Bangernomics: Is this the cheapest possible motoring?

kazrak

Just a quickie, i use the £400 then scrap at first repair principal and have just scrapped a car locally that was probably not going to make it through the mot...i got over £100 for the thing in scrap!!!!!! Therefore, even less expense.

pukkamum

spoyser wrote: »

One more way to potentially cut the cost of motoring is to get an old person (no offence) as a named driver on your insurance. I recently added my father-in-law (58) to my insurance and was pleasantly surprised when the cost went down!

Third-party insurance isn't necessarily a good thing either.

A number of years ago when I was in my early 20s I drove into a wall, the car had to be lifted out of the wall using lifting gear and then transported home on a car transporter costing me £250. The difference between 3rd party and fully comp was £60!!

The moral of this story: Make sure you check the actual cost of both before opting for the cheaper one as it might be false economy!!

Yes def i once discovered that i had been paying 3rd party when it was only another £20 fully comp!:o

Timbolla

I have looked at bangernomics over the years and for me it does not make sense as I am mechanically inept and I need a reliable car for work.
My first car was a Skoda Estelle which cost me £150 (plus services) and I got £400 part ex two years later when I upgraded, which was the best value car I had as all the others have cost me money. I have been driving for 20 years I have had 6 cars and never spent more than £4000 on any of them. I have been lucky and all have never needed any unexpected major mechanical repairs (YET). The way I look at the cost of my cars is purchase cost plus major repairs and if it costs me more than £80 per month for the time I own it I have not done well.
My current vehicle was only 3 years old when I bought it and cost me £4000. It is a Mondeo Diesel 6 speed estate and had 152,000 on the clock and a FSH when I bought it. I do less than 8000 miles a year so the longer I keep it the more average the mileage becomes. I bought it with my eyes open as I did research and found that the major issue would be a new clutch, hence 18 months post purchase I have a new clutch and flywheel at £900 fitted. This may sound like I have spent a lot of money compared to others who have bought real bangers, but as the engine is good for 250,000 I have potentially a good 5 to 7 years left before I need to look for another one. Without any further major mechanical repairs I think the car will have cost me between £550 and £700 per year and if it does not expire when I think it could I will keep it running. In the mean time I am now saving for the next car and putting the money in my mortgage offset savings account.

tomstickland

purplegrape wrote: »

the main difference I notice between new cars and old is the brakes and braking distances - makes them feel unsafe for me. (Am basing my experience on a 1984 Polo, so perhaps a little unfair...)

Does anyone have any thoughts on this in terms of make, etc?

The old polos had appalling brakes. Unservoed and not effective. Most cars from about 1988 on have good brakes. I'm talking about Mk2 Astras, M2 Golfs, and my 1991 BMW. I managed to lock the tyres up on all of them and you can't brake any harder than that.
Most modern cars have appalling brakes in my opinion - no feel at all, just an on/off action. The talk about compulsory brake assist makes me laugh too. We live in an age obsessed with the idea that there is a technological solution to every problem.

Davesnave

tomstickland wrote: »

The old polos had appalling brakes. Unservoed and not effective. Most cars from about 1988 on have good brakes. I'm talking about Mk2 Astras, M2 Golfs, and my 1991 BMW. I managed to lock the tyres up on all of them and you can't brake any harder than that.
Most modern cars have appalling brakes in my opinion - no feel at all, just an on/off action. The talk about compulsory brake assist makes me laugh too. We live in an age obsessed with the idea that there is a technological solution to every problem.

I find anti-lock brakes a bit scary, though I'm willing to believe they 'work' better. My last car had them and so does the present one, but the ordinary 'feel.' is OK.

I actually lost my last car when the garage couldn't finish a repair before the weekend, so they let me have the car back with a warning not to brake hard. I forgot, locked-up and went through the hedge! Still, it was blessing in disguise, as the same mechanic (normally OK) had ruined the suspension by 'renewing' it earlier and I'd hated the car ever since!

orlwaysbroke

HA - amateurs ...

A couple of years back the local VW dealership used to have a sales manager with a sense of humour. Every now and then he'd flog the old banger tradeins for a packet of sweets, as this was cheaper than auctioning them.

Being really broke at the time I jumped at the chance of an A registered Renault 11, with under one months tax and test for a packet of Trebor mints.

I nipped down , paid the man, and went to my local garage.

For around £25 he MOT'd the banger and after I paid £10 for a partworn tyre and topped up the windscreen washer, I set off on a years motoring for peanuts.

The old girl didn't fail once.

(She moved to the car lot in the sky at the next MOT anniversary, as even I could see she was gonna cost a few bob to repair!!!)

Haven't managed it since, but £35.20 for a years motoring seems pretty good to me.

stevlee

I definitely agree with japanese car, I had my 93 civic for 7 years now without a single break down other than caused by the old battery. Over the time I put 50k miles on it. It has never failed a single MOT in the years I have owned it. Only rust is on the door lock where a stupid thieve tried to break in a few years ago. I service the car myself, spark plug, fuel/air/oil filter and change oil myself, but leave any major items to the garage like exhaust. I have also owned a 95 Rover 216. Another perfect buy, despite the Rover badge, its actually a Honda engine and transmission under, so proven to be just as reliable until the radiator leaked and gf keeps driving therefore = head gasket
I will get a Honda and Toyota anyday if you want cheap motoring.

anewman

I'm not sure I see the need for ABS brakes. My car has pressure regulating valves to prevent the rear wheels locking up (I guess most non-ABS cars do) and it seems that's all you really need to stop losing control seriously under heavy braking.

purplegrape

tomstickland wrote: »

The old polos had appalling brakes. Unservoed and not effective. Most cars from about 1988 on have good brakes. I'm talking about Mk2 Astras, M2 Golfs, and my 1991 BMW. I managed to lock the tyres up on all of them and you can't brake any harder than that.
Most modern cars have appalling brakes in my opinion - no feel at all, just an on/off action. The talk about compulsory brake assist makes me laugh too. We live in an age obsessed with the idea that there is a technological solution to every problem.

Well that makes sense! I remember when I had it I needed to break almost double to time before any other car I've driven and even then it always felt like luck that I'd stopped in time!! :shocked: (Thankfully, I always did!)

I did love her though... despite her flaws. :rolleyes:

So a post 1988 car, gotcha!

Wig

I hope you get at least £50 from the scrap man for your cars. Round here, it's £50 picked up and towed away, and £70 if you drive it to the scrappy.