Best smoker barges 1-5 large [Vol 9]

[BlackGT3]

Checking in

[W00DY]

CharlesdeGaulle said:

Tough crowd for the Volvo! Back to Mercs; what's the view on this?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/2007-07-Reg-MERCEDES-BEN...

Looks goo. Nice spec and seems great value.

Just need to swap out the craptastic nav for comand.

[BlackGT3]

Checking in

[Eski1991]

W00DY said:

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...


http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/STUNNING-Example-Of-This...


http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Citroen-XM-V6-24v-Exclus...

Like all of those, haven't seen many Vel Satis around, must be a bit on the heavy side for the MPG mentioned in the advert?

The XM is very nice but a smidgen on the expensive side,no?

[gtidreamer]

7 series in Belfast.

http://www.usedcarsni.com/147889876

[bmthnick1981]

W00DY said:

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...


http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/STUNNING-Example-Of-This...


http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Citroen-XM-V6-24v-Exclus...

3 interesting finds. 607 probably favourite for me. I can't entertain the Vel Satis as a 13 year old diesel, problems await i'm sure. The XM is nice but I couldn't part with £5k for one. Still look 'futuristic' though!

[dscam]

CharlesdeGaulle said:

This might be one for kapitanlangziet (sp?), but open to comments from anyone and everyone really.

This is an 06 auto V70, 2.4 170. It's only 3 Autotrader miles from me, and my wife likes it. It's in depressingly dull Silver, but is otherwise inoffensive becasue I'm not averse to light coloured interiors.

Is there any reason to avoid? Gearbox? Anything else?

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...

Having just bought a petrol v70 of '05 vintage I would heartily recommend one. The build quality is superb and there can be few more practical cars - the boot is vast and the seats remain the best I've ever had for long distance comfort. Safe too, natch.

p.s. I'm well placed to view the XJS posted earlier if you were interested enough. Not got the first clue about them other than looking for the usual rust etc

[harrykul]

idiotgap said:

This is Pedro's outfit:
http://www.inautos.co.uk/
Do mention Joel and I.

Thank you Dave, will do. Hopefully he can help, otherwise I might end up breaking the car and selling the engines off...

[anonymous-user]

kapiteinlangzaam said:

The 170 NA engine is acceptable. Quite slow, but enough power to move it along at least (unlike the 140!).

Its also about as bulletproof as they get.

Autobox should be fine, wont have been stressed much. Do your due-diligence in any car (20-30 mins test drive to allow the fluid to get warm, they only bork when warm).

As already mentioned its rare to find a petrol model on an 06 plate, and I like it in Silver.

Very strong & dependable car. No bad image. Will last forever. Great old Hector

EDIT: 5k is strong money, so it needs to be perfect.

Good points, but tell me you'd rather have an "acceptable" 170bhp when you could have this for the same money

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...

[W00DY]

bmthnick1981 said:

3 interesting finds. 607 probably favourite for me. I can't entertain the Vel Satis as a 13 year old diesel, problems await i'm sure. The XM is nice but I couldn't part with £5k for one. Still look 'futuristic' though!

The 607 does seem like a genuine ownership proposition an looks really rather crisp.



It seems with Volvos that her really is only one way to go engine-wise




http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...


http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Volvo-XC90-SE-SPORT-V8-1...

[BigBen]

W00DY said:

CharlesdeGaulle said:

Tough crowd for the Volvo! Back to Mercs; what's the view on this?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/2007-07-Reg-MERCEDES-BEN...

Looks goo. Nice spec and seems great value.

Just need to swap out the craptastic nav for comand.

That looks really good and cheap. How easy is a swap to comand? not trivial I would imagine

[anonymous-user]

kapiteinlangzaam said:

Depends what you want from the car I suppose.

I used to have a T5 and the only way to make it average >25mpg would have been to push it off a cliff. <15mpg was typical if I pressed on (and you do press on with a T5!). Consumables and potential bork factor (along with g'box stress) is also exponentially increased.

As a 'buy and forget' prospect the 170NA is a good shout. Unlikely to go wrong and much cheaper to fix than a T5 when it does.

That facelift T5 is magnificent though

I think I'm a child and it would irritate me to know that I could have had a MUCH FASTER car for the same money

I have a 2004 MY 2.3 T5 with the electrical facelift and it's been a very sturdy workhorse. As you say fuel economy is not one of it's strong features and my wife averages 21MPG. I can get it over 30MPG on an extremely careful motorway run, but if you're going to do that you might as well get the 140bhp one. I'd like a manual T5, I suspect a lot of the poor economy is down to the crap gearbox.

I hate to say it, but a D5 and a cheeky remap is probably the most sensible option for these.

[barchetta_boy]

CharlesdeGaulle said:

Budget stretch alert, but if you fancy the girl at your local fuel station, this must be the car for you.

A rather appealing pre-HE V12, with fantastic colours. Not much effort made with the advert, but a nice-looking old thing.

http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C519076

Love this, and the other V12. What's the crack with the ambitiously-named "High Efficiency" variant vs the pre-HE?

[deadslow]

barchetta_boy said:

CharlesdeGaulle said:

Budget stretch alert, but if you fancy the girl at your local fuel station, this must be the car for you.

A rather appealing pre-HE V12, with fantastic colours. Not much effort made with the advert, but a nice-looking old thing.

http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C519076

Love this, and the other V12. What's the crack with the ambitiously-named "High Efficiency" variant vs the pre-HE?

I think the pre-HE cars are a bit quicker. Thirstier, if this can be imagined.

[MJK 24]

deadslow said:

barchetta_boy said:

CharlesdeGaulle said:

Budget stretch alert, but if you fancy the girl at your local fuel station, this must be the car for you.

A rather appealing pre-HE V12, with fantastic colours. Not much effort made with the advert, but a nice-looking old thing.

http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C519076

Love this, and the other V12. What's the crack with the ambitiously-named "High Efficiency" variant vs the pre-HE?

I think the pre-HE cars are a bit quicker. Thirstier, if this can be imagined.

I think Jaguar claimed a 12% improvement in economy with the HE. So a very gentle trundle that would have given 18mpg previously made the leap to the heady heights of 20.1MPG

[CharlesdeGaulle]

MJK 24 said:

deadslow said:

barchetta_boy said:

CharlesdeGaulle said:

Budget stretch alert, but if you fancy the girl at your local fuel station, this must be the car for you.

A rather appealing pre-HE V12, with fantastic colours. Not much effort made with the advert, but a nice-looking old thing.

http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C519076

Love this, and the other V12. What's the crack with the ambitiously-named "High Efficiency" variant vs the pre-HE?

I think the pre-HE cars are a bit quicker. Thirstier, if this can be imagined.

I think Jaguar claimed a 12% improvement in economy with the HE. So a very gentle trundle that would have given 18mpg previously made the leap to the heady heights of 20.1MPG

I was once told that HE offered an improvement of around 15% fuel economy, but to bear in mind that 15% of fk all was fk all!

[CharlesdeGaulle]

kapiteinlangzaam said:

dme123 said:

kapiteinlangzaam said:

The 170 NA engine is acceptable. Quite slow, but enough power to move it along at least (unlike the 140!).

Its also about as bulletproof as they get.

Autobox should be fine, wont have been stressed much. Do your due-diligence in any car (20-30 mins test drive to allow the fluid to get warm, they only bork when warm).

As already mentioned its rare to find a petrol model on an 06 plate, and I like it in Silver.

Very strong & dependable car. No bad image. Will last forever. Great old Hector

EDIT: 5k is strong money, so it needs to be perfect.

Good points, but tell me you'd rather have an "acceptable" 170bhp when you could have this for the same money

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...

Depends what you want from the car I suppose.

I used to have a T5 and the only way to make it average >25mpg would have been to push it off a cliff. <15mpg was typical if I pressed on (and you do press on with a T5!). Consumables and potential bork factor (along with g'box stress) is also exponentially increased.

As a 'buy and forget' prospect the 170NA is a good shout. Unlikely to go wrong and much cheaper to fix than a T5 when it does.

That facelift T5 is magnificent though

Thanks for the useful comments and suggestions.

For family lugging, I reckon the 170 would be perfectly adequate. I'm off to Sicily for the week tomorrow, otherwise I'd go and view it, noting the comment ref it being top-end price-wise.
The T5 is quite a way from me, and I'd prefer to lavish money on more interesting wagons than the family load lugger, so I suspect the more humble performance and bills of the non-T5 will be what I go for.
Well, either that or an E-class, I can't decide!

[CharlesdeGaulle]

BigBen said:

W00DY said:

CharlesdeGaulle said:

Tough crowd for the Volvo! Back to Mercs; what's the view on this?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/2007-07-Reg-MERCEDES-BEN...

Looks goo. Nice spec and seems great value.

Just need to swap out the craptastic nav for comand.

That looks really good and cheap. How easy is a swap to comand? not trivial I would imagine

I wonder if it's really essential? Most of the in-dash systems date pretty quickly anyway. What else does the annoyingly-spelled COMAND offer anyway?

[BigBen]

CharlesdeGaulle said:

BigBen said:

W00DY said:

CharlesdeGaulle said:

Tough crowd for the Volvo! Back to Mercs; what's the view on this?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/2007-07-Reg-MERCEDES-BEN...

Looks goo. Nice spec and seems great value.

Just need to swap out the craptastic nav for comand.

That looks really good and cheap. How easy is a swap to comand? not trivial I would imagine

I wonder if it's really essential? Most of the in-dash systems date pretty quickly anyway. What else does the annoyingly-spelled COMAND offer anyway?

Mainly it looks 1000 times better in the dash. My 2002 car has COMAND and I have to say it is quite a decent nav system, only the system of destination entry is a bit clunky. That car also lacks 'phone preparation, as does mine, and having investigated it is a proper PITA to add.

[Easternlight]

W00DY said:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Volvo-XC90-SE-SPORT-V8-1...

Got to love the way the dealer booasts of the "£16000" that its cost the 1 previous owner to run this for 9 years, and thats with out fuel