Here is a list, in order of priority!
1. safety. in a smash, needs to keep me safe. plus wife and kiddies.
2. automatic. driving with two mobiles at each ear, means..no gearstick allowed.
3. space. needs to fit golf clubs, bike and weekend fishing kit. also, kids + wife.
4. cost. needs to fit into 15K
5. reliability. can't be breaking down on route to golf, or fishing, or bike rides.
6. look and drive.
Any ideas?
I was thinking a second hand cmax, but its not the safest around, a corolla verso looks tempting, but costly and i hear the auto boxes in them are harsh, plus...there is the senic etc.
I have been thinking mainly along the lines of MPVs..but could go anywhere.
|
What choice did you make the last time you asked this, and did it fit the bill? tinyurl.com/ckwrv
I note that safety is important - how about spending a few bob on driver training to allay your fears a little?
|
|
Volvo V70 springs to mind
|
|
|
basically, we didn't buy anything last time, and plumped for a second hand focus.
the extra training, is something i give everyday! believe me.
|
|
|
|
As I read this I though V70 or Saab 9-5.
I read somewhere that the Swedes design their cars to withstand an elk hitting the windscreen (they have a heavy body and spindly legs) so the windscreen pillars are extra strong and overall these models are much better equipped to survive impact.
|
|
NCAP test results don't always support the view that Swedish is safe, a 2001 on Laguna is potentially safer than any 9-5 for instance.
|
"2. automatic. driving with two mobiles at each ear, means..no gearstick allowed."
That's not a smart thing to write. If safety is a priority then consider improving your 'active safety', i.e. switch the mobiles off and think about spending £70 on the IAM's Skills for Life programme.
|
I'm almost sure he's taking the mick Aprillia.
--
Adam
|
|
|
|
I can't dispute the NCAP results. European cars introduced since NCAP have been designed to perform well in the NCAP tests because of the marketing benefits.
Real world collisions are rarely as tidy as the NCAP simulation - e.g. an oblique angle impact with an HGV trailer where the bonnet would go underneath and everything above the waist line would be ripped off. This is the area where Volvo and Saab are claimed to be superior.
I read recently that Volvo are frustrated that the NCAP data is taken as gospel when it only gives a simplistic snapshot of real-world collision protection.
|
I've also heard the points made by Flying Red. And of course, as has been pointed out, NCAP results are not translatable across different classes of vehicle.
To quote the NCAP site
>>20. Are large cars safer than small cars? In frontal impacts between cars, the occupants of the >>heavier car or the one with higher structures tend to fare >>better than those travelling in lighter lower cars. As these >>effects are currently impossible to overcome, Euro NCAP only >>makes comparisons within size categories. The rating of a car >>within its size category is a function of the quality of its >>safety design.
>>21. Can results be compared between groups? Results should only be compared within the same group. >>The frontal testing method mirrors a crash between two similar >>sized cars. A heavier car or one with a higher structure will >>tend to have an advantage if it impacts a smaller car. The Euro >>NCAP results cannot be used to predict the outcome of such >>crashes
If safety is your main concern, I'd put more confidence in IAM training than NCAP stars.
|
|
And get a Landcruiser Amazon, just don't drive it like a car.
|
|
|
|
|
|
thanks for the comments folks.
yes, ncap for sure is not the final word, the final word is i guess something that is nearly impossible to test out.
doing stats on car fatalities does not work, since different types of people (old for example) buy different types of cars.
|
|
|
