Bangernomics: Is this the cheapest possible motoring?

Ginger_Nuts_2

Paul_Varjak wrote: »

I think that is true, yes



When I looked at the Which? reports a couple of years back I noted that newer Nissans and Volkswagens are less reliable than they used to be, wheras Fiat and Ford are becoming more reliable.



That is a very interesting and even more reason not to buy an old banger!

Look here for a test between a new and 9 year-old Renault Espace:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=3l4YBf2tjag&feature=related

I am looking for a Supermini next time and the only Supermini (prior to 2005) that has a 5 star Euro NCAP safety rating is a Renault Modus.

Perhaps trying to drive in a passive way would help more. Another view is that the safer cars are made, the more invincible people feel within them;)

gundo

stress_head wrote: »

I have a 1998 1.8 Mondeo LX which I paid £1200 for 2 years ago with 65K miles...

...The only out lay has been on a set of front disks (~£20) and a new battery (~£80).

I have a 10 year old Mondeo 2.0LX which I bought at a car auction 5 years ago for £2.5k with 54k miles on it. It now has 109k miles on it and in that time has been pretty cheap to run. It's only let me down once and that was due to a dead 8 year old battery. I'm surprised yours cost £80, mine was £35 from a motor factors. It has never failed an MOT yet.

Insurance, tyres, mot and servicing set me back about £400 a year tops and the car still drives very well, smooth and quiet and gives me 38+mpg on long runs.

Buying a wreck every 6 months might work out cheaper but I hate buying cars and so tend to keep mine until the bitter end. I will definitely get my next car at an auction again as it was so much less hassle and more pleasant than dealing with slippery car salesmen.

big_gay_kirk

bought a vauxhall cavalier mk 1 for thirty quid from the scrappy once... cost 25 quid for the mot, then a fiver for a new headlanmp unit to pass same... did it same day, so free retest... kept the car for three years.. didn't look brilliant, but i could squeeze 40mpg on a trip.. sold it for 50 quid... did 21,000 miles in it with no trouble... last car was a mk 5 cortina.. cost 250, had it for five years, driving everyday.. total parts cost over five years was about 150 quid... and that included buying a nearly complete car for spares.. trick is to do your own work.. lets be honest, what else would you be doing? watching "It Pays to Watch"????

must add.. for saying modern cars are supposedly more economic fuel wise, i always seem to buy less than my mates with modern rubbish... and my insurance has rarely been more than a hundred quid.... best so far was for the corty. 45 quid with fifty pounds cashback for fully comp... bargain!

Paul_Varjak

Ginger_Nuts wrote: »

Perhaps trying to drive in a passive way would help more. Another view is that the safer cars are made, the more invincible people feel within them;)

You are already preaching to the converted. I took the IAM Advanced Driving Test 30 years ago and was a winner in an RAC driving safety competition.

I think you will find that the recognised term is 'defensive' driving; not only does it save lives but it also saves on fuel, brakes and tyres. But to be really effective, defensive driving requires other drivers to drive in a similar fashion; sadly, that is not always the case so I would always prefer to be in the safest vehicle possible.

anewman

Paul_Varjak wrote: »

Look here for a test between a new and 9 year-old Renault Espace:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=3l4YBf2tjag&feature=related

It's interesting to see old cars were tested by being smashed head on into a concrete wall, and the new cars being crashed somewhat like the 5th gear tests with a solid object only on one side.

For example http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=4Utu4sA2qmI

Paul_Varjak

anewman wrote: »

It's interesting to see old cars were tested by being smashed head on into a concrete wall, and the new cars being crashed somewhat like the 5th gear tests with a solid object only on one side.

For example http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=4Utu4sA2qmI

Of course, the older tests were before NCAP existed. NCAP head-on crash tests involve what is a more typical 'offset' frontal collision. I think such tests help determine how well the forces created in a crash are distributed around the car. Those cars which are able to distribute these forces are those cars that are more likely to score highly in the NCAP tests.

aimharl

Just thought I would post this link to the guy who wrote the Bangernomics book. http://cars.uk.msn.com/bangernomics Great to see this thread coming alive.

ratbagski

My mate had a Fiat Tipo that failed its mot Thought that it wasnt worth selling so took it to the scrappy`s.
He went with a mate and took the wheel`s off ,thay take money off to dispose of,and he could not believe it when he got £148 for it. Result or what?
:beer:

georgevie

was thinking of doing this myself - thanx 4 all the good advice!

dbs

keithwjones wrote: »

Tip from a garage - brush old engine oil on to the pipes, then they do not corrode.

Last mot a new young tester did car, he thought the pipes were leaking and called an experienced tester who new what I was doing. The pipes will stay good for years. Funnily enough garages do not do this on a routine service.

Keith

If your pipes have surface rust on just rub with fine emery paper should come off easy then use the old engine oil tip.

If rust does not come off easy this means rust embedded into the pipes or pipes are pitted they need replacing.

I have done this to previous cars with no problems.