Help needed,Starting to question my order, days before delivery

[Kittycat]

I have had a 1 litre 95ps R line Polo on order since April.
I have the choice of this 95 R line which is probably a week away or waiting until February next year for a 115 R line.
I currently lease a vehicle which is being returned this month.
The dealer I have ordered my car from has now given me a shot of a Polo to tide me over until delivery of my new car.
This is where my doubts have now started.. I have been given a shot of a 1litre 60ps Polo which I think is a SE and the performance is poor just trying to get it moving etc, and it’s drank a half tank and I’ve only done under a 100 miles
This had made me question my order completely based on the performance and fuel of this one.
Looking for reassurance that the 95 or even 115 has a bit more go about it, as I’m questioning taking delivery and running out of time and options
I currently drive a diesel so am used to more tork, power and economy.
Please can you give me some advice and help

[Kss47]

The 60ps Polo is non turbo, both the 95ps and 115ps have turbos. I used to drive a Polo 1.4TDI and now drive a 2017 (previous model) Polo 90ps, both have similar levels of torque with the latter having more horse power and I'm pleased with it's performance. When my car was in for a service I had a 60ps Polo as a courtesy car and as you said it was gutless. l would imagine that you will be happy with your choice of 95ps.

[GregStudio]

I haven't driven the 60ps Polo so I can't compare. However, I bought a 95ps Highline (SE/SEL), without the opportunity to test drive it beforehand and I too was somewhat nervous of only 95ps. From the 1990's I've had a BMW 530i, a Mitsubishi 3000GT, an Audi A4 (2.4 V6) and a Citroen 2.0l (Diesel), all of which have fair bit or a lot more power on paper. To be honest I've been pleasantly surprised, my new Polo isn't in the same class as my 3000GT (about 290bhp if I remember correctly) but in comparison it certainly doesn't feel like it only has 95ps. I don't know what power you're personally used to, or what you're expecting but it's an eager engine with a fair bit more pull than my previous experience led me to expect from the 95ps published figure.

Greg

[Kittycat]

The last couple of years I’ve had a 1.8 Audi and then 2.0 diesels and my current car is the 1.5 diesel Fiesta.
My current car is a 95ps
I think I just got a shock at how much it struggles to get up to speed and pull away.
As I’m also going back to petrol So it’s a bit of a overall adjustment.
I didn’t realise the loan car didn’t have a turbo which is also where it maybe struggling a bit more

[GregStudio]

I don't think you'll be disappointed with the 95ps. At low revs, below about 1,800 - 2,100rpm depending on the gear, then it's gutless for a couple of seconds until the turbo gets up to speed. I'm guessing that's somewhat similar to what the 60ps engine feels like. In real world driving (for me) this is not an issue because I don't demand heavy acceleration from such low rpm. I just drop down a gear first and the turbo power is there without any noticeable lag, it feels like there's considerably more on tap than just 95ps and it maintains that pulling power fairly smoothly throughout the rather tall gearing. IMHO, it's a clever match of gear ratios and engine torque which gives a surprising push and makes overtaking a far easier and more enjoyable experience than I ever expected from only 95ps. The only downside is that at lower constant speeds it can sometimes feel like you're a bit between gears, still, it's a good compromise IMHO.

Greg

[RUM4MO]

Very unfortunate choice of car to pass out to a new customer really, but as a courtesy car they will be cheap and available.

I've never driven a 60PS Polo of any vintage, but I'm sure that the 95PS will keep you happy, or even more so if you waited for a 115PS.

[Dan34]

I’ve had a 6c 110 r-line previously and was surprised how nippy that was, i personally think you’ll be ok with the 95, it won’t feel like the 60 at all.

[wizzywig27]

I went from a 192ps Polo GTI to a 95ps Polo SE, the SE has a turbo and I’m quite surprised at how nippy it is for a 1 litre. The only thing I will say is the gears are less forgiving, get the timing wrong (for example when overtaking) and you will know about it.

[Kittycat]

Thank you for all your reassurance.
A bit confused to which car to take now the 95 or 115
There is also a difference with colour the 95 is limestone grey and the 115 is flash red, have ordered the bonnevile wheels as extra on both orders.
But the grey one is now in Germany and could be in the UK this week, where the red doesn’t even have a build week.
I think from a car I like it to be economical and not to gutsy on fuel so if I fill it up which I do normally every fortnight I hope it will last a fortnight (I normally do short trips and town driving)
Hoping that if I take the 95 it will be similar to my diesel fiesta ( within reason)

[CP_Vaughny]

What options have you chose for both cars?

[Kittycat]

What options have you chose for both cars?

The only options chosen for both cars that are R line models are just heated seats

[Leif]

I had a non TSI Polo for a few hours while my 95 PS SE Polo was being serviced. I don’t know which non turbo Polo it was, but I was shocked at the feeble performance. It did the job of getting me from A to B but the gear change was not smooth, and the acceleration was poor. My Polo is light years ahead. It accelerates nicely, and very smoothly, with a nice smooth gear change. I don’t think you will have a problem with the 95 engine unless you’re a bit of a girl racer and want rorty noises from your rear.

I get about 63 mpg calculated from fuel in and miles driven. I wouldn’t want the diesel, it costs more and they are generally more expensive to fix.

[monkeyhanger]

But diesels are generally a lot more robust, so don't need fixing that often. I've had a string of VW TDIs and never had an issue with the drivetrain except a 1.9TDI 6N Polo that had the turbo intermittently stop working over the course of 2 weeks and was replaced under warranty at 6 months old. My Dad ran a MK4 Golf 130TDI to 130k fault free miles before passing it on to my sister, took a MK5 Golf 170 TDI to 160k mikes and is currently on 88k miles with his MK7 Golf GTD.

As we are now seeing with the inclusion of gasoline particulate filters, petrol is as dirty as diesel and a tuned to the eyeballs 1.0 3-cyl petrol bangs out a lot of NOx too as it is working hard most of the time. I'd take a VW TDI 1.6 or 2.0 lump to last longer than the 1.0TSI (not saying the 1.0 will be atrociously unreliable but the TDIs are long established tech and aren't under so much stress in their state of standard tune.

Without dieselgate, VW wouldn't be pushing the 1.0TSI as hard as they are across the ranges.

I could hammer the wife's A1 1.6TDI Sport all day and still get 63mpg on my commute, or top 70mpg with just a little moderation. DPF equipped diesels take care of the soot but put out NOx. 1.0TSIs put out NOx in significant quantities too. If taxation considerations shifted from CO2 to NOx then the 1.5 Evo and GTI lump would be the cleanest engines in the range from a taxation point of view.

[TElwoody]

But diesels are generally a lot more robust, so don't need fixing that often. I've had a string of VW TDIs and never had an issue with the drivetrain except a 1.9TDI 6N Polo that had the turbo intermittently stop working over the course of 2 weeks and was replaced under warranty at 6 months old. My Dad ran a MK4 Golf 130TDI to 130k fault free miles before passing it on to my sister, took a MK5 Golf 170 TDI to 160k mikes and is currently on 88k miles with his MK7 Golf GTD.

As we are now seeing with the inclusion of gasoline particulate filters, petrol is as dirty as diesel and a tuned to the eyeballs 1.0 3-cyl petrol bangs out a lot of NOx too as it is working hard most of the time. I'd take a VW TDI 1.6 or 2.0 lump to last longer than the 1.0TSI (not saying the 1.0 will be atrociously unreliable but the TDIs are long established tech and aren't under so much stress in their state of standard tune.

Without dieselgate, VW wouldn't be pushing the 1.0TSI as hard as they are across the ranges.

I could hammer the wife's A1 1.6TDI Sport all day and still get 63mpg on my commute, or top 70mpg with just a little moderation. DPF equipped diesels take care of the soot but put out NOx. 1.0TSIs put out NOx in significant quantities too. If taxation considerations shifted from CO2 to NOx then the 1.5 Evo and GTI lump would be the cleanest engines in the range from a taxation point of view.

A 95HP, One litre, 3 cylinder isn't really tuned to the eyeballs. 115 HP is a bit more tuned (Turbo Changes and different Injectors), its when you get Ford trying to push 140 HP out of them that is tuned to the eyeballs, they are well know to go pop.

[monkeyhanger]

But diesels are generally a lot more robust, so don't need fixing that often. I've had a string of VW TDIs and never had an issue with the drivetrain except a 1.9TDI 6N Polo that had the turbo intermittently stop working over the course of 2 weeks and was replaced under warranty at 6 months old. My Dad ran a MK4 Golf 130TDI to 130k fault free miles before passing it on to my sister, took a MK5 Golf 170 TDI to 160k mikes and is currently on 88k miles with his MK7 Golf GTD.

As we are now seeing with the inclusion of gasoline particulate filters, petrol is as dirty as diesel and a tuned to the eyeballs 1.0 3-cyl petrol bangs out a lot of NOx too as it is working hard most of the time. I'd take a VW TDI 1.6 or 2.0 lump to last longer than the 1.0TSI (not saying the 1.0 will be atrociously unreliable but the TDIs are long established tech and aren't under so much stress in their state of standard tune.

Without dieselgate, VW wouldn't be pushing the 1.0TSI as hard as they are across the ranges.

I could hammer the wife's A1 1.6TDI Sport all day and still get 63mpg on my commute, or top 70mpg with just a little moderation. DPF equipped diesels take care of the soot but put out NOx. 1.0TSIs put out NOx in significant quantities too. If taxation considerations shifted from CO2 to NOx then the 1.5 Evo and GTI lump would be the cleanest engines in the range from a taxation point of view.

A 95HP, One litre, 3 cylinder isn't really tuned to the eyeballs. 115 HP is a bit more tuned (Turbo Changes and different Injectors), its when you get Ford trying to push 140 HP out of them that is tuned to the eyeballs, they are well know to go pop.

There are a lot of those 140ps 1.0 Ford lumps going bang right now, but in terms of NOx, all of the 1.0TSIs are going to be working harder more often, especially as the Polo is only marginally lighter than the Golf for the current incarnation, which means running hotter internally. More heat and pressure = more NOx. From an environmental point of view (considering all aspects, not just CO2), i'm surprised that VAG hasn't been pushing the cylinder deactivation solution harder across all models - an engine not pushed hard when all 4 cylinders are firing, and dropping off to 2 cylinders for low load options. That is a cracking engine, I was surprised how much you have to rev the 1.0TSI units (had the 115ps unit in a Polo courtesy car when last putting the Golf in for a service) - I found it akin to riding a motorbike, more so to get moving from a standstill. Easy to get used to, but it is a different driving style to what i'm used to.