Which of these would you enjoy driving more as a daily?
Discussion
yonex said:
Isn't a Clio a gamble at that money? If it has to be fun then Mx5, Mr2 (roadster) otherwise the sensible choice is something not fun and barge like...S60 
Not really, go for a mr2 and you have the risk of rust same with the mx5.Edited by yonex on Tuesday 6th October 23:27
Any oldish car is gong to have worn out parts, clutch, suspension etc so it's a gamble.
I just think the clio beats the mini hands down other than not having the supercharger noise and creature comforts.
Get a cup clio and you've pretty much got a factory lightened track car as long as you can live without air con, abs and having thinner glass.
The mr2 weighs loads more than a clio 182 ( not the cup) is a second slower to 60 ( if you bother with these ) and has a lower top speed.
Edited by egor110 on Tuesday 6th October 23:42
300bhp/ton said:
Thanks for the info and feedback. Appreciated. 
As for the Ti. I wonder if it's just how it looks that makes you 'think' it feels different? Or do they run a different suspension setup (camber/toein)?
I say this, as the compact and full e46 have identical wheelbases, widths and tracks. All the things that would make a car feel different and more pointier.
And as per the links above, the Compact is only 5kg lighter, not enough to physically notice in a car of this weight. The only real difference is a bit of visual styling and a little bit longer boot, all behind the rear wheel.
From what I have read the Compact got a different steering rack from day one, whereas other E46 models only got it on the facelift so in 2001, 2002 and early 2003 models the Compact would feel pointier, etc.As for the Ti. I wonder if it's just how it looks that makes you 'think' it feels different? Or do they run a different suspension setup (camber/toein)?
I say this, as the compact and full e46 have identical wheelbases, widths and tracks. All the things that would make a car feel different and more pointier.
And as per the links above, the Compact is only 5kg lighter, not enough to physically notice in a car of this weight. The only real difference is a bit of visual styling and a little bit longer boot, all behind the rear wheel.
But that may, or not, be a load of nonsense to a poster as prolific as the OP!
HustleRussell said:
The problem with old BMWs is that there is an awful lot of suspension and drivetrain bits that you're going to need to replace if you want it to drive the way it should.
Good point. I had a 330ci years ago when they were still relatively new cars. Even then I remember having to get some suspension components replaced due to wear.egor110 said:
The mr2 weighs loads more than a clio 182 ( not the cup) is a second slower to 60 ( if you bother with these ) and has a lower top speed.
0-60 on both is around 7 seconds. Both top out at around 140mph.
You're right about the weight.
But in the MR2 you won't be driving a slightly Max-Powered French shopping car.
BMW or maybe the Clio.
The MR2 will be a dog at that money, I would have thought. Cars like that hold money too well to be a sensible proposition as a quasi-shed for commuting.
The MINI will be a MINI. I've never driven the S, but the then new Cooper that I drove a few years back was utterly dog s
t. The 2014 one I drove last year was even worse. Too bulky to be a proper hatch; the worst suspension for our roads that I have experienced on any car built since 2000; horrendous MPG/performance ratio; cheap as chips interior and build quality. Fashion statements and nothing else. No excuse for any man buying one, let alone a car enthusiast. (In summary, I don't like them.)
I'm trying to ignore the fact that this thread is bonkers from the outset. Save the 2k, extra VED etc and just run one of your existing cars. You're just buying another car because you like buying cars.
I'm also trying to work out whether the reference to a Smart Roadster as a 'sports car' was a joke.
The MR2 will be a dog at that money, I would have thought. Cars like that hold money too well to be a sensible proposition as a quasi-shed for commuting.
The MINI will be a MINI. I've never driven the S, but the then new Cooper that I drove a few years back was utterly dog s
t. The 2014 one I drove last year was even worse. Too bulky to be a proper hatch; the worst suspension for our roads that I have experienced on any car built since 2000; horrendous MPG/performance ratio; cheap as chips interior and build quality. Fashion statements and nothing else. No excuse for any man buying one, let alone a car enthusiast. (In summary, I don't like them.)I'm trying to ignore the fact that this thread is bonkers from the outset. Save the 2k, extra VED etc and just run one of your existing cars. You're just buying another car because you like buying cars.
I'm also trying to work out whether the reference to a Smart Roadster as a 'sports car' was a joke.
Edited by ORD on Wednesday 7th October 07:35
I think firstly it's a means for the ever-entertaining 300 to have an argument - he could disagree with an empty room, and come up with reasons why they're wrong.
I also think it's a cry for help/attention - I considered suggesting that he gets a dog but deleted it before I posted it.
I think it's amusing that it's 300 asking about 3 COMPLETELY different cars when he's the first one to suggest a LHD V8 Corvette when someone is asking about accessibility in to a Polo TDI for their mum.
Having said that, next time I'm deliberating on a change of car, I hope he comes and helps suggest something, because quite often I can't see past the usual suspects when choosing a car... I will be after a 4x4, for example, for kayaking etc. I'd never think about a yankee thing or a lesser spotted 4x4 but I would expect 300 to suggest some fairly decent unexpected stuff.
The Roadster thing came from a post/thread long ago which has since passed in to lore. Essentially, that a Smart Roaster is faster/better handling than a TVR.
300, don't take any of the above personally, it is genuinely all meant with a bit of banterous affection. I'm sure you'll still call me a prick though
I also think it's a cry for help/attention - I considered suggesting that he gets a dog but deleted it before I posted it.
I think it's amusing that it's 300 asking about 3 COMPLETELY different cars when he's the first one to suggest a LHD V8 Corvette when someone is asking about accessibility in to a Polo TDI for their mum.
Having said that, next time I'm deliberating on a change of car, I hope he comes and helps suggest something, because quite often I can't see past the usual suspects when choosing a car... I will be after a 4x4, for example, for kayaking etc. I'd never think about a yankee thing or a lesser spotted 4x4 but I would expect 300 to suggest some fairly decent unexpected stuff.
The Roadster thing came from a post/thread long ago which has since passed in to lore. Essentially, that a Smart Roaster is faster/better handling than a TVR.
300, don't take any of the above personally, it is genuinely all meant with a bit of banterous affection. I'm sure you'll still call me a prick though
OpulentBob said:
I think firstly it's a means for the ever-entertaining 300 to have an argument - he could disagree with an empty room, and come up with reasons why they're wrong.
I also think it's a cry for help/attention - I considered suggesting that he gets a dog but deleted it before I posted it.
I think it's amusing that it's 300 asking about 3 COMPLETELY different cars when he's the first one to suggest a LHD V8 Corvette when someone is asking about accessibility in to a Polo TDI for their mum.
Having said that, next time I'm deliberating on a change of car, I hope he comes and helps suggest something, because quite often I can't see past the usual suspects when choosing a car... I will be after a 4x4, for example, for kayaking etc. I'd never think about a yankee thing or a lesser spotted 4x4 but I would expect 300 to suggest some fairly decent unexpected stuff.
The Roadster thing came from a post/thread long ago which has since passed in to lore. Essentially, that a Smart Roaster is faster/better handling than a TVR.
300, don't take any of the above personally, it is genuinely all meant with a bit of banterous affection. I'm sure you'll still call me a prick though
I think a diesel Deltic might fit the bill, it corners as if it is on rails.I also think it's a cry for help/attention - I considered suggesting that he gets a dog but deleted it before I posted it.
I think it's amusing that it's 300 asking about 3 COMPLETELY different cars when he's the first one to suggest a LHD V8 Corvette when someone is asking about accessibility in to a Polo TDI for their mum.
Having said that, next time I'm deliberating on a change of car, I hope he comes and helps suggest something, because quite often I can't see past the usual suspects when choosing a car... I will be after a 4x4, for example, for kayaking etc. I'd never think about a yankee thing or a lesser spotted 4x4 but I would expect 300 to suggest some fairly decent unexpected stuff.
The Roadster thing came from a post/thread long ago which has since passed in to lore. Essentially, that a Smart Roaster is faster/better handling than a TVR.
300, don't take any of the above personally, it is genuinely all meant with a bit of banterous affection. I'm sure you'll still call me a prick though
Not read the whole thread but, my take
MR2, I love them, the way they look, the MK2 was the high spot, but, and I am not sure why, I am not sure I could drive one, and age related stuff doesnt bother me normally but younger lads suit them but once over 40 you look a bit of a tit, especially if heavily modified, sorry MR2 owners over 40, great car but it doesnt suit the older chap somehow.
BMW 325i, 330i or go hone, why bother ?
I would probably say take the Mini but having had one briefly it would drive me batst on a daily basis with its hyperactive ride.
So, out of those three, or near enough a 330i.
MR2, I love them, the way they look, the MK2 was the high spot, but, and I am not sure why, I am not sure I could drive one, and age related stuff doesnt bother me normally but younger lads suit them but once over 40 you look a bit of a tit, especially if heavily modified, sorry MR2 owners over 40, great car but it doesnt suit the older chap somehow.
BMW 325i, 330i or go hone, why bother ?
I would probably say take the Mini but having had one briefly it would drive me bats
t on a daily basis with its hyperactive ride.So, out of those three, or near enough a 330i.
300bhp/ton said:
Buying another car is easier then trying to leverage the money monthly for additional fuel.
Riiigggghhhhtttttt. Man maths rules bro. It's not just fuel you know. What about insurance, tax, mot, repairs, general maintenance. All adds up.
Why not sell some of your sheds and use the Impreza. At least you get to spend a lot of time in a good car.
ORD said:
The MINI... No excuse for any man buying one, let alone a car enthusiast
Try an S. Although I don't quite get the criticism leveled at the Cooper either, in saying that I haven't driven a 2014 F56 yet. Plenty of reasons for a male car enthusiast to buy a MINI, as I'm sure many on here would testify. Ive had my R53 for a couple of years now.
I was going down the route of buying a golf R. However, on a busy commute the only places you can enjoy a car these days is often just slinging it through a small quiet roundabout when the chance presents itself or down a quiet stretch of B road before the numbers get to high. The Cooper S offers great fun and thrills at normal road speeds when most modern cars feel inert. Ive stuck with the mini after looking at a few more modern cars.
The mpg however is starting to annoy me. At the moment I sometimes drive 400-500 miles a week. In reality that'll equate to 2-3 fillups. I'm not bothered about the money, its that the tank is relatively small and I have to fill it up every few days.
I was going down the route of buying a golf R. However, on a busy commute the only places you can enjoy a car these days is often just slinging it through a small quiet roundabout when the chance presents itself or down a quiet stretch of B road before the numbers get to high. The Cooper S offers great fun and thrills at normal road speeds when most modern cars feel inert. Ive stuck with the mini after looking at a few more modern cars.
The mpg however is starting to annoy me. At the moment I sometimes drive 400-500 miles a week. In reality that'll equate to 2-3 fillups. I'm not bothered about the money, its that the tank is relatively small and I have to fill it up every few days.
doogz said:
Hoofy said:
Everyday, no matter what and reasonable running costs? I'd probably go for the Mini even if that isn't my first choice for a fun car that doesn't have to be everyday. I'm thinking those rare days it snows or you have a downpour. Or you need to drive for miles on the motorway.
MK3 MR2!My mid engined LSD'd dinky toy is better than a MINI in snow! Heck, it's better off road than my old 4x4.
OpulentBob said:
egor110 said:
The mr2 weighs loads more than a clio 182 ( not the cup) is a second slower to 60 ( if you bother with these ) and has a lower top speed.
0-60 on both is around 7 seconds. Both top out at around 140mph.
You're right about the weight.
But in the MR2 you won't be driving a slightly Max-Powered French shopping car.
egor110 said:
yonex said:
Isn't a Clio a gamble at that money? If it has to be fun then Mx5, Mr2 (roadster) otherwise the sensible choice is something not fun and barge like...S60
Not really, go for a mr2 and you have the risk of rust same with the mx5.Edited by yonex on Tuesday 6th October 23:27
The mr2 weighs loads more than a clio 182 ( not the cup) is a second slower to 60 ( if you bother with these ) and has a lower top speed.
You do realise that Yonex is referring to the MR2 Roadster, ie the Mk3?
Firstly, it's way less rust prone than the MX5's of similar vintage.
Secondly, "The MR2 weighs loads more than a Clio 182"
Really? So, a Clio 182 weighs less than 950kg?
Edited by TheJimi on Wednesday 7th October 10:44
egor110 said:
OpulentBob said:
egor110 said:
The mr2 weighs loads more than a clio 182 ( not the cup) is a second slower to 60 ( if you bother with these ) and has a lower top speed.
0-60 on both is around 7 seconds. Both top out at around 140mph.
You're right about the weight.
But in the MR2 you won't be driving a slightly Max-Powered French shopping car.
http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/5107...
MR2 7.1 secs
http://www.autosnout.com/Car-Performance-Statistic...
So I was right then.
ETA You're on 6k posts exactly... nice one!
Edited by OpulentBob on Wednesday 7th October 10:47
TheJimi said:
Eh?
You do realise that Yonex is referring to the MR2 Roadster, ie the Mk3?
Firstly, it's way less rust prone than the MX5's of similar vintage.
Secondly, "The MR2 weighs loads more than a Clio 182"
So, a Clio 182 weighs less than 950kg?
You do realise that Yonex is referring to the MR2 Roadster, ie the Mk3?
Firstly, it's way less rust prone than the MX5's of similar vintage.
Secondly, "The MR2 weighs loads more than a Clio 182"
So, a Clio 182 weighs less than 950kg?
The main issue I think with the mk3 was precats? I know they were labelled as a hairdressers car years back but everyone I know who has driven one has liked them. If you can put up with the storage space, which is limited, it's a decent bet. The prices are on the floor as well.
SonicShadow said:
With the earlier ones, it was a side effect of a much more serious problem - oval bores. This causes major oil consumption which then kills the precats. IIRC, this problem was fixed with the facelift models, so get a later model and you should be OK.
Aye, I was about to say that Kinda bugs me when I see people advertising an pre-facelift Mk3 as having the precats removed as if that solves all the problems.
Yes, it solves one potential issue, but removing the precats doesn't guarantee the absence of oval bores.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff