Ok, it?s another one of those ?What car shall I get now?? times.
Company car, to keep for 4 years. I have two small children, one is a babe in arms, the other a toddler. I do about 20k per annum. Space, practicality is important but I do like the way a 3 series drives which is why I have left it on the list?.
I have discounted the silly cars in respect of cost of income tax and cars that I really wouldn?t drive and here is my shortlist.
Audi A4 TDI Avant SE 143
BMW 3 series Touring 320d SE
Skoda Superb 2.0 TDI CR 170 Elegance
Rav 4 2.2D XT-R (not really sure about this one)
Verso T Spirit 2.0 d4d (again not really sure)
Passat Diesel estate Highline CR DSG (I do like autos)
Tiguan 2.0 TDI SE
Volvo V50 2.0d SE Lux (both powershift and non-powershift are available)
Your thoughts are most welcome.
|
The A4 is more practical than the 3-Series for boot space, but the Auto box of the 3 is better than the CVT of the A4. Take a *VERY* long drive in any DSG car before committing to one for 4 years. I personally find they don't match my driving style - you can't just nip through gaps on roundabouts as the sudden demand for power when slowing down confuses the heck out of the transmission. Rav4 is old now and probably will soon be updated/replaced. On the basis of your needs I'd go for this order:
1. Tiguan (Spacious, Classy, Not a van with windows - but avoid the 170)
2. A4 (Classy, reasonable to drive, good engine
3. 3 Series (Good to drive, good engine, good auto box)
4. Volvo V50 non-powershift
5. Verso T Spirit
6. Superb (but beware the TDI 170 has some fairly impressive turbo lag)
7. Rav4
8. Passat or V50 Powershift (yes I really dislike the DSG type box that much)
|
|
|
Have you omitted a diesel Subaru Legacy estate for a reason ?
I've not really considered Japanese cars before (excluding admiring Mazda Xedos from afar a few years ago) but I am starting to look that way. Better late than never some might say.
|
Have you omitted a diesel Subaru Legacy estate for a reason ?
Well the 2.0 D Legacy Sports Tourer is on the list but I have discounted it as it is only the 'R' spec so I assume that it would be poverty spec but I will re-visit this.
Is the diesel legacy 4wd or 2wd?
|
|
Mazda 6 estate or Honda Accord estate or possibly Citreon C5 estate for ride comfort and superb quietness.
|
Mazda 6 estate or Honda Accord estate or possibly Citreon C5 estate for ride comfort and superb quietness.
The only Accord estate on my list will cost me more than £100/month MORE than a 320d Tourer after tax. Sorry but the Accord is not that good and is therefore ruled out. That's why I've drawn up the shortlist based upon financial implications of BIK tax.
Thanks anyway.
|
|
|
|
Is the diesel legacy 4wd or 2wd?
4wd. R is the entry level spec but being Japanese I don't think it's poverty spec in the way entry level Euro cars can be.
Edited by gmac on 25/09/2009 at 21:00
|
|
|
|
320d of those. V50 D5 perhaps?
|
|
Seat Exeo and Exeo estate - same as old style A4 but improved where needed. Just a thought. Avoid Rav.
|
Seat Exeo and Exeo estate - same as old style A4 but improved where needed.
Except the looks, the '05-'08 A4 is good looking, as was the '01-'05, both better looking than the new one, saloon at least IMO.
|
>> Seat Exeo and Exeo estate - same as old style A4 but improved where needed. >> Except the looks the '05-'08 A4 is good looking as was the '01-'05 both better looking than the new one saloon at least IMO.
I agree, I used to have an 04 A4 saloon. Liked it but after 6 months changed to a BMW 320d (not the new shape, the 150hp version). It was a significantly better car. That's why I have discounted the Exeo, if I want a compact estate, I've listed the ones I consider to be the best on my list.
Thanks for the input though.
|
Although it costs more than an A4, consider the A5. Bigger boot and a hatchback. But only a four seater I think.
The 2.0T 180PS petrol engine has very low emissions for it's power output so might do better than you think for mpg.
|
|
The Skoda is the one that jumps out at me.
|
|
Especially the upcoming estate version of the Superb. Although the Octavia is a good car too.
|
|
|
|
|
Not on list unfortunately
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just to give you some idea of the BIK tax costs, a 320d touring is £166 a month out of my pocket, a 2.0d Volvo V50 SE Lux is £164 a month net. However if I chose a 1.6 D-Rive Volvo V50 SE Lux, it's only £96 a month from my pocket, certainly food for thought I think
|
Space, practicality is important but I do like the way a 3 series drives which is why I have left it on the list?.
You've compiled a great list there, a900ss. I'm sure that you'd like any of them really, but from the line that I have quoted above, I have to say get the 320d SE Touring.
I blow hot and cold on it (because I am a bit of an idiot at times), but SWMBO absolutely loves it. She is an enthusiastic driver, and loves the handling.
Some things in its favour:
1) The fuel economy is exceptional for a car of this pace. I regularly get near to 50 mpg in mixed driving with an AUTOMATIC box.
(I also tried a manual, and the box is very good - but I prefer Autos). I do 18k per annum,, so fuel economy is important to me.
2) Despite some reports that the Touring is too small, I have found it very practical. It's swallowed up huge amounts of stuff when required. Don't forget you can always make use of the roof rails if you need to.
3) Reliability has been top class, and I never need to lift the bonnet - except that I can't stop old habits! :-)
4) The ride on run-flats seems harsh at first, but you do get used to it. It is certainly not uncomfortable (nowhere near as bad as Audi S-Line, for example). After a while, it just seems "supple". Anyway, the run-flats give great peace of mind.
If I was buying now though, I'd seriously consider rtj70's advice about the A5, and the 180 PS engine. I have my eye on that one as well (the Quattro)!
|
Looking at your list - I drive a 330d E91 Touring (new-ish company car) and previously had a A4 B7 Avant (170TDi PD) so can comment on the Exeo to some extent I guess, I also tried the B8 Avant (170TDi CR) when considering my current car - all manuals though.
The boot on the 3 Series touring is no bigger than the saloon, however it is reasonably practical - the opening rear window allows you to pack things in 'better'. I opted for the folding towbar and bought a Brenderup trailer - sounds drastic (not cheap) but is a great way of keeping the car interior clean / undamaged and the car tows brilliantly. I use the roof bars for bike racks too.
The 'old' A4 B7 (so the Exeo) subjectively has less room in the back than the 3 Series E91 - this translates to your children kicking the back of your seat (the voice of experience) - there seems to be more legroom in the rear of the E91 3 Series to me.
I liked the new A4 B8 Avant, it's certainly bigger but I couldn't get over how thirsty my previous B7 170TDi PD had been - both in oil consumption and diesel (40mpg average). During an extended test I got around 47mpg out of the new A4 B8 170RDi CR but I get that from my 330d (for example) so would probably expect the 320d to better this. A colleague has the A4 B8 143ps CR auto and I think struggles to get more than the low 40s - if you're on HMRC approved mileage rates you may well end up paying out of your own pocket for business mileage.
And I absolutely can't stomach being asked to pay extra for a glovebox light - which Audi charge you for on the A4 B8 in their 'extended lighting pack', but that's a personal prejudice, perhaps a little too obsessive for this forum....
I considered the Subaru, the spec of the 'base' RD is actually very good - HID lamps, heated seats, cruise etc, but as far as I could tell it omits curtain airbags - you have to upgrade to RN (I think) to get them.
As for the others on your list - all good cars and mostly much bigger than the A4 or the 3 Series - when my kids were the same age as yours I had a Mondeo Estate (great car, honestly) - and we filled it on trips away so maybe you should consider the larger vehicles ?
btw as far as I know the 320d auto won't have stop/start or some of the other efficient dynamics features on it. I also think that BMW have 'removed' cruise control from the 320d SEs spec - how sad of me to notice !
Edited by idle_chatterer on 26/09/2009 at 00:57
|
Thanks for your time and informative reply - it's very appreciated.
I'm also appauled that the 320d SE no longer has cruise!!!
I've had merc's c classes, A4's and 3's and I would really miss cruise. In my opinion, all high mileage drivers NEED climate (but will begrudgingly accept air con), cruise and auto anti-dazzle rear view mirror.
Thanks again.
Edited by a900ss on 26/09/2009 at 01:04
|
|
|
>>>> btw as far as I know the 320d auto won't have stop/start >>
It seems that the manual 320d does have stop/start though the auto - good question.
What I want to know is can you turn stop/start off?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
>>>> the 320d SE Touring.1) The fuel economy is exceptional for a car of this pace. I regularly get near to 50 mpg in mixed driving with an AUTOMATIC box. (I also tried a manual and the box is very good - but I prefer Autos). I do 18k per annum so fuel economy is important to me.
>>
I am interested, the 320d auto, does it use the torque effectively, I mean when you floor it at, say, 50 to overtake does it use a high ish ratio with the revs around the torque peak (1800 ish) and waft past as you would in a manual TD, or does it change down and rev out through the gears?
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Just to throw a spanner in the works, also on the list is a Merc C250CDI, the twin turbo diesel that does 0-60 in 7 secs and nearly 50MPG!!!!
I am a bit off mercs at the moment as my last company car was a C220CDI and I got made redundant from that position. I am a huge beliver in fate/destiny.
Am I mad to discount probably the best car on the list for this reason????
|
Just to throw a spanner in the works also on the list is a Merc C250CDI the twin turbo diesel that does 0-60 in 7 secs and nearly 50MPG!!!!
Sorry, that should read OVER 50 MPG, nearly 55MPG.
|
Yes, I think I must be maturing - I rather like the look of the new E250CDi - same 204ps engine and low emissions (<140 I think).
I've read somewhere that this engine might even make it into the S-Class Mercs, apparently the future is super/turbo charged smaller capacity 4 cylinder engines e.g. BMW 123d, Merc E250CDi, VAG 1.4TSi etc
Not sure whether this applies to you but the Merc C/E class 250CDi is a 2.1L I think, so you'll get a better HMRC mileage rate - sub 2.0l diesels (like the 320d or A4) are bracketed with 1.4L diesels.
You can always specify cruise as an option on the 320d ES / SE of course, also the M-Sport has it (if you can stand the ride).
|
>> Not sure whether this applies to you but the Merc C/E class 250CDi is a 2.1L I think so you'll get a better HMRC mileage rate - sub 2.0l diesels (like the 320d or A4) are bracketed with 1.4L diesels.
I am a little out of touch, can you expand on the HMRC rates point, the difference between under and over 2ltr diesel for instance?
Thanks.
|
I am a little out of touch can you expand on the HMRC rates point the difference between under and over 2ltr diesel for instance?
You'd have to look on HMRC website but if your firm uses (or is mandated) to use their mileage rates for company car drivers (to avoid additional BIK tax) then think in terms of 10p per mile equating to a 47mpg average (so including all town driving) for sub 2L versus 13 p or 14p per mile for greater than 2L diesels meaning you have to average 'thirty something' - the maths isn't hard but it depends on fuel prices, it was particularly painful in mid 2008 I recall.
With company cars you have no recourse to claim back the excess that you're thirsty sub 2L diesel is costing you, I think I was once told it was designed to encourage us all to pick more economical cars, all in all it makes an efficient 4 cylinder 2.1L or 2.2L diesel very attractive to high mileage users - comparable fuel economy but properly recompensed mileage rates imho
Edited by idle_chatterer on 26/09/2009 at 10:19
|
Thanks, that is very clear, last time I had a company car (six years ago) we had a sliding scale based on its combined mpg and average fuel prices so it varied from month to month.
It looks like I might be back into the company car world after a period of self employment and that < 2ltr / > 2ltr difference is useful to know. So for petrol it is < 1.4ltr / > 1.4ltr or are there any other break points?
Many thanks.
|
So for petrol it is < 1.4ltr / > 1.4ltr or are there any other break points?
The logic is the same and I think that the break point is also 2L for petrol, I think someone has posted the HMRC URL.
|
|
|
|
I am a little out of touch can you expand on the HMRC rates point the difference between under and over 2ltr diesel for instance?
Google is your friend. www.hmrc.gov.uk/cars/advisory_fuel_current.htm
|
>> Google is your friend. >>
Aha, thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Am I mad to discount probably the best car on the list for this reason????
No - just human. Totally understandable that Mercs have some negative conversations.
But, yes, you gave us a body swerve by keeping quiet about the Mercedes! :-)
The new Blue Efficiency engines look good on paper, and the estate car has greater carrying capacity than the BMW or Audi. It does have what many in the BR insist is a "proper" auto, though "only" a five speed box.
(SWMBO has a five speed box on her petrol Mercedes, though and it is lovely - so I would not worry too much about that!)
The thing that worries me about all of these diesel engines is the Turbo. They have a notorious reputation for failure. Does 2 turbos in the Merc mean twice the chance of failure? Or does it mean LESS chance because they are worked less hard since they share the load?
If any technical bods out there know the answer, please reply!
|
EDIT: for "conversations" in the above post, please read "associations"
(It's getting late.....yawn)
|
|
|
I have had a 5 speed auto Merc before, a C220CDI avantgarde and had no problems with that.
However, if I should chose the C250CDI as my next company car, I can either choose auto or estate, that's all my budget will permit. Without hesitation an estate is more important than auto so that means I'm looking at a C25CDI estate MANUAL!!!! Manual and Mercedes seems a bit of an oxymoron!
Edited by a900ss on 26/09/2009 at 01:40
|
|
Now that a Merc has been thrown in, I dont think id be able to turn one down if it was me. The latest crop are getting really rather fab.
|
Now that a Merc has been thrown in, I dont think id be able to turn one down if it was me. The latest crop are getting really rather fab.......
Awfully middle aged, middle class monotony though, don't you think? Undoubtedly a decent enough car but so are all the rest on the list!
|
Someone has to say this, if you need space and want a thoroughly competent (i.e. good) car - why not a Ford Mondeo 2.2TDCi Estate, is it available on your 'list' ?
I know there's a brand image problem, I ran one for 3 years (a MK 3 2.0L Petrol estate) and in the end changed to an Audi because of my ego (to my shame), but the fact remains that it was a remarkably good car and there could almost be some inverse snobbery in running one e.g. 'I am comfortable with who I am and don't feel the need to compensate with a prestige car'...... I see that you've considered the Skoda so you might understand the logic ?
Anyhow, probably not helpful and I am in no position to give this advice !
|
Someone has to say this if you need space and want a thoroughly competent (i.e. good) car - why not a Ford Mondeo 2.2TDCi Estate is it available on your 'list' ? I know there's a brand image problem I ran one for 3 years (a MK 3 2.0L Petrol estate) and in the end changed to an Audi because of my ego (to my shame) but the fact remains that it was a remarkably good car and there could almost be some inverse snobbery in running one e.g. 'I am comfortable with who I am and don't feel the need to compensate with a prestige car'......
Good post!
Though contemporary Ford's are right up there, many people have changed 3 Series for S-Maxs without a thought though they may not have entertained a Skoda or Seat.
I am more than comfortable driving my 7 year old TDCi Ghia X, had it from new, 139k miles and the engine is as good as ever, bags of torque and crisp when revving unlike most diesels I have driven/been in, I can average 55 mpg at 80, overall average 46.5 since new, and it is still fun to drive, rewarding on challenging roads.
So now that I may be choosing a new car for the first time in seven years I am finding that very few appeal, 3 series, Golf (GT/D/i), C-Class, Mondeo, A5 and A4 (avant only) all for very different reasons. Perhaps a Lexus IS.
|
|
|
Mondeo 2.2 isn't on the list as it emits in excess of 160g of CO2 per km, company limit.
Some mondeos are on the list but they are the 'Edge' version, which I think is basic spec. That's why they have been discounted.
PS - I have no issue with the Ford Badge. 2 years ago I changed my 3 series touring for an S-Max!
Edited by a900ss on 26/09/2009 at 18:40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Good choices - a shortlist very similar to mine last time I was looking for a car.
I agree with cjehuk (how's that pronounced?!!) about the need to have a good run in one of the DSG-equipped models to make sure you can live with it. I like autos too but I also like a quick step off from rest, which is particularly hard to achieve with a diesel automatic. So one of your first thoughts needs to be 'can I live with a manual?'
But there's no need to avoid the 170 bhp VAG engine any longer: the CR doesn't quite have the same wallop of acceleration when the turbo kicks in, but it doesn't have the turbo lag either. Progress is seamless, and it's also more tractable at low revs. Corners that use to need 2nd gear can now be taken in 3rd.
I tried on several long test runs to like the 320d: it has all the attributes people have mentioned above, but for me personally the driving posiotion was wrong (probably my fault for being 5'7" and having average length arms and shortish legs!) and I didn't like the notchy manual gearchange. The torque-converter auto seemd to sap too much power.
My current Octavia vRS estate, with the CR 170 bhp engine, is great. Firmish ride, and a Superb would be softer, so for me it would be one of these. I can't see the point of the Passat: the Octavia is cheaper, has virtually the same anount of room inside, and it has a proper handbrake.
I haven't tried a Tiguan: that's a 4wd and the Touran with the same engine might be another possibility, if you can live with the van-like looks.
I seem to remember that you used to have, and liked, a Ford S-Max - are Fords not on your list?
|
I think I read that the BMW 3 series is due to be replaced soon so vanity would knock it off the list for me if I had to keep it for 4 years.
The Merc sounds the best option to me and in my opinion it would be a bit more left field than the well worn path towards BMW and Audi.
There is a Superb estate on he way that may be tempting also.
|
>>BMW 3 series is due to be replaced soon >>
2011 I read somewhere.
|
Haven't we just had a facelift 3 series saloon.
I've seen some with slightly different rear light arrangements in dealer compounds not the same as coupe style but nearer to that than the present model, what other differences are i couldn't really say.
|
|
|
|
Avant, I did indeed have an S-Max and I did like it. It was a 1.8 Titanium X with all the wistles and bells.
This new company has a CO2 limit of 160g and that is what stops a lot of the Fords coming in to play. Also, £ for £, the Fords are VERY expensive to lease vs the BMW's and Mercedes. I am looking at 'Edge' variants of the S-Max and Mondeo. Whereas the Passat on my list is Highline (Leather, Cruise, DSG), the Skoda is Elegance spec (again Leather, etc). The BMW is a 320d SE OR a 320d ES auto, the Merc is a C250 SE OR C220 Elegance. So when you look at that, the Ford's seem poor value considering I'll never own the car, just drive it.
I looked at the Merc C Estate today and I think that's what I am being drawn to, a nice 250CDI, 200hp twin turbo that does nearly 55MPG on the combined cycle. As others have said, it's a 2.1 litre engine and therefore I get a higher mileage rate for business miles vs the sub 2000cc cars.... It all adds up.
Thanks for all your imput guys - I'll let you know what I finally go for when I put the order in.
|
Shorten the list to make it easier.
Without question in no particular order i would look at
A4 instead of 3 series,
Skoda for sure
Mercedes that was mentioned if you can get past the older man image.
Then throw the RAV4 XTR in as an odd ball. I had a couple of these as the Mrs car and she and I loved them! Loads of space for the kids and tough as anything and as XTR with the side steps etc looks pretty nice imo. Goes well too and does 50MPG on the m-way which for a big SUV is awesome. New one comes with the punchier 2.2d engine. Avoid petrol like the plague.
Edited by OldSkoOL on 26/09/2009 at 23:26
|
|
|
s others have said, it's a 2.1 litre engine and therefore I get a higher mileage rate for business miles vs the sub 2000cc cars.... It all adds up.
Have you confirmed how the employer deals with mileage? Ours gives everyone a fuel card and I pay back via salary for the mileage I do. It used to be claim a particular amount for each mile based on the actual car but that does not apply.
|
|
|
|
|
I think I am now down to three cars:
Merc C Class estate 250CDi:
Quite simply, I think it's the best car on the list. It has a monster of an engine, is comfortable, economical, safe and I know from past experiences that Mercs are for long term relationships not quick emotional hits.
Passat Highline CR DSG 170 CR:
If the Merc isn't big enough for the family lifestyle, the Passat certainly is. It is also well equipped, auto, leather and cruise, items that I would miss on the Merc as they are not standard equipment.
Volvo V50 Se Lux 1.6 DRIve:
The smallest car on the list but also the best equipped with the exception of not being auto. The real draw on this is ultra low BIK company car tax. It will cost me £96 a month out of my pocket in tax, the Merc will be £171/month, the Passat £173/month.
I think I'll be going down the Mercedes route again but....
|
How about a Merc 220CDI, still 170 bhp, can you get a better spec 220?
I would pay £100 a month to have the performance of the Merc / VW over the 1.6 Volvo thoughg if it were a 2.0 then hmmm.
Have you ruled out a 3 Series?
|
I can get a 220CDI Elegance instead of a 250CDI SE, it will still miss on cruise though which I think is a bit tight. The major differences between SE and Elegance as I see it are mostly cosmetic.
I think I have ruled out the 320d. It is so similar to the Merc (size, spec, performance) and I think the Merc is the better of the 2 cars.
The 2.0 litre Volvo is similar BIK to the Merc/Passat so all I would get from that is a smaller car similar in spec to the Passat, therefore I'd choose the Passat over the 2.0 V50.
|
|
What is the quoted monthly lease cost for the C250 Blueythingy then?
|
|
Head says Skoda (peach of an engine) Heart says BMW (good engine and RWD !)
|
Further up thread, I was trying to persuade the OP to go for BMW as well.
I'd say that the engine line up was a bit better than merely "good" though.
RWD divides opinion of course. It could be the point that clinches the deal - or alternatively wrecks it.
|
|
|
|
The cost depends on the deal with the lease company I think. I'd tell you what it would be on our scheme but it's temporarily shutdown for ad-hoc quotes. We have redundancies ahead so new cars being ordered.
My car must be one of very few left with the lease company it's with (we swapped) so I wonder if they'll want to pay off my lease and swap me to another car.
|
|
|
What is the quoted monthly lease cost for the C250 Blueythingy then?
I'm not privvy to that information, I am just given a list of cars that are within my grade (I don't even know what the budget is!)
|
|
I've put my order in for a C250CDi Estate. Fingers crossed a pool car isn't found within the next few weeks whilst I'm waiting for it.....
|
Well....
The new car list for this month has come out and it includes a car I would have considered had it been on there last month.
A Volvo V70 SE Premium with Leather, heated seats, built in sat nav, premium audio with DAB and cruise control BUT only a 1.6 d engine. A large car that's really suitable for a family including 2 small children.
I'm tempted to try and stop my order for the Merc C 250CDI estate with hardly any toys but a powerful engine....
I need to sleep on this one.
|
|
You might find it too late to stop the order. But a V70 with a 1.6 diesel (so around 110PS?) sounds underpowered to me.
|
107 bhp according to the What Car table. Stick with the Merc: you'll get used to not having the toys, but sluggish acceleration will bug you all the time.
I believe the 1.6 DRIVE engine is OK in a V50 or S40, but a V70 is another matter. Skins and rice puddings spring to mind!
|
107 bhp according to the What Car table
Close to 110PS then :-) I think 110PS = 108.5PS.
Still underpowered for a V70!
|
Merc defo!
The 1.6 Peugeot/Ford 1.6 pulls a C-Max OK though is no ball of fire, I drove a C4 Picasso in the summer with this engine and while it held its own in the Pyranees it was not that refined, in a fully loaded V70 - no way. As a big estate a 2.0d Mondeo would be much better all around.
Though you said you could go for a higher spec C220 rather than the C250?
|
FWIW kerb weights:
C4 Picasso 1.6 HDi: 1489
V70 1.6D: 1667
|
|
A 1.6L D in a V70 (rather like a VAG PD in a convertible) seems a 'step too far' in the pursuit of low BIK tax for me, will the real world economy be so much better than the 2.0L D ? I appreciate it'll probably be better than the D5 although I've read that even this has improved somewhat of late and having driven one in the past I'd be prepared to pay the extra tax for the driving pleasure.
When you calculate your tax bill (and any personal usage charge), will the Merc (or a BMW) be so much more expensive ?
If you need a bigger estate, I've a few colleagues with the BMW 520d touring, this has reasonable CO2, and they all claim to get good economy and performance.
I always go for the 'engine' versus the 'toys' in the cost/spec trade-off, because as a company car you'll have to give it back one day and the toys will no-longer be yours, however the engine you'll have appreciated every time you drive the thing. This is a purely personal decision of course.
Can't see anyone enjoying a 1.6D V70 myself - least of all anyone following one loaded with 4 people and luggage up any kind of incline.....
Edited by idle_chatterer on 13/10/2009 at 17:22
|
|
Having just spent 4 days driving a rented Renault Scenic with a 1.4 litre petrol engine, I'd imagine that any kind of 1.6 in a V70 will be a disaster. That blasted Scenic was truly gutless, and in heavy, tight, fast East European city (and motorway come to that) traffic was a total liability.
|
The 1.6 in the V70 would be a diesel with about 110PS and more torque for sure than a 1.6 petrol. Still not enough though.
|
Guys,
Thought about it, decided to stick with the Merc. Not sure that the 90hp less than the Merc will deliver is outweighed by the extra toys of the Volvo.
Cheers.
|
I had a similar dilemma recently and went for the Passat CC TDI with DSG, it is very impressive and the DSG is much better than I had dared expect after reading rather neative comments on here.
The Volvo V 50 is small, about the size of a Focus, but if you save over 1200 a year then it has to be worth considering.
I was torn between the Audi A 4 and the Passat CC, but the VW was just a bit different wheras Audis are everywhere. If the Merc had been on my list I would have certainly got one though.
|
I had a similar dilemma recently and went for the Passat CC TDI with DSG it is very impressive and the DSG is much better than I had dared expect after reading rather neative comments on here.
This is very interesting. The Passat CC is growing on me.
Isn't your model with the 140 PS Engine which seems well thought of by backroomers? If so, how do you find it for quietness, smoothness and torque? (If you don't mind me asking)
|
"Isn't your model with the 140 PS Engine which seems well thought of by backroomers? If so, how do you find it for quietness, smoothness and torque? (If you don't mind me asking)"
As one who has a CR diesel engine in my Octavia (albeit the 170) I think it's much preferable to the PD. There's less of a sudden wallop of acceleration, but low-down torque is better, and corners that my previous PD-engined Golf estate had to otska in second can now be taken in third.
But above all it's MUCH quieter than the PD, and would be worth having for this reason alone.
I think that VW offer the CR engine across the board, but they muist be limiting the quantity available to Skoda, as only the Octavia vRS like mine has the CR engine.
|
An informative reply - many thanks.
You seem to know an awful lot about VAG cars (.....he said, enviously). I guess your posting name is a give away. Anyway, much appreciated.
I'm trying to compile a few mental notes for when SWMBO eventually releases funds for a new motor. VAG are my favoured option at the moment, though if the Japanese could start producing some decent diesel hatchbacks with automatic gearboxes then this could change.
|
Guys Thought about it decided to stick with the Merc. Not sure that the 90hp less than the Merc will deliver is outweighed by the extra toys of the Volvo. Cheers.
Good choice, I have to openly admit that a 1.6D V70 really offends my sensibilities as do VAG PD convertibles - compromising their core appeal in pursuit of low BIK imho.
I've generally found unstressed powerful engines more economical in general driving (when you're not utilising their full power of course) than less powerful ones which are being worked (too) hard (both petrol and diesel).
On the other hand, comfy heated seats for whilst you're 'mimsing' and sat-nav to help you avoid hills... ;-)
|
Well as I can no longer get my Merc due to relaiability issues (see my other thread) I have decided to go for the 1.6d V70!!!!!!
A little worried about the performance but it is easily the best car for a family with two small children, it is just so well thoughtout.
I'll report back what it's like when it arrives, I'm guessing it will be similar to the Bluemotion Passat which isn't as bad as people who haven't driven one think it is.
PS - Due to the lack of 1.6 DRIVe V70's, it hasn't been possible to test drive one so I am taking a bit of a flyer.
|
|
Sorry to be so blunt - rather you than me.....
|
|
PPS - Also, as I have a fuel card I can drive the wheels off it to deliver what performance it can deliver and I'm not actually concerned as to what real world economy it will deliver. It's BIK rate puts it as an 18% car and that is exceptional for a car of its size.
Edited by Webmaster on 28/10/2009 at 01:10
|
Sorry to be so blunt - rather you than me.....
I TOTALLY understand your opinion.
Like I said, I will update on the real world performance in a few months when it arrives.
|
But didn't you say you're stuck with your choice for 4 years ? It's an awfully long time to hate your car for, believe me I've been there (1996 Vectra) and I now pay extra for a 2 year lease since the option became available to me, it's a highly personal value judgement.
There are plenty of other options (BMW 520d for instance) that'll give 18% tax without the performance penalty....
Anyhow - I do wish you good luck with your choice, I hope it works out for you and doesn't become something you regret. I'd admit it's a personal 'gripe' that manufacturers produce compromised cars (IMHO) in pursuit of BIK benefit e.g. VAG PD convertibles or the 1.6D V70.
|
|
|
|
|
|
