being VW Jetta's) but I seemed to have trouble adjusting to the really LOW rpm-to-torque of the TDI and that may be what was wrong, but needles to say no matter how hard I tried, I still had trouble getting the VW's to squeal the tires off a standing start...and shifting up to second had no redeeming factors as it just slid in and started accelerating....up to highway speeds (for me about 95mph) which they both seemed to rev rather high!! (3200 to 3800 5th)

    now for the honda side. I haven't had much experience with these, but I still have come to love them rather unquestionably, mainly for the cost saving mileage, and maintenance! I also like the fact that there's the 7 year 160,000 KM BUMPER-TO-BUMPER warranty that's available! Sure, there's a few less "creature comforts" but for my needs, I don't really need them things like ABS and air conditioning and sunroofs!! Who really would with 9 months of below freezing weather a year!! as for the performance, sure, there may be the fact that the honda's that I'm playing with now are newer(2000 models compared with 91 tdi and 95 base jetta) so that may be another part of my bias, but I do like the fact that i don't have to worry about feeling like the car's gonna pull me off the road in a corner (being lighter) especially since I like taking them corners that are rated at a max safe speed of (pardon my canadian measurements) 30KM/H at about 110km/h!! that combined with the satisfying squeal of the tires from a standstill and another satisfying chirp on shifting to second!, and this is in the smallest performer in the honda line, slightly spruced up!! (dx hatch) which doesn't even hold a candle to the Coupe SiR thats available up here! Another little side note, the RPM levels at highway speeds (95MPH) are a nominal 2800 in 5th!

    LOL....never to make a small impression, I leave this rather long message for you all to peruse, and I shall be glad to answer to anything that may arise whenever I can, as I just discovered edmunds, and really appreciate everything that I have learned and read about here! I consider myself lucky to be able to be one of the relatively few to be able to actually come across such a haven of information in such a chaotic world such as the internet! and will endevor to keep visiting regularly to be able to reply to anything that I may be able to! I figure that I should be able to answer just about anything about the Canadian versions of the Civics that anyone may have, especially since I should be getting my new 2000 hatchback DX here in the next month or so (backordered!! they were really popular, but now that they've been discontinued due to the appearance of the special edition hatchback it's a relativly hard one to come by!) and will try to keep everyone posted on any developments that might deem useful!

    till later...
  • only1harryonly1harry NYPosts: 1,140
    I totally agree. Like I 've said before many times in this topic, the Civic hatchback is cheaper, has better acceleration and costs less to to own (gas, maintenance, etc).
    My '97 hatchback now with 92K mi. can still burn rubber and beat any stock 4cyl. Golf. With some aftermarket wheels, nothing fancy, just some 14x6" and 195-60 HR tires it becomes fun to drive and can take those turns much faster than before.

    So what's this special edition '00 hatchback? What does it come with? does it come with the same 106hp engine? I 'm lucky mine didn't come with power steering 3 years ago so I get a few more horses at the wheels (plus it weighs less)than today's DX htbk that has PS.
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • I just bought a black 2000 Golf GL. I got alloy wheels from the dealer. With the alloys and a cd changer I paid about 15.5k. I have put z rated tires on the car, splash guards, tinted the windows and it looks great. I get alot of questions and comments about it from people when they see it. I really like the way it handles around town and it cruises at 80mph just fine. I looked at Hondas and Focuses but the Honda HB didn't have abs and the Focus just seemed cheap to me...
Sign In or Register to comment.