|
Our neighbour bought a 6 year old diesel 2 years ago. Since then its spend some time in the garage having the engine light put out ( normally a sensor) and its just been at the garage a week having the DPF cleaned/replaced.
A quick tap at the Casio suggests he has probably saved £600 in fuel costs but many petrol cars of that age have low VED so little (if any) saving there.
He seems pretty fed up with the diesel car to be honest.
|
|
|
|
We’re also talking about an OP who was talking about cars costing less than £4,000. A complex DPF equipped diesel at this money will almost certainly cost more to run than a thirstier but vastly more reliable petrol engined equivalent as long as they avoid the less robust examples such as Fords 1.0 Ecoboom and VW’s early cheese chain driven TSi’s.
|
|
The cars I am looking at are generally between 2009 and 2013. Generally speaking, the diesel cars of this era have lower VED, whether a Ford or VW, etc. I also need this car before Christmas, so need to make a decision!
Example would be the Golf.
1.4 TSI 122 - £170 a year;
1.6 TDI 110 - £30 a year;
2.0 TDI 140 - £130 a year.
I believe Ford are very similar figures on the VED.
I was doing some further maths about miles per year, and I think this could be between £8K and £12.5K a year, dependent upon work requirements (this is commuting, so it will be paid for myself). The fuel saving's with some rough and ready numbers are at the top end. To keep it consistent, they are honest johns real world for the Golf, again.
1.4 TSI 42 MPG £1636.56
2.0 TDI 52 MPG £1913.15
The 1.6 TDI is only slightly higher, so I have avoided those numbers.
At the top end, its £276.59 a year, which whilst not to be sniffed at, but can easily be wiped out on maintenance, I assume? At the lower end of mileage (8K a year) it is £177.02. Ths is obviously less of a concern.
Also, the cars I am looking at generally are 'higher' mileage, whether a focus or Golf, Mazda 3, etc. The minimum is generally 70K miles, does that not lend itself towards a diesel? I see a lot of diesels still on the market at 200K+ miles, whereas petrol cars seem to die a lot earlier - is this correct? If I plan to keep it quite a few years if possible, does that not lend itself towards the diesel somewhat, especially if buying an example with say, 100K on the clock? Isn't there also issues with turbo's etc and their life span? I realise there is also a lot to go wrong on a diesel too, but the engines generally seem to last a bit longer? The main concerns are the EGR, DMF and DPF, I guess as all can be expensive.
Sorry if these come across as 'novice' points, its quite easy to overload yourself with information and the money I have available seems to be a hard budget for me. £4K is not a lot for a car, but also enough that you'd feel it if you bought an absolute dross example, so it's tricky.
I also drove a Skoda Fabia (2008) diesel recently, as helping a family member out, and with 2 car seats in there it felt extremely claustrophobic, so I think this is the minimum size car I can get away with.
I have also noticed ULEZ petrol cars going up in price, since the expansion, which is frustrating. Diesel cars, despite historical logic, seem a bit cheaper.
Edited by Dcoa93 on 17/12/2021 at 13:05
|
You will see high mileage diesels for sale but there’s no telling how much money has been spent on them over their life to get there. Modern petrol engines are capable of reaching huge mileage if correctly cared for and on their way they’ll typically avoid the big bills most modern diesels will accumulate.
I see you are full of doubt and I can only advise based on my own experiences over twenty years of buying and selling cars, in that time I found modern diesels are less reliable and much more likely to cost you additional money in repairs compared to most modern petrol cars, especially at the money you’re talking about. But if you want to buy a sub £4,000 diesel then scratch that itch and do so. Be careful and buy only with a full service history, look also for long term ownership and check the Mot history and HPI report. Keep money aside for repairs too but you might well get lucky if you buy well.
Again I’ll say this. Don’t get modern DPF equipped diesels mixed up with the bombproof old diesels we used to get in the 80’s and 90’s. Those could do interstellar mileages without difficulty, today’s highly complex diesels are made from glass by comparison and require careful and regular care by specialists.
|
|
Do you have any examples of petrol cars, lasting well into the 150K plus range? I assume the Mazda 3 1.6 and Ford Focus 1.6 are the examples? Realistically I am looking at cars with mileage of 80,000 to 110,000, so not too bad in terms of miles driven, especially if they have been looked after. Don't want to go higher than that really. It would likely be replaced before getting anywhere near the 150K (3-4 years of ownership) before I look to get a newer car (building up my driving experience), but still would like to avoid any expensive engine related bills (assume this also counts against diesels in some ways!)
Having done the math's again, the differences between fuels (even at 12.5K miles) at the top end of what I will ever be doing, is not that pronounced (unless the efficiency figures are way out). A few hundred a year can easily be lost by regular servicing and repairs (particularly on a more complicated car). I don't think the figures of 42 MPG and 52 MPG for petrol for diesel are too unrealistic on a family hatchback, unless I am underestimating/overestimating either diesel or petrol. Is there a particularly fuel efficient/reliable unit of this size car, that is also petrol? I guess regular returns of 40 MPG+ are considered efficient as they are heavier cars. I do believe the 1.4 TSI unit in the Golf is very efficient, but there are a lot of chain driven horror stories. I did see what I think is a nice example, as below, but that reliability question mark does have a big impact. Would one with the timing chain revisions, be a better bet? You also see a lot more diesel golfs, do you know why this might be?
www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202112060265275?f...s
And a diesel one, ignore the fact they are both red!
www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202109157398760?f...s
The latter lacks service history, so it has put me off.
I am happy to take on board your experience and look elsewhere (I assume you work in the trade), as I know very little and ultimately am working on reputation and enjoyed driving the Golf as a learner (probably some comfort there I think) plus a bit of aesthetics I guess.
Are there any other petrol cars, you'd recommend?
I am grateful for the help, btw
Edited by Dcoa93 on 17/12/2021 at 15:25
|
www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202112060265275?f...s
Hmm, I'd avoid the tsi on a 2009 car. This was well before any revisions.
With your budget I would take SLO's advice and look at reliable petrol alternatives.
One version I like with the simple and reliable 1.6 8v VAG petrol engine:-
www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202112160567487?m...1
Edited by Big John on 17/12/2021 at 20:29
|
|
|
|
We’ve taken Corollas to 120000(sold), 198000(p/x) and 220000(disassembled) . I think the wife’s RAV4 is at about 143000 so getting there.
Also a 118d to 120000 with only an indicator repeater to prove that not all BMWs are unreliable.
Current VW 2.0 diesel T6 however…. Sitting outside in shame for the fourth time in 3 years (from new). Engine warning lights again (NOX this time). Probably a software fix but dealer can’t see it till January. Never another VW….
|
|
|
|
|
We’re also talking about an OP who was talking about cars costing less than £4,000. A complex DPF equipped diesel at this money will almost certainly cost more to run than a thirstier but vastly more reliable petrol engined equivalent as long as they avoid the less robust examples such as Fords 1.0 Ecoboom and VW’s early cheese chain driven TSi’s.
I think the latest revision of the "cheese chain"VAG EA111 has been revised somewhat - I have a 1.4tsi EA111 a 2014 Superb which I got nearly new for an irresistible price back in 2015. 100kmiles later and other than servicing the only thing it's had is new front brakes and a couple of snapped springs (my local area terrible for speed bumps!). I've never had longlife servicing so it's had very regular oil changes with max 9500 mile intervals. I also used the 42mpg figure in my calcs before I bought it as I was worried about fuel costs on my horrible commute - The reality was 50mpg for my previous 2003 diesel 1.9 pd Superb mkI compared to 46mpg for the 2014 petrol 1.4tsi Superb mkII - same journey / driving style. One thing of note though was the diesel 1.9 seemed to do 50mpg whatever the journey type or car loading but the petrol 1.4tsi is much more sensitive to usage. The 1.4 tsi can easily do 52mpg on a long run two up with light luggage but it drops to about 40mpg fully loaded with heavy people and rammed with luggage.
There was some mention above about clutch slave/master cylinders with this engine further up the thread. I thought the master cylinder was the same for all manual versions whichever engine? and I've heard of the concentric(inside bellhousing) slave cylinder failing on the diesel models and it's a big gearbox out job but I've not heard of the simple external slave cylinder failing as fitted to all small petrol version - and if it did it's a quick/cheap and easy job.
The VAG EA211(1.0, 1.2, 1.4) is the sweet spot engine though - my son has the 1.2tsi version in his 2016 Octavia. Thus far fabulous but it's due a cambelt now. The EA211 also has the same slave cylinder setup. Not sure you'll manage to find one in budget especially in these mad times.
Also an advantage is the small lower powered manual petrol versions of VAG cars don't have DMF's, the water pump is run by a different belt (both EA111& EA211) and don't have the dreaded "silicat" bag that splits into the cooling system and does damage (usually blocks heater matrix) - this is fitted to diesel/bigger petrol versions.
NEVER NEVER consider a car fitted with the EA111 1.4tsi "twincharger" (aka supercharger & turbocharger). Usually earlier higher powered 1.4tsi (160ps?) - BIG TROUBLE
Edited by Big John on 17/12/2021 at 20:38
|
Thank you, I believe that the later MK6 did get better on the chain front, but as you say, that’s an 09 plate and it’s therefore an early one. I think I’ll have a look at some petrol options again.
That was always my thought as to the main fuel difference ie the diesel will get good returns anywhere, whereas the petrol will be much more sensitive.
I like the look of the GT 160 BHP Golf, but they are far too complicated it would seem.
I do want a low maintenance car (where possible).
|
|
This is available to me locally, from a small dealer (looks like they specialize in the cheaper side of things).
www.poplarsmotorcompany.co.uk/used/cars/ford-focus.../
Mileage is a bit high, but description looks good.
Would probably change the badges (if that is an easy job).
Looks OK though? Might see if I can get it to £3250?
|
The 1.6 petrol Focus is a good car but check those advisories for the last Mot relating to the corroded exhaust and mount are attended to before buying. Although it sounds good and is a good model at 100,000 miles plus it could be a money-pit or it could be good as gold. For a few hundred quid more I’d have the Hyundai i30 1.4 with half the miles the same dealer has. Assuming it checks out and has a good service record. It’ll have much more life left in it for a few hundred quid more.
www.poplarsmotorcompany.co.uk/used/cars/hyundai-i3.../
|
|
Thanks again, I did see that actually - will have a look.
Honest opinion, what do you think when you see cars like this? www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202111300088513?f...s
Look nice, but potential money pit?
This one only has 5 services (I guess I should expect 10/11) at this age of car, but MOT history does look good tbf (I think).
The MOT history seems to be a very good resource.
I will have a look through AT at some options, and share my findings.
|
|
Nah, it’s been neglected and no mention of the timing belt which will be heavily overdue if it’s not been done. These aren’t reliable cars to start with, the diesels in particular have a multitude of things that can and do go wrong so I certainly wouldn’t consider one that’s been neglected like this. It might not have seen spanner’s in years.
|
Thank you - assume you are basing that on the service history details?
This look better?
www.raccars.co.uk/car-61731596?i=126&m=vd
I am going to look at Mazdas/Fords again - any other brands to go for?
Petrol cars seem to have jumped up due to ULEZ expansion which is annoying.
|
|
Diesels are more complex and have a reputation for expensive problems as they age.
This may (or may not) be true - I have never seen it quantified objectively. FWIW:
- if you buy a diesel the running costs should be lower. Put any savings in running cats aside so you build up a contingency fund.
- any car 10+ years old, 100k+ miles, <£4k is a risk.
Buy on condition, service history (particularly cambelts etc), credible source (not doubtful dealers), well established spares network, etc
|
|
Just to update, after admittedly a lot of back and forth in my head, I have made up my mind.
Going to get a petrol car, likely a Mazda 3 1.6 or a Ford Focus 1.6. These should hopefully serve me well for 10K miles a year.
The VW feels too much of a punt, as there are so many poorly maintained ones. As soon as you start to ask any questions about them, most have had very hard lives or been messed around with a lot (petrol version). It amazes me how many have 1 or 2 services, then totally neglected - is that normal? I assume people just get them through MOTs and don't worry about the rest.
Ultimately running costs are a big factor, and the higher fuel costs (particularly at the moment will hurt), but the lessened risk of costly repairs should hopefully offset this a bit. This at least removes the chance of big costs with the DPF/EGR or DMF. One of those going, is a few years worth of fuel saving. The tax difference is only £40 a year and insurance is lower in the petrol cars. The timing chain of the petrol Golf has also put me off, as a lot of those you see in my budget have had no revisions to it, so its going to happen to me, which is going to hurt.
I realise any car will have faults, that is to be expected, but hopefully this is the 'sensible' choice.
|
“ Just to update, after admittedly a lot of back and forth in my head, I have made up my mind.
Going to get a petrol car, likely a Mazda 3 1.6 or a Ford Focus 1.6.”
Wise choice. The three golden words when buying a cheap used car should always be, keep it simple.
|
Thanks again for the help.
Out of interest, what are the lifespan of dual mass flywheels and Diesel Particulate Filters (on older cars particularly) - they are ultimately what has put me off a diesel, as the potential for repairs doesn’t seem worth 10 MPG.
Is the Mazda or Ford more fuel efficient, or similar?
Do they have timing belts, when do they need replacements?
Anything else I should look out for?
|
Thanks again for the help. Out of interest, what are the lifespan of dual mass flywheels and Diesel Particulate Filters (on older cars particularly) - they are ultimately what has put me off a diesel, as the potential for repairs doesn’t seem worth 10 MPG. Is the Mazda or Ford more fuel efficient, or similar? Do they have timing belts, when do they need replacements? Anything else I should look out for?
Difficult to tell with DPFs - their longevity relies on the use of low-SAPS oil of the correct specification - many cars out of warranty are run on whatever oil is to hand - not that you can guarantee that main dealers use the correct oil anyway.
|
Thanks again for the help. Out of interest, what are the lifespan of dual mass flywheels and Diesel Particulate Filters (on older cars particularly) - they are ultimately what has put me off a diesel, as the potential for repairs doesn’t seem worth 10 MPG. Is the Mazda or Ford more fuel efficient, or similar? Do they have timing belts, when do they need replacements? Anything else I should look out for?
Difficult to tell with DPFs - their longevity relies on the use of low-SAPS oil of the correct specification - many cars out of warranty are run on whatever oil is to hand - not that you can guarantee that main dealers use the correct oil anyway.
When we bought our Focus 1.6 TDCi I was initially put off with the prices quoted by the dealer for the topping up of the EOLYS tank every 37,500 miles and the scheduled DPF replacement every 75,000 miles. Spoke to the Ford specialist we used locally and he simply said topping up was not that expensive and the DPF only needed replacing when it would no longer regen. We had the car 10 years and following the advice of the local indy to only put in decent quantities of petrol when we filled (no 2 gallon splash and dash) we only had the tank topped up twice. The DPF was still the original after 10 years and never had an issue.
|
|
Had a few days off looking for a new car with Christmas etc, but would like to pick one up ASAP now.
Looking at Ford Focus' and Mazda 3's - am I right that..
Ford Focus - timing belt is every 10 years or 125K miles on the 1.6 petrol?
Mazda 3 - timing chain, should last the lifetime of the engine, with servicing? 1.6 petrol here too? Is the chain actually reliable?
Seems like chain's generally are pretty popular?
Also had a look at Kia C'eed's (believe they are also chain) but not as many out there.
Edited by Dcoa93 on 30/12/2021 at 19:38
|
Had a few days off looking for a new car with Christmas etc, but would like to pick one up ASAP now.
Excellent choice re getting a petrol however with any it's not just about the cambelt & cost etc - on the 1.6 Ford it's pretty cheap and it lasts 10 years - it's more about the history/condition of everything. If you're not sure yourself get someone in the know to look over a car out you want to buy. Lots to check:-
- Engine/gearbox (is cambelt due, or if a chain has it missed oil services/v bad for chains) & any oil leaks
- Exhaust
- Clutch
- Suspension
- Driveshafts
- Brakes inc handbrake
- Rubber & metal brake pipes (especially re the ones running over the fuel tank/ v hard to repair)
- Fuel tank/pump/lines
- Body work & subframes - rust is still out there (subframes/ crossmembers known for writing cars off). Lift up carpets in the boot / look under back seat.With the Ford check front/rear where wheel arches meet the sills especially behind the liner. With the Mazda check especially the wheel arches - but rust can be still surprisingly common although some cars better than other and sometimes it's a particular age period that's more resistant. My theory is it's to do with the quality of the metal at manufacture.
- Interior - especially check if floors are wet.
- All electrical items and does aircon and the heating work?
- Any warning lights?
- Tyre condition (different makes around the car not usually a good sign) - also check how much a new set would cost. On some obscure cars this can be a shock!
- Avoid older cars with a sunroof (higher risk of drain blockage/leaks)
- MOT History - www.gov.uk/check-mot-history
- Even on a cheaper car a HPI check is worth doing. I've been amazed as what's popped up over the years
Condition is all - especially for a 10 year old car but good ones are out there.
Edited by Big John on 30/12/2021 at 20:57
|
Excellent- thank you.
I find it a bit tricky to whittle them down from online adverts, but will have a good look through what is available.
Is 100K miles too much to buy a petrol car at? I assume not, if looked after?
Edited by Dcoa93 on 30/12/2021 at 21:01
|
Is 100K miles too much to buy a petrol car at? I assume not, if looked after?
No 100k isn't too much. I'd much rather have a car with 100k mile on that's in fab condition with a full service record + pile of receipts compared to a 60k mile car that is questionable and lacking in history.
For me, although some would disagree, I always prefer newer with higher mileage over older with less mileage - if that makes sense.
Condition is all though!
|
|
One way of looking at whether a diesel is worth it is when you are involved in a crash. The car is far less likely to catch fire.
Apart from brilliant fuel consumption, the exhausts last much longer and the engines seem to go on and on if you buy the right one.
|
One way of looking at whether a diesel is worth it is when you are involved in a crash. The car is far less likely to catch fire.
Very true - but for most people this fact will provide no actual benefit, as they will pass their entire driving career without being involved in a crash with fire. As I have (so far) ....
|
|
I have had a look at the market, mainly AT,Motors, AA and RAC cars.
I am struggling to find any decent Mazda 3s or Ford Focus' at the £4K price point.I could stretch to £5K. Both are 1.6 petrol cars .
The Ford's are generally about 100K+ miles, so similar to the VW Golf's I had originally looked at and don't look in the best condition, having had hard lives it seems. MOT history checks show the same issues over various checks, and quite a few fails throughout the years. They are normally from around 2011 (I like the mk3 from this period onwards, not so keen on the mk2).
With the Mazda's, most seem to have corrosion/rust on the MOT history, which I know to be an issue - its those where its on the sub frame, that is massively of concern to me (with limited understanding, obviously).
Here is one however that doesn't have it listed.
www.theaa.com/used-cars/cardetails/6-1943577
No mention of service history (which I generally take to be a bad sign) - although it does 'look' nice generally?
Any tips at all, I am in the Leeds/York/Harrogate area, if anyone wants to have a look!
|
|
I did another look through Autotrader, and perhaps not as bad as I thought on the Focus front.
Any thoughts on this? Willing to travel (friend will take me) if its worth a good look?
www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202111019104153?f...s
|
With the Mazda's, most seem to have corrosion/rust on the MOT history, which I know to be an issue - its those where its on the sub frame, that is massively of concern to me (with limited understanding, obviously).
Subframes themselves are normally pretty solid thick metal, so rust on them is usually not a worry before it is well advanced elsewhere. The really worrying areas are where subframes are attached to the rest of the car, which is much thinner. Those areas carry stresses and can be hard to keep clear of road dirt, which can concentrate corrosion there.
|
|
Had a look on Autotrader using a location central to the 3 areas you mention (Wetherby). Haven't looked at MOT history, but these Focus sized cars (which is what you seem to be interested in) are ones I`d be interested in having a closer at (depending on MOT history). Apart from the 2 Volvo`s at the end (the S40 and V50 are mechanically identical to the Focus under the skin) all are 2010 or younger with up to 100k miles and no ins write-offs and a max of 50 mile radius of Wetherby.
www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202112150526289?e...1
202112170594007
202112180631184
202110058143994
202109167451756
202111269960656
202102048682096
202112060260051
202111209793700
202109257797153
202112170611514
202112170602376
202112220751040
202110058129113
202112100408066
202110168572685
202112150540475
|
Subframes themselves are normally pretty solid thick metal, so rust on them is usually not a worry before it is well advanced elsewhere. The really worrying areas are where subframes are attached to the rest of the car, which is much thinner. Those areas carry stresses and can be hard to keep clear of road dirt, which can concentrate corrosion there.
I'd agree subframes and some suspension bits start out with thick metal but I've seen a few horrors as cars get older. I've seen rotten front subframes on older Golf's, Octavia's which have effectively written them off as it's a biiig job - usually on cars from more "climate hostile" areas. The bodywork around them was generally sound (ignoring crossmember under radiator) but even though this is thinner it's generally galvanised. It's usually at 15 years plus you really see these sort of failures though.
The other area you need to keep an eye on even though you start with thick metal is rear torsion beam suspension as mud/water traps eventually can make them unsafe. Fiat Panda/500 rather prone but there are others. Viable but still a big job to sort. The Panda also has an awful mudtrap within the front inner wing where the metal brake pipes route - rot appears within engine bay left&right which is hard for an owner to spot.
It's true pre galvanising the bodywork that subframes were attached to merrily rusted away - memories of welding old Mini's an Austin 1100/1300's. The worst Mini I welded back together had previously fitted with replacement front / rear subframes but the rest of the body was shot. Due to personal circumstances I still had to proceed(it should have been scrapped really) - talk about the Forth Bridge - I had no option to slowly work my way round the car and EVENTUALLY join back up with the first welded panel - total nightmare, I'd never used so much metal / welding wire.
All I'm saying with cars 10+ years old you just need to looksee underneath and really pay attention to MOT advisories/fails.
At the end of the day how cars rot is a mixture of luck of the draw re metal quality, rust proofing & design, environment and how the car is looked after. Condition is all. With the strange used car pricing at the moment it's still possible to spend a lot of money on an older car - what you need to avoid is it been effectively written off at the next MOT.
Edited by Big John on 31/12/2021 at 21:12
|
|
Thanks John, much appreciated.
I like the look of this one.
www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202112170602376?f...s
Anything to note on Kia C'eed's in particular? KIA are generally known for reliability, but all cars do have potential common faults.
|
|
Any thoughts on this, at all?
www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202112060265275?f...s
I know its a bit different, but is nearby and looks decent enough in the photos? The MOT history is very good, but the tyre photo is a bit of a question mark - as a novice, they look battered, is that right?
I also know they are chain driven, which does have its cons, but if I put aside the money I would spend on a belt as savings, could be OK? Looking at independent prices, they don't seem to be that much more.
Still mainly looking at Focus' but this popped up so thought I would share it.
Doesn't look to be the greatest spec, i.e no multimedia options on the steering wheel, but not sure how necessary that sort of thing is at this budget anyway. Are there any 'mod cons' I should definitely ensure the car has? The Golf S spec (for example) has no creature comforts at all.
|
|
Time to call a holt on any further internet browsing and actually go and view a few cars. Have you been to view any of the local cars we’ve went to the bother of searching out for you? There’s no point in looking at pictures on a screen and there’s no point in any of us giving further advice if you’re going to ignore it and seek out either an unreliable diesel or early TSI engined Golf. Did you look at that low mileage previous gen Hyundai i30 i flagged up?
I think you need to just go and buy a Golf and get it out of your system. Make sure it’s serviced by a good local VW specialist and you might get lucky. It’s not what I’d recommend but you really want one and obviously won’t be talked out of it. I’m going to leave the thread be now.
best wishes.
|
Time to call a holt on any further internet browsing and actually go and view a few cars. Have you been to view any of the local cars we’ve went to the bother of searching out for you? There’s no point in looking at pictures on a screen and there’s no point in any of us giving further advice if you’re going to ignore it and seek out either an unreliable diesel or early TSI engined Golf. Did you look at that low mileage previous gen Hyundai i30 i flagged up?
Quite agree SLO, you posted quite a few links for decent cars about a month ago. And the Kia Ceed ad the OP linked before the most recent Golf is one of the 17 cars I posted links to last night. Suggesting the OP hasn't actually bothered looking at them.
|
|
Hi John/SLO,
Apologies if the recent post came across that way with the link to the petrol Golf. One thing I had not realised on that, which I will get onto shortly, has put me off anyway. I do understand the message about diesel, so that is firmly off the table. My mileage will cost me a fair bit more in fuel, but the maintenance costs have the potential to lose any savings made (for a good few years, I assume).i.e a new DMF is 2 years of fuel savings there or there abouts
I am going to view the Ford Focus in Cleckheaton that was posted by John (looks like they have a fair bit of stock that may appeal), this week. It is quite local, which helps in the logistics of going to see it and have a look around it. I should also ask, is the 1.6 ecoboost engine deemed reliable? The MPG figures seem very similar to the standard 1.6, but see quite a few - just wondered if they had similar 'issues' to the 1.0L?
I did also view the Hyundai i30 previously suggested, also had a short test drive. It was OK to drive (I also drove the Focus). The Focus felt a lot nicer to drive from my perspective, the Hyundai for the mileage, also seemed a bit tired - the interior in particular, seemed to have quite a bit of wear. Not sure if this can be remedied with a good valet company, but wear on the wheel etc I assume not? In terms of convenience, it would be a good option, but I decided to continue having a look from that viewing.
I did also have some general questions about the purchasing process, which hopefully you both can help with.
Generally, I am looking to purchase through an independent dealer. In my experience thus far, they all seem to offer a warranty of some description. Various companies are involved, wthether it is Autoguard, the Autogroup, etc. I did not intend to purchase any extended warranty with any car I buy at this price point, but is it fair to say, most of these are effectively worthless, and that should a fault develop, it is best to complain to the dealer (obviously some may be more accommodating than others)? I have also seen RAC/AA 'approved' dealers, such as the one in Cleckheaton - are these safer bets, and are these warranties 'worth more' as they are through the AA/RAC? Should I be more 'reassured' if dealing with an AA dealer? The VW Golf dealer from the recent post uses Autogroup, and it seems to be worthless. If I did buy one with a dodgy chain and it went boom, I have thrown away best part of £5K. Guess this can happen with any car, but its about minimizing risk, I suppose. I did have an experience with one that I don't know whether it was positive or not - AA dealer. The car I looked at had some service history, however for about 5 years it had been owned by a 'friend' who did their own services (not unusual maybe?) and said friend was, and I quote 'not very good at parking' so it had a number of resprays over this time. You could however see immediately, that the bumpers and panels did not allign.by a good few MM. I know these are older cars, but that surely suggest accident damage anyway?. I obviously did not buy the car as all the alarm bells were ringing straight away, but it does make me think that AA approved or RAC approved, doesn't really matter. It is a bit confusing - I think the AA may help if you have issues with the dealer, though?
The other question I had (and the thread should be evidence of this). I don't really know anyone who is mechanically minded, and I am certainly not so. I can read around the problem, but it doesn't make me an expert at all. I could obviously spot the basics of rust, and general poor condition (the list on this post was helpful) and I have used some online resources to try and get the basics understood - but realistically, I doubt I would know due to lack of experience if something was terminally wrong with the car at purchase. I don't think I would know if a gearbox felt on its way out, unless it was extremely obvious. I could probably tell if a DMF was on its way out for instance, because they make an awful racket, but everything is not that obvious. With this in mind, is it worthwhile paying the AA to do a report on a car of interest? It costs about £200 I think.
Lastly, a general question as you guys will have followed the market over the years, much more so than I. At the £4K and below price point, how much have prices increased? A dealer told me a £4K car has always been one, and still is, there is just less stock. It’s newer stuff (5 years or less) that has had dramatic price increases due to COVID?
I am grateful for the help.
Edited by Dcoa93 on 02/01/2022 at 12:55
|
|
You ask about 'minimising risk', while looking to buy a car about 10 years old. The risk calculation may be an attempt to guess the probability of something failing and the cost of that failure. At 10 years old your best indicator is how previous owners (how many?) have looked after the car, which is partly shown by a Full Service History, plus accompanying paperwork for any other maintenance or repairs. If that is missing you are on your own, after looking at the MoT history online.
Take a proper test drive (>20 mins) to get the feel of the car and decide whether it is comfortable and meets your needs. Then haggle if you are interested, buy if you are, and ride your luck afterwards. You may be able to waive any warranty to save a few ££, as it probably won't save you much if you pay for it.
|
|
I wouldn't put too much on owners unless a silly number.
On a 10 year old car I wouldn't care if it has 2 or 4 owners but would think twice if it had 7 or 8.
|
|
Generally third part warranties aren't worth the paper (real or virtual) they are written on - however a thorough professional inspection is a good idea.
With a dealer you do have consumer law on your side :- www.theaa.com/car-buying/legal-rights
Don't forget www.gov.uk/check-mot-history for MOT history & mileage verification and vehicleenquiry.service.gov.uk/ which is useful as the usually the date the car became un-taxed is the date it landed in the dealer network. If this date is yonks ago I'd suspect a lemon.
Do test drives to make sure you are happy yourself with how it drives and make sure interior wear matches up with the age/mileage etc (sounds like a car you mentioned didn't) . As part of the test drives try to take a route where you can get up to a good speed. A simple check is to make sure all the controls do what they are supposed to. When you have truly narrowed down a potential car then that might be the best time to get a professional inspection. I'd still also recommend some sort of HPI check of your own.
The Kia you mentioned might be worth a look www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202112170602376?f...s
Edited by Big John on 02/01/2022 at 22:07
|
Thanks John.
The tip about tax is interesting. Given the often in one door out the other approach of dealers, one that had been with them 2 months, implies issues, then?
Thanks again for the insight!
|
One way of looking at whether a diesel is worth it is when you are involved in a crash. The car is far less likely to catch fire.
Very true - but for most people this fact will provide no actual benefit, as they will pass their entire driving career without being involved in a crash with fire. As I have (so far) ....
This is why they are "worth it" on sailboats (Someone mentioned boats above).
Petrol inboard engines are lighter, and the low hours usually run means fuel economy isn't much of an issue, but people don't like being blown up.
|
|
I think Clarkson proved when a diesel is worth it when he drove from London to Edinburgh and return in total comfort for 4 or maybe 5 in an Audi A6 Tdi on a single tank of fuel.
No time lost with fuel stops and a result so amazing it even impressed him.
|
I think Clarkson proved when a diesel is worth it when he drove from London to Edinburgh and return in total comfort for 4 or maybe 5 in an Audi A6 Tdi on a single tank of fuel.
No time lost with fuel stops and a result so amazing it even impressed him.
Now repeat with a sub £4,000 example…
|
I think Clarkson proved when a diesel is worth it when he drove from London to Edinburgh and return in total comfort for 4 or maybe 5 in an Audi A6 Tdi on a single tank of fuel.
What did that actually prove though?.
That a diesel A6 is more efficient than the petrol equivalent, that's what. Nothing more. And we already knew that.
No time lost with fuel stops and a result so amazing it even impressed him.
Who has a bladder big enough to travel by car from London to Edinburgh and back without stopping to use a toilet somewhere?, nobody, that's who. So seeing as you are already going to be stopping for a toilet break, how much more time will be 'lost' sticking some fuel in the car too?. 5 mins at most I'd say.
Hmm.
|
|
What impressed me with Clarksons claim was that for the cost of a tank of diesel he was able to drive virtually non stop without any attention to the car.
Imagine how many charging stops this would take in an EV and the petrol cost in a conventional car. Or the train fares for four or maybe five people.
The A6 has a large enough tank to manage this but similar diesels could make the journey with a few more fuel stops but possibly costing not a lot more.
|
|
We need to remember that Top Gear was not (and still isn't) a serious motoring programme. Like the Daily Mail they never let the truth and simple facts get in the way of a "good" story.
Like Badbusdriver said
Who has a bladder big enough to travel by car from London to Edinburgh and back without stopping to use a toilet somewhere?
In the approx 750 mile at a 60mph average (if you are lucky) it would take 12 1/2 hours. In that time I would need at the very minimum 3 comfort breaks not only to use the loo but also to return to a near human state.
If I undertook that same journey in our "thirsty" Pulsar (probably do 40 mpg at a 60 mph average) it would take me exactly the same time plus a few minutes for a refuel (in Edinburgh) with none of the panic that beset the end of the Top Gear trip when the Audi began to splutter.
|
We need to remember that Top Gear was not (and still isn't) a serious motoring programme. Like the Daily Mail they never let the truth and simple facts get in the way of a "good" story.
Like Badbusdriver said
Who has a bladder big enough to travel by car from London to Edinburgh and back without stopping to use a toilet somewhere?
In the approx 750 mile at a 60mph average (if you are lucky) it would take 12 1/2 hours. In that time I would need at the very minimum 3 comfort breaks not only to use the loo but also to return to a near human state.
If I undertook that same journey in our "thirsty" Pulsar (probably do 40 mpg at a 60 mph average) it would take me exactly the same time plus a few minutes for a refuel (in Edinburgh) with none of the panic that beset the end of the Top Gear trip when the Audi began to splutter.
My VW Touareg has a 100 litre fuel tank and I can get 750 miles per fill at legal motorway cruising speeds, averaging 67 mph as I travel off-peak so Clarkson's event wasn't that special - but my bladder doesn't have the same range and common sense dictates rest breaks or changes of driver.
|
What impressed me with Clarksons claim was that for the cost of a tank of diesel he was able to drive virtually non stop without any attention to the car.
Doesn't change the fact that nothing was proven re diesel.
In fact any ICE car, petrol or diesel, would manage the same thing if the ratio of tank size to economy worked out. It just so happened that the Audi has a big tank and is pretty efficient.
Imagine how many charging stops this would take in an EV and the petrol cost in a conventional car. Or the train fares for four or maybe five people.
Clarkson (of course) used the 4.0 V8 turbo diesel (it was an A8, not an A6). But here is an interesting fact, the 3.0 V6 petrol version of the same car has the same quoted average economy and the same sized fuel tank, so could have (in theory) done exactly the same journey for less money (because petrol is cheaper than diesel). Same goes for any petrol car who's mpg is at least equal to Clarkson's V8 turbo diesel.
Edited by badbusdriver on 05/01/2022 at 11:28
|
|
|
|
