Polo vivo 1.4 vs Rio1.2

M

matt_za

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2013
Messages
143
Reaction score
0
Hi
I currently have 2 options for a new car the polo vivo 1.4 base model or the Rio 1.2. I know there is a bit of a price difference between the 2 but as it is being financed by my father for the last year of varsity before i take over afterwards these are the 2 he is willing to finance. I am leaning towards the Rio as it has more features and is in the segment above the vivo but the 1.2 is worrying me. Was unable to test drive a 1.2 in Capetown as all the demo models have been sold at the moment out of the 3 dealerships i phoned. According to stats though on the internet/car magazine it seems to be on the same par as the vivo 1.4 though in terms of speed and acceleration +- a few km or tenths of a second due to a better quality engine. It will mainly be me driving around southern subs by myself etc and the salesmen assured me that i wouldn't notice the difference then between the 1.2 and 1.4. Would only become apparent when i have to drive home to Durban but thats only 2 times a year and i can live with that. Under a bit of time pressure as there is only one available and once thats gone its a 4 month waiting list for the hatch 1.2 rio.

So i am leaning towards the Rio due to its nicer interior, standard features and included service plan but bit worried about the 1.2 engine. Was wondering if anyone has experiance with the 1.2 and/or reasons as to buy it or avoid it.

Thanks in advance
 
I would go Vivo, simply because VW's are much more reliable and parts and cheap. I do agree it's very expensive though, especially since you will be paying for it
 
Does it have to be new? You can get a new generation Polo that's about 2/3 years old with reasonable kilometers and still under warranty.
 
I'm a big fan of VW's, and I'd take the Rio if those are your 2 choices. It's the better, much more modern option out of the two, and KIA definitely isn't a brand that one can look down on any more. The Vivo is VWSA's attempt to pull another Citi Golf on South African consumers, and I hope it fails sooner rather than later. If your choice was between the Rio and the VW Up! it'd be a much more tricky prospect.

Make no mistake though, you'd notice the difference between the 1.2 and 1.4 Rios - the latter has a 5th more power than the former. But it won't hinder you much cruisin' around the Cape.

Given free reign I'd buy something completely different that's a year of 3 old.
 
no potholes. and just standard tyres. dont know much about cars. Dont want to go second hand as i have had 2 extremely unreliable cars in the last 5 years and have finally called it quits. rather want to go for the lesser car but it being new.

Thanks for the advice so far. Writing a test tonight so will check back later.
 
The Rio without a doubt. Do you want a modern car or a rebadged car from the 90's? Speaking of 90's... engines have come a long way and traditional engine size has gone out of the window. Case in point is the new Golf 7 which comes in 1.2 and 1.4 petrol only. They not even bothering with bigger engines. So the Rio has 65kw 1.2l engine and the Vivo has a 55kw 1.4l engine. Nough said.

The Rio is a significantly higher class and is the no brainer choice. Also comes with a much better warranty and service plan. And a radio lol.
 
Take the Rio, for the next 5 years the warranty and service plan will be worth it, worry free driving for past 5 years of unreliability.
 
Vivo 1.4 = 63kw @ 5000 rpm

Kia 1.2 = 65kw @ 6000 rpm

So the Kia is a bit more revvy, but basically puts out the same power for less capacity.

Sadly VW gives no torque values on their car (what have they got to hide?) which combined with gearing is what really matters.


I would also have the Kia over the rebadged "old" Polo.
 
I have been looking in this segment myself recently and have decided on a 2nd hand Honda Jazz out of practicality and their reputation for reliability. The Jazz is unfortunately getting a little long in the tooth and being a student myself, I can see why it's not particularly appealing to our end of the market.

Between those two, from my test drives, the Polo is likely the better bet. Although not as well kitted as the Rio, the execution of the interior is better and the drive generally feels more responsive.

As for reliability, I think that the Koreans have come a long way and they are showing that with their 5yr/150000km warranty. However, this warranty forces you to service it with the agents which can be expensive. The parts prices on the Rio also aren't cheap and makes for a fair bit of budgeting after the service plan is up.

Tyres, nothing to worry about on either, it's only the Rio 1.4 Tec that has chunky 17" rims with low profile tyres on that will be costly to replace.

Insurance, the Polo's great downfall, you will do well to ask your insurance company for two comparative quotes between the two cars because they are a higher theft risk. The significance of this risk will depend on the actuarial assumptions applied to your own risk profile and hence the insurance companies will be able to help you out there.
 
SauRoNZA said:
Vivo 1.4 = 63kw @ 5000 rpm

Kia 1.2 = 65kw @ 6000 rpm

So the Kia is a bit more revvy, but basically puts out the same power for less capacity.

Sadly VW gives no torque values on their car (what have they got to hide?) which combined with gearing is what really matters.


I would also have the Kia over the rebadged "old" Polo.
Click to expand...

The torque figures are just hidden away - **** knows why - 132Nm @ 3,600 rpm on the 63kW jobbie you reference above.

Of course, as you say, one then has to consider gearing. At which point one realises that these are asthmatic city runabouts, and stops caring. :D
 
GMAN03 said:
I have been looking in this segment myself recently and have decided on a 2nd hand Honda Jazz out of practicality and their reputation for reliability. The Jazz is unfortunately getting a little long in the tooth and being a student myself, I can see why it's not particularly appealing to our end of the market.

Between those two, from my test drives, the Polo is likely the better bet. Although not as well kitted as the Rio, the execution of the interior is better and the drive generally feels more responsive.

As for reliability, I think that the Koreans have come a long way and they are showing that with their 5yr/150000km warranty. However, this warranty forces you to service it with the agents which can be expensive. The parts prices on the Rio also aren't cheap and makes for a fair bit of budgeting after the service plan is up.

Tyres, nothing to worry about on either, it's only the Rio 1.4 Tec that has chunky 17" rims with low profile tyres on that will be costly to replace.

Insurance, the Polo's great downfall, you will do well to ask your insurance company for two comparative quotes between the two cars because they are a higher theft risk. The significance of this risk will depend on the actuarial assumptions applied to your own risk profile and hence the insurance companies will be able to help you out there.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong but the Polo doesn't come with any service plan at all and is more expensive once you add some options to it which are standard on the Rio.

So I wouldn't worry about what happens AFTER 5 years of owning the Rio, but rather about the 5 years of owning the Polo without a service plan.

You'll be forced into services at VW while it's under warranty as well and they are not cheap.
 
HapticSimian said:
The torque figures are just hidden away - **** knows why - 132Nm @ 3,600 rpm on the 63kW jobbie you reference above.

Of course, as you say, one then has to consider gearing. At which point one realises that these are asthmatic city runabouts, and stops caring. :D
Click to expand...

I wouldn't worry too much about the gearing, unless they've used the 1.4's box in the 1.2 as well in which case I would need to have a very attentive test drive comparison.
 
Oh I see now the OP is referring to the Polo Vivo base model.

I'm going to assume the one that at least has aircon but doesn't even have electric windows.

Now more than ever I would say go for the Rio. It has the basics that VW really should have across all theirs cars...and more for a much better value proposition.
 
thanks given me alot to think about. To be honest the whole everything is not standard thing with VW really irritates me beyond belief. Had chosen the vivo but then the sales person proceeded to tell me that if i wanted a similer car to what i test drove an extra 20-25 grand would need to be dropped and thats when i came across the rio. However the 1.2 engine was worrying me about the rio but i see what you mean about it being a more modern engine inside compared to the 1.4 engine in vivo.
 
So i just got the invoice for the kia rio and they have included around R9000 for a service plan. My understanding was the service plan was standard on rio and you never had to pay more for the 60 000km service plan?
 
matt_za said:
So i just got the invoice for the kia rio and they have included around R9000 for a service plan. My understanding was the service plan was standard on rio and you never had to pay more for the 60 000km service plan?
Click to expand...

The Service Plan is definitely free.
http://www.kia.co.za/vehicles/rio

They usually try and add a maintenance plan for about that price (It was for my Cerato anyway). I hope the dealer isn't trying to rip you, its usually the case when cars are in demand as they will sell it tomorrow of you don't take the bait.
 
I think the additional R9k is the maintenance plan add on.

I had a similar choice but decided against the vivo GT because of what HapticSimian said.

IT is essentially a new 'Citi' and that is what i have been driving for the past 10 years... So why would I basically want to get the next one? lol

Anyway, Kia is no longer a brand that you can ignore, and My sister has been telling me that for quite some time. Pity VW just tries to rip people off...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X