Hi
I am looking to buy either of these cars and would appretiate your advice or indeed suggestions to alternatives in the same bracket, both from the broker autobytel
Ford Ka 1.3i £4991
Clio campus 1.2 £5995
thanks
Jim
|
|
Spend the money on a decent second hand car. These are both past their sell-by date.
|
|
did think about getting nother second hand car but all of the cars i have had before have been second hand, usually spent anywhere between 3 and 5k, and after a few years have needed lots of work doing to them so was hoping that by buying new any major work would be covered by the guarantee
|
|
|
|
|
see if you can get a brand new Mitsubishi colt 1.1 Red for £5995 still - do a forum search - good luck.
|
|
|
Between the two you suggest, I'd much rather have the Clio. Yeah, might be a bit long in tooth, but still a very nice car and well up to the job. My sister has the 1.2 16v, and she's never had any serious problems with it, well put together, comfortable, economical and nice to drive.
All the Ka's I?ve been in never seem to be as well built, with poor quality plastics and fitting. Not exactly well rust proofed neither. And it?s smaller then Clio I think. The only thing in its favor is that Ford finally did something with its fossil of an engine.
|
nobody"s mentioned a 205 yet, is that a record?:(
|
has the Ka changed engines then, is the new entry 1.3i a better engine than it had before ?
sorry silly questions i know
thanks
|
If I had to choose then I would go for the Clio. However, you don't say what use you are going to put these cars to. If you are pottering around town, with the odd longer journey, then they will do. On a longer run they will be pretty dire.
If you want the security of a warranty, then you can buy an after market one. By buying a decent second hand car, the saving in depreciation alone will pay for quite a few repairs. A quick search through autotrader will show some quite nice cars for your budget.
These cars are past it, they feel old and although the Clio still looks fresh, it's way behind the New Clio in terms of drivability and quality.
Some people reckon the Picanto is a good buy, I don't know whether it falls within your budget.
|
I've had the Clio a few times as a hire car, and spent my own hard earned cash on a new Ka a few years ago, and am still driving it.
The big advantage of the Ka over the Clio is that you save £1000 of your money! (It is also likely to be slightly more reliable than the Clio)
I've posted my thoughts on the Ka here:
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?v=e&t=39...6
Not much to add, except that:
1) fuel economy has now improved to about 48 mpg
2) the Ka engine is actually not bad - it has a chain cam, so no cam belt worries, and unless the Clio has the 16v 75bhp engine (which, at that price, I doubt), the Ka has more power and torque
3) the Ka is sparsely equiped (doesn't bother me, but it would bother some people)
4) braking can be improved by putting on improved brake pads - see CBCB
And among inexpensive cars, I don't believe the Ka has been surpassed as a fun vehicle on twisty back roads.
|
Thanks Tyro
this post has helped a lot, this will be our second car so will mostly be used to go to and from work (7-15miles each way) and occassionally carry one child as well, i was thinking strongly about the clio as it seems a bit bigger but then when i saw the Ka had been reduced and that there was 1k difference I started to think seriously about the Ka, will most likly order the ka now
thanks for all your help and replies
Jim
|
and occassionally carry one child as well,
In which case you might want to take into consideration the fact that the Clio has a better Euroncap crash test rating than the Ka, and I suspect that the Ka does not have a passenger airbag as standard, whereas I'm sure that the Clio does.
|
|
|
|
has the Ka changed engines then, is the new entry 1.3i a better engine than it had before ?
The new Duratec engine (which has been around a few years now) is reckoned to be better than the old Endura engine. Can't say I ever noticed it being any worse than the engines on the Clios that I hired!
sorry silly questions i know
Not half as silly as most of the ones I ask :-)
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry to be biased but as a ka owner.... well a ka.
As well as they're cheaper, they're more reliable as well.
Parts will be cheaper as well compared to Renault & more available IMHO.
Don't know what reg the Ka you're interested is but despite the newer Duretec engine being a bit more powerfull, they've had problems with them as HJ has mentioned in the link. But don't let this bother you as they don't happen very often so i hear, just do the usual checks underneatht the bonnet for mayo etc..
--
Its not what you drive, its how you drive it! :-)
|
I went to look at a 1.3 Fiesta (same engine) for a friend.
It had no coolant (I mean none - the expansion tank was empty), and the oil filler cap was packed with gunge. Despite this, it had somehow reached 88,000 miles.
Although, we still didn't buy it. ;o)
It's shocking what some people will do to their cars, but that's for another thread...
|
The Clio is a bigger car than tha Ka as it technically was the class above it. If you really need the bigger car then go for the Clio or better still try and find a dealer doing a Mistubishi Colt Red for 5995 as was availabe a few months ago.
If you don't need a bigger car and just want something small and nippy go for the Ka. Firstly it is a 1000 pounds cheaper and it is worth banking that. Secondly it is a very simple car technolgically so very little to go majorally wrong. In addition it is still great fun to drive. Though the interior leaves a lot to be desired it is well screwed together and tends to last.
The rust issue, i think was limited to the first few years of production and didn't happen on mine. The new 1.3 (Rocam) is derived from the old Endura E and is slightly better to drive.
The Kia Picanto falls in your price range and is a very good car, so maybe have a look at this as well. It has a free insurance offer on at the moment and are at the 5995 mark i think.
|
|
Wife's got a Clio and it is great though the Ka is fun to drive and better value at a grand cheaper.
|
|
I've owned a Ka with the old engine for 4 years now and both my wife and I are well pleased with it-having driven one with the later engine,that was even better.To the person who mentioned the level of trim,they're available in various guises from base to luxury.I now have a Sportka(1.6) on order that I'm looking forward to.
|
|
|
|
The Clio is a bigger car than tha Ka as it technically was the class above it.
The Clio is technically in the class above. In fact, there is more headroom and kneeroom in the front of the Ka than in the front of the old Clio. (If you don't have an opportunity to try it for yourself, you can verify it on the What Car web site.)
And when I tried putting the back seats down in the Clio, I had to move the driver's seat so far forward that I really could barely squeeze in, let alone drive. This is not a problem with the Ka.
|
Of all the cars I've driven, the Ford Ka stands out as the one that surprised me the most. I had one as a courtesy car once for a week. I really wanted to hate it, and after 6 days and 700 miles, ended up loving it.
It's just a proper "old school" small car. Cheap, basic, light, reasonably nippy and great fun to chuck about. Oh, and genuinely small, which most small cars now are not.
Amusing party piece too. accelerates from 60-80 mph on a level piece of road by doing nothing more than turning the aircon off. ;-)
|
I think the KA offers far better value for money - 10 year old clios are not worth much at all but the KA seems to do a great job of holding onto it's value.
If it was me i'd go for the KA and blow the extra grand on a decent holiday somewhere nice and hot.
|
1996 clios fetch about 5-800 pounds
1997 KA's fetch about 5-800 pounds...........It will have considerably more body rot.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
|
I know which one I'd rather be in, if involved in an accident.....
|
|
|
|
The rust issue, i think was limited to the first few years of production and didn't happen on mine. The new 1.3 (Rocam) is derived from the old Endura E and is slightly better to drive.
The 1.3 Duratec in the current Ka is based on a Zetec engine, the old pushrod engine is long gone, in the UK at least, though wikipedia will tell you otherwise!
--------------
Mike Farrow
|
|
|
|
|
You'll have a lot more fun with the Ka, not to mention the fun you can have with the £1004 that you save!
The Ka is a hoot to drive, and surprisingly relaxed at 70 - 80 mph on the motorway.
Ideal for what you say you need it for.
|
If you are interested in a car that you'll be covered for in the event of a fault, I suggest you take a look at a Hyundai Getz.
You can get one of these, at 2 years old, for around £3-4000. The great thing about this is that Hyundais come with a five-year unlimited-mileage and transferrable warranty, so buying a 2-year-old Getz is equivalent to buying a brand new Ka or Clio -- and bear in mind that some Kas on sale at car supermarkets only come with 2-year warranties for some reason (not a reason not to buy one, but make sure you know what cover you are getting).
The Getz isn't dynamically brilliant, but it's a perfectly good drive and has a very good reliability record (similar to a Japanese car in fact, and it's made with a lot of Mitsubishi-derived components).
You can save your £2-3000 and spend it on a holiday or put it aside for a rainy day. I think it's the sensible choice for someone in your position. OK, it won't be worth much when you sell it, but then again you didn't pay much for it.
Of the Clio and Ka, if the Ka is big enough I'd have the Ford. They are rust-prone, but this isn't an issue if you're only going to be keeping it for a few years and they hold their value really well next to the competition if bought cheaply in the first place
|
|
The new 1.3/1.6 is not based on the Zetec,no relation whatsoever.It stands alone tho' there are a few similarities to the old pushrod.As for rust,I've never seen a trace on the ones I've owned but I never had a 1996 one.Hydraulic tappets and chain-drive cam seem to a good idea for durability.As someone else said,I bought mine for local use but find it a suprisingly good vehicle for long-distance(including motorway use) but you will find one problem,people don't like being overtaken by them.
|
The new 1.3/1.6 is not based on the Zetec,no relation whatsoever.It stands alone tho' there are a few similarities to the old pushrod.
While I admit it may not be directly related, it exhibits similar layout to the Zetec though is cast iron to save on costs. Apart from this and the chain drive there is little shared design between the Duratec 8v and Endura-E.
--------------
Mike Farrow
|
|
|
|
