Volkswagen Polo 1.2 SE 65 5dr

What are the main things to look for when buying a Volkswagen Polo 1.2 SE 65 5dr.

http://www.seremotors.com/details.asp?CarID=9246
that is the car we are looking at. Can anybody tell me what to look out for?

Thanks, Clarke

Hate to say it but get a Toyota or a Honda!
Stevehttps://www.vwaudiforum.co.uk/forum/i...cons/icon4.gif

I have used this website and found it very useful to find info.

www.honestjohn.co.uk

Here is a direct link to info on your car, with a little on the 1.2

http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/carbycar/index.htm?md=555

For a full road test on the 1.2 here is a link to that:

http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/road_tests/index.htm?id=35

If you traul through the Polo section on the forum I'm sure you'll find plenty of info (good and bad) about the specific model you are looking at.

Hope this helps!

:beerchug:

I havet he same model, 1.2 65bhp 9n 5dr.

Personally I like the car, but it has many problems since I bought it 4months ago, I won't go into the problems as they are mostly specific to my own car.

Biggest advice I can give is DO NOT BUY THE 1.2, even if you got a good working one (better than mine) the 1.2 is a WOEFUL engine, VERY low on power, VERY difficult to drive (there is SO little power/torque that you have to slip the clutch A LOT to get it to move from stationary, so by 50k miles, the clutch is nearly gone, I have seen 3 similar 1.2's locally when buying mine with ~50k miles with virtually no clutch left, one was slipping!)

1) its very low on power
2) it BURNS FUEL LIKE NOTHING ELSE< for a 1.2, the economy is appauling, on the same 20mile each way work commute a modified, 2.0, 16v, turbocharged 265bhp, 1400kg saab gets SIGNIFICANTLY Better economy (39mpg for the polo, 46mpg for the saab), again, might be my particular car is bad
3) on the motorway its a joke, a genunie 70mph is 3800rpm, and fetchs me 38-42mpg at that speed, with just driver, no luggage, good weather, good tyres & just serviced by vw (42mpg is appauling for a car of this type)

the actual car, polo 9n (2002-2005) is BRILLIANT, I like EVERYTHING about it except that 1.2 engine.
On a recent holiday we hired a 9n1 (2007) polo with the 1.4 engine, and th difference was unbelievable.
the 1.4 is much quicker,
but more importantly, easier to drive, less tiresome on the clutch & gears (don't have to change gear so often), MUCH MUCH better MPG (motorway @ 70mph = 3000rpm, driver + 2passengers + luggage + good weather + recently serviced by hire company = 50mpg)

Been a bit of a blab, sorry for that, But I really can't stress enough, if you like the idea of a modern polo, buy the 1.4 petrol (any version) or the 1.4tdi (any version) for the love of god steer clear of the weesly 1.2 :beerchug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BrickMan

Biggest advice I can give is DO NOT BUY THE 1.2

---

In addition, if you read up on here, the 1.2 has a habit of throwing its timing chain a few teeth during the course of a routine oil change.

I believe it has something to do with the hydraulic chain tensioner going slack when the oil is drained. Upon the first re-start the flapping chain can jump a few teeth.

I don't think is that common but I've read of several instances on here.

:zx11: i am sorry to say that, but don't buy this car, it will only give u headaches and heartaches, timing chain prone to cause huge problem which cost easily over 1K to fix, electrics and underpowered engine is also a nightmare, the only thing i can praise abt the car is the chassis, sturdy.

I had a 2005 Polo 1.2 12v for two years and it ran faultlessly with what I considered to be a free revving, eager engine that returned an average of 42mpg over 15000 miles. It was not powerful but had plenty of mid range torque compared to rival 1.0 and 1.2 engines; In particular the Japanese engines which have impressive power outputs but no useable power at the low to mid range. I am sure that there are plenty of people out there who have had problems with their 1.2 but in the interests of balance, mine was great.
In a former life I used to sell lots of 1.2 Polos and only remember one coming back with a minor engine fault. The reason I bought the Polo over a Toyota / Honda was in part down to the fact that I don't like my cars to feel as if they are made out of paper. (I also used to sell Hondas). Having said all of that, when I buy another Polo it will be with the 1.4 engine. It is a smoother, gutsier engine and gives the car a more mature character.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ptolemy

I had a 2005 Polo 1.2 12v for two years and it ran faultlessly with what I considered to be a free revving, eager engine that returned an average of 42mpg over 15000 miles. It was not powerful but had plenty of mid range torque compared to rival 1.0 and 1.2 engines; In particular the Japanese engines which have impressive power outputs but no useable power at the low to mid range. I am sure that there are plenty of people out there who have had problems with their 1.2 but in the interests of balance, mine was great.
In a former life I used to sell lots of 1.2 Polos and only remember one coming back with a minor engine fault. The reason I bought the Polo over a Toyota / Honda was in part down to the fact that I don't like my cars to feel as if they are made out of paper. (I also used to sell Hondas). Having said all of that, when I buy another Polo it will be with the 1.4 engine. It is a smoother, gutsier engine and gives the car a more mature character.

---

i feel exactly the same as you when i bought the polo, well i guess its just me ::confused:

The 9n Polo is a terrible, terrible car. Sure, some people are lucky with them, and some of the more recent ones probably have most of the niggles fixed, but as a used car they tend to be a real liabiliy.

We just got rid of our 2002 1.2S after one year of ownership, during which our well kept, full service-historied car of average mileage cost us at least £1500 in repairs alone. A new throttle body, catalytic converter, and EGR valve were needed just to cure the various engine problems, and even then the EGR valve needed a second repair months later.

The climate control never worked properly due to sticky motorised valves (VERY common) meaning the car was permanently hot when you wanted cold and vice versa - repairing that would have cost us hundreds more as it means taking the dash off. The rear washer hose came apart in two different places over the winter, soaking the inside of the boot in the process. The suspension creaked when it was wet and knocked when it was dry - symptomatic of another common fault with the anti-roll bar that would have cost us plenty more if the MOT had picked up on it. All in all, the car was a complete disaster - and the vast majority of the problems were not down to poor maintenance or bad luck, but extremely bad design and engineering by Volkswagen back in 2002.

I'd never buy another Polo, I downright pity the people that are buying new Polos right now, and to be honest I'll be steering clear of Volkswagen and all their subsidiaries for many years to come.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JUV

The 9n Polo is a terrible, terrible car. Sure, some people are lucky with them, and some of the more recent ones probably have most of the niggles fixed, but as a used car they tend to be a real liabiliy.

We just got rid of our 2002 1.2S after one year of ownership, during which our well kept, full service-historied car of average mileage cost us at least £1500 in repairs alone. A new throttle body, catalytic converter, and EGR valve were needed just to cure the various engine problems, and even then the EGR valve needed a second repair months later.

The climate control never worked properly due to sticky motorised valves (VERY common) meaning the car was permanently hot when you wanted cold and vice versa - repairing that would have cost us hundreds more as it means taking the dash off. The rear washer hose came apart in two different places over the winter, soaking the inside of the boot in the process. The suspension creaked when it was wet and knocked when it was dry - symptomatic of another common fault with the anti-roll bar that would have cost us plenty more if the MOT had picked up on it. All in all, the car was a complete disaster - and the vast majority of the problems were not down to poor maintenance or bad luck, but extremely bad design and engineering by Volkswagen back in 2002.

I'd never buy another Polo, I downright pity the people that are buying new Polos right now, and to be honest I'll be steering clear of Volkswagen and all their subsidiaries for many years to come.

---

yep, totally with you on this one mate, u either lucky or i hell to be a polo owner, 3mths after i bought the car the cat converter went and cost me €900 to fix, then one year later the dash start blinking and eventually the timing chain went which makes the car to a complete stall, the bill is another €800, this happen on the day my new born son is ready to go home from hospital!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!remind you it will cost a hell lot more if i get it done with a VW dealer, and now 1.5 yrs later, a power steering problem, who knows it can be another few hundred down the drain....

if the car is as good as the polo 6N then i have no complaint really, but how on earth a car with such problem as the next generation ??

i can feel the repair cost is definitly first class, but the value u getting surely is lower class!:zx11:

There seem to be quite a few people with problematic Polos but I wouldn't say that it was a terrible car. In addition to my 2005 1.2 (65), my Mum also owned a 2003 1.2 (65) E and my friend has a 2004 1.2 55 (E) all without any serious problems over eight years of combined ownership. Every make of car has its problems and, having worked for two Japanese and two European manufacturers, I wouldn't say that the Polo was the worst offending car. If you get a bad car then I can appreciate that it would make you angry but for everyone who gets a bad Polo there will be many more with perfectly good ones. If you're looking at buying one then it would seem best to avoid the very early models and check for the common faults, just the same as with any other car. Each time a Polo is fixed under warranty it costs Volkswagen money and so if there were common faults with the 1.2 engine (and other bits of the car) then these should have been sorted over the production life of the car. It would be interesting to see some reliability data for the pre facelift 2002 - 2005 car and the facelifted 2005 - 2009 car although, as I say, my experience with the earlier car was very positive.