Thoughts on the suitability of a 1996 Toyota Carina E, 1.8 CD, 5 door for a 150 mile per day mainly motorway commute please. Actual fuel economy from owners, common faults and questions to ask seller. Also what to look for due to it having a towbar fitted that has been used to pull a caravan.
Got some great info from a previous thread regarding what to look for on the used market and am looking for fuel economy, reliability and comfort (decent drivers seat!!) above all else.
Many thanks in advance
|
Ran a 1.6 Carina for 5 years. Sold it with 130K on the clock a couple of years back and still see it running about today.
Great car, ultra reliable (I think the water pump and radiator had to be replaced and one of the door locks went...that's it apart from consumables)
Really comfortable seats front and back, very roomy. The 1.8 is meant to be equally as economical and a bit more torquey than the 1.6. I seem to remember averaging about 38/39 mpg. Good suspension too.
It should be fine for the motorway commute you mention.
Seem to remember first gear being a bit low so tended to wheelspin away from the lights up hill and in the wet.
If I was looking for a sub-£1000 budget car I'd have another one in a flash.
|
|
|
M
based on one day's use of a hire car some years back, I'd say;
I couldn't beleive it was a 1.6 under the bonnet, it performed as though it had something bigger
I found it equally hard to believe the fuel consumption for the size of the car. I brimmed it and reckoned that my mileage gave about 45mpg. Adding in unknown miles by delivery driver would make it even better.
Nice 'n comfortable.
There's a guy at work has had one from new and it's still going strong. I don't know how many miles, sorry.
JH
|
My input does not answer your question specifically but a friend has had a Carina from new (15 years old now I think) - he does not do high mileage - about 10-11K a year and other than serviceable items including pads - the only thing he has to replace is a rear light bulb. It has passed every MOT first time.
I think the 1.6 should be good for what you describe though and provide good fuel economy.
|
|
The 1.6 and 1.8 use 'lean-burn' technology engines and are very economical, but the 2.0 5S-FE and the very underated GTi 3S-GE (174 bhp!) are standard engines so not so economical. Lots of these as taxis (petrol and diesel) last time I was in Dublin (2002) so thats usually a good sign. Use the car-by-car-breakdown function on left to learn more.
|
|
|
Thanks for the replies to date.
This is a 1.8 CD and my only concern is that the fuel economy will not improve significantly on my 1.8 petrol Mondeo and with diesel now more expensive than petrol would I actually be just spending up to a grand (prob get it for about 800 I think) for no significant gain in commuting costs.
Interesting that I spoke to the guy selling and he really doesn't want to part with it - he has had it from about 1000 miles in 1996 to 159k now and he is selling to buy an Avensis which he calls the Carina replacement.
|
I owned a 1.8 GS for 8 years. This had the lean burn engine. Very economical car for a 1.8 if you are careful with the accelerator. If you drive with the engine on lean burn then I got 32mpg around town and up high 40mpg on a motorway. Once drive at speeds in excess of 80mph then the fuel consumption increased dramatically. Very reliable car. The lean burn engine takes some getting used to.
I changed the Toyota for a Mazda 6 1.8 and find the Mazda much thirstier on petrol.
|
On the Carina CD denotes a diesel model, not a trim level AFAIK (to confuse matters, there was a CDX level of trim in petrol cars).
If the Carina E the OP refers to is diesel, these only offer 4-6 mpg more than the already high MPG available from the petrol engines. It depends very much on what level diesel prices stay at to determine whether you'll save running one over a petrol car. Also, these engines tend to sound and feel rough (judging as a passenger in umpteen Carina taxis down the years). It wasn't uncommon to see cabs whose gear levers wobbled around the neutral position due to vibration as the lump knock-knock-knocked in idle while parked on the rank.
|
|
Correct, CD is a trim level on Toyotas (I had a Starlet CD), as is CDX, and the 1.8 will definately be a petrol. CD will probably have fake wood, maybe aircon, 4 x leccy windows etc. The diesel in the Carina E was the 74bhp (I think) 2.0 litre unit that was in the Corolla too and sluggish in N/A form.
|
|
|
|
|
Was the 1.8 lean burn engine carried over to the mk1 Avensis?
|
|
I think the lean burn engines were carried over yeah, until the Avensis range switched to VVTi engines.
|
|
Wasn't the whole point of the CD trim on the Carina E (Excellence in Europe - it was built in Derby) was that it had a CD player? I know we had one in the office in the early 1990s and it was very economical and reliable. However, as I am only 5'7" I felt like I was sitting in a bathtub.
|
Just because the car in front is a Toyota, 11 years old, 160k miles and 600 miles a week does not necessarily = reliable transport. Remember: the guy who's got is getting rid for some reason....
--
RichardW
Is it illogical? It must be Citroen....
|
600? Where did I get that from.... obviously 750, which is close to 40k a year - unless it's 150 miles each way...
--
RichardW
Is it illogical? It must be Citroen....
|
|
|
Just because the car in front is a Toyota, 11 years old, 160k miles and 600 miles a week does not necessarily = reliable transport. Remember: the guy who's got is getting rid for some reason....
Ask the owner if he has another one at the same price - you will need it as a spare or spares.
40K mls per year is a challenge for reliability in new cars - Even a toyota will struggle being 11 yrs old/160K doing another 40K / yr
|
|
Doing a quick back of fag packet estimation, if the Mondeo does 35 mpg and the Carina 40 mpg, the OP will use 143 gallons of fuel less per year, say 400 quid per year saving. Assuming all other running costs are equal.
|
I have a mate who has an L reg 1.6 E (the lean burn engine I believe as someone mentioned earlier), with his parsimonious driving habits (doesn't go above 65) he could get 45mpg on his daily 70 mile commute. He's taken the car from 60k -> 100k without anything more than a blown headlight bulb.
Loads of them are still used as minicabs up in the Blackburn/Bolton area and the few I've seen in scrappers all have 250k+ on the clock so I think you'll be ok with it for a few years.
If I were placed in the same position then I would consider buying a Carina.
|
|
When they first came out in the early 90s, I read one review where they tested the lean burn to see how much they could get per gallon. In one test they managed over 90 mpg (yip, 90), but it was very controlled, no more than 30mph etc!
|
Lean burn was killed off by cat converters, which need to run at stoichiometric ratio. Pity that the lean burn system was acutally better than the cat, but don't let that get in the way of the marketing. Betamax anyone?
--
RichardW
Is it illogical? It must be Citroen....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
