Cheapest £35 road tax cars?

springerholic

Ford Fusion 1.4 tdci, we have just acquired a 2003 model for £2600. And apparently it should do up to 65mpg!!

Mark_Hewitt

springerholic wrote: »

Ford Fusion 1.4 tdci, we have just acquired a 2003 model for £2600. And apparently it should do up to 65mpg!!

So does mine "apparently" but does it like hell actually do it! If you nurse it, it'll return just over the 50 but it's usually more like 43-45.

Comstock

Mark_Hewitt wrote: »

So does mine "apparently" but does it like hell actually do it! If you nurse it, it'll return just over the 50 but it's usually more like 43-45.

Yes, but that difference between claimed and real MPG is a problem across the motoring world. A car with a claimed MPG of 65 will use less fuel that one with a claimed MPG of 40, even if the real numbers are more like 50 vs 30 or so.

In the USA, the tests are stricter which means their car MPGs are not quite as bad as they look, even if they are still dire!

springerholic

Well Im sure it will be significantly better than the 2.0l petrol focus it has replaced!

AHAR

Comstock wrote: »

In the USA, the tests are stricter which means their car MPGs are not quite as bad as they look, even if they are still dire!

Also, US Gallons are smaller than Imperial ones.

Horizon81

Agree with Strider590 100%. You pay loads more for these rubbish little cars because they fall into the lower tax bracket when really you could have a much better car with a higher tax bracket but which costs a lot less in the first place. And don't think of buying an old Clio unless you like spending your life fixing electrical problems.

Comstock

Horizon81 wrote: »

Agree with Strider590 100%. You pay loads more for these rubbish little cars because they fall into the lower tax bracket when really you could have a much better car with a higher tax bracket but which costs a lot less in the first place.

Does bigger=better when it comes to build quality?

Also I'm not convinced that the price differential is as big as he suggests- a small 2004 car does not cost twice the price of a big one.

And don't think of buying an old Clio unless you like spending your life fixing electrical problems.

Thanks for this heads up though

Strider590

^^ this was 2 years ago....

Very basic 2004 Toyota Yaris was £6500 at a dealer
The Vec was £3000 (admittedly 800 less than most dealers)

And yeah I think you do tend to see greater quality in larger vehicles, don't forget that they we're a lot more money than a small car when new!

johnson293

Horizon81 wrote: »

And don't think of buying an old Clio unless you like spending your life fixing electrical problems.

I had two Clios, a 2003 and a 2004 model, both 1.5 DCi 80's, and neither had any electrical issues whatsoever.

I also got 60mpg out both, no problems.

My last car (before the Astra I have now) was a Renault Scenic 1.5 DCi however, and I had engine issues with that (burning oil).

Comstock

I guess with a car as common as the clio, there are going to be good and bad experiences.

Any others from the first half of the decade? The Seicento doesn't seem to qualify (not that I particularly want another Fiat!)