Any of the current crop of small cars actually fun to drive?

[AlexC1981]

Hi All,

I have been driving big fat cars for the last 12 years and I have this idea that a tiny car would be fun. It could be rose tinted spectacles as I look back at the fun I had driving my Metro Turbo years ago. I bought a TR7 V8 recently and it has reminded me how much fun driving used to be.

I really want that go-kart feeling again that I had in my Metro, but in a more sensible modern package than my TR7. Outright speed and acceleration is a secondary consideration to responsive steering, sharp throttle and a revvy engine, however I draw the line at anything slower than 12 seconds 0-60.

My car allowance from work means it has to be under 7 years old, so I was thinking of something 2012 or newer and I could spend up to £7500 for the right car, but I would prefer to spend under £6000.

I am currently considering:

Fiat Panda 0.9L TwinAir turbo. 83bhp, 145Nm, 1050Kg. 0-60 in 10.8 sec. Approx £5500. 3653mm long. Can be chipped to 95bhp. I really like the interior. Handling is thought to be decent, but not as good as a Ford Ka or a Kia Picanto.

Kia Picanto 1.25L. 84bhp, 121Nm, 925Kg. 0-60 in 11 sec. Approx £5500. 3595mm Impressive weight for a modern car and would still be in Kia's 7 year warranty. The handling well reviewed in Parkers, though I have not read any others yet.

Vauxhall Agila 1.2VVT / Suzuki Splash 1.2L. 92bhp, 118Nm, 990Kg. 0-60 in 11.6 sec. 3740mm long. Approx £5000. Has better power to weight ratio, but 0-60 is slowest.

Nissan Micra 1.2 Dig-S. 96bhp, 142N, 1005Kg, 0-60 in 10.9 sec. 3780mm long. Approx £6500. The numbers make this sound the best option, but the reviews say the handling is rubbish. It does have a supercharged engine, which might be interesting.

Chrysler Ypsilon 0.9L TwinAir. 83bhp, 145Nm, 975Kg. 0-60 in 11.5 sec. Approx £6500. 3842mm long. It looks minging, but it is sub 1000Kg. Not sure why it accelerates so slowly compared to the Panda that has the same engine.

Toyota Yaris 1.33 VVT-i. 99bhp, 132Nm, 1005Kg, 0-60 in 11.3 sec. 3885mm long. Approx £6000. Getting lardy now.

Honda Jazz 1.4i-VTEC. 98bhp, 127Nm, 1051Kg. 0-60 in 11.4 sec. 3900mm long. A bit porky.

Alfa Romeo Mito 1.4 TB. 105bhp, 130Nm, 1090Kg. 0-60 in 10.4 sec. 4063mm long Approx £6500. Tax and fuel economy is much worse than the above cars. Much more powerful versions are available if I max out my budget, but this car is much more lardy and I feel like I might be moving away from what I am looking for. It is 660mm longer than my Metro was and 250Kg heavier!

All these cars are bigger, heavier and slower. I appreciate that modern cars are more sturdy, but I can't find anything small and light that has a half decent engine in it to make up for the extra weight.

I have discounted Smart's due to the gearbox. Ibiza's, Clio's, 208's, Fabia's are too big. Fiat 500 is too girly. VW Up and the Seat/Skoda equivalents are too slow and so is the Toyota IQ, Ford Ka and the Citroen C1.

Does anyone have any experience in driving these cars or can offer any advice please? I drove a Corsa courtesy car a couple of years ago and hated it, so is this whole thing a really bad idea? After reviewing the cars available I'm not so sure. The Picanto sounds best at the moment, but I have a bit of a thing for the Panda interior styling which could push it into first place. Also the Kia is....a Kia.

I am not adverse to the idea of small modifications to improve handling or performance.

[AlexC1981]

Thanks for all the replies. I will have a read through when I get home tonight.

[AlexC1981]

I have added some of the recommendations to the shortlist. Thanks for these suggestions. Unfortunately the Audi A1 and the current model Hyundai I10 are over budget. The old I10 is a bit on the slow side and looks very bland. I chanced upon a Chevrolet Spark today. The seating position looked ridiculously high and not very sporty + a bit slow. I have pretty much discounted everything with less than 80bhp. The Citigo is about 13 sec to 60!

Swift Sport 1.6. 134bhp, 160Nm, 1045Kg, 8.4 sec 3890x1695mm. 44Mpg. £6500. Hard to find.

Renault Twingo 1.6vvt 133bhp, 160Nm, 1050Kg, 8.4 sec 3699x1949. 42Mpg. £5500. Hard to find one new enough.

Renault Twingo 1.2tce 98bhp, 155Nm, 980Kg, 9.5 sec 3600x1927. 49Mpg. £5000. Looks like a good option, but I have been driving a Renault for 8 years and I fancy a change.

Mitsubishi colt Ralliart. 1.5 turbo 147Bhp, 210Nm, 1060kg, 7.2 sec, 3880x1695. 42Mpg. £7000. Hard to find.

Mazda 2 1.5 Sport 101bhp, 137Nm, 1030Kg, 0-60 in 10.1 sec 3895x1695mm. 49.6mpg. £6000. Looks like a good option.

Fiesta 1.0 ecoboost 98bhp, 170Nm, 1091Kg, 0-60 in 10.8 sec, 3969x1978mm, 65mpg. £7700. Excellent engine performance and the best drive so the reviews would have me believe. It is right at the upper end of my budget, but has a low tax band and good economy. Hideous dashboard design and is the biggest and heaviest car on my list.

The extra power of the Swift, Twingo 1.6 and the Colt is very tempting, but I drive about 70 miles each day so they would hit me in the pocket + the tax and insurance are higher too. They are also a bit more expensive to buy. The closer the car gets to the £7500 upper budget, the more sensible the company car option looks instead of the car allowance. The company car would most likely be a BMW 118d and would have to be an automatic. They are economical and have a reasonable turn of speed + RWD. Downside being the diesel and the auto box and I prefer to have my own car. My current daily driver is a Laguna 173 GT DCi, which is now too old for the car allowance criteria and the mileage is coming up to the maximum allowed too.

Looking at the similarities between the Mazda 2 and the Colt, I would not mind betting they are the same car .

I will have to have a good think about this and perhaps test drive some of the slower cars on the list to see if I can be happy in them. I don't need it to be fast. As long as I reach 70mph by the time I get to the end of the slip road leading onto the M25 it should be good enough, or at least I hope so.

[AlexC1981]

Thanks for all those suggestions, I have been having a look through. The VW 1.2TSI engine sounds good, it's a shame they don't put it in the Citigo/Up/Mii. I like the Ibiza that has been linked to.

I don't think the Panda is going to cut it with only 79bhp/tonne. No doubt Fiat are resorting to a very long second gear to get it to 60mph so quickly. Being as I can't test drive them all, I think bhp per tonne is a fairer way of comparing the performance than the 0-60 stat.

Something weird is happening with the laws of physics.

The Ibiza is 94bhp/tonne, which interestingly is very close to the Picanto at 91bhp/t, yet the Ibiza is listed as 9.5 seconds to 60 compared to the Picanto at 11 seconds.

The MINI is an interesting one and the handling is great apparently. The 118bhp 1.6 litre is surprisingly economical, getting an average 52mpg. I wonder how that stacks up in the real world? I find it hard to believe as the Mazda 2 is lighter, has 100 fewer CCs and 20bhp less than the MINI, but gets worse mpg. Something else to think about now.

And no, my Metro was not as girly as a Fiat 500 even if the seatbelts and carpet were red.

Edited by AlexC1981 on Thursday 20th August 22:12

[AlexC1981]

Oh crikey this is getting complicated. My limited understanding of torque is that with greater torque more power is available at lower rpm, which makes the car feel more powerful because it makes decent power low down the rev range as well as high, so you don't need to rev the engine so much to make decent progress.

So if two cars had the same bhp and one of them had better torque, it wouldn't make much difference in the 0-60 because you would both be trying to keep the car at the rpm where it generates the most bhp by changing gear as needed. The higher torque car will generate maximum bhp for more of the time because it can do it over a wider rpm range.

The point about the MINI being a 6 speed is a good one. Most of my driving is done on the motorway and I tend to cruise at high speed, so I guess a 6th gear is going to be important to maintain the a reasonable economy.

The cash for car option isn't all that great where I work. Taking into account everything, If I buy a car for £5500 and sell it for £1000 in three years time, at the end of the 3 year cycle I will be £5586 better off than if I took the company car. So £1862 per annum averaged out. If I buy a car for £7500 and sell for £1500 I will be £3351 better off or £1117 per annum averaged out.

On the £5500 car cost it will take 1.34 years before the cost of the car is recovered. (cost of the car I have taken as the purchase price less the sell price after 3 years of ownership).

So yes, it's not a massive benefit taking the car allowance, but I would like to take the opportunity to own a variety of cars, otherwise I'll be stuck with the automatic 118d for the whole time I work here. I don't really see the 118d as much of an upgrade to my Laguna which is both bigger, faster, better specced and not an automatic I am on the car allowance at the moment, but my Laguna is too old and they have given me an exemption for a period. I dont want to take the piss and push it for too long before I make a decision to stick with the allowance or take the company car.

I'm finding the more I look into what car to get, the harder it is to make a decision. The Twingo 1.2TCe with a remap should make 116bhp Just looked at Clios. You can buy one with the 1.2TCe for the same price as the Twingo. I think the Twingo is a much more interesting car though. The newer and lighter Clio is too expensive if it comes with a decent engine.

The C1 with the turbo...the conversion alone costs £4500, so OB again I'm afraid. Thanks for the suggestion though.

[AlexC1981]

white_goodman said:

Hope this helps

Very helpful thank you.

Right, the Panda is definately out.

It's a shame the current model 1.3vvt-i Yaris gets slated so badly for the handling. 99bhp, 132Nm, 1005Kg, 52mpg and a 6-speed box. It sounded so promising.

The 1.6 Swift Sport is a bit on the pricey side and economy is not good. The 1.2 is a bit underpowered which is a shame. The ecoboost Fiesta is over budget unfortunately as it sounds like a great car.

I think I have narrowed it down to two cars:

The Twingo 1.2tce Gordini is a very good option. 98bhp, 155Nm, 980Kg, 9.5 sec 3600x1927. 49Mpg. £5000. 100bhp/t, 158.16Nm/t, but there are hardly any for sale at the moment that are new enough to consider. It has more torque per tonne than the Swift Sport as standard and when re-mapped only 8bhp shy per tonne. Only a 5-speed box though unlike the more recent edition of the Swift Sport. Re-mapped gets another 18bhp and 28Nm on top of the standard. I did want to avoid Renault as I would like a change, but this isn't vital.

The Ibiza 1.2 tsi 103Bhp, 175Nm, 1095kg, 9.5 sec, 4052x1693, 55mpg, £6700, 94bhp/t. 159.82Nm/t. Responds well to chipping, with another 20bhp and 40Nm (!) more easily obtainable if Superchips know their stuff. It's going to be £1500 to £2000 more expensive than the Twingo.

The Fabia and Polo with the same engines have quite possibly the blandest interior and dashboard design I have ever seen. The Ibiza appears better in every aspect than the Fabia/Polo, but it does not have the fun and cheeky appearance of the Twingo.

I have to seriously consider the economy as I drive 60-70 miles per day and this is supposed to be my sensible daily driver with a bit of fun thrown in. I've got my TR7 for speedy thrills.

Edited by AlexC1981 on Saturday 22 August 12:33

[AlexC1981]

I love the DS3. It looks great inside and out, but I really fancy a petrol this time for a change and hopefully a better experience. It's a shame Citroen stopped making the C2 in 2010 as I always wanted one of those.

ORD said:

Small turbo engines are extremely boring. I wouldn't go for speed as much as handling, a nice peaky engine and a bit of character. None of these cars will be fast, so focussing on 0-60 is kinda missing the point. A 9 second car is slow. A 10 second car is slow. I wouldn't worry about the numbers.

If you must take mpg into account, you should rely on the 'real world' figures available on the net rather than official figures. These cars will use very similar amounts of fuel in the real world, and the difference in costs over a year will be small.
The biggest difference will be gearing, and a tall top gear would be good on the motorway anyway. The rest is official cycle bks that means nothing on the road.

Perhaps with a small petrol turbo engine I am going to end up with an engine that behaves like a bigger turbo diesel anyway, so I will have the worst of both worlds – the economy of petrol, but the characteristic of diesel.

I have been considering mpg as an important issue otherwise there is no way I would be looking at 1.2's I have been looking at the “real world mpg” figures on the Honest Johns website as submitted by drivers and the overall fuel cost per year and that does give a different perspective.

Cost of a years fuel calculated based on 115p per litre, 13K miles and the given mpg.

Mazda 2 1.5 – 40.9mpg

Swift Sport – 42.1mpg. £1614.35 years fuel. Insurance group 19, £180 tax.

Picanto 1.25 – 48.4mpg. £1404.22 years fuel. Insurance group 5, £0 tax.

Twingo 1.6 – 41.3mpg. £1645.62 years fuel. Insurance group 20, £180 tax.

Twingo 1.2 tce – 33mpg (figure looks anomalous to me, see the other readings below, which is the same engine in heavier cars). Insurance group 20, £130 tax .
Clio 1.2tce – 41.6mpg. £1633.75 years fuel.
Modus 1.2tce – 38.7mpg
Wind 1.2tce – 37.7mpg

Ibiza 1.2tsi – 43.3mpg. £1569.61 years fuel. Insurance group 12, £110 tax
Fabia 1.2tsi – 45.7mpg (Honest John) 44.9mpg (What Car)
Polo 1.2tsi – 49.5mpg

Colt 1.5 Ralliart – 39.7mpg. £1711.94 years fuel.
Fiesta 1.0 ecoboost (125bhp) 44.2mpg

The Twingo does not have mpg computer/readout, so those figures will have been calculated by the people submitting the data to Honest John. Not sure if all the other cars on the list do. If we assume the Twingo 1.2tce gets the same mpg as the Clio that pretty much the same as the Twingo 1.6 and Swift Sport! If I chip the 1.2tce for more power it will probably be worse mpg for fewer bhp than the 1.6.

I like that the Swift Sport has a 6-speed, so mpg should be better for me as I mainly drive on the motorway. Should be quieter at speed too and overall, I think the Swift Sport would be a slightly better car than the Twingo 1.6. You know what bugs me about the Twingo? It's a small thing, but lazy design and cost cutting by not switching round the speedometer/radio binnacle to suit RHD cars, so we have to look right over to the left to see the speedo readout. The Swift will be at least £1000 more expensive to buy though. As I will most likely only own the car for 3 years, purchase cost and the re-sale value is an important one.

I am surprised at the variation between submitted figures and official. The computer in my Laguna is currently showing 47mpg (6-speed, 2.0 diesel, 173bhp). The official figure is also 47mpg! It was reading 44mpg for ages though some time back. Honest John shows the real world figure as 43.1mpg.

I was hoping that with a small capacity petrol engine in a small car I would see a saving on fuel, but if I can get about the same I will be happy enough.

I don't have a prejudice against French cars. Mine hasn’t been too bad considering it's done 129K miles (70K are mine). My German built 2004 Astra coupe is the only modern car I have owned that has actually left me stranded (rusted coolant pipe spraying over the engine and making lots of scary looking steam) and it was only 5 years old at the time.

I have got the day off work today, so I am going to have a nose round some dealerships now.

I am tempted to reconsider the Picanto as it looks very smart, especially the 3-door and it will be the cheapest option by far. (cheapest to buy, best economy, no tax and lowest insurance), but whilst Parkers say the handling is great, What Car say it's rubbish. Car Buyer say it's unexciting and rolls around. Top Gear don't even mention the handling in the review.

Edited by AlexC1981 on Monday 24th August 12:53

[AlexC1981]

That's a good call with Autocar reviews as their reviews go into more detail on the handling side. In terms of handling they seem to rate them in the order as follows:

Great - Swift Sport / Renault Twingo (normal version)

Good - Colt (normal version) / Ibiza

Fair/poor - Picanto.

(I really must get away from the computer now and get out!)

[AlexC1981]

GreatGranny said:

You've got the day off to look at cars and you're till slumped over the computer talking to strangers at 13:18?

I booked the day off to recover from V Festival It was raining all morning and I hoped it would have stopped by the afternoon. It didn't, it got heavier and I got wet and got to drive through some giant puddles. I'm not buying until I get paid at the end of the month anyway, possibly end of September if I buy at the high end of my budget.

I visited the Suzuki dealership first, and wow! The Swift Sport is really nice. It felt right from the moment I sat in it. Sporty, modern, stylish and well put together. The gearbox felt precise, if rather stiff to get in gear. This was a current model which they started making in 2012. They cost about £7500. A 2011 model is about £1000 cheaper, but has inferior stats (123bhp, 148Nm, 1105Kg, 8.6/8.9 sec. 5-speed. 40Mpg) and a not so nice interior, though I haven't seen the older model interior in the plastic yet.

Just over the road is the Citroen dealership. The DS3 comes with a range of interior styles, all different levels of minging. They look good in photos, but so garish and OTT in real life. The throw of the gear lever felt a bit long, but felt otherwise ok. The DS3 suggestion is a good one despite the above. I wrongly assumed a d-sport would be a diesel, but it's actually a 1.6 turbo. The 1.6 VTI also sounds very capable. Pertinent stats below:

DS3 1.6 dsport. 150bhp, 240Nm, 1090kg 2940x1715 7.3 sec 0-60, 48mpg, £180 tax, insurance group 22. Approx £7500. Real World 39.1mpg £1738.21 years fuel. Handling reviewed as on par with MINI/Ibiza/Colt. Chipping gets +42bhp +55nm. Wowsers!

DS3 1.6 Vti 118bhp, 160Nm, 1075kg, 3948x1715mm, 9.6 sec 0-60, 50mpg £1573.24 fuel. Approx £7500. £130 tax. Real world 43.2mpg 109.76bhp/t, 148.8Nm/t.

Five minutes along the road takes us to the Kia dealership. Picanto looks like a solid little car. Quite striking externally, but rather uninspiring inside. Something inside gave away the fact it is a cheap car, but I can't put my finger on what.

I drove to a 2nd hand car dealer that had an old style swift, but couldn't find it gave up after 20 minutes of driving around.

Onward to the Seat dealership. They didn't have the Ibiza coupe, but they had the 5 door 1.2 tsi FR. Not bad, but the heater knobs creak when you grasp them. It wasn't bad at all and it somehow had a big car feel to it. It did have a surprisingly large boot. It was fine really, but not as nice as the Swift Sport and a bit "meh". I had a look in a Leon while I was there and that definitely felt a step up in quality over the Ibiza.

I didn't get to test drive anything unfortunately, but how much leeway can you get to test the handling of a car from a dealer you are not going to buy from anyway?

Next weekend I will have to find a Twingo, Mazda 2, pre-2012 Swift and possibly a Colt, Polo TSI and a MINI. I don't think I will have any surprises from the Twingo as it's a Renault of the same era as my own. The Mazda 2 is worth reconsidering. Now I have done the fuel cost calculations and also taken into account real world economy, the fact that I can buy one for £1500-£2000 less than a Swift Sport is quite significant. It handles well according to reviews, but it's noisy at speed and only has a 5-speed which is a bit poor.

There is something about the MINI that is so "look at me in my MINI!" I can't quite come around to the idea of owning one at the moment, but I'm going to see one to see if it changes my mind, as undoubtedly it is very capable from everything I've read.

[AlexC1981]

white_goodman said:

You surprise me on the interior. Traditionally, I would rank them VW-SEAT-Skoda in terms of interiors. My dad had a 2010 Polo and I thought the interior was alright (like a mini-Golf really) and certainly nicer than the one in my old-shape 2008 Polo. The SEAT looks a bit sportier though, especially as a 3 door, so I get why you might prefer the SEAT.

Forgot to reply before. The Polo just seems a bit boring really. If the DS3 is too much, the Polo is too little. I'll have a look inside one as photos can be deceptive as I have recently found out after sitting in a DS3.



It looks like it's got those same creaky knobs the Ibiza has. Reminds me of an old Skoda Felicia.

[AlexC1981]

Blayney said:

I average 40mpg in the Twingo 1.2 TCe GT but I drive it quite hard.

My best result was on a drive from Swansea to Nottingham and back. On the way up I was doing relatively normal driving 80ish when the road was clear, down to 50 through the road works etc. About 40 minutes of stop start crawling. Had the AC on the whole way etc.

On the way home I realised I might make it on one tank so adopted some better driving techniques, AC off and a solid 65mph all the way home and as little braking as possible.

I got 49.5mpg on that tank.

Just to give you some real experience for the 1.2 TCe

edit- also looking left to the speedo is no hardship. The only down side is it's easily readable for passengers. I like that it is digital because it takes the guesswork out of it. I know that 54mph indicated on the speedo is gps 50mph. So that's the speed I go through the average speed checks on the M4 at Port Talbot. I pass everyone and no fines.

Useful info on the Twingo, thanks. Can you tell me what rpm is does at 70mph? Have you ever considered getting a remap? Superchips say they get an extra 18bhp and 28nm for £320. I would be tempted!

I just so happened to pass a dealer today with a 2003 MINI Cooper 1.6 and a 2009 Swift 1.3. I know the Swift Sport interior would have a few upgrades over the one I saw, but I have to say the pre-2012 interior is nowhere near as nice as the current one.

I'm still not sure on the MINI. The one I saw was 8 years older than the one I would buy, but I was not particularly impressed with the acres of silver painted plastic. I like the retro knobs and wiper controls. Not sure about the massive speedometer in the middle of the dashboard. It all looked a bit plasticy. I'll need to see a more up-to-date model I think.

I was a bit harsh in my criticism of the Polo interior in the photo above. It looks better than the cars I saw today.

[AlexC1981]

Hi All

Twingo's off the list due to 3500rpm at 70mph. I'm sure it's fine for a town car, but I do all motorway driving so it's not going to be suitable for reasons of economy and comfort. Thanks to the information and advice that was provided on it. The old Swift Sport does the same rpm at 70. My Laguna cruises comfortably at just 2000rpm and still has plenty of pull.

I'm really trying to keep costs under £7000 otherwise I could take the company car. So I havent really considered the Abarth cars as the newer models are £8000+. The 2012 Swift is my base car against which I judge all the others, but it is about £1500 more than I want to spend.

I am trying to convice myself to buy the Ibiza coupe 1.2tsi. I've seen two now. Reasonable speed, economy, handling (as reviewed) good pricing (£6500) and can be chipped for another 18bhp if I get bored. Decent torque and low down power too, but this might take away some of the fun factor. The FR trim looks best inside and out, but they are a bit more expensive. Overall the interior is rather serious and drab looking compared to Swift and Mazda 2. It does not look quite so nice from the outside either. It's all so very...'ok'

I'm going to see a Mazda 2 - 1.5 Sport today. From what I have read the handling is superb and it is fun to drive as you need to rev it high for maximum power and torque and makes for an involving drive. I wonder if that could get annoying eventually... I'll let you know what I think of the interior when I get back. It appears similar to the current Swift Sport inside, so I expect to like it, but we'll see. Similar pricing to the Ibiza.

I am also seeing a MINI One today. The MINI One has the same engine as the Cooper. The only difference is the amount the throttle opens, which is controlled by the ecu. A remap would give the same power + 10bhp, so this is something I am considering. I'll have to check the insurance as a remapped One might be more expensive than a standard Cooper. The Mini One is a bit more expensive to buy than the above options, but cheaper than a Cooper. Cooper prices are similar to the Swift, but I prefer the Swift. I actually like the Clubman (the one with the van doors), but they are heavier and more expensive.

white_goodman said:

I don't really consider Renault and Reliability to be two words that go together

It's normally ok, but this has been an exceptionally bad month for my Laguna! The cd player broke a few weeks back so now I am going to have to dismantle it to get my CDs out, then carefully put it back together and hope the radio still works! This week I have had to buy a new battery as it started boiling its acid and venting hydrogen - lots of it too, I was lucky it didn't blow up! It was 9 years old though, so pretty good really. Oh and yesterday I managed to brake the footrest in half. It's like it knows I don't want it any more.

[AlexC1981]

I drove the Mazda 2 earlier. It felt so light, alive and sharp, it really tempts to rev it high and chuck it into corners. In terms of acceleration it was fine up to 60mph, but so slow beyond that. The interior was ok, not quote as good as I had hoped, but acceptable. The engine was quiet at speed, but there was quite a lot of tyre noise.

I saw a MINI One today and booked a test drive for tomorrow. The MINI is slightly down on bhp, but up on torque. Based on my Mazda 2 drive today, I might have disregarded the MINI One due to similar power levels but for an extra 38bhp being within very easy reach by remapping. I was very impressed with the quality of the MINI. Very nice inside and well put together. The sound system was much better than the Mazda's as well - the reviews don't tell you this sort of thing.

I have decided to eliminate the Mazda 2. I seem to be eliminating all the cheap options from my short-list The Ibiza TSI is the last cheap option. I'm going to drive that next week and if I don't like it, it will be between the MINI and the Swift and I will have to up my budget!

[AlexC1981]

Drove the MINI One today. It lacked the sharpness of the Mazda 2, but felt a bit more planted. Overall, I preferred the drive of the Mazda. Shame Mazda don't make a 2 with a more powerful engine.

I drove an older Swift 1.5GLX, which considering it wasn't a proper Sport handled quite nicely. Somewhere between the Mazda 2 and the MINI. The sound system wasnt too bad either, though inferior to the MINI. I am hoping to see a proper Swift Sport tomorrow and I am booked for the Ibiza 1.2TSI on Tuesday after work.

[AlexC1981]

The deal is done. I collect next week.



It's a 2012 Seat Ibiza Sportcoupe 1.2 TSI Sportrider. Long name! I was impressed with it on the test drive, so after sleeping on it, I signed the paperwork today.

I was initially hoping for one with the FR spec, but the Sportrider spec is very similar. The 1.2 tsi outputs the same power and they both have sports suspension. The FR has more sporty styling (red stitching, twin chrome exhaust, FR badges). The Sportrider gains more toys (climate control, parking sensors, start/stop tech). Mine is just prior to the 2012 facelift which gets new bumpers, lights and radio, but I am quite happy with the older styling. 6-speaker radio sounded reasonable, which is quite important as it's the only source of entertainment on a long motorway run!

Not the most inspiring interior, but not bad either. I actually prefer the retro red glowing interior lights instead of the black and white look the facelifted model has. My Laguna interior lights are more similar to the facelift, so I am glad to have a change.

It looks just like this one I've googled:


I felt it steered very precisely and generally felt pretty good round the corners. Better than the Swift GLX and the MINI and similar to the Mazda 2. Time will tell after I get to take it out for a proper drive. I think that although a larger capacity NASP engine could have been more fun, when you are driving a car with only 105bhp you need that low down turbo torque for everyday convenience.

Once it's out of warranty I can remap it up to around 130bhp, which should give it similar performance to the Swift Sport.

It revs at 2600rpm at 70mph even though it only has 5 gears and it is definitely the quietest of the cars I test drove. If it was geared for lower rpm than that it would lack any sort of acceleration in 5th at motorway speeds, so 2600rpm seems a reasonable compromise.

Tax is only £30 annually and it is one of the more economical (both actual and the real world submitted figures) cars I considered.

The information you all provided to me was invaluable in helping me to weigh up the factors of handling, performance, tuning capability, practicality, reliability, running costs and purchase cost. So thank you very much for all the contributions, they were all extremely helpful. I have never done so much research into a car before buying.

I pick it up next week after it has been serviced, had a couple of dings fixed and the alloys refurbished. Can't wait!

[AlexC1981]

The Twingo's certainly sound like a good little package and they are a real bargain as well.

The Ibiza was up for £6200 and has 40k miles on it. They agreed to take £200 off the Ibiza price and give me £500 for the Laguna. I look at it as £700 for the Laguna. I have had three other dealers offer me £500 and one offered me £900. I am not too disappointed with the trade in as it has a couple of issues that need sorting - cd multichanger broken, no dvd for the sat-nav, check hand brake light on, due a service and the bodywork has rear bumper crack and some scuffs. Alloys kerbed and quite badly corroded actually. It has done 129K miles and not many people are interested in a slightly tatty French rep-mobile with a reputation for being unreliable and high mileage, even though it does have a good spec and a very good engine.

I have had a very bad habit in past years of declining part/ex offers, then hanging on to cars for months until the battery runs down and the MOT expires, which ends up costing me more money. I'd rather just have it gone as I don't have space to keep three cars for any length of time anyway. I wonder how it would have fared as Shed of the Week

The Ibiza is getting serviced and err..touched up before I collect plus a years warranty, so I think its a fair deal.