Interesting to read a thorough report on these cars which has been methodically done. My only query is why Skidpan values fuel economy so highly while he cheerfully spends much more than he saves, by buying new cars quite often :-)) It must be simple curiosity.
Its because I can afford to buy 2 new cars every 3 years now so why not. There are no pockets in shrouds. But I still want decent mpg and people buying used versions of these cars will surely be interested in the stunning economy and performance modern petrol turbo's can achieve.
Do you honestly think I buy new cars just to see what mpg they will do?
|
|
<< Do you honestly think I buy new cars just to see what mpg they will do? >>
No, I just wonder about the strong interest in fuel economy, but not in the economy of depreciation. I have never been fascinated by owning a brand-new car - for one thing I don't like the smell of them. Any car one buys loses money as one drives it off the forecourt, but rather more with new ones, even with a brilliant deal from a broker.
|
<< Do you honestly think I buy new cars just to see what mpg they will do? >>
No, I just wonder about the strong interest in fuel economy, but not in the economy of depreciation. I have never been fascinated by owning a brand-new car - for one thing I don't like the smell of them. Any car one buys loses money as one drives it off the forecourt, but rather more with new ones, even with a brilliant deal from a broker.
As in my reply to the other post about private number plates.
If Skidpan wants to buy a car or two every three years, then that is his choice. The treasury are at least pleased with him! I spend my money on the things i like and still have enough left over to invest some every month. I have been tempted to buy a jaguar (at a discount) but can think of better things to do with the money, mostly because there is no attraction to me in owning a 3 year old jaguar product. Costs and unreliability spring to mind. A friend has just forked out £1500 for an entertainment system ecu? ????
Skidpan, enjoy the cars, and please, no skidmarks....
|
No, I just wonder about the strong interest in fuel economy, but not in the economy of depreciation. I have never been fascinated by owning a brand-new car - for one thing I don't like the smell of them. Any car one buys loses money as one drives it off the forecourt, but rather more with new ones, even with a brilliant deal from a broker.
Depreciation is a fact of life. I just accept it. I bought my last used car in 1978 off my dad, his 3 year old works car. It cost me a fortune in repairs, I soon worked out it would be cheaper to get a loan for a new one instead of keep paying for part. So I bought a 2 week old motor with 11 miles on the clock from a chap who got a new job with company car the day after taking delivery, that was in August when the new reg came out. Got it 25% less than new. Ran it 2 years and lost £150 on it. For the next 11 years I changed every 2 or 3 years and since work paid me expenses that actually covered the loan and petrol, all it cost me from my wages was the servicing. When I took up competing I spent cash on the Caterham instead of my road car thus I kept it longer, over 7 years. At the time the mrs car was also over 7 years old and between them had 250,000 miles on the clock. They both became unreliable at the same time and we vowed never to keep a car over 5 years again. Well we actually kept 3 longer than 5 years but all were much lower mileage and no issues.
So since we have no mortage, decent pensions and investments its time to splash out and new cars every 3 years is one of our treats. Our other treat has been a bigger detached house with 2 garages.
You should be thankful, we are putting excellent cars on the forcourt for you and others to buy when we change.
|
|
I must admit I always compare cars based on the overall ownership cost over their lifetime, as long as they meet minimum criteria in non-financial areas. I agree - sometimes it can be fine running a car for well over a decade, saving vast amounts more money than changing every 3 years, but its what the driving and ownership experience is that can easily sway the descision.
Once a car goes below that minimum criteria and cannot be 'fixed' economically (or enough to make the cost justifiable), then its time for a change for me. Handy reviews like this and me keeping an eye on the market mean that choice is made a good deal easier.
The Fabia is one I will mention to my 75yo Dad when he decides to change his 08Reg (run-out) Fiesta to their final car - to me, its a 'Ronseal' type car - nothing flashy, does what it says on the tin, good value. How's the all-round visibility? A big problem on many modern cars with big C pillars and small back windows.
Ones like the Jazz are good, but come at a high cost. The full size spare I think is a great boon as well - certainly for me it is. It shows they bother to think of the customer, not just the bottom line or virtue-signalling to politicians by disposing of them in favour of the 'tube of goo'.
|
The Fabia is one I will mention to my 75yo Dad when he decides to change his 08Reg (run-out) Fiesta to their final car
Ones like the Jazz are good, but come at a high cost.
When my dad was 75 he bought a Jazz expecting it to last him while he wanted to drive. But after 5 years he still enjoyed driving so bought a Micra (on my recomendation) and immediately realised it was the better car in many respects. And it cost a lot less than a Jazz. He ran the Micra for almost 7 years and only replaced a spring.
How's the all-round visibility? A big problem on many modern cars with big C pillars and small back windows.
Rear (and all round) visibilty is the best we have had since the 2 K12 Micras (a 2005 and a 2007). Its one of the first things I noticed and it makes parking and manouvering into tights spots easy. The standard rear parking sensors are not really needed.
The full size spare I think is a great boon as well - certainly for me it is. It shows they bother to think of the customer, not just the bottom line or virtue-signalling to politicians by disposing of them in favour of the 'tube of goo'.
Goo is standard but they offer a space saver or temporary spare for an extra £100. The space saver is obvious, its a bike tyre, the temporary spare is Skoda speak for a propper tyre on a propper rim but not the same size as the 4 on the car. Its the same overall diameter but you are still speed restriced. But its way better than a limited mileage bike tyre IMHO. Nothing to stop you getting a matching wheel/tyre, plenty of space in the well without taking any boot up, but Skoda don't offer it. E-Bay is your friend.
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, in 6 years of XF 3.0D ownership, over two cars, we've had precisely nothing go wrong. Zilch, etc. It's a wonderful experience, go for an XF.
If the infotainment system goes down in a Golf, the hallowed VW want £4,000, so £1,500 for the Jaguar doesn't seem so bad. I wonder how much the Skoda garage would charge. I'm not being shirty, I'm just curious since I presume it to be the same component. Does anyone know?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actually there is a pocket on a shroud, enough size for a credit card.....
That new car smell is addictive, though most second hand cars I have bought from dealers have had some work done, unless you know the car...
|
|
All the above noted as always.
Not going to repeat the obvious points, many (if not most) of the oft repeated ones have been made above. Horses, courses etc.
My first car was bought in 1968 and I owned various used ones until 1984 when I started having both new as well as used. Obviously I've (a) paid the price in terms of depreciation on the new ones in all that time ... and have also, equally obviously, (b) paid for various repairs on all the used ones.
Nothing outstanding or outrageous there. And whilst I've not added up the losses it must, unsurprisingly, be the case that the new ones have cost more than the used ones. Haven't got a problem there at all, if I chose to be the first owner then I've accepted that I'd generally have to pay for the privilege.
And if I now consider the present time ... I don't particularly want to buy used and am often found considering what would suit next time... BUT ... admit to being utterly confused by the choice of PCP vs PCH vs outright purchase.
Despite listening to,and reading, advice about PCP contracts I remain ignorant of what would REALISTICALLY, ACTUALLY suit me best (or should I say, cost me the least - whilst I'm prepared to pay the price of a new car ownership I'd still prefer to get the best deal over the time I owned it). It really is confusing if you take into account ....interest rates on PCPs (or NIL interest rates too), balloons, manufacturers contributions, depreciation comparisons between the different manufacturers, (which presumably, contribute to how much the monthly payments of PCPs are). Not to mention - do you hand it back or buy it after the term finishes?
I suspect I'll finish up buying one having tried to choose sensibly (i.e. something I like but with favourable depreciation, decent warranty period) and might be talked into taking out PCP then paying it off within a week.
But how do you, sensibly, compare all the many offers, deals etc - of all the different makers (which probably change weekly). Maybe I shouldn't concern myself too much and just get what takes my fancy? But the tight wad in me still says it would nice not to lose more than was strictly necessary.
A bit long and drawn out ... sorry.
|
admit to being utterly confused by the choice of PCP vs PCH vs outright purchase.
Simple fact, most finance will cost you money because you pay interest.
But there are exceptions.
0% is the obvious one but sometimes the price you pay can be more because the dealer has smaller margins when 0% is used, just beware.
PCP's with manufacturer contributions are great providing you can afford to pay off early, preferably within 14 days. The law allows you to ask for a settlement figure within 14 days and providing you pay that off with a month the interest is set on the day you request the figure. neither the dealer or manufacturer is allowed to ask for the contribution back. We paid about £7 interest on the Fabia but sometimes there is a fee to pay, Nissan charged us one. When you consider we have had about £6500 form Nissan, Skoda and Seat in the last 5 years and paid sod all interest.
One thing to beware of, broker deals may be less good if you take the PCP option, when we bought the Superb it was 14% discount for cash or 0% finance, it was only 8% with a PCP and contribution deal. Simple maths showed there was only about £100 difference between the deals so I kept my money in the bank hoping interest rates went up and offset that £100, some hope.
If you don't have the cash it may be viable to get a loan from a bank or even supermarket at a much lower rate.
Do your sums before deciding, its only simple maths and the seller must provide you with all the figures for comparison.
|
|
Ta for the above. All noted and absorbed.
Having the ability to buy outright without a loan is (obviously enough) a bonus ... although my poor old bones now ache after having abused them whilst earning the aforementioned funds.
It was really a matter of trying to work out if after, say, three years, a car aquired on PCP cost more or less than the same car bought at a discount (be that a broker's discount or a dealer's discount or either of the above but with the extra PCP money off that has been mentioned.
I even saw something the other day that suggested the dealer himself prompted the customer to take out a PCP deal ... and then cancel it. If that were the case perhaps you wouldn't feel so bad when returning to the dealers premises for after-sales issues or service etc (although most would say you shouldn't feel remotely bad about that anyway).
|
|
|
|
|
|
