Petrol car cheaper than diesel car??

johnfarquhar74

As others have intimated, the OP has to state the intended use and expected mileage for an informed answer.
Very little point in getting a small, newish diesel if they only do a few thousand miles per year in suburbia!

fresh_start

I have a 52 plate 1.5 DCi Clio (80 BHP version) its very nippy and does 60mpg minimum, depending how i drive it, i have had 70mpg+++

Done 75K miles, and sales through its MOT etc, the garage have said a few times that its in good nick

One other thing to bear in mind.....it costs me £20 per year in Tax..!

anotherbaldrick

johnfarquhar74 wrote: »

As others have intimated, the OP has to state the intended use and expected mileage for an informed answer.
Very little point in getting a small, newish diesel if they only do a few thousand miles per year in suburbia!

If you do the DPF will go ape

attila_

Diesels hold their value better. No more to be said.

almillar

Hammyman, I agree with the general advice about underpowered cars, your example of the 1.6 Mondeo is good. VW also have a bad habit of underpowering cars. I think there's a Skoda Roomster with a 1.2 engine?!
BUT, I don't think a 1-1.2L supermini specifically is underpowered, and for most people in general use would be more economical than a 1.4. Until OP comes back and tells us their annual mileage there's no point trying to decide between petrol and diesel...

Lum

The op has stated that they are doing mostly shortish trips and they are looking at cars up to 10 years old. They are also looking at Clio-sized cars, not superminis.

The correct answer, IMO, is a 1.4 or 1.6 petrol engined car that is not French.

almillar

Lum, a Clio, Fiesta, Corsa, Fabia, Yaris etc IS a supermini in my book. Short trips = go for petrol. Mileage still unknown. I still stand by a <1.3L engine for OP unless we find out they're doing loads of motorway miles or fully loaded travelling, otherwise a 1.4 or 1.6 is using petrol for performance that isn't required.

davidjwest

Strider590 wrote: »

Only thing to say is that maintenance wise and repairs wise, a diesel gets to that expensive point in it's life much quicker than a petrol.
New or nearly new diesel = unbeatable.
Anything more than 4,5,6 years old and your headed toward some hefty bills.

But as I always say with regard to car buying, just get what YOU want, the costs really don't vary a great deal when spread over the course of a year, unless your comparing a 5 litre V8 to a Toyota Yaris.

I was going to reply to this last week but MOT was today so didn't want to tempt fate!



My diesel Mondeo on an 04 plate, 160k, failed MOT due to a worn tyre and that's it.

The current Michelins have done ~55k so fairly happy with that, rears have got a few k left on them.

No major bills, it's only needed bulbs, pads etc.

We've also got a petrol Renault Grand Scenic, spent well over £2k on it in repairs etc and it's only done 55k!

I think it's called "Grand" as that's how much it costs getting it through its MOT every year.

:rotfl:

Lum

almillar wrote: »

Lum, a Clio, Fiesta, Corsa, Fabia, Yaris etc IS a supermini in my book. Short trips = go for petrol. Mileage still unknown. I still stand by a <1.3L engine for OP unless we find out they're doing loads of motorway miles or fully loaded travelling, otherwise a 1.4 or 1.6 is using petrol for performance that isn't required.

I've always seen the Clio as a little bit bigger than a supermini, but it looks like Wikipedia agrees with you, so I guess I get to eat a bit of humble pie there.

Even so, given the weight of a modern Clio, I still disagree with your suggestion of <1.3

alexlyne

petrol engines usually more expensive to tax than diesels.
My wifes 1.4d fiesta is only £35 a year (it's a 53), and even she gets a reasonable fuel economy.