Which would be the better buy with the main concern being reliability and running/maintenance costs? Does the Almera Tino have a cambelt or chain?
moved you over to Discussion
Edited by Pugugly on 02/01/2009 at 18:42
|
|
CBC refers to the poor reliability of the Renault. If you can't split them on price, condition, or just personal preference, that's probably the clincher. The Almera has a better NCAP rating as well, and AFAIK it's a chain driven camshaft.
|
At this age, the Nissan. Newer Renaults (04 ish onwards) are better though.
Edited by DP on 02/01/2009 at 21:55
|
I'd be very surprised if the Tino's 1.5 and 1.8 litre petrol engines were different to those in the Almera, and both in the Almera both are chain cam. Note that there were a few probs with the 1.5 engine, and the 1.8 which you were considering is a better bet.
See the Car-by-cat Breakdown: www.honestjohn.co.uk/carbycar/index.htm?md=279
and HJ's roadtest at www.honestjohn.co.uk/road_tests/index.htm?id=62
|
We ran a 1.8 Tino, 03 reg, for two years. Yes, it was utterly reliable but I found it noisy and sluggish. The main reason we sold it, though, was its dreadful fuel consumption; 25mpg in town, maybe 35 on a (very) gentle motorway run. We're now running a Kia Rio diesel and getting at least 50, sometimes even 60.
I never grew to like it - after three Primeras (not the last shape) it was a disappointment but a lot of that was because ours had the integrated CD player / radio / aircon / reversing camera / trip computer which, quite frankly, was technology for technology's sake. If the 01 is a more traditional setup, and you can live with the fuel consumption, then it should be a good buy.
|
We ran a 1.8 Tino 03 reg for two years. Yes it was utterly reliable but I found it noisy and sluggish. The main reason we sold it though was its dreadful fuel consumption; 25mpg in town maybe 35 on a (very) gentle motorway run.
That's surprising. My Almera 1.8 automatic does 36-37 on the motorways when pushed, and over 40 when mollycoddled. The Tino is not all that much bulkier or heavier, so I'm surprised hat it shoukd be thirstier than my auto hatchback. Was your the CVT Tino?
I never grew to like it - after three Primeras (not the last shape) it was a disappointment but a lot of that was because ours had the integrated CD player / radio / aircon / reversing camera / trip computer which quite frankly was technology for technology's sake.
Each to their own, but I rather like the integrated control thingy. Fewer buttons, and after 10 or 15 minutes at the start learning how I works, I find it very handy: clear display, big buttons, much easier than lots of little ones. The 01 model which the OP is looking at won't have it, but I regard it as benefit of the later models, not a downside.
|
> so I'm surprised hat it shoukd be thirstier than my auto hatchback.
Its much taller so has worse aerodynamics and is heavier. The scenic does better due to being lighter (plastic wings etc)
|
> so I'm surprised hat it shoukd be thirstier than my auto hatchback. Its much taller so has worse aerodynamics and is heavier. The scenic does better due to being lighter (plastic wings etc)
I can understand the Scenic doing better, but the difference between the two Almerae puzzles me, even taking into account a small increase in weight and drag. Parkers lists the 1.8 Almera hatchback as 37mpg and 180g/km, with the Tino at 36mpg and 183g/km
www.parkers.co.uk/cars/specs/Detail.aspx?deriv=239...7
www.parkers.co.uk/cars/specs/Detail.aspx?deriv=192...7
I wonder if there was somethimg awry with Sheepy's Tino?
{links to rival site made non clickable}
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 03/01/2009 at 15:23
|
|
|
|
> The Almera has a better NCAP rating as well
both the same 4* at this vintage.
If you want better reliability go for the tino, if you want a better ride, better handling, quieter, more versatile, then go for the scenic.
|
>>both the same 4* at this vintage
My mistake. I was surprised to read it in the CBC as Renault have been consistently good on NCAP for years, but I can't find it now so I must have been reading about something else entirely...I'll go and stand in the corner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I know it's annoying when you want advice on the choice between Car A and Car B and someone suggests Car C - but I do think you could put the Toyota Verso (Corolla Verso) on your shortlist. It should be as reliable as the Tino but as good to drive as the Scenic.
|
I have a 2002 T1.8 Tino SE and love it!
The engine is chain cam. Comments on here regarding the car's thirst are fair - it does seem to use quite a bit of petrol.
Drives well. We looked at a Renault when we bought the Tino (in 06) but wanted a new shape one - which was too expensive.
I think we made the right decision.
|
We had a 1.8 Tino for a couple of months and now have a Scenic 1.6 petrol. Can't compare reliability as we didn't have the Tino long enough but to live with and drive the Renault comprehensively trumps it.
The Tino was noisy, slow and thirsty. Motorway cruising was a chore. The renault is a quiet and comfortable cruiser and the 1.6vvt petrol engine has much more go.
The practicality of the Scenic beats the Tino, the seats move about more, there are more cubby holes and many more "surprise and delight" features.
The new shaped Scenics are quite cheap now, our 3 year old 20k miler was just over £3,500 at auction in July last year. Older and cheaper versions are widely available.
Also I much prefer the styling of the Scenic, the Tino seems quite old-hat now.
|
|
|
|
