RE: Service History: In an ordinary world
Discussion
In 2010 I learnt to drive in my instructor's 1998 Corolla, and the following year got my first car, a 1997 Fiesta (with the 1.25 Zetec engine). The Fiesta felt a lot sweeter to drive than the Corolla, so my conclusion was that the Ford was great and the Toyota not so much. I'd driven a couple of other cars by that point, but only briefly, and so the Corolla and Fiesta became my benchmark cars every time I had the opportunity to drive anything else. And when I did drive much newer cars (an Alfa Romeo MiTo and Renault Captur come to mind) I realised how skewed my original conclusion was - the Corolla wasn't bad at all! 7 years later, I still drive my Fiesta daily and feel smug when I hear people complain about a newer car being a rubbish drive.
CornedBeef said:
Definitely calls for a readers cars thread! Love an old Volvo.
I will get around to it at some point! Would like to make a video or two on it first (Yes I'm one of those 'youtube millennials' when I find the time to film myself) Can't beat a good old forum thread though, here's a pic to keep you entertained for now
greenarrow said:
GIYess said:
C70R said:
GIYess said:
My second car was a mk4 astra. Its a bit of a later car than the above but, while it wasn't fast by any stretch of the imagination. It handled like a dream and felt quick. Same principle, great suspension and engine for a bog standard car.
Mk4 Astras never handled "like a dream". Even the high performance ones were dismal to drive. Take away the nostalgia, and you've got a pretty sh*t car that you've just canonised.This is a great article BTW and so true. I was only thinking yesterday that car adverts these days are all about the fancy dash, the infotainment and the monthly lease cost. No one mentions 0-60 times, handling, etc any more. I recently bought my daughter a Ford KA, which dates back to the 1990s and its absolutely brilliant for driving round town. It just floats over all those horrible pot holes and bumps, feels like it weighs next to nothing and is just so easy for getting around town. I get back into my Insignia, with its crashy ride, turbo lag and tank like reflexes and think "is this really progress?"
I had a 1998 Civic like the one in the article and it really was a fantastic servant. It was never going to be a car anyone would buy with their heart but it was utterly brilliant and just being a car. It had everything you really need, comfy seats, good heater, air conditioning, nice radio, remote locking without any of the modern flimflam.
greenarrow said:
They weren't dismal to drive at all. I know its fashionable to bash Vauxhalls, but if you read the comparison tests of the day, the Astra was rated fairly favourably. The Focus of course ruled the roost, but the Astra really wasn't that far behind.
This is a great article BTW and so true. I was only thinking yesterday that car adverts these days are all about the fancy dash, the infotainment and the monthly lease cost. No one mentions 0-60 times, handling, etc any more. I recently bought my daughter a Ford KA, which dates back to the 1990s and its absolutely brilliant for driving round town. It just floats over all those horrible pot holes and bumps, feels like it weighs next to nothing and is just so easy for getting around town. I get back into my Insignia, with its crashy ride, turbo lag and tank like reflexes and think "is this really progress?"
I'm glad someone is confirming my thoughts, I've never owned a high performance car so may not be the best judge but certainly would hold its own against many, more modern cars, I have driven since.This is a great article BTW and so true. I was only thinking yesterday that car adverts these days are all about the fancy dash, the infotainment and the monthly lease cost. No one mentions 0-60 times, handling, etc any more. I recently bought my daughter a Ford KA, which dates back to the 1990s and its absolutely brilliant for driving round town. It just floats over all those horrible pot holes and bumps, feels like it weighs next to nothing and is just so easy for getting around town. I get back into my Insignia, with its crashy ride, turbo lag and tank like reflexes and think "is this really progress?"
we still have our 05 corolla 1.6 petrol. Only 100k km on the clock!! It may outlive us...
The biggest drawback with it and with other cars of its generation and older is that, relatively speaking, it likes a drink. This would have been easily solved by an extra gear I reckon.
On the Peugeot 306 points, I have a family member in the aircraft industry who actively seeks them out and runs them (provided they have the older XUD heater plug diesel) on the old jet fuel drained from jets taken into the hanger for work.
The biggest drawback with it and with other cars of its generation and older is that, relatively speaking, it likes a drink. This would have been easily solved by an extra gear I reckon.
On the Peugeot 306 points, I have a family member in the aircraft industry who actively seeks them out and runs them (provided they have the older XUD heater plug diesel) on the old jet fuel drained from jets taken into the hanger for work.
MC Bodge said:
greenarrow said:
GIYess said:
C70R said:
GIYess said:
My second car was a mk4 astra. Its a bit of a later car than the above but, while it wasn't fast by any stretch of the imagination. It handled like a dream and felt quick. Same principle, great suspension and engine for a bog standard car.
Mk4 Astras never handled "like a dream". Even the high performance ones were dismal to drive. Take away the nostalgia, and you've got a pretty sh*t car that you've just canonised.This is a great article BTW and so true. I was only thinking yesterday that car adverts these days are all about the fancy dash, the infotainment and the monthly lease cost. No one mentions 0-60 times, handling, etc any more. I recently bought my daughter a Ford KA, which dates back to the 1990s and its absolutely brilliant for driving round town. It just floats over all those horrible pot holes and bumps, feels like it weighs next to nothing and is just so easy for getting around town. I get back into my Insignia, with its crashy ride, turbo lag and tank like reflexes and think "is this really progress?"
Those of you who think that the Mk4 Astra was a "good handling" car need help. It's not even in the top 50% of all-time "good handling cars". Can we please stop talking such absolute tripe.
and I despair of people like you who only come onto PH to start an argument. All your posts on this thread are the same, picking holes in some thing someone has said...just for a change why not say something positive?
We're not saying the MK4 Astra was a good handling car per se, (depending on what you're benchmarking it against) but it was in line with the class standards of the day and perfectly competent. For you to say it was rubbish, is doing the car a dis-service when all the period road tests considered it perfectly competent for what was a late 1990s cooking family hatchback.
//rant over!
We're not saying the MK4 Astra was a good handling car per se, (depending on what you're benchmarking it against) but it was in line with the class standards of the day and perfectly competent. For you to say it was rubbish, is doing the car a dis-service when all the period road tests considered it perfectly competent for what was a late 1990s cooking family hatchback.
//rant over!
CornedBeef said:
Billy.RS said:
After reading PH forums daily for years, now I've seen this thread I had to sign up!
I've just gone through this exact process recently, my MK1 MX5 is off the road being stripped back to standard so I can sell up, so I needed a sensible, comfortable daily driver that's cheap to run.
'Normal' 21 year-olds would be trawling through Gumtree for a 10yr old Fiesta, Corsa etc etc to get them by, what do I do:
I buy a 30 year old Volvo 340! It was £600, all original, 4 owners, 94k miles and is *the* most comfortable car I've ever driven! 80 profile sidewalls help with that a bit, but after 3 weeks I'm yet to actually 'feel' a pothole in the road
4 doors, a huge boot, maintenance parts cost absolute pennies and so far it's returning just over 35MPG... partly due to it not having the ability to go over '69'mph due it's age, and dare I push a 30 year old brick that far anyway! 
Credit where credit is due, 'new' cars are perfect for the average consumer who wants the mod cons but they just don't tick the boxes for me. Cars are extensions of personalities and 'cars for the people' nowadays just don't feel involed and connected enough. I'd be lucky if the Volvo is pushing around 50HP (1397cc on carb with a manual choke) but it's the most fun you'll ever have with the least amount of power possible! Mates will often crack the odd joke and laugh about it, but I can afford better tyres and service my car more regularly as a result because it is so cheap, while they're in tears when they're A3/1 series/A Class goes into a dealer and costs them a weeks pay
Definitely calls for a readers cars thread! Love an old Volvo.I've just gone through this exact process recently, my MK1 MX5 is off the road being stripped back to standard so I can sell up, so I needed a sensible, comfortable daily driver that's cheap to run.
'Normal' 21 year-olds would be trawling through Gumtree for a 10yr old Fiesta, Corsa etc etc to get them by, what do I do:
I buy a 30 year old Volvo 340! It was £600, all original, 4 owners, 94k miles and is *the* most comfortable car I've ever driven! 80 profile sidewalls help with that a bit, but after 3 weeks I'm yet to actually 'feel' a pothole in the road
4 doors, a huge boot, maintenance parts cost absolute pennies and so far it's returning just over 35MPG... partly due to it not having the ability to go over '69'mph due it's age, and dare I push a 30 year old brick that far anyway! Credit where credit is due, 'new' cars are perfect for the average consumer who wants the mod cons but they just don't tick the boxes for me. Cars are extensions of personalities and 'cars for the people' nowadays just don't feel involed and connected enough. I'd be lucky if the Volvo is pushing around 50HP (1397cc on carb with a manual choke) but it's the most fun you'll ever have with the least amount of power possible! Mates will often crack the odd joke and laugh about it, but I can afford better tyres and service my car more regularly as a result because it is so cheap, while they're in tears when they're A3/1 series/A Class goes into a dealer and costs them a weeks pay
Edited by Billy.RS on Monday 30th July 11:48
krismccloy said:
Honda's from the 90's are great cars to drive IMO. The Pedal weights and positions are how you would like, The gear changes feel accurate and mechanical, The suspension movement was nice and fluid and the cars felt relatively nimble. Well engineered things, and you could tell more of the budget was spent on the underpinnings rather than the interior. Which is the exact opposite for cars in this class now-a-days, But it's what the mass of consumers want, Nice interiors with a nice infotainment system and well insulated from the strains of driving. And this suits manufacturers because they can just share platforms with McPherson struts, rear beams and drums brakes because no-body really cares about things like that as whole in this era.
'Nice and light steering, sharp brakes, nice screen on the dash, It can park itself and it looks nice, I'll have it'
As long as you remember to lubricate and adjust the throttle cable occasionally - otherwise they are intolerably 'jumpy'. Even the NSX, which has an electronic throttle, yet still has a short cable to the rheostat.'Nice and light steering, sharp brakes, nice screen on the dash, It can park itself and it looks nice, I'll have it'
But yes; never the absolute pinnacle of ride/handling, but they seemed very refined, ergonomically excellent and simply a pleasure to use because of that.
C70R said:
God, I absolutely despair.
Those of you who think that the Mk4 Astra was a "good handling" car need help. It's not even in the top 50% of all-time "good handling cars". Can we please stop talking such absolute tripe.
I'd agree that it's not going to be in the top 50 best handling cars of all time but the mk4 astra was genuinely good in the context of the day.Those of you who think that the Mk4 Astra was a "good handling" car need help. It's not even in the top 50% of all-time "good handling cars". Can we please stop talking such absolute tripe.
The focus genuinely moved things on and I remember driving them when they first came out but the astra did run it surprisingly close.
I had a 2.2 Sri mk4 astra company car back then and I really enjoyed it.
The spring / damper rates were great and it could genuinely take everything I could throw at it. I did over 100k in it in 2 years and aside from uncomfortable seats it was genuinely fun to drive at 11 /10 back when there was more freedom to do so.
I have great memories of driving to appointments in Edinburgh (from surrey) rather than take the train so I could attack the a697 from Morpeth to Edinburgh.
Interestingly I tried the turbo mk4 and it left me a bit cold. It was quicker but just didn't have the pliancy of the lower power models and was only marginally quicker with worse throttle response.
After that I had a megane (original version with the bum boot) and it was carp in comparison. Horrible steering and nothing like the feeling of being able to soak up anything you could throw at it.
It's interesting that a number of people mention the 406. I ran a v6 (saloon) for a year a couple of years back. The thing was really great. Sounded lovely, the ride was amazing, it steered sweetly and you didn't have to pick your way around the pot holes like you have to do with modern stuff on big wheels.
It also had velour seats which while I know isn't exactly fashionable now felt so comfy and held you in so much better than leather.
Where the difference really shows though compared to modern stuff is the quality of fit and finish of the interiors. Comedy gaps and no real attempt to integrate things like the door cards and dash. I guess that's down to improvements in computing allowing those things to be designed much more accurately.
If I could find a nice one a 306gti6 would be great but alas I think that's a tall order now.
C70R said:
God, I absolutely despair.
Those of you who think that the Mk4 Astra was a "good handling" car need help. It's not even in the top 50% of all-time "good handling cars". Can we please stop talking such absolute tripe.
In common with many of the other 'connoisseurs' on PH, you sound a bit silly.Those of you who think that the Mk4 Astra was a "good handling" car need help. It's not even in the top 50% of all-time "good handling cars". Can we please stop talking such absolute tripe.
T1berious said:
I'm no expert but isn't part of the reason normal cars feel like buses compared to their brethren of the 90's due to weight?
Exactly this.I've been banging on for longer than I care to remember (to anyone who'd listen) about how cars these days should be taxed by weight, not their emissions. I'm always surprised how punters will worry more about emissions - or more accurately, saving a few quid on VED - than about any other costs in running a car. "A few grand more depreciation? A couple of hundred quid more on tyres, brakes etc.? Who cares, the car tax is £50 less!!"
Everything else being equal a lighter car will have lower emissions anyway, but weight isn't something which can be got round by software tweaks. Just pull a random car off the showroom floor and weigh it, if you suspect there's been some skullduggery around the official weight.
A lighter car will also be better to be hit by in an accident and will go through fewer consumables like brakes and tyres, so should appeal to the green/leftie/snowflake lobby on that count (delete according to political bias). Also less wear and tear on the roads, so surely local government should be in favour too?
Come the revolution, this will be one of the first changes.
Of course at the end of the day, it would all just be an exercise in getting the various interest groups to unwittingly support the production of better drivers' cars. Colin Chapman was right, you know.
rm163603 said:
The focus genuinely moved things on and I remember driving them when they first came out but the astra did run it surprisingly close.
I had a 2.2 Sri mk4 astra company car back then and I really enjoyed it.
The spring / damper rates were great and it could genuinely take everything I could throw at it. I did over 100k in it in 2 years and aside from uncomfortable seats it was genuinely fun to drive at 11 /10 back when there was more freedom to do so.
I have great memories of driving to appointments in Edinburgh (from surrey) rather than take the train so I could attack the a697 from Morpeth to Edinburgh.
Interestingly I tried the turbo mk4 and it left me a bit cold. It was quicker but just didn't have the pliancy of the lower power models and was only marginally quicker with worse throttle response.
Yes, those Mk4 Astras got great reviews when they came out around 98 - the vanilla ones as well as the sportier stuff - not quite as good as the Focus or 306 - but genuinely good to drive and ran the other 2 close. Much, much better than the Vectra of that time was the tagline. One of the major mags did a big group test and put the top 3 as Focus, 306 and Astra, People tend to pigeonhole some makes though and Vauxhall is definitely one. See also the comments recently re the Nova SR article - was rated just behind the 205 and a great handling little car at the time of launch in pretty much every review - certainly not an awful handler amongst its contemporaries I had a 2.2 Sri mk4 astra company car back then and I really enjoyed it.
The spring / damper rates were great and it could genuinely take everything I could throw at it. I did over 100k in it in 2 years and aside from uncomfortable seats it was genuinely fun to drive at 11 /10 back when there was more freedom to do so.
I have great memories of driving to appointments in Edinburgh (from surrey) rather than take the train so I could attack the a697 from Morpeth to Edinburgh.
Interestingly I tried the turbo mk4 and it left me a bit cold. It was quicker but just didn't have the pliancy of the lower power models and was only marginally quicker with worse throttle response.
adricmarsh said:
RE the factory runaround. A google can probably find the detail but from memory back in the day an original mini was used as a factory runaround in I want to say Longbridge. It had a bit of an accident which put a dent in the roof, so it was hidden in the basement (old bomb shelter?). When it was discovered this side of 2000 it was repaired and auctioned off for a pretty penny
This one?http://www.urbexforums.com/showthread.php/12725-MG...
s m said:
Yes, those Mk4 Astras got great reviews when they came out around 98 - the vanilla ones as well as the sportier stuff - not quite as good as the Focus or 306 - but genuinely good to drive and ran the other 2 close. Much, much better than the Vectra of that time was the tagline. One of the major mags did a big group test and put the top 3 as Focus, 306 and Astra, People tend to pigeonhole some makes though and Vauxhall is definitely one. See also the comments recently re the Nova SR article - was rated just behind the 205 and a great handling little car at the time of launch in pretty much every review - certainly not an awful handler amongst its contemporaries
Agreed regarding the vectra comparison. That was very bargy and not much better than the cavalier.One of the other great cars I remember from the time was the pug 309. You don't see them anymore but a mate had the 309sri with the 1.6 205 gti engine. That was a really nicely handling and riding car, some even prefered it to the 205gti as the longer wheelbase made it more stable.
I think the focus was a real turning point though with the independent rear end. Everything else fwd up till then had been a beam axle.
I remember my brother and I hired one to go to a wedding up in the lakes and spent most of the weekend 'testing' it round the area. It really was a lot of fun not even just in comparison to it's contemporaries but made some supposedly much more sporting stuff seem wooden.
rm163603 said:
s m said:
Yes, those Mk4 Astras got great reviews when they came out around 98 - the vanilla ones as well as the sportier stuff - not quite as good as the Focus or 306 - but genuinely good to drive and ran the other 2 close. Much, much better than the Vectra of that time was the tagline. One of the major mags did a big group test and put the top 3 as Focus, 306 and Astra, People tend to pigeonhole some makes though and Vauxhall is definitely one. See also the comments recently re the Nova SR article - was rated just behind the 205 and a great handling little car at the time of launch in pretty much every review - certainly not an awful handler amongst its contemporaries
Agreed regarding the vectra comparison. That was very bargy and not much better than the cavalier.One of the other great cars I remember from the time was the pug 309. You don't see them anymore but a mate had the 309sri with the 1.6 205 gti engine. That was a really nicely handling and riding car, some even prefered it to the 205gti as the longer wheelbase made it more stable.
I think the focus was a real turning point though with the independent rear end. Everything else fwd up till then had been a beam axle.
I remember my brother and I hired one to go to a wedding up in the lakes and spent most of the weekend 'testing' it round the area. It really was a lot of fun not even just in comparison to it's contemporaries but made some supposedly much more sporting stuff seem wooden.
They were a great handling car - at one time Performance Car magazine had the 309 marked out in The Knowledge section in the back of the mag as Peugeot's best handling car
Similarly in Autocar and Motor mag
Also had the Mk2 Astra 16v which was a lot better than many remember - more like a 205 than the 309 in that it could be a bit tail-led if you were indecisive with the throttle into bends
I bought a 2 seat sports car in 2014, but needed something vaguely sensible for daily duties.
So I bought a 1996 Mazda 323f with just over 60K miles, but some scrapes on the bodywork (I think the previous owners may have been pensioners on the South Coast)! Being the 1,500 cc model it was in the cheap road tax bracket and had a non-interference engine - just in case the cam-belt snapped!
It drove just fine, smooth and comfortable albeit a bit roly-poly in the handling department! But it was so slow! So I replaced it with an E46 325ti after 6 months (more than twice the power was a big attraction)!
But other than that the Mazda was a great car! Central locking, electric windows in the front, A/C - that's all I really need!
So I bought a 1996 Mazda 323f with just over 60K miles, but some scrapes on the bodywork (I think the previous owners may have been pensioners on the South Coast)! Being the 1,500 cc model it was in the cheap road tax bracket and had a non-interference engine - just in case the cam-belt snapped!
It drove just fine, smooth and comfortable albeit a bit roly-poly in the handling department! But it was so slow! So I replaced it with an E46 325ti after 6 months (more than twice the power was a big attraction)!
But other than that the Mazda was a great car! Central locking, electric windows in the front, A/C - that's all I really need!
greenarrow said:
and I despair of people like you who only come onto PH to start an argument. All your posts on this thread are the same, picking holes in some thing someone has said...just for a change why not say something positive?
We're not saying the MK4 Astra was a good handling car per se, (depending on what you're benchmarking it against) but it was in line with the class standards of the day and perfectly competent. For you to say it was rubbish, is doing the car a dis-service when all the period road tests considered it perfectly competent for what was a late 1990s cooking family hatchback.
//rant over!
You're the one failing to read posts and "picking an argument". The original quote in my post above uses the phrase "handles like a dream".We're not saying the MK4 Astra was a good handling car per se, (depending on what you're benchmarking it against) but it was in line with the class standards of the day and perfectly competent. For you to say it was rubbish, is doing the car a dis-service when all the period road tests considered it perfectly competent for what was a late 1990s cooking family hatchback.
//rant over!
MC Bodge said:
C70R said:
God, I absolutely despair.
Those of you who think that the Mk4 Astra was a "good handling" car need help. It's not even in the top 50% of all-time "good handling cars". Can we please stop talking such absolute tripe.
In common with many of the other 'connoisseurs' on PH, you sound a bit silly.Those of you who think that the Mk4 Astra was a "good handling" car need help. It's not even in the top 50% of all-time "good handling cars". Can we please stop talking such absolute tripe.
Parkers said:
There are more thrills to be had with Astra than some other cars in its class.
PH is notorious for rewriting history for the sake of emphasising how terrible cars are "these days", and so much sh*te is spouted around this kind of thing that it deserves to be called out.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff