Evening all,

My sister is after her first car; something small, reliable and reasonably economical. She's not overly bothered about performance or handling as it'll be almost exclusively used to trek into Manchester and back.

She has narrowed down her choice to either a Fabia, a Polo or possibly a Fiesta. The latter gives a few concerns about reliability . . . although I don't know if they're unfounded. She prefers the look of the Polo (we're thinking 05/06 year) to the Fabia and there's actually very little between them in their used prices too (surprisingly).

I am fairly sure that for a while, the Fabia had the new platform while the Polo had the old one, but given that the Fabia came out in 2000, was that new platform introduced into the Polo by 2005? The reason I'm asking about that is safety; I believe the new platform is safer than the old one. The other factor is reliability; what would people's money be on for reliability between the two? I am biased - my Fabia was excellent for the time I had it, while the only VW I've owned (a Passat B5) was a nightmare.

Any thoughts would be appreciated. Also open to other car suggestions too, probably looking at a budget of about £4k absolute tops.

Cheers.

Hi, the Fabia did get the new platform first, the Polo recieved that platform in around 2002/03. Both have their good and bad points. Know people with that model Polo who think there a brill car and have never had problems with them. Think that the polo rides/ drives slightly better but think that the interior trim on Fabia comfort/ ambiente and elegance models seems better built/ quality, probably personal taste. Think they are both about equal for relaibility. I still wouldn't discount the Fiesta, based on the Fabia's I had I did have a few common problems so do think that the reliability can be overstated its just luck of the draw. Have a drive of both and see which she prefers, in terms of safety think that all polos early on had 4 airbags and abs v Fabia 2 airbags and abs for most models.

Edited 14 March, 201016 yr by Fabia00

Hi, the Fabia did get the new platform first, the Polo recieved that platform in around 2002/03. Both have their good and bad points. Know people with that model Polo who think there a brill car and have never had problems with them. Think that the polo rides/ drives slightly better but think that the interior trim on Fabia comfort/ ambiente and elegance models seems better built/ quality, probably personal taste. Think they are both about equal for relaibility. I still wouldn't discount the Fiesta, based on the Fabia's I had I did have a few common problems so do think that the reliability can be overstated its just luck of the draw. Have a drive of both and see which she prefers, in terms of safety think that all polos early on had 4 airbags and abs v Fabia 2 airbags and abs for most models.

the gti has proper seats tho.....recaro ftw!!!!!!!

Get a clio

Get a clio

non - asin the language of le prats and lamb haters - get a Furby - more fun - now Fiesta - ( Found On Road Dead ,or Fix Or Repair Daily) - ,Polo - car with hole in muddle - no contest -Get a Furby -no holes -just honest value .And tell Nicole that if Dad can stuff French bit - she 's at liberty to have her evil way with boyfriend -something that our family friendly Skoda would not encourage .

non - asin the language of le prats and lamb haters - get a Furby - more fun - now Fiesta - ( Found On Road Dead ,or Fix Or Repair Daily) - ,Polo - car with hole in muddle - no contest -Get a Furby -no holes -just honest value .And tell Nicole that if Dad can stuff French bit - she 's at liberty to have her evil way with boyfriend -something that our family friendly Skoda would not encourage .

He speaks the truth.

Don't get a Clio. 3yr old and it'll already be rattling like a council skip.

If resale is an issue the Polo will hold onto more of it's money for longer, irrespective of wether it or the Furby is the better car.

TBH the Fiesta probably wouldn't be any better or worse than the VAG cars. None of them are new cars, things will go wrong you just have to hope nothing big.

On that note are 3rd party warranties cheaper for any of them?

Edited 18 March, 201016 yr by Aspman

I reckon the Fabia is the slightly more practical car...my car has split-folding rear seats that fold flat, my dad's 54-plate Polo does not. Fractionally more rear legroom in the Fabia too.

Seat??

as we have just bought a polo,and have owned 3 fabias and an octavia i will say unless buying the gti you will get more fabia for the money,the polo residuals are very strong,the fabias are not too shabby either but you will get more toys with the skoda,so on value for money i would say the skoda,regardless of what anyone says the polo is the higher quality item,by a lot,no squeeks rattles and all the materials feel much better quality,and it is put together properly,tho my only expieriences come from the gti vs vrs the lesser models may use different materials,so thats one each,for me the polo looks the better of the two,but again i'm refering to the gti version,i think the lesser models look very ordinary,where the fabia could never be mistaken for anything else!!!!!! On balence both are excellent cars,but if it was my money,i would get the newer/better specced fabia rather than spend the same on an older/lower spec polo!!!

Fabia

You will get more for your money. Wife's now got a Polo again after the Panda, not even remote central locking ....pah!!

Seat??

I was goint to suggest Ibiza. Oh, and for God's sake don't buy a Clio.

If I was looking it would be Polo, Fabia, or Ibiza, and I wouldn't decide which one, just look at all of them and buy on condition.

id say get a fabia imo

Oh, and for God's sake don't buy a Clio

One of my neighbours had a 53 plate Clio that spontaneously combusted on it own... Was parked outside the house, locked up, and caught fire from behind the dash someplace

Never buying another French car after that!

non - asin the language of le prats and lamb haters - get a Furby - more fun - now Fiesta - ( Found On Road Dead ,or Fix Or Repair Daily) - ,Polo - car with hole in muddle - no contest -Get a Furby -no holes -just honest value .And tell Nicole that if Dad can stuff French bit - she 's at liberty to have her evil way with boyfriend -something that our family friendly Skoda would not encourage .

He speaks the truth.

how on earth can you tell...?

Edited 21 March, 201016 yr by andypandypoos

I test drove the previous model of 1.2 polo before I bought a Furby (2003). And later drove the 3-cylinder HTP engine in a Mk 1 Furby.

I'd say if you want a nippy car for short journies round town there was not much to choose between 3 Cylinder Polo or Furby. Possibly the Polo has a quickr gear change and better cornering ability/ front end handling - cable clutch and standard suspension, but the penalty for this is that the Polo is a bit of a harder ride than the Furby.

If you want something for longer cross- country journeys which has got big car feel, is going to smooth out the bumps and not make you as tired, go for the Furby with its unconventional front-end suspension and hydraulic clutch.

Both VW and Skoda offer a 3- cylinder engine, which comes in 60(6valve) or 70 (12valve) PS versions. IMHO the 3 cyl is not man-enough for motorway driving. Go for the 4 cylinder engine if you envisage a substantial amount of motorway/main A road driving.

I've just taken a look at the new polos and the interiors are much improved on the earlier version - based on the new golf. But presumably both Polo and Furby will have the same floorpan, therefore expect a slightly offset driving position - pedals slightly to the left of straight ahead position due to intrusion of wheel well into driver footwell space. But that sort of ergonomic compromise is prevalent amongst a lot of new cars today.

The torque is good across the both engine ranges, with a max of 80 ft lb even on the 1.2 60 PS, quite low down the rev range (3000 RPM), and there's the prospect of the turbocharged 1.2 105 PS engine next year in the top of the range models - same one as goes in the Yeti ? There's also a 70Ps 1.2.

Nick

Edited 21 March, 201016 yr by Clunkclick

Funny enough - one of my mates at work did ask same question of Furby - with It's 1.4 engine -what wud it be like on the motorway . It's two years since my dad died ,and for the two yeasrs before that - we travelled from just out side Coventry to short of Inverness ,about once a month .Furby's 1.4Tdi lapped up the distance -it almost relished it -one of the few cars I've had that was a pleasure on that trip -and I've done it in cars from furby 's1,4 to Mondeos @ 2 litre-none was as much fun .And it's only the Vauxhall Insignia that's done it in less fuel .And that was a 2lirte version .Round the town ,Furby just gets on with it -ask for a bit of poke -and she surprises the bigger cars .Me -I'm converted to a 1.4 diesel Furby ,and that's after about 2M miles of petrols .9