Buying my first ever car

hartcjhart

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

blibly blobly numphy manthy blobody blob:rotfl::rotfl:


that is snobbish,it was a very nice car to drive,I had the great pleasure to drive one from here to southern spain,apx 1200 miles,no problems,comfortable,and an average of 40mpg

as for ncap it means diddly squat depending on the crash,any vehicle that is hit by an artic at 60mph is going to be squashed

hewhoisnotintheknow

you need to compare like for like the saxo came out in 96, so you need to compare it to cars of the same vintage, all saxos had power steering apart from the base model, but thats what makes it base model, and its good to have the option to buy a cheaper car if you dont want the extras

Lemonade_Pockets

There are plenty of cars i do like...see my posts on the first page.

There are some cars however that i evidently dislike and cannot understand why anyone would pick one over the other options.

NCAP as you have pointed out does not test at 60mph, however how many artics hit stationary cars at 60mph. If i'm being pendantic i'd say none as they are limited to 56mph however even then i'd much prefer to be in 5 car ncap rated car than a austin metro.

The arguement about it coming out in 96 is equally flawed because if you use that logic then you have to compare it to clio that was launched in 93 and fiesta that was from the 80's. Not really fair either, 2000 was a nice round year where all the cars were not near the end of their product cycle.

I was merely trying to explain why in my original post's i had included the clio, and not saxo's et al. If you care to read any independant report i suspect you will find similar arguements (if not as strongly worded).

You maybe interested to know that toyata has just recalled 4.3million vehicles. Evidently the Jap reliability is slipping a little.


Edit: This is a general response to the above posts

hewhoisnotintheknow

Lemonade_Pockets wrote: »

There are plenty of cars i do like...see my posts on the first page.

There are some cars however that i evidently dislike and cannot understand why anyone would pick one over the other options.

NCAP as you have pointed out does not test at 60mph, however how many artics hit stationary cars at 60mph. If i'm being pendantic i'd say none as they are limited to 56mph however even then i'd much prefer to be in 5 car ncap rated car than a austin metro.

The arguement about it coming out in 96 is equally flawed because if you use that logic then you have to compare it to clio that was launched in 93 and fiesta that was from the 80's. Not really fair either, 2000 was a nice round year where all the cars were not near the end of their product cycle.

I was merely trying to explain why in my original post's i had included the clio, and not saxo's et al. If you care to read any independant report i suspect you will find similar arguements (if not as strongly worded).

You maybe interested to know that toyata has just recalled 4.3million vehicles. Evidently the Jap reliability is slipping a little.

You have missed my point

Lemonade_Pockets

you need to compare like for like the saxo came out in 96, so you need to compare it to cars of the same vintage,

The arguement about it coming out in 96 is equally flawed because if you use that logic then you have to compare it to clio that was launched in 93 and fiesta that was from the 80's. Not really fair either, 2000 was a nice round year where all the cars were not near the end of their product cycle.

You have missed my point

Sorry what was your point?

Inactive

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.

There are lots of people that buy and read the Sun Newspaper, doesn't make it a good paper.

clairmelville

I would second NOT getting a Ka.
Mines was my pride and joy and I loved being able to park into tiny spots in my very overcrowded with cars street.
Then a ford focus ran into the back of it at about 50mph (I'd stopped on the motorway and she didn't slow down in time) and wrote it off. According to the guy who came to tow it off I was lucky there was no-one in the back and that I had a spare wheel in the back as there might have been some proper damage to passengers or myself otherwise.
Pity the ka's are so cheap (and yes being a woman I did like the way it looked - funky colour I thought)

Radsteral

defenitely do the homework before you buy.
i bought my wife a diesel mini 2003 , she learned to drive on it, and is a second driver insured with me the first driver- 380 fully comprehensive.
i tried to get quotes for other cars we were looking to buy but they all came above 1350 quid.
Mini bouught for 4000 , so saving from insurance means we only paid 3000.

we insured when her was on provisional...but i looked at it as provisional or full licence and there was no difference on direct line, norwich etc

rev_henry

Radsteral wrote: »

defenitely do the homework before you buy.
i bought my wife a diesel mini 2003 , she learned to drive on it, and is a second driver insured with me the first driver- 380 fully comprehensive.
i tried to get quotes for other cars we were looking to buy but they all came above 1350 quid.
Mini bouught for 4000 , so saving from insurance means we only paid 3000.

we insured when her was on provisional...but i looked at it as provisional or full licence and there was no difference on direct line, norwich etc

You do know if its really her car and she's the main driver then what you're doing is fronting and is illegal?

flyingscotno1

rev_henry wrote: »

You do know if its really her car and she's the main driver then what you're doing is fronting and is illegal?

Equally some policies state the main policyholder must be registered keeper too. I came across this problem when I got a new job a year or two back after finishing uni. My Mum gave me her car to use for work, but I couldn't get insurance unless I was the registered keeper on the V5! We had to just sign it over and then sign it back when I bought something! :rotfl: