|
I dont want to put you off a C1, but it wont do 60 mpg, unless you do long slow journeys, and live somewhere very flat. A friend has run a 107 (same thing) from early 2008 and 51 mpg is the best its seen, more often 48/49. They also have a known short clutch life on the original clutch of maybe 30,000 miles or slightly more. Later models have a better cluch, but if you buy a 2008 model make sure its had a new cluch or budget for another before long (£350).
They are also known to leak so check the floors for damp. Most are OK, but if its leaky its a real pain. Also demisting the front screen is hard work without aircon, but most 2008 models didnt have it, so try to find one with it.
Having said that, basic reliability is great, and they are fun to chuck around, and running costs are very low. I would still pick the 107/C1/Aygo above the other city cars available.
|
We are on our third C1 they have all been great , no issues whatsoever.never needed a clutch even with 2 girls learning to drive on the first one. Not had any issues with water leaks and if you do it it's a simple fix of putting a rubber seal in the door apatures . They are a Citroen part.
Our first one used to get 72 mpg ona run if kept at 62 mph or below.
Our latr ones have AC and average about 60 mpg driven carefully.
Great cars no complaints and our latest one now is zero road tax.
|
|
It is interesting the very different experiences people can have with the same make of car. After spending many hours researching different cars I think there is an element of chance. Probably the best way to make an informed choice is either an independent professional review, e.g by Which ( this also has owner input) or looking at a site such as Autotrader which has numerous reviews for each make of car. This will give a statistically more accurate picture. I have not found the perfect car so perhaps it is just personal preference and some compromise. Obviously be as well informed as possible and consider the views from a forum.
Edited by scot22 on 01/03/2014 at 19:35
|
|
given these requirements i would go for a fiat panda
|
|
Fiat panda is also on my radar
Could get 2010 1.1 - 56 mpg.
Are they good? Reliable?
The Kia Picanto is also a possibility
I could pick up a kia still under warranty.
so newish (2010) Suzuki Alto - still dont know much about this
or C1 - but have to avoid bad clutch and leakiness with 2009 and pre models
Kia Picanto - possibly still under manufacturer warranty
or Fiat Panda 2010 ish
Your votes please!
Thanks
|
|
|
|
Our Aygo would do over 60mpg, unfortunately you had to do journeys you wouldn't want to do in an Aygo! Namely a few hours at between 50 amd 60mph. Round town it did 45 or so.
At 6 years and 20,000 miles it was leaking like a sieve and the electrics were starting to show they were French. The positive was depreciation was only £3,000.
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting...
thanks for the input people.
I had also read that the C1 up to 2009 had issues. So would need to go for a 2009/10 and make sure I check when clutch was done.
And nobody steps up to defend the Suzuki Alto?
It seems to get low scores everywhere because it is so basic and 'cheap'. But it is reliable, good mpg also.
Anybody have experience of the Alto?
Thanks
|
|
Or the Picanto
Or the Panda?
|
The only issue with the clutch is wear and tear, some people are so hard on clutches that it wouldn't matter if you fitted a solid steel one they would still destroy it !
Pre 2008 models had a slightly smaller clutch and the later models had a units 20mm bigger.
Our first one was a2008 and did 6 years service with just one wiper blade, one indicator bulb and pair front tyres, our second was a 2010 model which we still have and 100% trouble free and a 2013. Model in addition which has only done 7k to date.
No hassles, no issues, cheap to run and fun to drive. Actually performs well as a bonus. They do take some miles to loosen up and our first one got really lively when it reached 30k.
|
|
|
|
|
You wouldn't volunteer to have an accident in either...but given the choice the Citroen looks the safer (literally) bet. See NCAP.
The little Chevrolet Matiz was another you wouldn't want to have an accident in if you could help it. Locally there was a head on between the Matiz and an MG ZT (essentially a Rover 75) and, of course the MG won the contest. The galling thing was the MG driver was on drugs - and totally on the wrong side of the road - and he walked away whilst the Matiz passenger died and the driver now needs round the clock care for the rest of her life.
And in recent memory the Metro was one of the memorably poor performing small cars when it came to staying intact in a crash..
You hope you'll not have to find which was the better bet but maybe it's something to give some consideration to when weighing up the mpg etc versus the possibility of injury.
Edited by KB. on 01/03/2014 at 20:34
|
|
Thanks for this - I hadnt considered safety.
How is the panda / picanto for safety vs the citroen?
|
|
This is a very interesting and informative thread. Can I reinforce KBs comment about safety and looking at the NCAP site. I've had some pleasant short drives in a small courtesy car recently. It was a very reasonable price. Researching it I found the economy had been made in safety features. Without pushing Autotrader too much it has a filter so that you can select only cars with the number of stars awarded by NCAP that you will accept.
|
|
|
Thanks for this - I hadnt considered safety.
How is the panda / picanto for safety vs the citroen?
You'd probably feel happier checking yourself - that way you know someone isn't offloading their bias on to you. For example Googling something like "safest small cars" will help. Then, in answer to your query re. say, a Panda, if you type in Fiat Panda NCAP, you'll be taken to that specific test. You'll see that newer cars have a different type of rating....pre and post 2009. Type Panda in and you'll get both - in keeping with different models. Type Rover 100 (the newer version of the older Metro - but the same car) in to NCAP's own search box and prepare to be shocked. See the ONE star and see the video clips!!.
Go to NCAP's home page and read the general advice and information in their FAQ's and different sections about safety. It's good stuff and unbiased.
So type Picanto into the NCAP search box and see whether you'd sooner be in the earlier (three star) Picanto or the later (2011 I think it was ) Picanto. Again, you'll frighten yourself by looking at the detailed results of the earlier one - and you'll probably decide you don't want to be in one. Then you'll see that the later model is far safer. Just look at the colour of the dummies in the diagram on the older version. Look at the red and the brown bits and see what red and brown equates to in the explanation guide. You'll see the Alto only gets three stars.
Hours of fun. But it might, just, save your life...or the life of whoever sits next to you.
Here's what they said about the earlier Picanto..............
The Picanto performed badly, only doing just enough to merit its three star rating. This is extremely disappointing for a new model in a market segment where other manufacturers have made major improvements in recent years. However, the car protected its child occupants well, although the protection it gave to pedestrians was poor. KIA decided to fund the testing of a car with side impact airbags, which are an option in some parts of Europe. The results for this are shown below but not included in the car’s overall scores. The results improved on the standard car’s but a door opened in the test.
Front impact
The restraint system included single stage tethered airbags and front belt pre-tensioners and load limiters. Despite this and a stable body shell, forces recorded by the dummies were high. Aggressive structures behind the fascia compromised the protection for the driver and the passenger. The steering wheel and brake pedal were also pushed back. As a consequence, the passenger cell became a particularly unfriendly environment to be in.
Side impact
The Picanto’s performance was unimpressive. Instrumentation in the driver dummy’s chest and abdomen recorded high loads. The car was also penalised because forces transferred in an unrealistic manner up the test dummy’s spine so reducing the level of forces recorded by the instrumentation in its chest.
Edited by KB. on 01/03/2014 at 22:39
|
|
Off the top of my head two smallish cars sprang to mind, both of which are cheap enough I'd have thought. The Chevrolet Aveo is safe according to NCAP (maximum five stars awarded and a really high 95%!!) and will be cheap due to the way Chevrolet is going in the UK - and maybe that won't matter at your price range as parts will be OK for a good while yet (GM / Vauxhall). I saw several in your price range on AT.
Also the Suzuki Swift is safe according to NCAP but I haven't looked at prices admittedly. It received the maximum five stars and achieved 94% (that's high!!).
There will be others...maybe something slightly left field (as they say) will be better than a mainstream, popular jobbie as the Fiestas and Corsas are perenially popular but not everyone knows what an Aveo is.
Edited by KB. on 01/03/2014 at 22:55
|
|
Last word for now.
The 2005 Yaris is five stars NCAP and top of the class for reliability and, of course, Toyota is also commended for customer service.
You might find some cheap Hyundai i10's about (some coming to the end of their five year warranty) but my experience was that it wasn't economical in any way, shape or form. Others may disagree. Quite a lot of car for not too much money and probably reliable enough as long as the clutch doesn't judder (see the Hyundai forums).
|
|
|
|
If you're looking at City size cars (Alto, C1, i10, Picanto), the Aveo and Swift are in the next class up - Supermini class.
The Chevrolet alternative to the Alto is the Spark.
Suzuki also make the Splash in the City class - which shares its design with the Vauxhall Agila.
The Nissan Pixo is effectively a re-badged Alto with different frontal treatment and trim.
There is also the Perodua Myvi - a version of the Daihatsu Sirion licence-built in Malaysia.
|
|
The small car that impressed me in both quality of build and economics was the Toyota IQ with the 1.0 litre engine.
|
|
Whilst not dismissing it altogther, you have to put this NCAP obsession into context, if you hit at C/D segment Rover 75, or larger vehicle, head on with a micro shopping trolley the results are obvious.
If crash protection is a real concern (a very reasonable consideration these day), lose 10mpg and go up to B or preferably C segment, all the NCAP stars in the world in a tiny tin box won't make a scrap of difference if a van/4x4/bus/lorry ram you up the back side, or T bone you, hard enough.
|
|
I agree with how gordonbennet put it into context and illustrated the reply so well. I just used to look at the number of stars until it was explained to me the relative nature of the stars. Either you are putting it as a priority, in which case look at a bigger car, or accept you are dealing with what are possibly minor differences in protection if it is needed. As usual with cars it seems to be finding a balance between advantages and disadvantages. It has given me a few stressful choices !
|
|
GB, when you speak of an "NCAP obsession", is it just this reference of mine that you're regarding an obsession, or the existance of NCAP generally and references to it by manufacturers, motoring press etc?
Whilst noting the OP's request for views on 'city cars' (ie. Aygo, C1, Alto) I did take the liberty of making suggestions from the next class up, so maybe that was inappropriate but only because cars from that class do seem to offer much better protection and would give you a bit more of a chance.
You'll have seen me refer, in the past, to my having had first hand and close and quarters experience of this sort of thing in a previous incarnation - and the Metro just happens to stick graphically in my mind. Hence I agree with your point regarding going up a segment but losing 10mpg, whilst, of course, also agreeing about a shopping trolley versus an artic having predictable results.........it's just a question of balance and improving your chances a bit at the cost of some economy and stepping up from those very vulnerable and tiny, earlier, designs.
Or is it an obsession?
|
|
I dont think NCAP is much different to the official CO2 figures, in that cars are now designed to pass the tests. Now you cant get 5 stars in the NCAP test without having ESP fitted, and the car also has to be kind to the pedestrians it might run over. Whilst both are good ideas in principal, neither make cars safer if you are having a crash. They also put in their small print that cars of different classes shoulnt be compared, so it may be a 3 star mid size car is actually safer than a 5 star city car.
Of course i am not against increases in safety, but i wouldnt let the NCAP rating sway me from my chosen car. Afterall i must have spent most of the last 29 years driving cars that wouldnt get 1 star if tested today, yet i am still here.
If the OP wants a C1, go for it, they are good fun and very cheap to run. He hasnt mentioned insurance, but they are also very cheap to insure, particularly for younger drivers.
|
|
Nothing aimed at you KB, nor anyone else, if people are really concerned about crash worthiness, and i don't blame anyone that is seeing the antics on the road every day, then it would make sense, to me anyway, to make a rational judgement about the typical use the car is put to and choose a standard of car to suit that use.
I'd happily run round in an Austin A35 during most times in my area, but come 1pm on a Friday afternoon when the heroes are on a mission i'd much rather be in my old Landcruiser, which incidentally would probably get 1* on the NCAP.
Edited by gordonbennet on 02/03/2014 at 13:52
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks all.
After careful consideration - I have decided on the Hyundai i10.
It has a very good and consistent safety record, can do c. 56 mpg. Is reliable. Can possibly get one still under hyundai warranty. And the 1.2 comfort I believe has a chain rather than a cambelt (timing belt) so this would save a mid life fork out.
The C1 is my second choice, but is less safe. The Panda third, but again, would only be able to afford older versions that are possibly less reliable. Same for the Kia Picanto newer (safer) models.
The i10, which I thought was priced out for me seems actually quite reasonable, and the older 2010 models are fine. The car is also supposed to be very good in general.
Thanks for all the input.
|
|
Pleased you've come to a decision.
Try hard to get one within warranty. Shouldn't be difficult.Try to get full dealer servicing as that will have kept the warranty valid. If they say it has full servicing and is covered by warranty CHECK THE RECEIPTS yourself to make sure -otherwise without them you may well find the warranty invalid. Ignore anyone who says' it's on the computer system' and doesn't need paper receipts. You do! If an independant has serviced it Hyundai have strict criteria regarding non main dealer servicing - check the Hyundai website for details. Has to fulfil specific requirements, all of which are clearly published.
I suggest looking at the forum... www.hyundai-forums.com/205-i10-forum/ and spending some time serching back to see what owners had to say (I'm one myself). Many of the "old hands" have left that forum so you need to search back to gain their informative comments and experience. Current posters on the Hyundai i10 forum are not so useful to you.
Your mpg will be very dependant on your type of journey (obviously enough) but don't expect 50 mpg. I have the auto i10 which does 32 mpg (I check it religiously every time) but manuals will do more....but some don't do a lot more. 40 mpg is probably to be expected but a gentle long drive at 50 mph will reap results (trouble is not many people do that).
Take an extended test drive and work the clutch and gearbox thoroughly and if it's a main dealer ask them what their attitude would be regarding clutch judder or bearing noise. In all honesty you shouldn't expect them to say you'd be covered (due, of course, to the infamous "wear and tear" clause) but at least mention it at the outset so they know that you know something of the history of clutch issues. My first one (a manual) developed clutch judder within a few months from new and had a new clutch fitted. Research the question of modified clutches as Hyundai are now very aware of the issues that occurred early on. The problem of errant headlightr adjusters should be fixed now but be aware of continuous buzzing noises from the front as the adjusters used to to malfunction and keep actuating.
The 1.2 is pokier than the 1 litre but either will do. Tyres and stuff are cheap enough. Get an insurance quote beforehand as they aren't rock bottom to insure compared to others.
Good luck.
Edited by KB. on 02/03/2014 at 21:13
|
|
Dont forget, there is a brand new i10 now out.
Reminder the selling dealer as much as you can that your testing/buying the old model when negotiating a discount.
|
|
|
Your mpg will be very dependant on your type of journey (obviously enough) but don't expect 50 mpg. I have the auto i10 which does 32 mpg (I check it religiously every time) but manuals will do more....but some don't do a lot more. 40 mpg is probably to be expected but a gentle long drive at 50 mph will reap results (trouble is not many people do that).
Don't know if that applies to only the older ones but I have a 2013 model (1.2 manual) and I have an average 49 MPG and that's with a mix of town and motorway. Even the worst I have had was about 47MPG when I first got it.
I do love my i10 and have been very happy with it - plenty of space for me and my wife and can can get the mum in-law in the back easy enough as well!
|
|
Agreed, there were bods on the other forum that did get great mpg and have been over the moon...and some who didn't (and kept accurate records to indicate as much)..mine was one of those which fell in to the latter despite very gentle driving (perhaps I should have caned it more). Hopefully the OP will get a good one. I'm sure he will.
Quite right to mention the new model when haggling.
My Mrs loves ours. I'm less keen especially as they didn't manage to completely fix the droning noise associated with some automatics when doing 70mph. (See HJ's notes on this site) But all the time she's happy, then that's fine :-)
And it is a lot of car for not a huge amount of money so, ultimately, a good choice...buy wisely and keep your wits about you.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi again. This clutch issue has made me frightened of the i10.
Does anybody know which model/year it applies to?
Seems the clutch isnt covered by any warranty so may have put me off the car.
I plan to buy a hyundai (if poss) i10 from a main hyundai dealer - so it is manufacturer approved.
But in the light of this - is the C1 a better bet? Buying an expensive car and having to replace the clutch is exactly what I want to avoid!
Thanks
|
|
I have also just checked the insurance groups.
The i10 is more expensive to insure than the 2010 C1.
This may have swayed me.
|
|
Whether or not the insurance costs should put you off would depend how much more....it was just a consideration I suggested as I happened to know they're not as cheap as some competitors. and was a factor for you to add into the mix.
NO manufacturer will warranty a clutch as they'll say it's a wear and tear consumable. It was just that early i10's had problems which Hyundai initially denied - but later on acknowledged and replaced defective ones free of charge. It affected clutches from launch (08/09) and went on for several years - by the time of the facelift they had started to get to grips with it.
You say..."I plan to buy a hyundai (if poss) i10 from a main hyundai dealer - so it is manufacturer approved".... You'll have to tell me what that means as I don't understand it. What exactly is 'manufacturer approved'? The car? or the servicing? or the warranty?....You'll have to expand on that a bit.
You have said that ....."Buying an expensive car and having to replace the clutch is exactly what I want to avoid!"....... but your not buying an expensive car - £3.5k isn't a lot to pay for a car. They're 9k or 10k new and you're paying a third of that. There has to be reason why you're only paying a third of the cost new. The car will have been used. There are no guarantees with clutches (or brakes or other consumables) so factor a new one in to the equation if you're concerned.
I sense you don't have an in depth knowledge of the motor trade and £3.5 k does tend to take you out of the main dealer circuit and to hope to get a one owner car with warranty remaining AND a cast iron guarantee on all the components is a tad optomistic, I feel. That's why people pay more and get a newish one and get greater peace of mind perhaps?
Did you read the HJ advice in the relevant Good/Bad section of the i10, as advised? or check on the Hyundai forum?
The information about these things is out there and you have to do a bit of homework if you want to get the best for yourself.
Edited by KB. on 03/03/2014 at 13:13
|
|
Basically - I have 3.5 - 4.5 to spend. Ideally. I know its not alot in the grand scheme of things, but it is a lot to me!
And that budget will get me a used C1 or Hyundai i10.
I am just trying to make sure I don't get one that will require alot of spend on it. Which is why I am going for a reliable make / model / year.
The models selected are also cheap to run - but as stated - the C1 has an insurance 'band' of 1 vs the hyundai's 10-12. Thus it is cheaper to run the C1. And it has a higher average mpg.
Manufacturer approved just means it has been checked over (i think!) and they will offer a 1 year warranty on the car (this comes from a hyundai dealer.) Not the same as the main 5 yr warranty -but I think those cars are out pf my price range.
I know the clutch is not under warranty - but some folk have managed to categorise it as a fault - and got this repaired under warranty. Just want to avoid the models where this may be a problem - if possible.
'£3.5 k does tend to take you out of the main dealer circuit and to hope to get a one owner car with warranty remaining AND a cast iron guarantee on all the components is a tad optomistic''
I am being optimistic - but I know I need to balance out all these factors and see which is more important in order to get the best deal for my money. I know the car will be used - I'm going for a 40k mls 2010 probably - but this is why I am doing all the research - to try to steer clear of any potentially expensive fixes - which is why the hyundai now seems like a higher risk than the citroen. Main dealers do have cars for c.4000 - 4500. I could stretch to that. Need just some kind of warranty and a way to ensure I dont buy a dud. For instance - without asking, I could have gone for a C1 pre 2009 and ended up with a leaky car with a bad clutch. Just looking for a smart buy for my pittance. .
|
|
Oh - yes I did read the HJ notes on the hyundai. And whatcar. And Carsite. And parkers!
Problem is there is alot of conflicting info out there - and almost too much to take on board when researching a handful of cars!
The other sites for instance didn't mention anything about the clutch. And I only just found out the i10 1.0 /1.2 and C1 1.0 dont have cambelts!
It feels like negociating through a minefield bllindfolded - armed with a light purse.
|
|
I have shared that feeling many times ! Its true that reviews/advice are often conflicting. Some aspects appear to me to be purely luck - although always try to mimise that element by research, which you are. When I was thinking of Hyundai ix 20 I read a few posts that there is a problem with the supply of spare parts : is that sorted ? Sorry for another consideration. Just letting you know you are not alone in finding it a 'mind swirling' process. Wonder if there are similar problems with a horse and cart ?
|
When I was thinking of Hyundai ix 20 I read a few posts that there is a problem with the supply of spare parts : is that sorted ?
There was an issue regarding the supply of spares in the last few months of 2012 - which also coincided with issues of sticking rear brake calipers - 14 months or so ago.
|
|
I think I've offered enough on this topic and will leave the OP to come to his own conclusion but as the question of i20's has arisen I would finally say that my inclination, if i was in the OP's position, would be to search for the right Hyundai i20 ....OR the right Toyota Yaris and be ready to grab it when it appeared with cash in hand.
The OP has said that a Citroen was on his list due to his need for reliability. Whilst I'm sure there are countless reliable Cit's about I'm sure no-one would disagree if I suggest that French isn't the first word to spring to the lips when discussing reliability.
I've had Renaults and Peugeots and still live to tell the tale but there can't, surely, be much dispute that GENERALLY the Japanese - followed by the Koreans have it sewn up on the reliability front?
Hence my two suggestions.
The i20 hasn't featured so prolifically in the complaints department on the forums as much as the i10 did and I know of owners whe get amazing mpg from them...better than the i10 (See HJ's Real MPG listing for proof of this...46 versus 43 avearage). It's safer, more comfortable, more economical...what's not to like?) There are some on AT within the OP's price range including one with the right mileage and still in warranty with full dealer servicing....
www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/20140221196...p
And lastly the Yaris is the most reliable car in the history of the world, is safe and economical - but will be dearer I would think and you'd probably have to look hard to find the right one (haven't looked on AT so don't know for sure...the OP can do that. Don't know why the OP hasn't seen the Yaris as the final solution - maybe the mpg isn't good enough? maybe the insurance is too high? maybe it's too expensive? Don't know
But I think I've hogged the airwaves for long enough - just hope I have given the OP some food for thought.
|
|
I hadnt considered the i20.
I will take a look.
I think the Yaris is out of price range.
But in terms of the French vs Japanese question - In general - French cars are ok - electrics typically fail - but the engines are fine.
On researching this before - it seems cars share engines and it is no longer a case of the nationality of the car - that said, the C1 is the same as the Toyota Aygo and peugeot 107 -so again - it's not simply the nationality of the car.
Thus - I researched the individual cars - finding here that the C1 is reliable, and the hyundai i10 is - bearing in mind certain models of the two suffer from clutch issues.
|
But in terms of the French vs Japanese question - In general - French cars are ok - electrics typically fail - but the engines are fine.
On researching this before - it seems cars share engines and it is no longer a case of the nationality of the car - that said, the C1 is the same as the Toyota Aygo and peugeot 107 -so again - it's not simply the nationality of the car.
Thus - I researched the individual cars - finding here that the C1 is reliable, and the hyundai i10 is - bearing in mind certain models of the two suffer from clutch issues.
Well I thank you for your advice regarding the above and I'm pleased to see that you know as much about these cars as anyone on here so you should be in a good position to sort it out yourself.
|
|
I just had a quick look at the Yaris.
It is defintely a possiblity.
Slightly lower mpg. Haven't checked the insurance.
I did look at the i20 - but think the insurance again is too high. The citroen C1 is insurance group 1. The i10 and i20 is about group 9.
so Suzuki alto vs C1 has become
i10 vs C1
and now
Yaris vs C1.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I dont want to put you off a C1, but it wont do 60 mpg, unless you do long slow journeys, and live somewhere very flat. A friend has run a 107 (same thing) from early 2008 and 51 mpg is the best its seen, more often 48/49.
That sounds low, but it depends largely on the kind of driving you do. I currently get 52-55mpg, that incldues quite a bit of traffic and varying speeds. When I was using the motorway regularly I wasn't far off 60mpg. With very steady driving (50-60mph instead of 70mph) I could get a little over 65mpg.
The C1's have had their consumption tweaked a few times. It has improved very slightly eg. the current ones emit less than 100g of CO2, but the original ones didn't.
|
|
according to real mpgs on this site, the C1 does c.54 on average
The Yaris does about 53.
So I could afford a slightly older Yaris - 2008/2009 - but possibly with less miles than the C1 as I would need to get a newer C1 to avoid clutch issues, so have to sacrifice a few thousand miles.
They are both reliable. Yaris is safer. Both low insurance.
Both have chain timing belt?
Seems like a tie.
Anyone advise on this comparison?
|
|
Someone was sounding a note of caution about French cars - quite right: there are plenmty of good ones but they are more vulnerable to abuse or neglect than cars from Japan.
But don't forget that the C1 isn't French: it;s the same car as the Toyota Aygo and Peugeot 107, and they're all built somewhere in Central Europe.
|
I think the op is getting hung up on the clutch issue ! One of our neigHbours got 78 k and two learner drivers through 6 years and my other neighbour has done 96k on original clutch and 1learner driver.
Ours have been great, zero road tax and 160 quid a year to insure and roughly 35-40 quid a month on fuel ! You can't beat the economy.
You need to remember that its a very responsive revvy engine and some people are really bad drivers that cause the wear. A replacement isn't expensive either so better to buy the car you like that try and find one that you think may have an ok clutch but hasn't been looked after in other respects ,
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder if the OP has thought of a new car? At one point you mention a budget of £4,500. Could you find a little more?
I found this advertised. www.pentagon-group.co.uk/new-cars/peugeot/107/1.0-...5
I appreciate that you would need to find (borrow?) another £2,000, but then there are no worries about its past or other out of warreny failures, and it will have a lot more life in it than a 5 year old car. And no costs other than an annual service for quite some time.
|
|
Good find there...over two and a half grand off list. That'll help offset a lot of depreciation and, as you say, give three years of cheap, basic motoring in the knowledge that no-one has frigged about with it or driven it through floodwater (probably not a good time to buy a used car from Somerset). The OP has mentioned clutches (admittedly it was probably my input that set him off) and leaks (not guilty on that one) and petrol costs and insurance costs but no mention of depreciation has occurred....and it's that which will probably account for most of our motoring losses unless you're either very cute or very lucky or you steal it.
The OP has benefitted readers earlier in the topic with his advice summarizing the pros and cons of French cars versus Japanese cars and what are good cars and what aren't etc.etc.so I Ifeel he is well equipped to make an informed purchase and, anyway, it's bedtime...so it's goodnight from me - and it's goodnight from him.
|
Depreciation
We bought our first one in 2008 and is was 6250 brand new on the road for a 5dr
When we sold it we got3250 for it 6years later!
We thought it was very good.
5door models hold their price better
We lost over 20k on our landrover in 3 years !
|
|
|
|
Thanks all.
The 107 seems like a good deal, but I simply cant afford it. I will have about a grand as a deposit and plan to pay the rest using a finance deal, hopefully 0%!
I prefer the citroen because I am aiming to get one via Hartwell - who seem to have a decent warranty - and happens to be round the corner from me.
Or I plan to get an citroen used/ approved warranty from a different franchise.
I had kind of written off the peugeot as it is the same as citroen, and like I said, we have a citroen round the corner, and we also have a C3 which has been pretry reliable.
I will do some sums re. Yaris cost vs C1 and decide between them.
If the clutch isnt an issue on the C1, I could go pre 2009 and maybe get some good deals. Anyone know which reg of 2009 models was after the clutch/leaky fiasco?
And in terms of depreciation - I'm not too fussed about what happens in a few yrs time, looking to keep the car for as long as poss - just want low cost, reliable motoring asap.
Thanks
|
|
Just checked -
Yaris is more expensive.
A good 700/800 quid more expensive than the 107 and the C1 for yrs 2010, 2009, 2008.
C1 & 107 are about the same.
But C1 edges it because it seems to have slightly higher scores everywhere. Slightly more reliable - can't think why as it's the same car.
There are more 107's about , but ideally - simply because I know citroens, and I have the citroen garage round the corner - I think that settles it.
It is the C1 for me. with the 107 as backup.
Thanks for all the help everybody - this has been very imformative. So much to consider.
Edited by samuelodog on 04/03/2014 at 10:21
|
|
A Citroen dealer will have no trouble servicing a 107. Buy whatever's the best condition/price - treat them as one and the same.
And when you have bought it, come back and Gordonbennet or myself will tell you how to make it a quieter drive.
Edited by Chris M on 04/03/2014 at 12:50
|
|
Just done 297 miles mostly motorway at 70-80+ Just refilled tank and it averaged 57.9 not bad with 3 adults and luggage and pushing along swiftly.
If we had driven at a staedy 60 it would of nudged up nearer 70 mpg.
I have no idea how some report 45mpg
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
