|
Lots of people quite understandably would like a prestige badge, but can't afford a new one or even nearly-new. But unfortunately prestige badges are no guarantee of reliability: the only guarantee is that their spare parts will be more expensive.
We are forever recommending Japanese or Korean petrol cars, with good reason. If you find these too run-of-the-mill, Hondas and Mazdas have a slightly more upmarket image, and Subaru and Volvo a bit more still. Try looking for one of these, but avoid older used diesels.
|
|
Not sure that the Saab engines in the 9-5 are inherently more reliable than the GM based engines in the 9-3 (I'm ignoring the diesels which are the same). They need good regular servicing otherwise they sludge up, the direct igntion cassettes often go etc.
If you avoid the diesels, the petrol 9-3s are OK as long as they are cheap IMO and you check the electrics and gearbox very carefully.
Common faults are the steering column electrics which can bring up random airbag lights, check the key and electronic steering lock works right and if a 6-speed check there is no whine in 6th at speed.
They are basically a throw away car now but a cheap one with some history and a long MOT might give you a year or so.
|
|
Hi, thanks. I am looking at petrol as I dont really need a diesel and would rather not pay out the price of repairing one.
I rarely keep a car for longer than 2 years anyway.
|
|
|
|
Just looking at Vectras and you can get a lot of car for your money. They maybe a bit overkill for me size wise but you jsut seem to get so many more options than for an equivilant Astra. The Suzuki Swift, a bit out of left field looks a decent used buy as well.
|
|
The Vectra's cheap for many good reasons. Fiat diesels are weak and the 1800 VVT is murder for VVT pulleys and timing belt tensioners failing, the earlier less complex (no VVT) first gen cars make good cheap old smokers but they're dull as hell to drive. A petrol Mondeo is a far better bet but you did hit on one good option... the Suzuki Swift is a brilliant little car, again if you avoid the Fiat 1.3 diesel.
|
|
The Vectra I was looking at was the 2.2 petrol as I thought the 1.8 maybe aa bit underpowered for the car and struggle as a result. Yeah the swift looks a great buy some really late expamples for little money really.
|
|
The 2.2 is well known for timing chain problems. Again listen for rattles on startup and make sure the engine is genuinely cold when you try it. Don't touch it unless there's proof of fresh oil every year. Chain driven engines need frequent oil changes, this is even more important than on a belt driven engine. Find a well serviced car and it might make an ok old runabout though. The 2.2 is a bit thirsty though, breaking 30mpg will take a gentle right foot. To be honest I wouldn't be worrying too much about performance at this money, hammer it and it'll fall to bits in no time.
|
|
|Liking the swift for the money tbh, If i can get a nice tidy example with a few extras it should suit me. Be nice to have a BMW.Merc Volvo etc but its not much use if its stopping me getting to work.
|
|
The problem with the Vectra is that I simply can't think of a single reason to buy one over the equiavlent Mondeo.
The Mondeo is arguiably more reliable but it is also sooooo... much nicer to drive.
|
|
What yearand engine are you talking about here?
|
What yearand engine are you talking about here?
Pretty much any petrol engined Mondeo. Not much to fear mechanically if looked after and they're light years ahead to drive.
|
|
Premium cars have premium repair costs. And if your budget is sub £2k you need to buy on age, condition and service history only. A £2k premium car is banger territory - ok if you can fix it yourself, potentially ruinous otherwise.
Lots of us have to make similar choices - in my case a 6/7 year old Jag/Merc/Audi/BMW or a six month old sub 10k miles Focus/Astra/Octavia/Leon.
The former is attractive - brand, toys, ego, premium feel. The downside is higher cost servicing, consumables given age (battery, discs, sterring and suspension, wiper moter, seat motor etc) and the ever present risk of a £2k+ bill - turbo, ECU, auto gearbox, engine components etc.
The nearly new option will give manufacturers support for first 3+ years and limited failures likely in other components. Currrent 6 year old 90k Octavia - only failure was water pump under warranty.
With a £2k budget I would go for newer basic transport - less likely to go wrong and cheaper to fix if it does. Functionally it will get you from A to B just the same as the premium option.
If you go for a premium option service history and condition is critical - but you may still end up writing it off at the first major failure.
|
|
There is nothing intrinsically wrong with a £2k bargain barge gamble as long as (a) you are capable of judging what is right or wrong with it at point of purchse and (b) you recognise it is a gamble and are prepared to walk away if it goes wrong.
It is all a state of mind!
(Alternatively, you could find a well looked after LS400 in which case you will need to accept it will probably out live you even if you're in your 20s).
|
|
Id say the real costs of a premium brand is the main dealer labour costs. My BM has been on a 5 year pre payment maintenance plan so Im not sure what their current hourly rate is. But, Im pretty certain it is north of £90 an hour and maybe topping £100.
I think like most main dealers, they'll also soak you as far as the cost of oil is concerned.
|
|
Chatting to my trusted independent yesterday I learned that he'd bought parts to fix a customer's Audi for £180, his customer had priced these up at the Audi dealer and been quoted £150.
Querying this the dealer said "We can't sell to independents at the price we charge our customers, this is company policy"..
The difference in labour rates made it cheaper to have it done at the independent garage.
As has been remarked previously, they have to pay for the glass palaces somehow.
|
Chatting to my trusted independent yesterday I learned that he'd bought parts to fix a customer's Audi for £180, his customer had priced these up at the Audi dealer and been quoted £150.
Querying this the dealer said "We can't sell to independents at the price we charge our customers, this is company policy"..
The difference in labour rates made it cheaper to have it done at the independent garage.
As has been remarked previously, they have to pay for the glass palaces somehow.
Get quotes for work from local garages then ask your main dealer to discount to match or come near. Mine recently came within £20 of matching a local backstreet garage for a new timing belt, water pump and service and the main dealer was using genuine VW parts and the belt comes with a 5yr guarantee whereas the smaller workshop was quoting with aftermarket parts. The main dealer history will allow me to get top dollar when I come to sell it too. Don't dismiss the glass palaces, sometimes they can match or get pretty close to Dodgy Joe's workshop and they know these cars better than anyone and that dealer history is worth money especially if you intend on selling privately for extra cash. Everything is negotiable including finance rates and servicing, two things people always seem to accept face value.
|
|
I had a 2004 plate Mazda 3 sports (2 litre engine). I purchased it with 62786 miles on the clock and ran it to 125540 in a few years with only 1 breakdown (some cheap 30 quid engine part).
If it wasn't for the rust I would have kept it longer.
Buy a Japanese petrol car.......
|
|
Hi OK,
I think ive narrowed it down to;
Astra H 1.8 petrol
Focus 1.8-2.0 litre
Hyundai Coupe 2.0
Civic 1.8 I-Vtec
Civic Type S
Lexus IS200 2.0
Mazda 3
Toyota Corrola/Auris
Suzuki Swift sport.
maybe a Mazda 6 if the price is right.
No I know some of these are getting old but if I have a grand or so left over after the purchase it gives me a little breathing space for repairs.
All petrol by the way
Thoughts?
Edited by Dazl1212 on 10/04/2017 at 13:09
|
I'd leave the Astra 1800. It uses GM's troublesome VVT system. Stick to the 1.6 which is nippy enough and has few vices.
The Lexus IS a greedy thing (25mpg day to day) and parts can be dear so it's another I'd leave.
Other than that it's a good shortlist. Doubt you'll get a good Swift Sport for the money but if you do you'll love driving it, these have an almost cult following and are brilliant fun. Many are abused or ruined with modifications by younger drivers though so be wary.
|
|
TYhe petrol issue isnt too big a deal as I only do about 50 miles per week, the parts issue though is different, if I could get third party parts thats different.
That said I'm leanijng towards the Hyundai Coupe, CIvic and Swift Sport, in no particular order.
|
I had a 2004 plate Mazda 3 sports (2 litre engine). I purchased it with 62786 miles on the clock and ran it to 125540 in a few years with only 1 breakdown (some cheap 30 quid engine part).
If it wasn't for the rust I would have kept it longer.
Buy a Japanese petrol car.......
I cant understand why everyone bangs on about Mazda when they have well reported history of rust, fitting of a 1970s car.
|
"I cant understand why everyone bangs on about Mazda when they have well reported history of rust, fitting of a 1970s car."
They do but mechanically and electronically they're excellent. They are also top notch for driver enjoyment from 2002 onwards with the 2,3,5 and 6. I've run and traded loads of them over the years and aside from the occasional sticky brake calipper on MX5's I've had no trouble at all. Rust is your only worry but even at that it's more cosmetic than structural on most of them. The MX5 is the worst of the lot.
|
|
It certainly isn't cosmetic on the MX5 or 6 (although not a difficult fix on the MX-5) but often a MOT failure and call to the scrap yard on Mk 1 6s.
Mazdas can be very good indeed but they've had more design disasters than Toyota over the years. Their diesel engines were a disaster and their customer service with them apalling - you only need to search back on this site to find some awful cases.
|
It certainly isn't cosmetic on the MX5 or 6 (although not a difficult fix on the MX-5) but often a MOT failure and call to the scrap yard on Mk 1 6s.
Mazdas can be very good indeed but they've had more design disasters than Toyota over the years. Their diesel engines were a disaster and their customer service with them apalling - you only need to search back on this site to find some awful cases.
Mazda have been using Ford and PSA diesels for years which the 1600 is notoriously weak but the old Mazda 2.0 turbo diesel in the 323 and 626 was as tough as old boots. Agree the latest Skyactiv D 2.2 isn't forging a great reputation and Mazda do have a history of trying a little too hard to be different with some messy results. Rotary engines are turbine smooth but troublesome yet they stuck by them for decades and are still working on them today. Can't say I've encountered any issues with Mazda customer service myself.
|
It certainly isn't cosmetic on the MX5 or 6 (although not a difficult fix on the MX-5) but often a MOT failure and call to the scrap yard on Mk 1 6s.
Mazdas can be very good indeed but they've had more design disasters than Toyota over the years. Their diesel engines were a disaster and their customer service with them apalling - you only need to search back on this site to find some awful cases.
Mazda have been using Ford and PSA diesels for years which the 1600 is notoriously weak but the old Mazda 2.0 turbo diesel in the 323 and 626 was as tough as old boots. Agree the latest Skyactiv D 2.2 isn't forging a great reputation and Mazda do have a history of trying a little too hard to be different with some messy results. Rotary engines are turbine smooth but troublesome yet they stuck by them for decades and are still working on them today. Can't say I've encountered any issues with Mazda customer service myself.
The Ford and PSA ones are not too bad. The recent ones which gave all the problems were Mazdas own 2.0 and 2.2 diesels. On the Mk 1 6 many a 2.0 failed at low mileages due to a complete mess of a DPF design and Mazda denied any issues despite them being widespread.
Both the MZR original 2.0 and later 2.2 are well known for issues.
|
I had a 2004 plate Mazda 3 sports (2 litre engine). I purchased it with 62786 miles on the clock and ran it to 125540 in a few years with only 1 breakdown (some cheap 30 quid engine part).
If it wasn't for the rust I would have kept it longer.
Buy a Japanese petrol car.......
I cant understand why everyone bangs on about Mazda when they have well reported history of rust, fitting of a 1970s car.
They're no that bad - my 11yo Mazda3 (petrol) is almost rust free on the bodywork, and no more underneath than any other comparable Japanese car of that age. Never failed its MOT and only had 2 advisories in that time (serviced at the same time), all of which were wear and tear related and fixed. I still see loads of mk1 3s and 6s (most pre 2007) locally, the vast majority in very good nick and certainly not rust buckets. I don't hear of that many since the early mk1s having serious rust issues, as SLO76 says, its mainly confined to the wheel arches. A few US mk3s (early ones) has similar issues, but had not heard of similar problems over here.
The diesels always have been a problem, but fortunately would be here as the OP has (wisely) decide that their low mileage doesn't require one. To be honest, the vast majority of problems with cars these days come about either becuase of design flaws (normally electrical and/or controls systems, which are usually evident soon after their first built) that require replacement parts, or that and bad marketing, whereby customers are fed lies and misinformation (sometimes through the media in reviews) that complex diesel cars are fine for people who do low mileages, lots of short journeys and/or in slow-moving urban traffic, which patently they were never designed to do.
Its the same reason I never felt sorry for those idiot customers visiting my local main dealer after buying a rotary-engined RX-8 and ignoring the manufacturer's advice that they're not shopping cars, whining away that their beloved's CAT has broken and now faces a bill on £1k to have a new one fitted...
|
|
Would the 2.7v6 coupe be a risk if a decent one came up? fuel and insurance etc aren't too bad for what I need.
|
Would the 2.7v6 coupe be a risk if a decent one came up? fuel and insurance etc aren't too bad for what I need.
There's no reason not to buy one if you like it. Needs a timing belt and water pump every 5yrs or 50k and I'd imagine it's not a cheap job to do (£400 plus) so factor it in when looking. The 2.7 really isn't any quicker on the road than the 2.0, it lacks low speed pull and handling is compromised by the heavier engine up front. Might make a tempting old smoker for a few hundred quid then run til it goes pop. Don't pay too much for one and make sure you have a good look under it before parting with the cash as they rot quite badly underneath.
Edited by SLO76 on 11/04/2017 at 14:33
|
|
Pretty much my thoughts on it mate, its just I was thinking if one turned up that was in good nick for the money whether there were any issues that would make it a bad buy compared to the 2.0, which is what I would prefer.
Edited by Dazl1212 on 11/04/2017 at 18:05
|
|
|
|
Just noticed you mention Subaru's, aren't they ridiculously complicated and therefore more likely to go wrong and won't the parts be really dear?
|
|
Yes, they are quite complicated.
So yes, if they go wrong, they can be expensive to fix.
But they don't break down much - especially petrol engined ones with manual gearboxes.
|
|
Do you think £4k could get me a decent WRX?
|
|
and how much would you budget for repair costs?
|
|
How much do you reckon I'd need? I spent about 2k in a year on my old Octavia vrs that I paid £1300 for and I'd be hoping to not have to spend that much. That said I was doing 60 miles a day in that. I barely do that in a week now.
Edited by Dazl1212 on 15/04/2017 at 22:29
|
|
An unstressed Subaru should be reliable ... but by the time a WRX is going for £4K it's probably been thrashed and likely to bring you big bills, but perhaps you need to learn the hard way!
|
|
|
|
|
|
