Best MPG Car For A Young Driver?

F1F93

forgotmyname wrote: »

Nope not just the engine.. They didnt do the 1.6 Mondeo until 2011, the price swap maybe borderline on that year.. Add another year or two and the smaller car will cost more.

£7000 for a 2011 1.6 TDCi Mondeo with 70k miles.

£7500 for a 2011 1.6 TDCI Fiesta with 50k miles.

The Fiesta still has lower mileage!

sh0597

There's a reason the big cars depreciate more. Less fuel efficient, higher tax and higher insurance often higher repair bills.

forgotmyname

Yes but if the 1.6 Mondeo was a year or 2 older then the Fiesta would be cheaper. As i mentioned the 1.6 was only released in 2011.

Whats 20k miles worth £400 - £600 or so? So its almost there.. Compare the new prices though and the Mondeo has depreciated a lot more.

F1F93

forgotmyname wrote: »

Yes but if the 1.6 Mondeo was a year or 2 older then the Fiesta would be cheaper. As i mentioned the 1.6 was only released in 2011.

Whats 20k miles worth £400 - £600 or so? So its almost there.. Compare the new prices though and the Mondeo has depreciated a lot more.

All of this is true, just missing my original point - Strider590 said that a small car is £3000 more than a bigger car. Even if the Fiesta and Mondeo were worth the same after correcting for mileage (we would still need to adjust for condition, spec etc) there will be nowhere near £3000 difference.

forgotmyname

Maybe possible i guess. But even though i have no life, I dont fancy wasting any of it looking for a small cars thats £3000 cheaper

Although... If its not the same manufacturer... what's that big chevvy they couldnt sell? Chevrolet Epica...

2008 for £2895. 83000 miles. Im sure there are smaller cars that cost £3k more than that.

Wh05apk

A vote for a yaris 1.3, on a run like that you will get 50+mpg, with enough performance to be safe, totally reliable and comfortable ( I have done 500+ miles in a day!)
Insurance will likely be less than your Ka.

onomatopoeia99

Mxty wrote: »

I have a very old Ford Ka (S Reg), although it has been reliable I fear it may not be something I can trust to get me to and from work everyday. It'll end up packing in pretty quickly.

Can't see why it is more likely to break down than any other car over a few years old.

Does it have any issues that would indicate imminent engine failure, e.g. overheating at motorway speeds or in traffic, strange knocking noises from inside the engine etc? Have MOTs noted any incipient rust problems? Those are the typical car killers, but stuff that wears out, e.g. brakes, balljoints, bushes, CV joints and so on can fail at any time once a car has a few years / miles on it.

I'm an advocate for keeping a car that's a known quantity going rather than just replacing it based on age or mileage though. Something like a Ka, which is mechanically quite straightforward shouldn't be expensive to keep on the road, and if something big fails, then is the time for a new car.

I did bangernomics until I was 23 (it helped that I taught myself car maintenance with the aid of a Haynes manual and some second-hand tools my dad gave me, so my costs were mainly in parts), then bought something relatively new and had a ton of problems with it!

JustinR1979

tea_break wrote: »

I wonder about this theory that petrol is often the best choice. I reckon I'm spending almost double the amount in fuel in my new petrol engine than I did in my diesel and even at only 10000 miles a year, I could end up spending £8-900 more in fuel, plus an extra £120 in road tax.

My Passat was £1600 18 months ago, I do 140 miles a week for work and a bit of running around.
Is comfortable and pokey enough.
For mot I had to clean a number plate light connection.
I could get a little petrol to match the mpg, but I wouldn't have 130bhp and 230 lb/ft of torque - be more like 60bhp 80 lb/ft of torque.
What would you rather have?
A petrol with similar performance for same price I would have to nurse to do 35mpg, instead of getting 54mpg and not hanging about. £175 road tax too, so not too bad there also.

rev_henry

forgotmyname wrote: »

Maybe possible i guess. But even though i have no life, I dont fancy wasting any of it looking for a small cars thats £3000 cheaper

Although... If its not the same manufacturer... what's that big chevvy they couldnt sell? Chevrolet Epica...

2008 for £2895. 83000 miles. Im sure there are smaller cars that cost £3k more than that.

Just had a look at that, its like an Impala turned into a euro econobox. Therefore awful. Cheap though!

forgotmyname

rev_henry wrote: »

Just had a look at that, its like an Impala turned into a euro econobox. Therefore awful. Cheap though!

Yeah, A cheap nasty car all around. But instead of selling it as cheap and nasty they tried to make it appear a car worth having.

Sold for 2 or 3 years says it all. (less than 600 sold)?