|
*Al*
2,958 posts
91 months
|
Saw amother RCZ yesterday at our local hospital, Pug or not i think it's a great looking car!
|
|
|
Bodo
9,409 posts
135 months
|
  The Pug looks like it should resemble a mid-engined car though.
|
|
|
XitUp
7,690 posts
73 months
|
Skater12 said: and seriously consider the diesel engine if you do more than 8000 miles per year. Why? Why on earth would you want a 'sporty' coupe with a diesel engine? LuS1fer said: It would but in an age of speed cameras and CCTV and massive insurance premiums, cars are increasingly about style over substance and sales to the iPad generation. Yes cars are getting faster and faster? Strange that. Also, the only person I know with an iPad is 60.
|
|
|
LuS1fer
28,471 posts
114 months
|
XitUp said: Yes cars are getting faster and faster? Strange that.
Also, the only person I know with an iPad is 60. It must be hard for you in the OAP home. I know plenty of people with an iPad. My 12 year old daughter is physically grafted to hers. Cars are certainly not getting faster - more powerful and heavier, yes, and you can ultimately get a faster car if you want to pay for it but in general, increased bloat slows them down. I think our Mondeo hits 60 in about 11 seconds as did our Mazda 5 - certainly no better than average 80s cars.
|
|
|
lazystudent
1,507 posts
30 months
|
Jimbo. said: I've not driven, can't afford and will never be able to afford either. BUT, I love these cars. They stop every road, traffic jam and car park from being a a sea of bland, grey, TDI tedium. Got to admire the manufacturers, seemingly building these cars for the hell of it despite there it being a very limited market, and therefore very little money in it  Quite the opposite- there is plenty of money in these cars, especially the mini- the marginal development cost for putting a coupe on the mini platform for example will, I imagine, be very low especially seeing as they are selling loads of them!
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
XitUp
7,690 posts
73 months
|
That's your fault for buying her one. She will be a brat with a sense of entitlement forever now.  I think we were talking about hot hatches though, weren't we, not dad cars. They are getting faster. Although I agree they are also getting too big and heavy. Most cars are.
|
|
|
Skater12
398 posts
27 months
|
XitUp said: Skater12 said: and seriously consider the diesel engine if you do more than 8000 miles per year. Why? Why on earth would you want a 'sporty' coupe with a diesel engine? LuS1fer said: It would but in an age of speed cameras and CCTV and massive insurance premiums, cars are increasingly about style over substance and sales to the iPad generation. Yes cars are getting faster and faster? Strange that. Also, the only person I know with an iPad is 60. Because the petrol cars are awful on fuel, and unless your name is Mr Shell-Texaco-Esso, i'm sure the fact that fuel keeps going up in price effect you too. The petrol car i had for 2 weeks averaged 18 MPG on the route i used to drive, and I wasn't driving it all that hard. The Diesel managed to average 48 MPG, driven in exactly the same way on exactly the same routes at the same times of day etc etc. Plus, the torque delivery of the diesel makes it a more enjoyable drive on any road other than motorways at 80 MPH or higher, in which case i'd say yeah go for the petrol. Obviously this is only my opinion, but then I can make an educated comment, based on the fact i have driven both options over a decent period of time. Also, people who hark on about how it's not up to Audi levels of refinement, well no it isn't, but then you're not paying for that level. If you go to dinner at Noma then you get what you pay for. If you go for dinner at Nandos you get what you pay for. Understand the difference ?
|
|
|
XitUp
7,690 posts
73 months
|
18mpg! That's pretty s  t for average driving in this type of car. As for enjoying the diesel more, nope, I just don't get that. And I've never eaten at those places, although I did have a few beers in Nandos in Brighton before heading out on a stag do once.
|
|
|
LuS1fer
28,471 posts
114 months
|
XitUp said: That's your fault for buying her one. She will be a brat with a sense of entitlement forever now. I think we were talking about hot hatches though, weren't we, not dad cars. They are getting faster. Although I agree they are also getting too big and heavy. Most cars are. Oy, that's my little princess you're talking about. My 1986 R5 Turbo did 0-60 in 7.5 but cost a few beans. The Golf GTI did it in something like 8 or 8.5. I am sure a £30000 Golf is faster but so it should be, not least because most "heavy hatches" now have turbos as standard and those that didn't, like Honda, don't seem to make a hot hatch any more. 
|
|
|
XitUp
7,690 posts
73 months
|
I was about to hall you up on the Honda bit but I've just checked their website. Didn't realise they don't make the Type R any more. How sad.
I guess the CR-Z is a warm hatch, the Mugan version counts as a hot hatch though.
|
|
|
LuS1fer
28,471 posts
114 months
|
XitUp said: I was about to haul you up on the Honda bit but I've just checked their website. Didn't realise they don't make the Type R any more. How sad.
I guess the CR-Z is a warm hatch, the Mugen version counts as a hot hatch though. I'll hold judgement on the Mugen as everyone has only driven the prototype AFA I can see. I seem to recall 5th Gear said it understeered a lot and the easily-pleased VBH was a bit "meh" about it. Of the standard CR-Z, CAR said: "The Honda’s ride quality was terrible. Brittle, stiff and ludicrously lacking in compliancy, it made tackling our roads something to be done through gritted teeth. I don't quite understand why Honda has got this so wrong over the last decade – every Honda I’ve driven in recent memory has been marked out by a stiff-jointed and unforgiving ride. The other major shortcoming was the mute and artificial-feeling steering. Sure, it was quick and unerringly accurate, and you could peel the coupe into corners with real precision, but my nephew’s plastic Playstation steering wheel has better feel and feedback. Maybe Honda’s engineers need to have a long drive in the 1995 Integra Type R – one of the finest front wheel-drive cars (along with the Peugeot 306 Rallye and Ford Racing Puma) I have ever driven – to remind themselves that they’ve done it once, so they can and should do it again."
|
|
|
XitUp
7,690 posts
73 months
|
Indeed, not long ago honda were making the best mpg car in the world, the best handling fwd car in the world, the most useable supercar in the world and the revvyest sports car in the world. They seem to have gone wrong recently.
|
|
|
thewheelman
2,194 posts
42 months
|
Frimley111R said: Beauty and the beast! Yeah, that Peugeot is damn ugly! The Mini looks far better in real life than in pics.
|
|
|
bulldong
1,237 posts
72 months
|
fathomfive said: I really wish Peugeot would invest in a better steering wheel design. This is so true, and gear stick column and surround. I sat in one while waiting for a hire car once and the entire thing was let down by the fact that the steering wheel reminded me of my 306 I had when I was 17. Looks nice although if you're in the market for any of these and are going to pay new prices, £25k gets you a hell of a lot else in the same genre. TT 3.2v6 with low miles would be my option.
|
|
|
Vron
1,966 posts
78 months
|
bulldong said: fathomfive said: I really wish Peugeot would invest in a better steering wheel design. This is so true, and gear stick column and surround. I sat in one while waiting for a hire car once and the entire thing was let down by the fact that the steering wheel reminded me of my 306 I had when I was 17. Looks nice although if you're in the market for any of these and are going to pay new prices, £25k gets you a hell of a lot else in the same genre. TT 3.2v6 with low miles would be my option. Yes the Peugeot interior is a massive disappointment compared to the Mini in those photographs.
|
|
|
nickfrog
2,137 posts
86 months
|
Skater12 said: Right sorry but I have spent 2 days on the phone and exchanging emails with various brokers and obviously the one above etc and these deals are definitely phoney. Needless to say that should they have honoured the price I would have gone for it. You're looking at about twice the money quoted. Plenty of excuses, like typing mistakes, admin error, car not available etc etc. They were VERY quick at offering alternative Mercs of similar values but at more than twice the monthly cost and obviously deposit. Clearly scripted too. So as I said, unless you EFFECTIVELY get one of those "too good to be true" deals signed, you do pay for all of the depreciation and some.
|
|
|
Skater12
398 posts
27 months
|
nickfrog said: Skater12 said: Right sorry but I have spent 2 days on the phone and exchanging emails with various brokers and obviously the one above etc and these deals are definitely phoney. Needless to say that should they have honoured the price I would have gone for it. You're looking at about twice the money quoted. Plenty of excuses, like typing mistakes, admin error, car not available etc etc. They were VERY quick at offering alternative Mercs of similar values but at more than twice the monthly cost and obviously deposit. Clearly scripted too. So as I said, unless you EFFECTIVELY get one of those "too good to be true" deals signed, you do pay for all of the depreciation and some. False advertising seems to be common in that case, as i could have given a load more examples.
|
|
|
nickfrog
2,137 posts
86 months
|
Well you say that, but I had a good look around too and that particular car is around the £500+VAT mark at best...
I did compare the cost of leasing a Qashqai+2 identical to the one we bought last year from a broKer at 18% off list and my predicted (pessimistic) depreciation + loss of interest on the capital is still way below the best leasing quote...
|
|
|
CHJ
487 posts
82 months
|
Skater12 said: Because the petrol cars are awful on fuel, and unless your name is Mr Shell-Texaco-Esso, i'm sure the fact that fuel keeps going up in price effect you too.
The petrol car i had for 2 weeks averaged 18 MPG on the route i used to drive, and I wasn't driving it all that hard.
The Diesel managed to average 48 MPG, driven in exactly the same way on exactly the same routes at the same times of day etc etc.
Plus, the torque delivery of the diesel makes it a more enjoyable drive on any road other than motorways at 80 MPH or higher, in which case i'd say yeah go for the petrol. 18mpg?? I get 39mpg average from my RCZ 200GT, and I don't hang around (14k trouble free miles to date). I used to just about get 18mpg out of a Jag XJR8 and that's what I sold when buying the RCZ. Interestingly, peak torque in the 200GT is at just 1800rpm, which I think makes it very easy to drive on a daily basis. A quick upgrade to a k&n filter makes the engine even better. Admittedly its not a sports car but then that's why I have a TVR too.
|
|
|
Mr2Mike
9,420 posts
124 months
|
Skater12 said: Because the petrol cars are awful on fuel, and unless your name is Mr Shell-Texaco-Esso, i'm sure the fact that fuel keeps going up in price effect you too.
The petrol car i had for 2 weeks averaged 18 MPG on the route i used to drive, and I wasn't driving it all that hard. Did you do 50 miles in 2nd gear? Short of putting it on a track that's the only way you should be getting that sort of economy from it.
|
|
