£3k to spend - petrol or diesel?

£3k to spend - petrol or diesel?

Author
Discussion

Garett

Original Poster:

1,626 posts

193 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
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


Garett

Original Poster:

1,626 posts

193 months

Tuesday 4th January 2011
quotequote all
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.

Garett

Original Poster:

1,626 posts

193 months

Tuesday 4th January 2011
quotequote all
VX Foxy said:
Why no 9-5?
Because the diesels are st and the petrols aren't drastically different from my 9k. wink

Garett

Original Poster:

1,626 posts

193 months

Wednesday 5th January 2011
quotequote all
[redacted]

Garett

Original Poster:

1,626 posts

193 months

Wednesday 5th January 2011
quotequote all
VX Foxy said:
Ah, you didn't say it had to be different! tongue out

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 smile

Would a 9-3 fit the criteria?
Sorry, I meant in terms of MPGs wink

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!?

Garett

Original Poster:

1,626 posts

193 months

Wednesday 5th January 2011
quotequote all
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

Original Poster:

1,626 posts

193 months

Wednesday 5th January 2011
quotequote all
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?