RE: Insignia VXR Supersport: 170mph for sub £30K
Discussion
Crafty_ said:
Limits on low gears is nothing new, cavalier & calibra turbo had the same thing, inhibited boost in 1st and 2nd.
You're right. I think the criticism is just that if it were derestricted, it would have far more impressive standing-start acceleration figures. Probably true, but is there not a likely detrimental effect to mechanical longevity?yep. its torque that breaks stuff. I shouldn't of thought wheelspin would be a problem, did manage it a few times in my cavalier many years ago (limit removed as a by product of manual boost control) but you had to be trying to do it.. given the rather weak transfer box on those cars it wasn't a good idea!
Its probably all down to cost again - yes they could make the drivetrain stronger to allow the boost, but it'd cost more and the benefit to the driver is negligible, so easier and cheaper to put the limit in and economise on the drivetrain costs.
Its probably all down to cost again - yes they could make the drivetrain stronger to allow the boost, but it'd cost more and the benefit to the driver is negligible, so easier and cheaper to put the limit in and economise on the drivetrain costs.
s_zigmond said:
I believe that the gearbox is the limiting factor. I think it still uses the F40 gearbox, which peaks in standard form at 400nm. This has been uped (not sure how) for the insignia VXR. However the standard gear box is running fine with over 400lbft on plenty of Vectra VXR's
Just for the record, 400nm is 295lb/ft, and the engine in the car peaks at 325lb/ft.I doubt they changed anything in the gearbox for this, it's likely they simply recertified it at a higher level.
C
Crafty_ said:
Limits on low gears is nothing new, cavalier & calibra turbo had the same thing, inhibited boost in 1st and 2nd.
This was even true of the Ford Puma after certain problems were raised with (I think) drive shaft issues. It wasn't the gearbox that was protected but supporting components.GTEYE said:
Sadly, i would wager a bet that it still won't do much to improve sales....as unfiortunately bar a very small market, this isn't what the general car buying public wants...
Wrong badge
Wrong fuel
Sadly, true. But cracking buy used.
Wrong handling probably too...Wrong badge
Wrong fuel
Sadly, true. But cracking buy used.
For me badge is irrelevant.
As for fuel... I wonder how many people who buy a diesels to do about 6-8k miles a year actually do the matchs to find out if it even makes sense...
s_zigmond said:
I believe that the gearbox is the limiting factor. I think it still uses the F40 gearbox, which peaks in standard form at 400nm. This has been uped (not sure how) for the insignia VXR. However the standard gear box is running fine with over 400lbft on plenty of Vectra VXR's
Yes it does use the F40 with different final drive and obviously a transfer box. F is front wheel drive and the number I understand relates to the amount of torque it can cope with in NM x10 so F40 would have a limit of 400NM Edited by H100S on Friday 9th November 18:30
Grovsie26 said:
JREwing said:
As far as I can tell, the depreciation seems remarkably low. I'd buy new for the warranty.
At this price bracket? What comparable BMW is available brand new for £23,555?
Maybe a bottom spec mini 1? LOL.At this price bracket? What comparable BMW is available brand new for £23,555?
JREwing said:
As far as I can tell, the depreciation seems remarkably low. I'd buy new for the warranty.
At this price bracket? What comparable BMW is available brand new for £23,555?
What have I missed? The car is 29 grand in the original story.At this price bracket? What comparable BMW is available brand new for £23,555?
Ok so it is alot smaller but a 135i ticks alot of boxes around that price point (for me) if I was going to buy brand new.
I'm not going to discount looking at the Insignia as a 2nd hand purchase though. Father in law has an insignia and although the diesel engine is outclassed the rest of the car is very competent.
v8will said:
What have I missed? The car is 29 grand in the original story.
Ok so it is alot smaller but a 135i ticks alot of boxes around that price point (for me) if I was going to buy brand new.
I'm not going to discount looking at the Insignia as a 2nd hand purchase though. Father in law has an insignia and although the diesel engine is outclassed the rest of the car is very competent.
Someone linked to a dealer offering brand new, unregistered examples for £23,555 as I remember, which makes it a whole lot more of an interesting prospect. Ok so it is alot smaller but a 135i ticks alot of boxes around that price point (for me) if I was going to buy brand new.
I'm not going to discount looking at the Insignia as a 2nd hand purchase though. Father in law has an insignia and although the diesel engine is outclassed the rest of the car is very competent.
v8will said:
Indeed it does, 23 and a half sounds almost like a bargain.
I'd say a true bargain. I can't think of anything that quite compares. There are similarly quick cars, but similarly quick family cars backed up by a lifetime warranty from a major maker? It sounds far too good to be true. Maybe it is 
I read PH less by the day due to the negative morons that use this forum. This topic in particular is case in point. I have never driven the car but the figures, costs and reviews allow me to at least see the positives. Comparing this to anything that is not brand new makes no sense what so ever. If we live by that logic what on earth is the point of buying new? The other thing that gets me is those suggesting that a used car is a better choice cant afford either, it's ridiculous.
vz-r_dave said:
I read PH less by the day due to the negative morons that use this forum. This topic in particular is case in point. I have never driven the car but the figures, costs and reviews allow me to at least see the positives. Comparing this to anything that is not brand new makes no sense what so ever. If we live by that logic what on earth is the point of buying new? The other thing that gets me is those suggesting that a used car is a better choice cant afford either, it's ridiculous.
It does make sense because you CAN buy a used car, or a new car.Maybe it's not fair, but since when was anything fair?
Truth is people who want to spend £1/mile + on a 'petrol head' car WILL consider 2nd hand/used, or nearly new... whatever you want it's a viable option.
Buy one by all means people who think it's cheap and a bargain. Plenty of other people will consider £3500 a year in depreciation expensive for a Vauxhall, and expensive generally when there are as good cars out there on paper, that cost a similar amount to buy, that are gonna be cheaper overall to run, or at least equal, they might just be a few years old.
Would that really stop a petrol head buying the better car? Being not new?
If so then fine, but I'm sure those people are in the vast minority. If they were not then Vauxhall wouldn't be offering such massive discounts on the car to get it to sell!
Dave
Mr Whippy said:
It does make sense because you CAN buy a used car, or a new car.
Maybe it's not fair, but since when was anything fair?
Truth is people who want to spend £1/mile + on a 'petrol head' car WILL consider 2nd hand/used, or nearly new... whatever you want it's a viable option.
Buy one by all means people who think it's cheap and a bargain. Plenty of other people will consider £3500 a year in depreciation expensive for a Vauxhall, and expensive generally when there are as good cars out there on paper, that cost a similar amount to buy, that are gonna be cheaper overall to run, or at least equal, they might just be a few years old.
Would that really stop a petrol head buying the better car? Being not new?
If so then fine, but I'm sure those people are in the vast minority. If they were not then Vauxhall wouldn't be offering such massive discounts on the car to get it to sell!
Dave
Ok I think we are aligning our thoughts here. So comparing one car with another new and old is fair on costs, residuals etc but I guess what I am pointing out is the performance comparisons. The logic on this thread suggests to me that there is no point in buying anything new as you can get better bang for your buck for older models/competition. Maybe it's not fair, but since when was anything fair?
Truth is people who want to spend £1/mile + on a 'petrol head' car WILL consider 2nd hand/used, or nearly new... whatever you want it's a viable option.
Buy one by all means people who think it's cheap and a bargain. Plenty of other people will consider £3500 a year in depreciation expensive for a Vauxhall, and expensive generally when there are as good cars out there on paper, that cost a similar amount to buy, that are gonna be cheaper overall to run, or at least equal, they might just be a few years old.
Would that really stop a petrol head buying the better car? Being not new?
If so then fine, but I'm sure those people are in the vast minority. If they were not then Vauxhall wouldn't be offering such massive discounts on the car to get it to sell!
Dave
For 30K you can go and buy an M5, RS4, RS6 etc but why is it used to slate a new offering when its f
king obvious. Why do people need to bring this up when it's logical that you can get more for your money in a used car. It should not always come down to this comparison, we should look at this car without that in mind. Unless we are going to buy it and lets say 90% of posters will never do so nor will they buy the cheaper option either. Trolls.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff