Buying my first ever car

rev_henry

CocoPopsLover wrote: »

I was looking to do extra lessons before my test with a family member or a friend in the car which is why I was considering insuring it straight away

Even if i didnt use it, can the car just sit there with no insurance? I thought you had to have insurance no matter what? Or is the rule; you cannot move the car if it is not insured?

By the sounds of things, if i want reliability i am better of getting a Japanese car? Id say that from majority comments!

TIA

Yer its not a big deal seeing about insurance before and after the test. Are you taking the test in your own car?
See my first post about the need for insurance.
Almost anything East Asian should be reliable (i.e. japanese plus Hyundai etc). That's not to say anything non jap will break down; tbh most cars these days are reliable, with the aforementioned exceptions. Corsas, micras, clios, fiestas - all good cars. Just have a look on auto trader at what's within your price range, and probably don't go for anything above a 1.4 engine so the insurance isn't too much. Unless its a diesel, in which case engine size doesn't really matter because they work completely differently, i.e. the 1.9 diesel clio I believe offers similar performance to the 1.2 petrol, and insurance costs accordingly. That's not to say you'll be able to insure a diesel land rover though, just because its a diesel. If that makes sense?

While I'm on about diesels; they generally offer much better fuel consumption and more low down power (I think?). Take a bit of getting used to from a petrol as the gearchanges are a bit different. Although if you're doing mainly short trips don't get a diesel as such trips are worse for diesel engines than petrols (they're not good for any engine really; as the car can't warm to normal healthy operating temperatures).

rev_henry

Lemonade_Pockets wrote: »

Probably not a bad generalisation however there are always exceptions to the rule as already discussed.

Avoid the new frog eyed micra's or at least ones with any toys as they suffer from electrical glitches. Also be careful with insurance groups as they tend to be higher on Japenese models for some reason.

good luck with your test

Maybe because they're built on the same platform as the new clio, so the French have infected the car with dodgy electrics.

karenx

CocoPopsLover wrote: »

I was looking to do extra lessons before my test with a family member or a friend in the car which is why I was considering insuring it straight away

Even if i didnt use it, can the car just sit there with no insurance? I thought you had to have insurance no matter what? Or is the rule; you cannot move the car if it is not insured?

By the sounds of things, if i want reliability i am better of getting a Japanese car? Id say that from majority comments!

TIA

Its wise to have insurance, but yes you can just leave it on your drive and not use it and have no insurance for it. But if it gets damaged or stolen then you have no insurance and have to pay out yourself.
I would recomend a japanese car, I have 3 hondas just now and 2 minis. But they are more expensive to insure, especially if you have just passed. And yes its true about what was said before that your insurance is likely to be higher once you pass not go lower. When your learning your always careful and theres someone else in the car with you so its another pair of eyes to watch the road incase of oncoming cars etc. Once you pass your on your own and might get carried away and not pay attention. Not saying that everybody is like that but insurance companies dont know everybody on a personal level so therefor every new driver is put in the same category!

hartcjhart

nothing wrong with the micra(older models) apart from some rust problems especially by the front crossmember just under the radiator,

citroen saxo, pug 106/306 absolutely no problems very rarely rusty and as cheap as chips for parts,

skoda great little cars especially the old favorit

steer clear of old fiestas/clio's,KA's as usually rust buckets


as an aside when the favorit was first being introduced over here we had a couple to use as we were making parts for them,my brother was going down the A1 and got clocked doing 100mph,the old bill let him of as when they saw it was a skoda they thought their equipment was faulty:rotfl::rotfl:

Lemonade_Pockets

hartcjhart wrote: »

citroen saxo, pug 106 absolutely no problems very rarely rusty and as cheap as chips for parts,

skoda great little cars especially the old favorit

I'm not disputing that they may be fairly resilient to rust and cheap to repair. But have you actually ever driven one of these things.

Take the saxo for example i've no idea how they managed to get a tin can feel like it was a tank when parking. Conversely once on the move at anything north of 20mph i'm convinced a motorised trifle would feel more stable let alone not pitch and roll as much in the corners.

This is before you inevitably crash in one...... i've seen mountain bikes with better crash protection and bigger brakes.

Money saving isn't the only consideration especially if there's a little one on board.

Incidently i had a Skoda fabia VRS, which was so badly designed its snapped roll bars for fun. Parts weren't cheap either.

hartcjhart

Lemonade_Pockets wrote: »

I'm not disputing that they may be fairly resilient to rust and cheap to repair. But have you actually ever driven one of these things.

Take the saxo for example i've no idea how they managed to get a tin can feel like it was a tank when parking. Conversely once on the move at anything north of 20mph i'm convinced a motorised trifle would feel more stable let alone not pitch and roll as much in the corners.

This is before you inevitably crash in one i've seen..... mountain bikes with better crash protection and bigger brakes.

Money saving isn't the only consideration especially if there's a little one on board.

Incidently i had a Skoda fabia VRS, which was so badly designed its snapped roll bars for fun. Parts weren't cheap either.

I have driven probably 40-50 saxo's/106's and yes the steering is heavy thats why you go for the one with powersteering,again never had one that didnt feel totally safe either on motorways or round lanes,never crashed one so dont know,BUT any small older car is not going to be as safe as a newer one but I am guessing that the OP is not spending grands,perhaps you were unlucky?

well maitained brakes are no problem effiency is tested at the MOT

cant comment on the Fabia as we only dealt with the Favorit

Lemonade_Pockets

hartcjhart wrote: »

I have driven probably 40-50 saxo's/106's and yes the steering is heavy thats why you go for the one with powersteering,again never had one that didnt feel totally safe either on motorways or round lanes,never crashed one so dont know,BUT any small older car is not going to be as safe as a newer one but I am guessing that the OP is not spending grands,perhaps you were unlucky?

well maitained brakes are no problem effiency is tested at the MOT

cant comment on the Fabia as we only dealt with the Favorit

You don't need to crash in one too know that your going to end doing a good impression of sardine if you do.
The brakes were crap from the factory maintenance has nothing to do with it.

That is all of course subjective on my part however i think your mad if you honestly disagree.

To quantify it (using cars of a 2000 vintage since you mentioned power steering although i think it was still rare on the saxo even in 2000) The saxo has a dismal 2star safety rating from NCAP. The clio has 4star, even the fiesta which was pretty dire has 3star, the corsa also has 4star. Polo 4 star.
I.e. Its gonna hurt like hell if you crash into a) Anything big or b) Anything with a good safety rating.

As for the Favorit i've never had the pleasure of driving one. However without wishing to sound snobbish i can imagine its a bl00dy horrible car. My point about the fabia was purely demonstrate that skoda does not nessecarily = reliability. All mfr's have their reliability troubles. Some just have better marketing departments

CocoPopsLover

Atomised wrote: »

This thread is confusing me . people hate Clios but they are cheap to run/insure and i'm always seeing them when i'm out so they must be reliable for some people? My neighbour's clio looks at least 7 years old and although i'd lobe a Focus , it's 100's more to insure so a Clio sounds liek the ideal choice to me.

Lol, I am confused too! I agree with what ur saying though!

Indout96

Atomised wrote: »

This thread is confusing me . people hate Clios but they are cheap to run/insure and i'm always seeing them when i'm out so they must be reliable for some people? My neighbour's clio looks at least 7 years old and although i'd lobe a Focus , it's 100's more to insure so a Clio sounds liek the ideal choice to me.

The Clio is a great little car, Mine was a "W" (Oct 2000) 1.2 Grande which I bought 6 months old and ran for 2 years until I bought the Celica, I then sold it to my friend who spends nothing at all on cars, the clio has had 1 service since I sold it to her in 2003 and it has just had its first breakdown which cost her the massive sum of £88 to have fixed by a local garage. It felt fine on motorways at high speed. If I was looking foe a small car again I would have it at the top of my list (not too keen on the new shape though LOL)

rev_henry

Lemonade_Pockets wrote: »

You don't need to crash in one too know that your going to end doing a good impression of sardine if you do.
The brakes were crap from the factory maintenance has nothing to do with it.

That is all of course subjective on my part however i think your mad if you honestly disagree.

To quantify it (using cars of a 2000 vintage since you mentioned power steering although i think it was still rare on the saxo even in 2000) The saxo has a dismal 2star safety rating from NCAP. The clio has 4star, even the fiesta which was pretty dire has 3star, the corsa also has 4star. Polo 4 star.
I.e. Its gonna hurt like hell if you crash into a) Anything big or b) Anything with a good safety rating.

As for the Favorit i've never had the pleasure of driving one. However without wishing to sound snobbish i can imagine its a bl00dy horrible car. My point about the fabia was purely demonstrate that skoda does not nessecarily = reliability. All mfr's have their reliability troubles. Some just have better marketing departments

Lemonade Pockets, is there any car you actually like and approve of?