Volkswagen Eos Forum banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I’m looking at an 2008 EOS lux with 136k miles on it. Looks great and has a new timing belt and water pump.

is it too risky?

thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,620 Posts
Everything has its price. Generally the older the vehicle, higher the mileage and the less you pay for it increases the risk. Otherwise the P.O would hang on to the car. If you are a competent DIY enthusiast for this car, the risk is still there but the cost of repairing it could be less. Therefore, relatively few knowledgeable DIY buyers of older EOS's not influenced by advertising should be getting them cheap and won't expect expensive bad news for dealer repairs when things go wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Thank you. It’s cheap and probably I’ll be the last owner. I’m worried if this engine is already past his lifetime even with some minor work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
251 Posts
It depends entirely on the price. It might last 1 year, then enough faults are built up its not worth fixing for the next MoT. Having said that, apart from the roof the Eos is pretty easy for DIY work and there is a big knowledgebase of tech info (not so much on this site but obviously it shares mechanicals with other VWs).
 

·
Life is good... so far
Joined
·
1,051 Posts
How long the car lasts depends on how well its been cared for and how the car is driven. They apparently did the belt and pump as recommended. So at least the owner seems to have to have taken some care of it. Not all people are villainous in the sale of a car, but there are gambles to everything. Our 07 just turned 123,000 and still runs great. We try to keep up with all VW suggested maintenances. Other than sticking side flaps on the roof, the roof has been pretty dependable. Don't cheap out. Use only quality parts and materials. if that is not your plan get something else.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
I’m looking at an 2008 EOS lux with 136k miles on it. Looks great and has a new timing belt and water pump.

is it too risky?

thanks
I've got a 2012 and recently talked to a 2005 2nd owner who had no problems except for rust that was covered under warrantee. However, my 2012 over the period of my 1 year of ownership, had fail: engine (timing belt, covered under warrantee), high-speed fuel pump, 1 fuel injector, pcv valve (spewed oil interior to engine, requiring expensive engine cleaning). All expensive, but if you like fast under-the-radar cars, worth the price, especially if you have a supportive partner who likes convertibles. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
I didn't even think they made an EOS in 2005? Anyway, I drive a 2008 EOS Turbo to work, every week. It currently just clicked over to 240,000 miles. I had the timing belt and pump done around 120,000 miles or so, but that was preventative. I'm no mechanic, but I'm able to do less difficult things. Replaced the thermostat, pcv valve/oil separator, a small little part that I can't remember the name of but had something to do with me topping off the gas too much, maybe? Other than that, regular oil changes and such. Hell, hasn't even needed any suspension parts replaced, brake pads don't count! It's been a good car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
More risky if you are in an accident... My 2010 was totaled at 25 MPH.
The other vehicle didn't look like had much damage (bumper cover and maybe trunk lid needed replaced.)
If I was going faster, I hate to think what the outcome could have been - especially highway speeds. I contemplated another one, knowing I would never take it on a highway, but ultimately decided I'm looking for a Golf, Jetta or Beetle instead for safety reasons.

I’m looking at an 2008 EOS lux with 136k miles on it. Looks great and has a new timing belt and water pump.

is it too risky?

thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,620 Posts
It's not fair to say an EOS is less safe because yours had more damage in a 2 car collision? The more damage you had, just tells you the crumple zones and consequential damage worked to save you. The most important point about collision damage however small on an older EOS is it is likely to write off the car because of damage and misalignment to the roof. Insurance companies are unlikely to cover the cost of a new replacement roof, but ask for confirmation before insuring.

IMHO the downside of an older EOS is the risk of it written off beyond economic repair compared to another non-cabriolet car. Consider your EOS as driving around in an eggshell with internal safety and weigh up the collision risk for the areas and times at which you are likely to be driving it. That is what most classic car owners would think about?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
2,326 Posts
It's not fair to say an EOS is less safe because yours had more damage in a 2 car collision? The more damage you had, just tells you the crumple zones and consequential damage worked to save you. The most important point about collision damage however small on an older EOS is it is likely to write off the car because of damage and misalignment to the roof. Insurance companies are unlikely to cover the cost of a new replacement roof, but ask for confirmation before insuring.

IMHO the downside of an older EOS is the risk of it written off beyond economic repair compared to another non-cabriolet car. Consider your EOS as driving around in an eggshell with internal safety and weigh up the collision risk for the areas and times at which you are likely to be driving it. That is what most classic car owners would think about?
Vox is "right on the money" - one of the main factors here is the incorporation of "crumple zones" in modern car structures to provide increased occupant protection in accident situations by design techniques which allow the body structure to absorb a significant proportion of the impact forces by structural deformation instead of these forces impacting on the occupants causing major injuries or death.

This is the reason why most cars are "written-off" by insurers after an accident instead of being repaired due to the costs involved and difficulties encountered in repairing the car body deformation. The choice involve two alternatives: higher insurance costs due to the "writing off" of cars or the often tremendous cost of hospitalisation and medical treatment for vehicle occupants injured as a consequence of a crash together with the ongoing suffering they may endure from the consequences of their injuries. The choice is an obvious one for me; quality of life over increased cost of vehicle ownership every time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
More risky if you are in an accident... My 2010 was totaled at 25 MPH.
The other vehicle didn't look like had much damage (bumper cover and maybe trunk lid needed replaced.)
If I was going faster, I hate to think what the outcome could have been - especially highway speeds. I contemplated another one, knowing I would never take it on a highway, but ultimately decided I'm looking for a Golf, Jetta or Beetle instead for safety reasons.
This is nothing more than the inbuilt safety features of modern cars at work, dissipating the energy released by the collision and cushioning the impact by deforming in a controlled manner, no different to a Golf, Jetta, Beetle or any other modern vehicle in fact.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top