£8k for family car
18 January 2013, 11:39 AM
#31
im hardly going to buy a 3.2l m3 am i... i may aswell get another impreza... i want a practical, economical yet good looking car... ive got a family to ferry around now so my fun 'so to speak' has took a back seat for a while
nice looking
spacious
5 door
big boot
good mpg
lowish tax rate
nice looking
spacious
5 door
big boot
good mpg
lowish tax rate
18 January 2013, 12:38 PM
#33
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,629
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, Mondeo ST TDCI is quite a good shout. I had the petrol ST220 but it certainly doesn't qualify as having "good mpg". Otherwise it is a nice looking car, big, comfortable, well equipped, etc.
18 January 2013, 04:58 PM
#35
One thing that gets me with threads like these is people say £8k or £10k and needs to return decent mpg blah, blah, blah.
When perfectly good cars can be had for half that money, i don't see the point in loosing £4/5k in depreciation over 3/4yrs, and most will be out of warranty anyway.
£8k is a lot to splash on a car because it does 10/15mpg more than something like my car which is a WRX Wagon PPP that cost £4k 18 months ago and is the best of both worlds, plenty of room for kids, dog, bike or going to pick up a dish washer from curry's, and all the power you need in the real world, with awd for the bad weather.
That extra £4k buys a lot of fuel, and in 3/4yrs the car will only lose a couple of grand, and running costs are much of a muchness as i do my own servicing.
Sorry guys but the numbers don't add up for me or am i missing something.
When perfectly good cars can be had for half that money, i don't see the point in loosing £4/5k in depreciation over 3/4yrs, and most will be out of warranty anyway.
£8k is a lot to splash on a car because it does 10/15mpg more than something like my car which is a WRX Wagon PPP that cost £4k 18 months ago and is the best of both worlds, plenty of room for kids, dog, bike or going to pick up a dish washer from curry's, and all the power you need in the real world, with awd for the bad weather.
That extra £4k buys a lot of fuel, and in 3/4yrs the car will only lose a couple of grand, and running costs are much of a muchness as i do my own servicing.
Sorry guys but the numbers don't add up for me or am i missing something.
18 January 2013, 05:51 PM
#36
Surely that depends on the mileage per year?
My wife, for example, does 12000 minimum to work and back.
In the Xantia we had, that equates to between £1500 and £1800 pa.
In the Scoob, it would be between £3000 and £3500.
So £1500 in one year alone. And that's on average mileage. Anyone with more of a commute than 250 miles per week is looking at more difference
Even looking at going to France and back, we would have about £250 more to spend on the house if we DON'T take the Scoob.
My wife, for example, does 12000 minimum to work and back.
In the Xantia we had, that equates to between £1500 and £1800 pa.
In the Scoob, it would be between £3000 and £3500.
So £1500 in one year alone. And that's on average mileage. Anyone with more of a commute than 250 miles per week is looking at more difference
Even looking at going to France and back, we would have about £250 more to spend on the house if we DON'T take the Scoob.
Last edited by alcazar; 18 January 2013 at 05:52 PM.
18 January 2013, 07:27 PM
#37
I hear you, but by my VERY rough calculations that 12,000 miles in my WRX would cost around £1200 more in fuel, then there is the £4k more purchase price and the circa £2k more in depreciation which is roughly £6k over 3yrs but the fuel bill would be circa £3600 more in that time, all things being equal as in no major faults, so even if we are less than generous with the fuel consumption, the scoob still works out a couple of grand cheaper over 3yrs.
Now these calculations were based on 28mpg in my wagon and 45mpg on your average diesel with a bit of umph, i'm not being overly scientific about it, and diesel costs more and diesel cars tend to have lots of problems these days, i just struggle with the concept that they are better than a petrol equivalent especially if you do average miles.
I think the trap people fall into is that they are cheaper on a day to day basis as you watch what your spending weekly or monthly but folks tend not to look at the overall cost.
Please feel free to do the math exactly and show me otherwise as it's something i'm interested in knowing.
Now these calculations were based on 28mpg in my wagon and 45mpg on your average diesel with a bit of umph, i'm not being overly scientific about it, and diesel costs more and diesel cars tend to have lots of problems these days, i just struggle with the concept that they are better than a petrol equivalent especially if you do average miles.
I think the trap people fall into is that they are cheaper on a day to day basis as you watch what your spending weekly or monthly but folks tend not to look at the overall cost.
Please feel free to do the math exactly and show me otherwise as it's something i'm interested in knowing.
18 January 2013, 08:48 PM
#38
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,629
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ditchmyster, I look at the problem from a slightly different angle.
Let's assume you have £4,000 saved up and are torn between something sporty but expensive to run and something quick, more sensible and cheap to run. Our options are:
1. A 70k miles 2004 sporty car for £4,000 that returns 28mpg
2. A 30k miles 2009 quick diesel for £9,000 that returns 45mpg
I think 12k miles, while average, is a little on the low side for anyone considering a diesel. If we assume 1400 a month that's 16,800 a year and a bit more representative of anyone truly facing this sort of dilemma. We'll assume that fuelling each is 1.38l as that is the average price for both diesel and SUL.
Looking at fuel alone the 2004 car costs £313 versus £194 a month for the diesel. That is a difference of £119.
My angle is: that difference pays for a loan. Specifically, £5,000 over 4 years at 7.0% is £120 a month. In short, for the same monthly outlay you can have a much newer, much younger, much fresher car.
But there's more, let's assume we sell each car in 4 years time and consider our options afresh at that time.
In that case, our sporty car has 137,000 miles on the clock and I'd guestimate a value of £1500, meaning we have lost £2500 of our initial £4k pot.
On the other hand, our diesel has 102,000 miles (not terrible for an oil burner) and I guestimate a worth of £3,000. The loan is paid off (our credit rating looks good) and we have only lost £1000 of our initial pot.
So, you can have younger, fresher car to drive for 4-years and have more of your investment left at the end of it. Furthermore, this takes zero account of the difference in servicing, road tax and insurance which I'm sure we'll both agree will be £thousands apart over the course of 4 years/67,000 miles.
I sort of see your point/thinking but unless you do really low mileage (i.e. well less than the 12k/yr average) I don't think it really stacks up. If you want the fun/performance you speak of then you really do have to pay the extra for it one way or another.
Let's assume you have £4,000 saved up and are torn between something sporty but expensive to run and something quick, more sensible and cheap to run. Our options are:
1. A 70k miles 2004 sporty car for £4,000 that returns 28mpg
2. A 30k miles 2009 quick diesel for £9,000 that returns 45mpg
I think 12k miles, while average, is a little on the low side for anyone considering a diesel. If we assume 1400 a month that's 16,800 a year and a bit more representative of anyone truly facing this sort of dilemma. We'll assume that fuelling each is 1.38l as that is the average price for both diesel and SUL.
Looking at fuel alone the 2004 car costs £313 versus £194 a month for the diesel. That is a difference of £119.
My angle is: that difference pays for a loan. Specifically, £5,000 over 4 years at 7.0% is £120 a month. In short, for the same monthly outlay you can have a much newer, much younger, much fresher car.
But there's more, let's assume we sell each car in 4 years time and consider our options afresh at that time.
In that case, our sporty car has 137,000 miles on the clock and I'd guestimate a value of £1500, meaning we have lost £2500 of our initial £4k pot.
On the other hand, our diesel has 102,000 miles (not terrible for an oil burner) and I guestimate a worth of £3,000. The loan is paid off (our credit rating looks good) and we have only lost £1000 of our initial pot.
So, you can have younger, fresher car to drive for 4-years and have more of your investment left at the end of it. Furthermore, this takes zero account of the difference in servicing, road tax and insurance which I'm sure we'll both agree will be £thousands apart over the course of 4 years/67,000 miles.
I sort of see your point/thinking but unless you do really low mileage (i.e. well less than the 12k/yr average) I don't think it really stacks up. If you want the fun/performance you speak of then you really do have to pay the extra for it one way or another.
18 January 2013, 09:09 PM
#39
Scooby Regular
why do diesels have so many problems
not in my experience
my two diesels have 380,000 miles between them, both drive like new
spend virtualy nothing on them (i do change the oil and filter every 5k on both)
with diesels you don't have to worry about spark plugs, ignition coils/systems, plug leads
you don't have to worry about damp or moisture getting everywhere
not in my experience
my two diesels have 380,000 miles between them, both drive like new
spend virtualy nothing on them (i do change the oil and filter every 5k on both)
with diesels you don't have to worry about spark plugs, ignition coils/systems, plug leads
you don't have to worry about damp or moisture getting everywhere
18 January 2013, 09:17 PM
#40
Ditchmyster, I look at the problem from a slightly different angle.
Let's assume you have £4,000 saved up and are torn between something sporty but expensive to run and something quick, more sensible and cheap to run. Our options are:
1. A 70k miles 2004 sporty car for £4,000 that returns 28mpg
2. A 30k miles 2009 quick diesel for £9,000 that returns 45mpg
I think 12k miles, while average, is a little on the low side for anyone considering a diesel. If we assume 1400 a month that's 16,800 a year and a bit more representative of anyone truly facing this sort of dilemma. We'll assume that fuelling each is 1.38l as that is the average price for both diesel and SUL.
Looking at fuel alone the 2004 car costs £313 versus £194 a month for the diesel. That is a difference of £119.
My angle is: that difference pays for a loan. Specifically, £5,000 over 4 years at 7.0% is £120 a month. In short, for the same monthly outlay you can have a much newer, much younger, much fresher car.
But there's more, let's assume we sell each car in 4 years time and consider our options afresh at that time.
In that case, our sporty car has 137,000 miles on the clock and I'd guestimate a value of £1500, meaning we have lost £2500 of our initial £4k pot.
On the other hand, our diesel has 102,000 miles (not terrible for an oil burner) and I guestimate a worth of £3,000. The loan is paid off (our credit rating looks good) and we have only lost £1000 of our initial pot.
So, you can have younger, fresher car to drive for 4-years and have more of your investment left at the end of it. Furthermore, this takes zero account of the difference in servicing, road tax and insurance which I'm sure we'll both agree will be £thousands apart over the course of 4 years/67,000 miles.
I sort of see your point/thinking but unless you do really low mileage (i.e. well less than the 12k/yr average) I don't think it really stacks up. If you want the fun/performance you speak of then you really do have to pay the extra for it one way or another.
Let's assume you have £4,000 saved up and are torn between something sporty but expensive to run and something quick, more sensible and cheap to run. Our options are:
1. A 70k miles 2004 sporty car for £4,000 that returns 28mpg
2. A 30k miles 2009 quick diesel for £9,000 that returns 45mpg
I think 12k miles, while average, is a little on the low side for anyone considering a diesel. If we assume 1400 a month that's 16,800 a year and a bit more representative of anyone truly facing this sort of dilemma. We'll assume that fuelling each is 1.38l as that is the average price for both diesel and SUL.
Looking at fuel alone the 2004 car costs £313 versus £194 a month for the diesel. That is a difference of £119.
My angle is: that difference pays for a loan. Specifically, £5,000 over 4 years at 7.0% is £120 a month. In short, for the same monthly outlay you can have a much newer, much younger, much fresher car.
But there's more, let's assume we sell each car in 4 years time and consider our options afresh at that time.
In that case, our sporty car has 137,000 miles on the clock and I'd guestimate a value of £1500, meaning we have lost £2500 of our initial £4k pot.
On the other hand, our diesel has 102,000 miles (not terrible for an oil burner) and I guestimate a worth of £3,000. The loan is paid off (our credit rating looks good) and we have only lost £1000 of our initial pot.
So, you can have younger, fresher car to drive for 4-years and have more of your investment left at the end of it. Furthermore, this takes zero account of the difference in servicing, road tax and insurance which I'm sure we'll both agree will be £thousands apart over the course of 4 years/67,000 miles.
I sort of see your point/thinking but unless you do really low mileage (i.e. well less than the 12k/yr average) I don't think it really stacks up. If you want the fun/performance you speak of then you really do have to pay the extra for it one way or another.
your mental, and obviously like being in debt, i'd be very interested in how this flies in the real world. but what do i care, it's your money.
edit to add, your also tied to dealer servicing to make it worth what you say in the end, as the mugs that will buy it will want full main dealer service history.
Last edited by ditchmyster; 18 January 2013 at 09:34 PM.
18 January 2013, 09:25 PM
#41
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have done the sums on my WRX Wagon and at 67k you can't get a diesel that comes close and isn't over the 100k mark.
As Ditchmyster says the bigger picture at 28mpg is viable when you look at a £4k car.
As Ditchmyster says the bigger picture at 28mpg is viable when you look at a £4k car.
18 January 2013, 09:27 PM
#42
why do diesels have so many problems
not in my experience
my two diesels have 380,000 miles between them, both drive like new
spend virtualy nothing on them (i do change the oil and filter every 5k on both)
with diesels you don't have to worry about spark plugs, ignition coils/systems, plug leads
you don't have to worry about damp or moisture getting everywhere
not in my experience
my two diesels have 380,000 miles between them, both drive like new
spend virtualy nothing on them (i do change the oil and filter every 5k on both)
with diesels you don't have to worry about spark plugs, ignition coils/systems, plug leads
you don't have to worry about damp or moisture getting everywhere
18 January 2013, 10:08 PM
#43
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,629
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
your mental, and obviously like being in debt, i'd be very interested in how this flies in the real world. but what do i care, it's your money.
edit to add, your also tied to dealer servicing to make it worth what you say in the end, as the mugs that will buy it will want full main dealer service history.
I've been there and done that with performance at 12k+ mileage and it really grates; the money you **** away to be stuck in traffic and trudging around on daily chores in unreal (I was doing 24k/yr when I had my first scoob). These days I'd much rather have something sensible with poke and then a second fun car for <4k miles at the weekends/evenings.
In my current situation I have a £1000 1996 Volvo T5 with 125k miles that does 25mpg over my 1500 miles per month. It is paid for outright and if I let this situation prevail I will continue to pay the £355 it costs to fuel it per month. It does 0-100mph in 19s and is plenty quick enough.
Or,
I can sell it for £1k and take out a £9k loan over 5 years which will cost me £170/month. With that I buy a Seat Leon CR FR TDI which I expect to average 47mpg in. It costs me £199 per month to fuel - some £156 cheaper than the Volvo. The Leon will be a 2009/10 with <40k miles in mint condition and will do 0-100mph in 22s stock and <19 with a £399 remap.
So, my options are keep the Volvo and pay £330 a month to the Government fuelling it or find £3.50 a week for a better equipped, better looking, better handing, as fast or faster, modern car that is 16 years younger and accept some debt that will have zero impact on my life. Also, don't forget that when the fuel savings have paid the loan off in 5-years the Seat will still have a value greater than the Volvo would have.
TBH, I'm mad not to do this and I've got a test drive booked tomorrow.
18 January 2013, 10:10 PM
#44
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,629
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You just need to do your research and avoid potential pitfalls. I could get a PD Leon far, far cheaper than the common-rail version but the PD's have got a reputation for having a number of issues that don't affect the PD.
19 January 2013, 12:01 AM
#45
ok...unfortunatly none of the above is helping me lol..
ive got upto £8k for a car... im looking for something low millage, around 2/3 yrs old with a good mpg and low tax,as i have said already.
i DONT want another impreza which will give me around 28mpg on a run ive had them and would have kept the one ive just sold if i did... right now i want cheaper insurance (if poss) i dont want to be paying around £240 road tax per year like the scoob, the missus will be using the new car aswell as me for everyday use.. school runs, shopping, and whatever else she wants to do which in a sccob would just drink fuel.. this year im going a few places as a family (cornwall, wales ect..) which a 7hr drive to cornwall would be an expensive one in a high performance car once it was filled up with 4 people plus a weeks worth of stuff.
so,while all the maths above is interesteing to read, none of it is a recomendation of which cars out there fit the bill.
so ..to clarify..
cheap road tax
good mpg
spacious with a big boot space
good looking
2/3 yrs old maybe
no imprezas thanks
ive got upto £8k for a car... im looking for something low millage, around 2/3 yrs old with a good mpg and low tax,as i have said already.
i DONT want another impreza which will give me around 28mpg on a run ive had them and would have kept the one ive just sold if i did... right now i want cheaper insurance (if poss) i dont want to be paying around £240 road tax per year like the scoob, the missus will be using the new car aswell as me for everyday use.. school runs, shopping, and whatever else she wants to do which in a sccob would just drink fuel.. this year im going a few places as a family (cornwall, wales ect..) which a 7hr drive to cornwall would be an expensive one in a high performance car once it was filled up with 4 people plus a weeks worth of stuff.
so,while all the maths above is interesteing to read, none of it is a recomendation of which cars out there fit the bill.
so ..to clarify..
cheap road tax
good mpg
spacious with a big boot space
good looking
2/3 yrs old maybe
no imprezas thanks
Last edited by powerwrx; 19 January 2013 at 12:03 AM.
19 January 2013, 07:52 AM
#46
Powerwrx.
I had a Volvo V50 sport 2.0L D, while it didn't set the world on fire, it did fit the bill, looked nice in gunmetal gray, full leather and all the toys, like i said it was a sport so had side skirts and roof spoiler and other bit's i cant remember,also had the winter pack so heated seats and blah blah.
Handled well enough went ok, i believe they can be remapped but mine was new and company lease so didn't do that, would do 50 odd mpg if you take it easy, which i never did, but it was also a very nice place to be, classy and a bit sporty.
Mine was the first sport in the country so was a few years ago now, and i think i saw one with the d5 engine not 100%, but if you want something that does go maybe look at it's big brother the V70 with the d5 engine, i had one on loan and for a big car they shift, even without a remap so with one they must be a serious tool and fuel economy is good too.
I'm a fan of bangernomics and stick my Mrs and boy in a sub £1k car to do the shopping/ tip runs and general day to day stuff, and you don't have to worry about it being parked anywhere, but we need 2 cars and she treats them badly as does the 5yr old feet on dash drinks and food on floor, car park dings , dirty dog in back etc.
Current one is a rover 25. less than £40 to fill and gets around 350 miles to a tank, we have done 49,000 miles in it trouble free, and it cost £800, if it breaks i can happily leave the keys in it and walk away.
19 January 2013, 12:08 PM
#47
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,629
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As much as I love the Volvo and it has shepherded us through a storm; driving a ~£1000 banger really does wear thin. You start to look at 20010+ 1.something focuses with envy!
OP will have his pick of many lovely motors with £8k to spend and I see no reason to encourage him to get something older that is less up to date and probably poorly equipped by modern standards.
OP will have his pick of many lovely motors with £8k to spend and I see no reason to encourage him to get something older that is less up to date and probably poorly equipped by modern standards.
19 January 2013, 01:22 PM
#49
I LOL at the mpg estimates: who gets 28mpg in a Scoob? I mean...come on.
If we are saying 45mpg in a modern diesel, I'd say 25mpg was closer for a Scoob.
And that's an increase of nearly 11% on your fuel bill straight away.
Don't get me wrong here, I love my Scoob and it's running 400/400 so NOT frugal when I "play" with it.
But I am SERIOUSLY looking at funding a little Ibiza or something, an FR or Cupra diesel, so I can take the Scoob off the road and garage it during winter. I would then declare the Ibiza SORN during spring/summer.
My Scoob IS 15 years old this September, after all......
And it WOULD be nice to be able to afford to go somewhere for the day, without having to wonder if I can fund the fuel.........
If we are saying 45mpg in a modern diesel, I'd say 25mpg was closer for a Scoob.
And that's an increase of nearly 11% on your fuel bill straight away.
Don't get me wrong here, I love my Scoob and it's running 400/400 so NOT frugal when I "play" with it.
But I am SERIOUSLY looking at funding a little Ibiza or something, an FR or Cupra diesel, so I can take the Scoob off the road and garage it during winter. I would then declare the Ibiza SORN during spring/summer.
My Scoob IS 15 years old this September, after all......
And it WOULD be nice to be able to afford to go somewhere for the day, without having to wonder if I can fund the fuel.........
19 January 2013, 02:07 PM
#50
I LOL at the mpg estimates: who gets 28mpg in a Scoob? I mean...come on.
If we are saying 45mpg in a modern diesel, I'd say 25mpg was closer for a Scoob.
And that's an increase of nearly 11% on your fuel bill straight away.
Don't get me wrong here, I love my Scoob and it's running 400/400 so NOT frugal when I "play" with it.
But I am SERIOUSLY looking at funding a little Ibiza or something, an FR or Cupra diesel, so I can take the Scoob off the road and garage it during winter. I would then declare the Ibiza SORN during spring/summer.
My Scoob IS 15 years old this September, after all......
And it WOULD be nice to be able to afford to go somewhere for the day, without having to wonder if I can fund the fuel.........
If we are saying 45mpg in a modern diesel, I'd say 25mpg was closer for a Scoob.
And that's an increase of nearly 11% on your fuel bill straight away.
Don't get me wrong here, I love my Scoob and it's running 400/400 so NOT frugal when I "play" with it.
But I am SERIOUSLY looking at funding a little Ibiza or something, an FR or Cupra diesel, so I can take the Scoob off the road and garage it during winter. I would then declare the Ibiza SORN during spring/summer.
My Scoob IS 15 years old this September, after all......
And it WOULD be nice to be able to afford to go somewhere for the day, without having to wonder if I can fund the fuel.........
As for funding the fuel the £4k you save in the purchase price and lower depreciation does that nicely.
But it just depends how you want to look at it, day to day, week by week, personally i take the long view because ultimately it's the overall True cost of ownership that i'm concerned with, and i get to drive a car that makes me feel good.
Then i use the mrs £800 banger for the hum drum day to day and that does 40 odd mpg and i don't care what happens to it.
I suspect never the twain shall meet, i don't like new cars, i have had more than i can remember over 25yrs of company cars and all were soulless boxes on wheels.
Subarus have a certain je na se qua that i don't mind paying for, or not depending on your point of view.
19 January 2013, 02:42 PM
#51
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,629
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree, I humoured him with the 28mpg when I did my calculations but I never got anywhere near that in my Impreza's and I was doing 24k with lots of motorway mileage. I was 25mpg at best and often low/sub 20s.
19 January 2013, 02:57 PM
#52
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,629
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ditchy, as a car enthusiast I get your point to a degree. I do laugh at people that buy souless 1.something or 120bhp diesel boxes for £10k+ or worse still £17k+ for something new. I always wonder why they don't spend £5-6k on a nippy diesel daily driver and £10k on something fun. However, I think you are stretching the numbers an awful lot. There's really no getting away from it, you have to pay if you want a the performance we are speaking about.
OP, just back from driving the Seat Leon FR TDI. It was a short drive but enjoyable all the same and high up on my own list. I haven't driven direct competitor vehicles so I can't offer comparisons but these are my thoughts:
* The interior was nice enough and ok quality (not quite Golf standard).
* The seats were lovely and supportive and you sit quite low in a sporty stance
* The steering wheel was really nice to hold, felt quite small and sporty and had reasonable weighting.
* The main controls were light and easy but the brakes were the usual VAG over-assisted (I guess you get used to it).
* The gearbox was a real surprise, quite a short throw for that sort of car and smooth + precise
* Even with my long leg driving position there was plenty of room for a 6 foot passenger behind me. However, the boot was a little on the nippy side. That said, hatchback practicality and folding rear seats (60/40) give you plenty of flexibility.
* There is a useful lug of power in the mid-range making the car feel plenty quick (even stock). The only disadvantage is that in the wet it wanted to spin the wheels readily in 2nd gear.
Overall it felt solid, easy to drive, modern and quite sporty. A world apart from the Volvo but probably quite a lot 'fresher' than even the ST220. It is defo worth a look; I think I'll try the Octavia vRS next, possibly with the 2.0 TFSI engine to give me a powerplant comparison.
OP, just back from driving the Seat Leon FR TDI. It was a short drive but enjoyable all the same and high up on my own list. I haven't driven direct competitor vehicles so I can't offer comparisons but these are my thoughts:
* The interior was nice enough and ok quality (not quite Golf standard).
* The seats were lovely and supportive and you sit quite low in a sporty stance
* The steering wheel was really nice to hold, felt quite small and sporty and had reasonable weighting.
* The main controls were light and easy but the brakes were the usual VAG over-assisted (I guess you get used to it).
* The gearbox was a real surprise, quite a short throw for that sort of car and smooth + precise
* Even with my long leg driving position there was plenty of room for a 6 foot passenger behind me. However, the boot was a little on the nippy side. That said, hatchback practicality and folding rear seats (60/40) give you plenty of flexibility.
* There is a useful lug of power in the mid-range making the car feel plenty quick (even stock). The only disadvantage is that in the wet it wanted to spin the wheels readily in 2nd gear.
Overall it felt solid, easy to drive, modern and quite sporty. A world apart from the Volvo but probably quite a lot 'fresher' than even the ST220. It is defo worth a look; I think I'll try the Octavia vRS next, possibly with the 2.0 TFSI engine to give me a powerplant comparison.
19 January 2013, 05:10 PM
#54
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have always got 28mpg in all in driving 29 sometimes, cheaper than running two cars, insurance, MOT's etc. Been there with a series of Skylines and a Peugot 406 as a hack, this is the best fit I have had in a long while. Seen a 12 plate Golf GTD failing to get up our hill in the snow I know why I drive an Impreza
19 January 2013, 06:27 PM
#55
I have always got 28mpg in all in driving 29 sometimes, cheaper than running two cars, insurance, MOT's etc. Been there with a series of Skylines and a Peugot 406 as a hack, this is the best fit I have had in a long while. Seen a 12 plate Golf GTD failing to get up our hill in the snow I know why I drive an Impreza
I must be blind because i still can't see how it's better to spend £8k+ on a car and take a £4/5k depreciation hit over 36,000 miles to be in something as crappy as a seat or a vauxhall, if the lease company ever gave me a vauxhall i'd jump in it as soon as i'd signed for it and go straight to east midlands airport to change it for anything that wasn't a vauxhall.
Oh and i was in an Octavia VRS about a week ago, don't see the attraction, it was shoite, i'd hate my life if i had to walk out my front door every day knowing i had a £10k loan to drive one, and i'd feel the same about a seat too
19 January 2013, 08:08 PM
#56
Op, out of the many cars i have driven over the years one that does stick in my mind is a Mazda 6, although i'm not sure about the diesel's the petrol was a nice enough car, bit plastic fantastic but what car isn't, plus point being it did handle quite well when compared to it's rivals.
They are quite cheap to buy as they seem to not be as popular as other jap marques, again just a bit of food for thought, and they look slightly more interesting than the standard euro box too.
Oh while i'm at it another thought popped into my head
these £8k motors coming from dealers are they think you need to add the dealer mark up onto your spread sheet 
so anywhere between £1/2k.
Oh now i see it makes perfect sense.
They are quite cheap to buy as they seem to not be as popular as other jap marques, again just a bit of food for thought, and they look slightly more interesting than the standard euro box too.
Oh while i'm at it another thought popped into my head
these £8k motors coming from dealers are they think you need to add the dealer mark up onto your spread sheet so anywhere between £1/2k.Oh now i see it makes perfect sense.
19 January 2013, 09:10 PM
#57
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said Ditchmyster I hate paying dealers a penny, robbing b**gers.
If I was mad enough to part ex my wagon I would lose a grand on the part ex need 4k to make the £8k. So if my beloved car was worth £3k the cash I need is too much to bear and no way will I get sub 65k miles on an £8k diesel unless its got issues.
Look at honest johns site the scooby only has a rust subframe issues and an unliked look the other cars discussed have issues running into pages.
If I was mad enough to part ex my wagon I would lose a grand on the part ex need 4k to make the £8k. So if my beloved car was worth £3k the cash I need is too much to bear and no way will I get sub 65k miles on an £8k diesel unless its got issues.
Look at honest johns site the scooby only has a rust subframe issues and an unliked look the other cars discussed have issues running into pages.
20 January 2013, 11:41 AM
#58
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,629
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh and i was in an Octavia VRS about a week ago, don't see the attraction, it was shoite, i'd hate my life if i had to walk out my front door every day knowing i had a £10k loan to drive one, and i'd feel the same about a seat too
You keep making the point about depreciation but you curiously neglect to mention that you suffer the exact same (or greater) losses at the fuel pump. Most of the money you put into your scooby goes to the Government and most of that goes to the benefits system. With your fuel money the chavs buy ciggies, booze and £2k classic Impreza's which they rally at 120mph down high streets serving to further ruin the image of the car you drive.
20 January 2013, 12:03 PM
#59
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Bedford
Posts: 1,944
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi. Didn't read previous posts so don't know if this car been recommended yet.
I'm a father of two and previously owned VW PASSAT. At some stage car becomes to be not big enough so decided to buy a proper family car. Budget was exactly same as yours and were considering between VW Touran, Sharan and Ford S-Max.
Touran too small with not very good reviews, Sharan was OK but 8k was not enough for newer shape as we wanted so got S-Max in the end and have to say that.... we LOVE it !!!
7 seater 1.8 TDCI Zetec 6 speed 07 plate with very low mileage of 43k cost us £7.900
Having this car couple of months now and CAN'T really say bad word about it. Loads of room and really very good handling as for such a bulky car.
Highly recommended to everyone looking for a reliable, family car.
I'm a father of two and previously owned VW PASSAT. At some stage car becomes to be not big enough so decided to buy a proper family car. Budget was exactly same as yours and were considering between VW Touran, Sharan and Ford S-Max.
Touran too small with not very good reviews, Sharan was OK but 8k was not enough for newer shape as we wanted so got S-Max in the end and have to say that.... we LOVE it !!!
7 seater 1.8 TDCI Zetec 6 speed 07 plate with very low mileage of 43k cost us £7.900
Having this car couple of months now and CAN'T really say bad word about it. Loads of room and really very good handling as for such a bulky car.
Highly recommended to everyone looking for a reliable, family car.
20 January 2013, 12:12 PM
#60
Horses for courses, but I'd have the Seat Leon over my classic MY99 or STI-5 any day of the week. Not as fast or as exciting but a better car in pretty much every other way (chiefly because it's got 10+ years of development and improvement on the scoob). These days I need more than just raw performance; we spend so much time running errands and pootling around that things like spaces, comforts and a modern interior start to really matter. To be honest, I don't know why anyone would choose to run around in, for example, a chavved up classic Impreza when they could have something like a remapped Leon or a 330d for approximately the same monthly outlay and still enjoy reasonable poke for sliproads, overtakes, etc.
You keep making the point about depreciation but you curiously neglect to mention that you suffer the exact same (or greater) losses at the fuel pump. Most of the money you put into your scooby goes to the Government and most of that goes to the benefits system. With your fuel money the chavs buy ciggies, booze and £2k classic Impreza's which they rally at 120mph down high streets serving to further ruin the image of the car you drive.
You keep making the point about depreciation but you curiously neglect to mention that you suffer the exact same (or greater) losses at the fuel pump. Most of the money you put into your scooby goes to the Government and most of that goes to the benefits system. With your fuel money the chavs buy ciggies, booze and £2k classic Impreza's which they rally at 120mph down high streets serving to further ruin the image of the car you drive.
As for your point about giving money to the government, it hardly gives you the moral high ground when your planning on feeding the bankers.
As you say, it's horses for courses, i have spent more miles than i care to remember (somewhere around your monthly milage per week for over 20yrs) in all manner of modern vehicles, so please forgive my lack of enthusiasm to get in to debt to drive one again.