The going rate for a 2012 1.8 Civic auto with sensible miles starts around £7k and id recommend spending at least this amount to get a nice example with lowish miles and a full history. The 1800 petrol is better on fuel than your old Mazda and quicker too with 40mpg possible day to day if driven sensibly. It is a far more reliable longterm bet than a modern DPF equipped diesel. If you’re willing and able to up the budget to around £8.5-£9k this will open up the Mazda 3 2.0 Skyactiv auto which is another excellent option. Better on fuel than your old Mazda, just as reliable and very nice to drive.
Indeed - the OP should be able to get around 38-40mpg with the gen-3 Mazda3 2.0 auto (confirmed by the Real MPG data) which I easily managed with a brand new one (not worn in) on a test drive (same for the CX-3 which is lighter but less aerodynamic [higher sided]) in mixed driving.
To the OP - If you prefer the 3, I'd go with the SE-L (whether you want the Nav version or not is up to you - it isn't the best system and only ones from late 2017 [out of your price range] come with Android Auto/Apple Car Play) as its the best value for money and is shod on sensible wheels/tyres with barely any penalty in handling. Make sure you find a main dealer with a decent post-sales reputation, as getting one with a bad rep will leave you with a bitter taste.
I wouldn't touch the diesel versions though, even though mileage-wise they are suitable, as any sort of usage as a urban runaround with short trips from cold can easily lead to major (and very expensive) problems down the line for future prospective owners like you.
The Hyundai/KIA option is better if the usage/service/MOT history shows no issues with the DPF or that sort of usage pattern as they seem less susceptible to problems. Unfortunately the Honda equivalent will be out of your price range for the same age of car and would likely necessitate going for a considerably older car, meaning reliability and bigger wear and tear bills may soon come along. A KIA may well still be in warranty if it has been serviced on schedule and to specs by a main dealer throughout.
|
|
100 miles plus per day easily put you into diesel territory. That should improve your fuel consumption figures. I get into the high 40's from a 2.0 diesel automatic, so a smaller engine in a smaller car should deliver good results. For that money though you need to sift out the wheat from the chaff! Good luck. Concrete
|
|
Thanks for all the replies so far....lots of food for thought.
If I was up my budget for an electric car, would that be more economical and long term cost less than a petrol/diesel?
If so, what electric car would be recommended?
Thanks again.
|
If so, what electric car would be recommended?
Thanks again.
I don't think your usage would suit an electric/hybrid car. They make more sense in urban or short local journey use.
Edited by corax on 16/01/2020 at 17:18
|
|
I too suggest finding the right Diesel, your mileage will keep the DPF happy and you should get a fair bargain seeing as everyone and his dog has convinced themselves that Diesels are finished.
|
If I was up my budget for an electric car, would that be more economical and long term cost less than a petrol/diesel?
If so, what electric car would be recommended?
Is there somewhere you know you will be able to charge the car at work?.
If the answer is no, then you would need an electric car with enough range to go both ways. Fair enough you think, there are quite a few electric cars with a range greater than 100 miles, right?. On paper, yes, but in the real world, with battery degredation, cold weather affecting the range, plus traffic jams (especially in winter), i would be looking for a range of 200 miles. That is going to make it very difficult, possibly inpossible to get something within your (as yet unspecified) budget.
If the answer is yes, well in theory, it shouldn't be too difficult depending on budget, to find something which could do this. The problem, when buying used, is battery degredation and to what extent any car you look at is affected. As an example, there was a post on the forum not too long ago from someone who had bought a second hand Renault Zoe. I think the car was 5 years old, but with the battery fully charged the range stood at just under 50 miles. That wouldn't even get you to where you are going, never mind home too!.
Honestly, unless you were in the position of getting a new electric car, i don't think i'd be looking at electric for your useage.
Edited by badbusdriver on 16/01/2020 at 17:44
|
|
|
|
|
I wouldn’t touch an electric car unless you’re leasing or buying new and offloading before it hits 5yrs old. The batteries lose efficiency as they age and the trade are unsure of how to value them as trade-ins and thus they lose a fortune in depreciation which more than wipes out any fuel savings.
|
|
|
|
100 miles plus per day easily put you into diesel territory. That should improve your fuel consumption figures. I get into the high 40's from a 2.0 diesel automatic, so a smaller engine in a smaller car should deliver good results. For that money though you need to sift out the wheat from the chaff! Good luck. Concrete
The problem may be for the OP that their daily journey takes them through or to somewhere that will soon be implementing a ban or high daily charges for diesel-engined cars that are Euro5 and older. I'm not sure whether any diesels (including those from the Hyundai/KIA stable I suggested) would be compliant WRT to their budget.
Difficult to say without knowing more about where they live and work, as well as have use for the car at other times.
No way would I buy an EV on a budget of around $6k for a high mileage use. Too much recharging, the battery life will be poor and could go at any time (huge replacement cost), earlier generations of EVs aren't anywhere near as good (range/battery life/general reliability) as older ones and, if I recall, Tesla basically stick two fingers up at owners after the car gets to 10yo - I was told they won't provide any support or spare parts.
Edited by Engineer Andy on 16/01/2020 at 18:08
|
|
Ok...so I will rule out EV!
I am travelling from Hertfordshire to both Cambridge (A505) and also Peterborough (A1).
I am deciding on petrol then and something economical. If I were to up the budget to 8-9k what would be a good option which is both economical and also a car with the same level of reliability as the Honda's of this world.
Thank you all for the advice so far. I am learning a lot!
|
|
If you want something as reliable as a Honda then it would need to be a Honda, Toyota or Mazda. Your problem, assuming you want to avoid diesel, is the auto gearbox. As has been said before, while torque converter (T/C) are more reliable than an automated manual, but they thirstier. Automated manuals, well they are more efficient than T/C (probably 5-10mpg for a car the size of your Mazda 3), but the long term reliability just isn't there. So you see the problem. Also of course, it depends on what mpg you are wanting or expecting in comparison to your previous car?.
In terms of the newer Mazda 3 mentioned earlier, you should get into a 2015 car with decent miles for £9k.
For the Civic, it would be around the same age.
For a Toyota Auris, it would also be around the same age, but the Auris does use a CVT transmission which should be more efficient.
|
|
I was hoping for nearer 45mpg than 32 which my Mazda was. I am not in favour of petrol but it sounded like from the posts above Diesel may long-term cost me more to run?
|
|
|
|
Might also be worth considering a step down in size?.
The Honda Jazz was mentioned earlier, and while i am full of praise for our 2017 version, it does get a bit tiresome at motorway/dual carriageway speeds due to its lack of torque and hyperactive CVT 7 transmission. Not such an issue on flatter terrain (we live in North East Scotland), but something to be aware of, also it isn't that refined anyway (though ours does have the largest wheel/tyre combo).
But you could consider the Toyota Yaris, which has a very similar transmission, a similar amount of power, but its peak torque is both slightly higher and produced 1000rpm lower, so it should be a bit more settled. In addition, the current Yaris is praised in its review on this website for its comfort and refinement at motorway speeds.
Or the Mazda 2. This is a very well liked little car which uses a 1.5 petrol engine with a T/C auto. It does not weigh very much, and has a decent amount of torque compared to the Jazz and Yaris. It is also quiet and refined, helped no doubt by having sensible wheel/tyre sizes.
£9k would get you into a 2016/2017 example of each (sadly it wouldn't be quite enought to get into the 1.5 ((non-hybrid)) Yaris)
|
|
The only issue with the Mazda 2 auto would be availability - not many auto versions sold (small autos outside of the Yaris and Jazz aren't popular, probably because of the extra expense of buying).
Definitely worth a look if you can find one - performance-wise, about the same as my older 1.6 petrol (manual) Mazda3 (0-60 in 12 sec) but the Real MPG says average of around 50, min 40 in town. Great handling too, and again decent spec for the SE-L variant.
The Jazz is still the most sensible option and best for use of space (the Mazda2 isn't large, especially the boot).
To the OP - I'd get in some test drives, don't commit to anything yet, just say you're looking and want to test out how they feel for comfort and the driving experience. Nothing lost in spending a while to whittle your list down to a final 2 or 3.
Just make sure the spec reasonably matches so that you get the car shod on the size of tyres you'd likely end up with in the car you buy - some 'Sport' models of small cars can have a very firm ride because of their low profile tyres, and can be quite a bit different from the lower spec (but often still very generously kitted out) models. With some brands (like Mazda), they have only a limited number of spec levels for autos, so it might be one choice only for that car. Probably not so with the Jazz, at least.
|
|
Thank you for all the advice. I like the Jazz but was hoping for something a big bigger, but take the points mentioned and my requirements.
Question re petrol vs diesel. I always thought petrol was cheaper on tax and diesel is being phased out and owners charged more due to emissions? I may be wrong, hence the question as opposed to statement!
|
|
What makes you think that a diesel is much more expensive to run than a petrol car for 25K miles per annum? Based on fairly nominal figures of 40mpg for petrol and 50mpg for diesel then the fuel saving will be in the order of £750. That ain't chicken feed!! An annual service may be a tad more but only tens of pounds. Do your sums. As GB says you stand more chance of picking up a bargain diesel than a petrol. Cheers Concrete
|
|
Also, diesels aren't being "phased out". They may well be going through a rocky patch, and it may well be the case that for cars up to the size of a Golf, it isn't really worth bothering about diesel with so many efficient small capacity turbo petrols (a 1.4TSI Golf or Leon would easily manage 50+mpg). But for bigger heavier cars, especially SUV's, diesel is just the most sensible and efficient choice. This is borne out by the fact that Audi have turned away from petrol and back to diesel (coupled to a mild hybrid and 48v electrics) in a big way for certain types and sizes of car.
|
|
|
|
|
|
