An 'economical' car on a par with a Golf VR6 for performance?

AlexLK

E46 BMW 330d.

OddballJamie

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

Not really. My mum for example likes basic A-B motoring. No frills. She owned an old Nova Saloon for 15 years. Only recently getting rid. She was more than happy with it.


EDIT: As an aside, just clicked the Civic link. Why do they all seem to go for those whopping tailpipes? It's a matter of opinion but i think they look bloody awful.

Didn't notice that as I only looked at the first couple of images, the standard twins look better. That's part of the problem with old hot hatches, rare to find unfettled models for cheap prices.

OddballJamie

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

Agreed. If we didn't care about fuel consumption then it'd be a whole different question. In fact if fuel consumption, coupled with road tax, coupled with insurance group wasn't even a worry then i wouldn't even be asking the question.

But affordability is key here. That's the whole package - car cost, tax, insurance, fuel cost, all whilst being "quick" if possible *checks he used the right term* Yup, i did. Good to go.

As I get older I realise more and more that reliability is very important. You've got to remember that some of these cars are £20k-£30k new and are gonna cost big money when they go wrong.

My Dads neighbour has a M3 CSL which costs a bomb when it goes wrong, which unfortunately seems to be fairly often. Although this seems to be offset by depreciation as I don't think it has lost anything in the few years he's owned it.

goonarmy

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

Not really. My mum for example likes basic A-B motoring. No frills. She owned an old Nova Saloon for 15 years. Only recently getting rid. She was more than happy with it.


EDIT: As an aside, just clicked the Civic link. Why do they all seem to go for those whopping tailpipes? It's a matter of opinion but i think they look bloody awful.

And i wouldnt touch anything with them crappy stickers on the side.
And have you looked at mondeo st tdci's?

ILW

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

Not really. My mum for example likes basic A-B motoring. No frills. She owned an old Nova Saloon for 15 years. Only recently getting rid. She was more than happy with it.


EDIT: As an aside, just clicked the Civic link. Why do they all seem to go for those whopping tailpipes? It's a matter of opinion but i think they look bloody awful.

Because they are Chav wagons?

[Deleted User]

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201310059135434/sort/pricedesc/usedcars/price-to/3000/maximum-age/up_to_7_years_old/engine-size-cars/2l_to_2-5l/fuel-type/diesel/model/octavia/make/skoda/onesearchad/used/onesearchad/nearlynew/onesearchad/new/postcode/sa57bx/page/1/radius/1500?logcode=p

quick ish roomy economical slightly over budget:p

JustAnotherSaver

Well, dilemma over so it seems.

He's decided that as a works car, he'd be happy with a sub 10 second diesel. So there's quite a lot fitting that category right out the box. Sorted.

Although i should really point out to him it isn't all about saving on fuel .... as he wont get rid of the VR6, that'll mean shelling out for a new car, more tax, more insurance, which will take a long time to pay off in fuel savings. Probably longer than he'd keep the car tbh.

goonarmy wrote: »

And i wouldnt touch anything with them crappy stickers on the side.
And have you looked at mondeo st tdci's?

Agreed. I'm no fan of stickers.

Don't get me wrong, my car is modded, but i like things subtle.

Also, i looked into the Mondeo ST TDCI for myself fairly recently. I quite like the MK3 Mondeo & i like the look of the ST. Couldn't afford the petrol.

Unfortunately reliability seems to be an issue with them & when i read about modern diesels, it seems to be injectors & costly repair bills that come up in searches. Puts me off them. I'd like a MK5 Astra 1.9 CDTI 150, but chocolate gearbox. Modern diesels don't seem to fair so well with reliability.

Flying-High_2

Wouldnt fancy a £2k Type R or a 182.... £2k would easily get a decent 172 though and if unable to DIY pretty much allow for the belts and dephaser being changed so all is well.

londonTiger

mk2 golf 16v gti iis better than the latter cars, after the 90's they just got heavier ans heavier.

the modern golfs probably are closer to the original golfs, the fuel economy makes them get the most out of fuel and that often means when you thrash the gas pedal you get more power out of it.

if you want something old and good on fuel, you have to ignore the petrol gtis and 6 cylinders and got for a torqey diesel. they are very nippy in low gears, can get to 40 on gear 2 before you even notice anything.

bigjl

I would say go for a 2.0 D Focus mk2 shape.

136bhp standard and can be remapped for 150/170 apparently.

Or if you want have a T5 saloon replica then an S40 Volvo (2004 on) has the same engine etc.

Standard the 0-60 is around the 9second mark but you can get that closer to 8 with a remap.

But the torque and ingear acceleration times will be better than a VR6 when standard i suspect so should be a sizable improvement in usable performance.

I think that is one reason many drivers find the torque of a turbo diesel so difficult to move away from even if they would be better served by a petrok vehicle.


The Astra 1.9cdti from 05 onwards is also really rather quick in 150bhp form.

A remapped one was raced against a VXR on Fifth Gear i seem to remember.

And the 200bhp Astra diesel was far from embarressed.

Take it easy and you have 50mpg ability.