Team-BHP (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)

-   Official New Car Reviews (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/official-new-car-reviews/)

-   -   Volkswagen Polo 1.2L GT TSI : Official Review (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/official-new-car-reviews/135550-volkswagen-polo-1-2l-gt-tsi-official-review-354.html)

I do sometimes get lazy about checking and filling tires, but the car soon lets me know. At 24psi, the car would feel heavier than a vehicle without power-assisted steering! I can probably feel the difference below about 30.

And running your car at around 2/3rds the recommended pressure? Don't expect your tyres to last long!


.

I agree with you. All except the buyers remorse.

There are many good bits about the GT TSI but VW have not been able to achieve a trade off between a practical every day vehicle (on poor quality Indian roads) and a sports vehicle.

As the have used 16" wheels and low aspect (55%) tyres , the ride quality is bound to deteriorate. But I would expect a company like VW to make necessary adjustments to their suspension set up to make the ride acceptable.

On the concrete sections of the Mumbai Pune expressway also, the GT TSI was terrible,I could not drive at speeds higher than 60/70kmph.

Our other car is a Jetta 1.4 TSI which also has similar ride quality issues. That vehicle is also mounted with 55 aspect ratio tyres.

This definitely is a short coming on the part of VW. Though not on the same price level, BMW cars which are fitted with low aspect ratio run flat tyres (very stiff sidewall) deliver acceptable performance even on poor road conditions.

Also, all my previous cars Maruti 800/ Indica/ Aveo/Ritz/ Amaze none had such poor ride quality.

Have you tried driving another GT TSI with 16" rims to confirm if your car has identical/worse ride quality?

This should eliminate the possibility of there being some kind of problem with the suspension setup with your car.

I travel on the MPEH frequently. My GT has 15" rims.
The Polo's suspension can flatten out the concrete surface if driven between 80-90 kph.
However, the undulations on the concrete surface result in a vertical motion of the car.
In general to get good ride quality out of a Polo, it should be driven above 60 kph on uneven road surfaces, provided there are no potholes.

The Inflation pressures quoted by the manufacturer is at "full load". My car never is loaded with 4 or 5 passengers. So I expect that I am not too badly under-inflated.

My main concern is a comfortable ride. I really do not mind if my tyres wear out in 20,000 km of comfortable riding.

But unfortunately , even after reducing the pressure to 24psi, the road undulations still get transferred to the car, reducing the pressure does not seem to help at all.




VW confirms that my car is absolutely perfect. I did drive another GT TSI which had similar bumpy ride.

Perhaps the difference between your car & mine is that with 60 aspect ratio tyres, your ride will be better than mine with 55 aspect ratio tyres. As the sidewall height decreases, the cushioning of the tyre worsens.

Leads me to the conclusion that with our roads, we should not go in for low aspect sporty tyres.... or the suspension has to be suitably tuned. VW does not seem to have done a good job here. Its a pity, as it is a great car in all other respects.

VW/Skoda recommend tyre pressures at full load up to 42psi. 32/30 is at the specified load which in my car is just the driver and front passenger, not full load.

You bought the wrong car for your main concern, imho. No point crying over spilled milk though - have you thought about swapping the rims/tyres to 15 inchers with higher profiles? Should do wonders, and you could even upsize the tyres within tolerable limits for best results.

Can someone who has the new version of Polo with 195/55R16 tyres share what the size and type of spare wheel is? Is it alloy with 195/55R16, steel wheel with 185/60R15 or 175/70R14?

My car (done 2500 Kms) is now showing the D3/D2 jerk. The only worry is the clunking sound when it shifts to D2. Is that normal? I find that the clunk is more prominent as I get out of road humps.

Hmm... you prompted me to read the manual! :)

VW warn that under-inflated tyres heat up more and this can lead to bursting, so it may be a more serious issue than just the running costs of tyre replacement.

It is certainly true that your different model, with different tyres, could well work with different pressures, and I had not thought about that.

As well as taking a look at the section of manual on the subject, I also took a look at the sticker inside the fuel-filler cover that specifies pressures. Also something I have not done for a long time, having simply memorised the single number appropriate to my usage. My car is also usually driven lightly loaded and the recommendation is 33 all round. What took me by surprise is that the recommendation for my car fully loaded, is front=36, rear=39! I always inflate to 33 and have done with both of my Polos. I do sometimes carry four people, so I guess I should regard that as the minimum for my car.

What does the label say for your car? I feel that 24 is way too low, but have no experience of your model: I really want to know what VW say!

Hi guys, I am back from a road trip to coastal Karnataka. My car held up very well, and took all the ghats with charm. Of course the gear box was stressed but it performed.
However, I now see that there is a significant jerk from D4->D3 and even more significant from D3 to D2.
I want to believe that the ECU was calibrated for the uneven terrain (I drove 1700 kms) and I need to add new kilometers in Bangalore to unlearn the terrain? (I seriously wish this _is_ the problem and nothing else)

Hi Drop Head.

24 PSI is too low. Even at low load, VW recommends 29 PSI ( not sure if its different for the 16 inch tyres). It will lead to unwanted to stress and uneven wear. Side will wear more and middle will wear less.

The diff between 55 and 60 is not as great as you imagine. Its 185/60 vs 195/55. So as you can see the actual side wall height difference is neglibile. And for the record my tyre is 195/55 R15. But guess what, my ride quality didnt deteriorate at all coz my EOM was Alnacs and now I am using S drives. So imagine if you change to a comfy tyre like MC5, P3ST etc. Ride would improve even further. But ya the low speed ride is less cushy than cars like Liva, Indigo even, but its stable. It is a tough trade off.

Back in 2013 i purchased the first generation GT TSI within a month of its launch and i also compiled a initial ownership review which was one of the first ownership reviews on team bhp. After owning the first gen GT TSI for 2 years and 9 months i went on to sell it and purchase the Abarth Punto. As i primarily drive within the city the Abarth didn't feel practical anymore and i had to sell it earlier this month and i purchased a new 2018 May manufactured GT TSI once again. I took delivery of my car yesterday and here are a few observations that I was able to make when i compare it with the first gen model that i used to own.

1. The current generation GT TSI does not idle at a high rpm on a cold start unlike the first generation model which used to idle around 1100 rpm for about a couple of minutes after which the revs used to settle around the 900 rpm mark. I wonder why this is? Has VW made any changes to the turbo or engine?

2. The comfort level of the current generation GT TSI seems to be a notch lower than the 2013 model that i used to own. I am having to slow down to a really slow pace compared to the 2013 model when i go over speed humps. I'm not sure whether this is because of the 195/55 R 16 tires compared to the 185/65 R 15's that the original used to sport.

3. The D mode in the new generation seems to be more aggressive than the D mode in the 2013 model. I also feel that the S mode doesn't feel quite as mind blowing as what it used to feel like in the 2013 version.

4. Though the overall equipment level has increased there has been quite a bit of cost cutting from VW in the current generation. Plastic quality is definitely a notch lower than what i experienced in the 2013 version. The most shocking thing is that the current version does not come with a under engine guard. You can see the whole road underneath if you open the bonnet and that's just ridiculous :Frustrati

These are the few observations that I've been able to make over the 40 kilometers that I've driven so far.

Let me add to the on-going discussion on tyre pressure, 15" vs 16" rims, sidewall comparison, and the related comfort level of the car.

I have a GT TSI made in February 2017. This was one of the first GT TSIs with 16" rims, at least in our forum. I test drove on 15" version, and then finally owned the 16" version.

My view is that the handling, road-grip and the steering-feel is noticeably improved with the 16" version, especially with the Continental MC5 195/55/R16 tyres that I changed to immediately after taking delivery of the car.

Let me also add that, the handling of the car significantly suffers if the tyre pressures are down by 5 psi or lower from the prescribed values. The prescribed values, very clearly marked on the inside of the fuel lid cover, are 36 psi for the front tyres and 33 psi for the rear tyres (for the driver and one passenger on the front) and even more for passengers on the back seats. I fill nitrogen that keeps the pressure at their prescribed values for longer.

The ride comfort is only marginally different from the 15" version, as theoretically it should be because the sidewalls on 185/60/R15 and 195/55/R16 are only very slightly different. However, the real difference, if any, I feel, is from the slightly higher ground clearance on 16" version.

Personally I would never drive this car with 24 psi on the tyres. Then the whole fun part is lost - the car is so well planted on sharp turns with the prescribed tyre pressures that even a relatively inexperienced colleague of mine (who recently bought his first car) noticed from the passenger seat.

The ride comfort is at the expected level. Over the bumps, the Honda City (my other car) or my Hyundai Getz (the car that was replaced by the GT TSI) are smoother. But that is only expected from this car. However, the comfort level is quite acceptable to me. And the NVH level is way better than the other two cars I mentioned above.

Last summer, I drove from Kolkata to Puri, a 8 hours and a half drive each way, on this car. I am 59, nearly 6 feet tall, and was driving long distance after 13 long years. With one stop each way, roughly at the mid-points, and me as the only driver, at the end of journey each way, I was not tired at all. The seats are excellent, it is very easy to find a comfortable driving position, and all the controls are ergonomic enough for me. True, I have done a lot of long drives in my life, but all that in my youth before I was 35 or 36, and most of them in Europe or USA. My wife was not very confident that whether I would be able to take up the job at this age, and it turned out rather easy, and a lot of the credit goes to the car, the ease of driving it, and the pleasure associated with it.

Congratulations chase_nt! I think the earlier size was 185/60R15.

Can you share size and/or pictures of spare wheel and recommended tyre pressure placard for the Polo with 16 inch wheels?

On ghats, it's better to drive is the "S" mode where the car stays on higher revs and it's safer as well. It also reduces the use of the brakes.

Thanks. Yes that's right i was mistaken, the original GT TSI came with 185/60 R15 tires. My GT TSI came with a 175/70 R14 non alloy steel spare wheel manufactured by Goodyear. The 195/55 R16 tires on my vehicle are Goodyear as well. I am attaching a photo of the recommended tire pressure sticker.