What Economical, Comfortable, Reliable Daily and CHEAP Hack?

[r.g.]

After my previous daily snorter got squashed in a rear end shunt last week I need a new one.

Requirements are fairly specific. Needs to have the following:

Reliable
Economical
Comfortable
Have arm rest
Have cruise control
Cost less than £1,500

I regularly do a 400 mile round trip in a day, hence the specifics.

Thoughts so far are:
Focus Ghia
Mondeo
Volvo s40
Volvo S60

By economical I suppose I mean 40+mpg on a run. The more the better.

Suggestions please.

Edited by r.g. on Wednesday 25th January 15:55

[TEKNOPUG]

Whichever car you can find that is in the best condition. Make/Model utterly irrelevant when you're shopping in the bargain basement for second-hand sheds.

You could argue that a Ford is a better buy than a Volvo because replacement parts are cheaper. But then maybe Volvo parts don't wear out as quickly? I certainly wouldn't look for a specific car, rather have an open mind about everything. That will greatly increase your chance of grabbing a bargain.

[r.g.]

Indeed. Image is not an issue.

[willmagrath]

Have a fish for a nice Saab 9-3 Tid.
My dad had one a few years back, did 50K trouble free, 40mpg was easy and it was incredibly comfortable.

[battered]

Saab a good call. As others say, a good example of a lesser car is a better buy than a scruffy example of a "better" car when you are hammering on the miles.

I really ought to follow my own advice, I bought a scruffy Mondeo. 2.5 years and 35k on it's a better car than it was when I bought it, but I've done some work to it to make it so.

[SlimJim16v]

Diesel MX5 on winter tyres

[r.g.]

I had considered the Saab, but had read some horror stories on the 1.9d engine in that they fling cam belts like they're going out of fashion, and dicky swirl flaps?? Just scare mongering? I do like them.

I'm having this internal battle re the benefits of economy of a diesel offset against the complexity of them (especially the common rail ones) and potential DPF issues, and dual mass flywheels. Is a (relatively) simple petrol engine a better bet?

No Cruise on the MX5 I'm afraid.

[culpz]

Honda Accord?

[battered]

r.g. said:

I had considered the Saab, but had read some horror stories on the 1.9d engine in that they fling cam belts like they're going out of fashion, and dicky swirl flaps?? Just scare mongering? I do like them.

I think the swirl flaps are a known problem and fixable.

r.g. said:

I'm having this internal battle re the benefits of economy of a diesel offset against the complexity of them (especially the common rail ones) and potential DPF issues, and dual mass flywheels. Is a (relatively) simple petrol engine a better bet?

I feel the same, though how much of that is just trying to justify not liking diesels I don't know. I do think that the kind of diesels you get for £1500 are suffering from early-adopter syndrome on all the tech. DPF/DMF and all the rest is not good news in an older car, the old TDis were an easier bet. Maybe the tech is tamed on newer cars, or maybe it just hasn't gone wrong yet. I do know a friend who had a C-Max or S-Max that threw a DPF and related faults at a very low mileage as a result of being used for short trips. It was supposed to be a cheap car, but wasn't. She ended up getting it bodged on the cheap and trading it in quickly as a proper repair was £2k ish on a car not worth much more. Cynics at this point are free to say "it's her fault, shouldn't use a diesel car like that for short trips". I'd say "It's a f*ing CAR. It should be fit for purpose, and not all of us are sales reps. Short trips are what a C Max does most of the time."

[TEKNOPUG]

r.g. said:

I had considered the Saab, but had read some horror stories on the 1.9d engine in that they fling cam belts like they're going out of fashion, and dicky swirl flaps?? Just scare mongering? I do like them.

I'm having this internal battle re the benefits of economy of a diesel offset against the complexity of them (especially the common rail ones) and potential DPF issues, and dual mass flywheels. Is a (relatively) simple petrol engine a better bet?

No Cruise on the MX5 I'm afraid.

A 2.0 petrol saloon should manage 35+mpg on a 400mile motorway cruise. So the difference between petrol/diesel for a typical journey is probably less than a tenner in fuel. Surely as you say, a basic petrol engine will have far less potential bork than a diesel?

What about this? http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/m...

[RizzoTheRat]

r.g. said:

I'm having this internal battle re the benefits of economy of a diesel offset against the complexity of them (especially the common rail ones) and potential DPF issues, and dual mass flywheels. Is a (relatively) simple petrol engine a better bet?

Is there much real evidence that modern diesels are less reliable? Most of the horror stories I hear are from diesel haters who knew someone with the issue, are there any actual stats on it? My 2.0 Common Rail Octavia is currently approaching 120k miles with no issues (other than one caused by an incompetent mechanic at a service) and has been doing a lot of short journeys (9 mile commute) over the last couple of years. I average mid 40's mpg on shorter trips but was was in the mid 50's when commuting 70 miles each way. However I accept that is just as anecdotal as the problem cases.

So in short, I'd reccomend an Octavia, either with the 1.9 PD or 2.0 CR engine. Slightly more road noise than the equivalent VW/Audi but the badge means you get a newer car for your money, and the higher spec ones come with cruise control, climate control etc, and 170bhp if you want. Skoda got the CR engines a few years after VW so maybe they'd ironed out the bugs by then.

[rxe]

Left field - Alfa 156 JTD 10V

I've just bought one for £380. In terms of essential work, it's needed a new aux belt and a CV boot - that is the sum total of stuff needed after the "post purchase shed inspection". New tyres, new brakes, no corrosion.

Now, because I'm a retentive Alfa fanatic, I've:

- put a leather interior in (£64 - ebay)
- changed the everything in the cambelt area (wasn't due, but like I said, I'm retentive about such things. £200 in parts)
- changed a couple of engine mounts sort some vibrations (£100 in parts)

If I'm really picky, the clutch is a bit high, but it isn't slipping, and it's probably good for another 20k of sensible driving. I'm not going to do that - I'm going to decat it, stick a FMIC in, meth injection and change the turbo if I need to. Apparently the 10V engines are good for >220 HP reasonably easily, and they have a unburstable reputation.

[V8NRG]

willmagrath said:

Have a fish for a nice Saab 9-3 Tid.
My dad had one a few years back, did 50K trouble free, 40mpg was easy and it was incredibly comfortable.

I had exactly the same criteria and picked up a Saab 9-3 Tids vector sportwagon last week.
Auto, estate, comfy, frugal and in reasonable condition.
Cant say anything bad about it so far.

[TEKNOPUG]

RizzoTheRat said:

r.g. said:

I'm having this internal battle re the benefits of economy of a diesel offset against the complexity of them (especially the common rail ones) and potential DPF issues, and dual mass flywheels. Is a (relatively) simple petrol engine a better bet?

Is there much real evidence that modern diesels are less reliable? Most of the horror stories I hear are from diesel haters who knew someone with the issue, are there any actual stats on it? My 2.0 Common Rail Octavia is currently approaching 120k miles with no issues (other than one caused by an incompetent mechanic at a service) and has been doing a lot of short journeys (9 mile commute) over the last couple of years. I average mid 40's mpg on shorter trips but was was in the mid 50's when commuting 70 miles each way. However I accept that is just as anecdotal as the problem cases.

So in short, I'd reccomend an Octavia, either with the 1.9 PD or 2.0 CR engine. Slightly more road noise than the equivalent VW/Audi but the badge means you get a newer car for your money, and the higher spec ones come with cruise control, climate control etc, and 170bhp if you want. Skoda got the CR engines a few years after VW so maybe they'd ironed out the bugs by then.

For £1500? There is only 1 Diesel Octavia on PH and it's £2k

[RizzoTheRat]

Other car sales sites are available though, to be honest it wouldn't even occur to me to look on PH classifieds for cars in this price range.

There's 10 PD's showing up with half an hour of me on Autotrader for under £1500.


At this price point I'd be looking at Autotrader and e-bay to see what's available in the price range within a sensible distance rather than focusing on a specific model.

Edited by RizzoTheRat on Thursday 26th January 11:13

[Mammasaid]

Passat 1.9 TDI (not 2.0 TDI) like this

http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/v...

[CABC]

V8NRG said:

willmagrath said:

Have a fish for a nice Saab 9-3 Tid.
My dad had one a few years back, did 50K trouble free, 40mpg was easy and it was incredibly comfortable.

I had exactly the same criteria and picked up a Saab 9-3 Tids vector sportwagon last week.
Auto, estate, comfy, frugal and in reasonable condition.
Cant say anything bad about it so far.

so far, maybe.
and 50k from new is not the criteria either, it's £1500 now and reliable.
i'd have thought Japanese? Avensis? old Toyotas and Hondas have best shed pedigree

[Pete-mojsh]

I am in a similar situation, I keep looking at various options but I'm wary of the modern diesels, possibly needlessly but even though DPF issues may not arise with the mileage and journeys I would be doing it's likely that the damage could already be done by previous owners.

The ones I keep coming back to are the Avensis estate in 1.8 or 2.0 petrol and the accord estate in 2.0 and 2.4 petrol.

My dad has a 9-3 tid that after a few initial faults has been good and very capable across a few trips to the south of France. I wouldn't rule one out but would need to check everything thoroughly, it's a decent drive for what it is, the 9-5 is bigger still.

[r.g.]

Some interesting suggestions.

That Merc 220 chucks in another conundrum. Go older/classic, forego the MPG and some of the luxuries, and sit back in the knowledge that the depreciation curve will be flat. Admittedly, at the £1,500 price point and below, there's not a huge depreciation hit to take, but this is bangernomics and justifications for a particular choice are always interesting.

Would be nice to know what real world mpg those old Mercs achieve.

Goes off to look up Merc 190's for sale.....

[TEKNOPUG]

r.g. said:

Some interesting suggestions.

That Merc 220 chucks in another conundrum. Go older/classic, forego the MPG and some of the luxuries, and sit back in the knowledge that the depreciation curve will be flat. Admittedly, at the £1,500 price point and below, there's not a huge depreciation hit to take, but this is bangernomics and justifications for a particular choice are always interesting.

Would be nice to know what real world mpg those old Mercs achieve.

Goes off to look up Merc 190's for sale.....

Depends where you are driving. 30+ on an M-way cruise if all working properly, easily. Town driving, not so much.