Scirocco Central

Hey, think this may be the first time I have posted(sorry if it's in the wrong section) I am looking into buyin a 1.4 tsi 160ps. Now I have a few questions first. I have two cars in mind 1 is a 61 plate rising blue 122ps 5500 miles, rear parking sensors and the rest as standard £17000. The second is a 11/11 indium grey 160ps 2400 miles also with rear parking sensors. £17675. Now some questions.

I have test driven the 122, is there lots o difference between the 122 and 160?
How do these prices compare to others on the Market? I.e good value?
Realistically what would be the choice of other members?

I love both colours. I would have preferred 18" alloys and fogs but I'm just fussy are fogs easily retro fitted? Thanks again. H.

no problem the 160 every time with the 122 you lose a lot of power plus no suspension adjuster. i didnt think it would make a lot of differance but after a year, how i wish i had gone for the 160. as for price i think other members would have a much better idea than me. colour well i have an indium and its a nice colour in the sun. really shines hope you enjoy which ever one you choose.

I'd defo go for the 160 over the 122. The 160 has least amount of power a car like this should have, my opinion. I regreat I didn't go for the 2.0 TSI or the R, but car prices here in Norway effectively put a stopper for that

Thanks for the replys people the option of the 2.0 tsi have to be thrown out because of tax + insurance. Im coming from a 1.4 civic. A very nice car inside. But I'm looking to change for the scirocco looks

Go for the 1.4 TSI 160 - it has lower mileage than the base car and is only a few hundred more. In my opinion the 160 is the best value car in the Scirocco range. Performance is not that far behind the 2 litre petrol and running costs are usefully lower.

It's a pity you can't have the 2.0TSI, I agree with the above about minimal power for it should be 160, as I think the 200 I have should be more, but a trip to Revo this year should sort that.

it's always nice to have more power, but you have to be realistic I've found 160 enough for the twisty backroads, and anywhere where you don't have to accelerate hard above 140 kmh. On the other hand, 210 was still under powered above that speed. so you get a faster car, but still no super car that's why I've gone for 160. Apart from lower price, it's best feature is the sound of the supercharger on the lower revs, when you're cruising slowly through the city with both windows down.
The only real downside of 160 is it's previous problems with reliability, so check that out well.

Again great advice! I'm heading down next Sunday to see what they have on the system. I love the 122 but it's HAS to be to 160 now! Clour choice is still up for grabs tho, anything but silver what kind of problem are we talking? I do town driving and some country roads so the 160 sounds perfect.

Read about 160 misfires. It's very well covered here. Don't let it curb you enthusiasm though in short, engines made before the first half of 2010 may exhibit problems with engine misfiring, which may cause even a piston damage, and engine replacement. If you are after the car from this period, check well if it was services properly, especially if took place in the service action (i don't remember the number). If it's newer though, there is probably not that much more to worry about than with any other turbo charged engine