£3k to spend - petrol or diesel?

[Garett]

I currently have a Saab 9000 Turbo, which is a lovely car to drive and I don't really want to get rid of it but its thirsty managing just 28mpg currently. Its also getting on a bit and the turbo is smoky on start-up, I've already had some pretty big bills for it and I think if there was to be another one I wouldn't bother repairing it.

So I'm looking for a car that will be cheaper to run but still be something interesting or a bit special or fun. I do 16k miles a year so it also needs to be reasonable on fuel and reliable. I'm also looking for something no more than 10 years old.

Now I'm not particularly struck with diesels but they make the most sense financially as I do approx 16k miles a year, and I could live with one as they are torquey engines, a bit like my current car as it only revs to 5700rpm.

Also I seem to be getting high insurance quotes for all of these cars, I know insurance has gone up since I last renewed but is it also becasue they are more desirable to steal being more valuable than my current steed?

So here are a few of my own suggestions and their pros and cons, I should be able to get decent examples of any of these cars for my money. I haven't driven any of these cars yet, so I'm guessing a bit on pros and cons so input please if anyone has owned any these cars.

Current car
Saab 9000 2.3 Turbo with stage 1 remap 230bhp
28-34 mpg
Insurance £550
Pros - Nice car, lots of toys, fast
Cons - Thirsty, getting old, smoky turbo on start up could mean its on its way out.

Potentials

VW Golf MK4/Skoda Fabia VRS/Seat Leon 130bhp PD TDi Engine
45-55 mpg
Insurance £700 (Golf)
Pros - Nice cars, well built, torquey diesel lump, good mpg, reliable
Cons - Diesel, bit dull being VAG

Volvo S60 2.4 D5 163bhp
40-50 mpg
Insurance - £885 (!!!)
Pros - High spec, nice 5 pot engine, good mpg, relaible
Cons - Possibly a bit dull to drive, high insurance cost

Toyota Celica 1.8 VVT-i 140bhp
30-38mpg (allegedly)
Insurance - £700
Pros - Revvy engine, looks great IMO, probably quite fun to drive, not bad on fuel
Cons - Not great on fuel, not much 'grunt'

Renault Clio 172 172bhp
32-40mpg (allegedly)
Insurance - £770
Pros - Fantastic fun
Cons - Perhaps not great for high miles, its French so it will require regular attention

[Classic Grad 98]

I'd go for a petrol. Diesel cars of this age and in this price range have their problems and can be expensive to put right- wiping out any saving from the fuel cost.
Research Dual Mass Flywheels (DMF), Injector failures, turbo failures, EGR valves etc before buying a diesel.
I bought a £2k diesel banger to be used as a towcar and its doing a great job- but with all this in mind, if I didn't have to tow, I'd certainly buy a petrol car

[Garett]

Yeah that's the main thing putting me off diesels, the fact that if they go wrong they are complicated and can be expensive to repair. Also the fact that they are more expensive than their petrol equivalents, like for like, just compare a Golf MK4 GTi to a TDi, you can get a lower mileage/better looked after car if its petrol for your money.

[mike50001]

i thought this was going to be another price of fuel thread,

3k should just about fill your tank in most cars

[redgriff500]

Your answer is to buy an already converted LPG car

[VX Foxy]

Why no 9-5?

[Garett]

VX Foxy said:

Why no 9-5?

Because the diesels are st and the petrols aren't drastically different from my 9k.

[VX Foxy]

Ah, you didn't say it had to be different!

Is the 2.2 really that much worse than the vag 1.9 PD lump? ...but agreed - I'd always go for a petrol turbo saab

Would a 9-3 fit the criteria?

[Jw Vw]

Post 2001 Passat TDI? should pick up a good one for £3k

[parapaul]

[redacted]

[Garett]

[redacted]

[Garett]

VX Foxy said:

Ah, you didn't say it had to be different!

Is the 2.2 really that much worse than the vag 1.9 PD lump? ...but agreed - I'd always go for a petrol turbo saab

Would a 9-3 fit the criteria?

Sorry, I meant in terms of MPGs

I think the 2.2 is generally considered fairly turd, I did look at 9-3s briefly a 1.9 can be had on my budget, but for some reason they just don't float my boat, maybe its because of the dirty GM-ness of it all!?

[AlpineWhite]

May struggle to find a tidy Fabia vRS at that price point, I think if it were me is I'd look at earlier Passats or Leons.

[Chris_w666]

If you chose to try the VAG TDI route I would suggest the Bora and Toledo as neither are loved but both came with 130PD engines and lots of nice bits.

[5charlie46]

I'd recommend getting the clio 172, loads of fun and fairly economical.they don't suffer from the same reliability issues as other Renaults as they are built in the renaultsport factory which is a completely different set up. they are good fairly good at doing high mileage due to the build quality and being french they are comfy. But they do lack the feel of the VAG stuff but make up for it by being a superior drive.

[Beartato]

Of the choices offered I'd go for the Clio 172. As you say, they're good fun although if you consider 28MPG to be "thirsty" be prepared to be disappointed with the fuel economy. Nothing else on the list would be as good to drive, and the reliability problems seem to be exagerated somewhat by the angry minority. A couple of apprentices at my work have Renaultsport Clios and they've never had any problems. Could be that they have been lucky, but I had a go in them and they are cracking little motors to drive.

PS The other options are too underpowered (other than the SAAB[old and worrysome] and the Volvo[heavy and boring]). Of the options the Clio is the only one where driving enjoyment is even a consideration.

[anonymous-user]

Beartato said:

Of the choices offered I'd go for the Clio 172. As you say, they're good fun although if you consider 28MPG to be "thirsty" be prepared to be disappointed with the fuel economy.

@OP as a lot of us have said in your other thread these cars will easily get over 28mpg on a daily run, well into the 30s.

If a 172 is getting less than 28mpg in normal use there is something wrong with it.

[Garett]

MSTRBKR said:

Beartato said:

Of the choices offered I'd go for the Clio 172. As you say, they're good fun although if you consider 28MPG to be "thirsty" be prepared to be disappointed with the fuel economy.

@OP as a lot of us have said in your other thread these cars will easily get over 28mpg on a daily run, well into the 30s.

If a 172 is getting less than 28mpg in normal use there is something wrong with it.

I think Beartato means that a Clio 172 will not be dramatically better on fuel than my Saab that I'm currently getting 28mpg out of. That how I interpreted it anyway.

[Garett]

I appreciate all the input on both threads but I'm still agonising over what's best for me to do. I'm sure most have us have been there!

At this point in time I swaying towards a VAG TDi, even if only as a short term solution and if I get bored I can always swap and probably not lose that much money... but I am very tired now and when I've slept on it I'll probably have changed my mind again!

One last thing before I disappear to Nodsville, how much are remaps on the PD VAG engines and what kind of increases can you see?

[Beartato]

Garett said:

MSTRBKR said:

Beartato said:

Of the choices offered I'd go for the Clio 172. As you say, they're good fun although if you consider 28MPG to be "thirsty" be prepared to be disappointed with the fuel economy.

@OP as a lot of us have said in your other thread these cars will easily get over 28mpg on a daily run, well into the 30s.

If a 172 is getting less than 28mpg in normal use there is something wrong with it.

I think Beartato means that a Clio 172 will not be dramatically better on fuel than my Saab that I'm currently getting 28mpg out of. That how I interpreted it anyway.

Hate to quote myself but you've got it spot on Garett. You have to be prepared to weigh up fuel costs versus how much you enjoy driving the car. If it's really good then a few pence per mile is worth it. The Clio is the only car which wins this weighing up for me. Add to this the fact that unless you drive the Clio consistently mercilessly it will return a greater MPG than your SAAB and the choice is clear.