In 2002, I bought a cheap 1992 Pug 309 diesel with 110,000 miles on it and a bit of service history. It was the sort of hack that you don't mind leaving in railway station carparks etc.
Well, four lears later and now with 166,000 miles on it, said car is still going strong, doesn't burn oil, and is still returning 53 mpg!! Even allowing for it's 5 percent overeading odometer, fuel consumption works out to 51 mpg.
The car is also used as an automotive experiment.
Apart from safety checks/annual MOT test, it never misses a beat despite the 15,000 to 18,000 miles annual mileage. The MOT testing garage are always amazed at the low smoke readings.
What amazes me about these PSA engines is that the car has never had an oil change at the recommened 6,000 mile interval. In fact most years, it has gone 10,000 and even 15,000 miles before oil changes.
However I regularly change the coolant and use top branded antifreeze. What oil it does get is always semi-synth oil and I do keep to the schedule for fuel filter replacement intervals to protect the injection pump.
Last year I replaced the cylinder head gasket as these are a known weakspot on the XU engines. It hadn't failed but thought it prudent to replace it because of the mileage and use the car gets. Whilst the head was off I also replaced the valve stem oil seals as they were baked hard and not doing the job.
Cylinder bore wear was well within text book limits and the honing looked nigh on perfect! What an engine!

Just to prove how reliable the car is, it has just returned from a tour around North Devon, Exmoor, Somerset and Porlock Hill, although fully laden, Porlock Hill was 'interesting'.
I suppose that the main reason why the car is still reliable is that I cover about 15 to 18K miles per year and mostly on motorways to and from work. But I don't pussyfoot around, so the car sits at 75 to 80 mph all day (where conditions allow)
I firmly believe that the 309 was one of the best designs (originally it was to be badged a Talbot when it first came out) that Peugeot came up with, and having owned a 306 TD (never again) the 309 was a much better product.
Anyone else out there had good ownership experience with the 309?


Andrew Read more

Anyone know an insurer/broker that takes a sensible view of au pairs - my current insurer has suddenly decided that it would be cheaper to put Osama Bin Laden on my policy.

Thanks Read more

We all know that they tend to be two schools of thought within motoring. One group of people tend to like buying their vehicle new, or nearly new, and then they get rid of the car before it starts to cost any cash (I?m thinking of a friend who is getting rid of his Leon Cupra at 60k because he doesn?t want an unreliable car). The other group prefer to buy old and cheap, and get the maximum use out of the car for minimum money. Bangeromics is the term I think.

As far as I can see, for low mileage drivers these are probably the two sensible options available to them. It?s a sliding scale, and the choice will largely be made on preference, budget, and depends on whether the car needing regular attention and not being 100% reliable is acceptable to you.

However, as long as my assumptions and logic hold, then I'm not sure this is true for the high mileage motorist. I'm assuming:

· Corrosion and other age related problems will not be accelerated by high mileage use
· Electrical systems have a lifetime measured in years and not miles
· It is possible to replace mechanical systems, up to and including entire engine and transmission systems, in order to keep the car running properly

If the above are true, I think there is some widespread wooly thinking on the economics behind changing a high mileage newish car.

For example, my car is a common rail diesel, and therefore many people have advised me against trying to run it to very high mileages. They warn that it will need new fuel pumps, for example, by 150,000 miles, at a possible cost of £1000. This is just one cost that I will likely incur. I can also imagine needing new suspension, drive shafts, possibly gearbox, possibly even the engine.

Even if all the above does need replacing, which might come to £5,000, I will hit that mileage in about four years. As long as my three assumptions above are actually correct though, by spending that £5,000, I could end up with a completely sound car. Especially if the engine etc had been changed, I would have something approaching a new car for less than a quarter of the cost.

Is this flawed logic? Am I living in cloud cuckoo land?

There's always talk of old cars being uneconomic to repair because the cost of the repair exceeds their book value. I just wonder that, on a car that's been well looked after, whether this misses the true cost of changing. In the example above, my friend could have the cam belt changed and other minor problems fixed on his Cupra for £1000. Even if he spend another £500 having it chipped up to 225 bhp, he would still only have spent 10% of what he will spend changing the car. To me that makes changing a car he admits he loves financial madness, although he doesn't see it that way. (By the way, I know it?s entirely legitimate to just want a change, I?m only questioning the financial side of this).

What do people think?

G Read more

I have an M Reg 1995 Yamaha YZF 750 which has started to overheat recently. On a long run with relatively few stops the problem does not present itself with the temperature indicating around 70 degrees. If however I have to go through town or ride slowly, the temperature increases to around 95 degrees (indicated) before the bike appears to boil all the water from the expansion tank through its overboard drain pipe. I have checked the operation of the thermostat in boiling water and it does open fully, the fan does not come on when the overheating occurs but the manual does state that its operating temperature is 105 degrees plus/minus 3 degrees (the fans do operate when the connectors are shorted). Does anyone have experience of this problem with a YZF 750 or perhaps have any ideas on components I could check? Thanks. Read more

I had an advisory last year on the Volvo's front discs, to the effect that they were getting thin.

Now they have lasted 235K miles and I've only done about 2K since last year, the car having been SORN'd since May so the thin-ness should hardly have increased (or should that be decreased?) so I took a chance and put it through again, however this year it was a fail.

I'm not grumbling, it's a fair cop, the tester is actually *very* fair with my vehicles, it is just a snag with the computerised system, there is no chance of him forgetting last year's advisories and re-issuing them.

Unfortunately this year's advisory is a steering rack inner ball joint so, unless this bit is available separately, next year will be the end of the road.

----------------------------------------------

One mans junk is another mans treasure Read more