|
This is the exact reason I am not getting the 635d as for the 123d, I can get one with lower mileage not far of the one I had before, but ideally wanting something different.
By the sounds of things the type-r should be getting better mpg so this is something I will be looking into. If I can get it higher then saves a lot of hassle!
|
This is the exact reason I am not getting the 635d as for the 123d, I can get one with lower mileage not far of the one I had before, but ideally wanting something different.
By the sounds of things the type-r should be getting better mpg so this is something I will be looking into. If I can get it higher then saves a lot of hassle!
how many miles do you get from a tankfull? its an 11.11 gallon tank or 50ltrs
Edited by bolt on 19/10/2017 at 16:27
|
|
From full getting around 260 miles and that's not me pushing it, at the moment I am driving it like it's a 1.4 to try and get better results but no joy. This is the main reason for the change. Recently had full service, garage has checked the car over and just been told they are thirsty cars.
I get if I push it the mpg is going to plummet but thay part of the course, but when taking it easy I would expect better results.
|
From full getting around 260 miles and that's not me pushing it, at the moment I am driving it like it's a 1.4 to try and get better results but no joy. This is the main reason for the change. Recently had full service, garage has checked the car over and just been told they are thirsty cars.
I get if I push it the mpg is going to plummet but thay part of the course, but when taking it easy I would expect better results.
depends partly on the area you drive in, ie if you drive in a hilly area then you cant expect 35mpg, plus im surprised you didnt expect its fuel consumption when you got it, as most that buy them would worry more about its performance that fuel it gets through
has it been tampered with in any way like rechipped or anything else done to it also what do you call a performance car and what date is it as there are different models ie 8th gen 9th gen civic
|
|
It's a 2007 plate, personally a hot hatch doesn't fall into the performance category especially not a 2.0 v-tec. It's a hot hatch, quick but let's be honest not that quick and definitely (to me) shouldn't be getting 26mpg when driving normally. I live in a prity flat area (Peterborough). As said my Z4 was returning better mpg on the same route.
|
|
Average economy for my 2003 2 litre CR-V with roof rails is 27.7mpg over 11974 miles so something is definately wrong if you are driving as sedately as you say.
Binding brakes?
|
|
|
|
This is the exact reason I am not getting the 635d as for the 123d, I can get one with lower mileage not far of the one I had before, but ideally wanting something different.
By the sounds of things the type-r should be getting better mpg so this is something I will be looking into. If I can get it higher then saves a lot of hassle!
The 123d uses the N47 2.0 which is notorious for timing chain issues among many other problems. This engine is not a good bet on your limited budget, even less so in twin turbo form. I can't stress this enough to you... keep it simple or you'll come a cropper.
The real world economy on a Type R is 31mpg according to owners reports in HJ's real economy section but I'd expect high 20's to be acceptable. If economy was important and you're on a tight budget something's got to give I'm afraid. You haven't the funds to afford a good performance diesel and you can't stand the poor economy of a performance petrol... you need to make a choice, spend more or reign in your ambitions.
Edited by SLO76 on 19/10/2017 at 17:24
|
|
I don't mind the economy of a performance petrol but I would hardly call it a performance car, would you! My chrysler srt8 6.1ltr V8 was 24mpg which was acceptable I thought for a car like that.
Anyway re timing chain from what I remember reading up on the 123d before I got my last one I thought so long as they had the re call this wasn't such a big issue? Seen a few with fsh with around 70k in budget. Equally as you say turbos can always be an issue.
Also at the back of my mind there is the uncertainty around what the government are going to do with diesels and increasing tax. London is quickly becoming expensive for diesels to visit which isn't a deal breaker unless that becomes a popular thing with other cities. Then the worry of increased tax on the fuel itself and possibility of the road tax going up. Could quickly make petrols a lot cheaper to run!
Thanks for the advice.
|
I don't mind the economy of a performance petrol but I would hardly call it a performance car, would you! My chrysler srt8 6.1ltr V8 was 24mpg which was acceptable I thought for a car like that.
Anyway re timing chain from what I remember reading up on the 123d before I got my last one I thought so long as they had the re call this wasn't such a big issue? Seen a few with fsh with around 70k in budget. Equally as you say turbos can always be an issue.
Also at the back of my mind there is the uncertainty around what the government are going to do with diesels and increasing tax. London is quickly becoming expensive for diesels to visit which isn't a deal breaker unless that becomes a popular thing with other cities. Then the worry of increased tax on the fuel itself and possibility of the road tax going up. Could quickly make petrols a lot cheaper to run!
Thanks for the advice.
This seems to be the Clarkson syndrome!, maybe you wouldn't consider a car which does 0-60 in 6.6 seconds and go on to 146mph a performance car, neither would he. Personally, i would.
I don't have any particular desire, or need for a 'performance car', but if i did, a civic type r would be some way above either a bmw 123d or a chrysler SRT8 on my imaginary list.
It sounds like you just want something which is economical and has overtaking grunt, for which you don't need a performance, or sports car. Anything with a reasonably powerful turbo diesel engine would fit that bill, but it would be a risky buy.
(That's another thing about the honda, reliability)
|
|
The reason I sold my srt8 was that exact point, I am now looking for a more practical car re mpg but equally doesn't look like crap.
The 6 series was onky mentioned for an idea re the bavk seats and a general look, performance wise for the trips I do would hardly get the chance to be used, so a tad pointless. If only they did a 620d!
|
|
|
|
"Anyway re timing chain from what I remember reading up on the 123d before I got my last one I thought so long as they had the re call this wasn't such a big issue? Seen a few with fsh with around 70k in budget. Equally as you say turbos can always be an issue."
Bulk of them suffer problems due to non-franchised garages using the wrong oil. I know plenty of these guys and every motor that passes over their ramps gets the same oil in it. They buy in bulk and don't buy for each car they service. Cars, especially with complex modern turbocharged engines are very oil specific, with some firms having oil specially designed specifically for that motor. Buy with a full main dealer history and you'll stand half a chance (though BM's are simply not as reliable as most mainstream manufacturers) but buy with missing stamps or a back street or fast fit history and you'll suffer. I still wouldn't touch one at this money with a very long barge pole.
|
|
OK so taking the 123 away what would you recommend?
|
|
There's two ways to buy cars - with your head or your heart - no-one buying with their head ever buys a performance car, only considering value and practicality.
As you are, or seem to be, buying with your heart, it needs to be something you're passionate about. I don't see that being logical ever works with a performance car.
Edited by RT on 19/10/2017 at 20:06
|
|
Of course, if you really want practical, performance and reliability, then there's one manufacturer in particular that ticks all the boxes.
Subaru Impreza - get something petrol, manual, and you're sorted. As long as it's been serviced properly and regularly, then they're about as bombproof as it gets.
£6-7k gets you into a 2009-2011 2.5 turbo WRX. Road tax is brutally high though - which is why the cars are quite cheap. They also are steep on the fuel bills.
Alternatively, a Ford focus ST-3 2.5 might just fall into your budget.
Or even a Golf TSi GTi (note, do NOT even consider anything other than a manual box with this, the DSG auto is a disaster waiting to happen).
Skoda Octavia VRS is a bit of a 'Q car'. looks nothing special, but plenty of grunt. Again, only consider a manual box.
SEAT Leon 2.0 Tsi Cupra - same engine as the VW and Skoda. Again, manual gearbox is a must.
Any of those will be a great drivers car.
|
|
I'd second the idea of an Octavia vRS or SEAT Leon - both petrol and manual. I had a petrol manual vRS and got 34 mpg in town and 40+ on long runs. Either of these will be cheaper to buy and insure than a Golf GTI.
|
|
Thanks for the information, appreciate!
|
|
|
Thanks for the info, manual is always my preferred choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell me roughly where you are in the U.K. and I'll have a wee look at a few motors I'd view if I were in your shoes. Plus what is your top budget and also how do you intend on financing it? Is it savings or a loan?
|
|
Located in Peterborough and will be buying with savings.
|
I haven't spent time looking at Mot histories on any of these but here's a few i noticed that may be of interest.
The Civic 2.2 CTDi never had a DPF fitted, even 2011 registered cars as it was a runout model. The later 2.2 DTEC does however but would be out of budget unless it's been to Mars and back. These have masses of torque (250lb/ft) and loads of go but will still hit 50mpg easy enough. It's not without its worries however with timing chain issues, EGR problems and turbo failure relatively common especially on neglected or poorly serviced examples. I flogged a tidy 57 plate with 73k to a friend a couple of years back and it's never coughed despite having well into six figures under its belt now. He loves it.
Auto Trader:
www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/20171013024...4
Auto Trader:
www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/20170826870...6
Auto Trader:
www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/20171002987...8
Auto Trader:
www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/20171013024...o Trader:
www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/20170923958...2
Accord estate looks nice but is newer DTEC with a DPF. Auto Trader:
www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/20170924962...2
Spotted this too but it is suspiciously cheap so very likely there's something not right... Auto Trader:
www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/20171004996...0
Edited by SLO76 on 20/10/2017 at 22:24
|
|
I was juat looking at these! But going by the mpg for a diesel people seem to be slating them.
So I have started to look at the mini S which seem ok so far f room what I have seen/read. They are not bad looking cars (pending the extras that where chosen when first bought) and the general mpg seem prity good, it drops if pushed obviously but can be good when driving steadily, unlike the type-r. This being said still looking into them!
|
|
The thing is, your (slightly) poor mpg on the Honda could be down to a number of factors - anything from over-fuelling or the wrong grade of oil, through to the way that the car is set up, and even the tyres you've got fitted or the pressure in them.
For example. If you've got really high-performance tyres, then those tyres are very 'grippy'. Which means fuel economy suffers. Same applies if you've got big wheels and wide, low-profile tyres.
As an example, on my 325d touring with summer wheels (19") and staggered setup tyres (225/40 R19 on the fronts, 255/35 R19 on the back), running on Pirelli PZero tyres, I get about 45 mpg. When I change to my 18" winter wheels and square setup (225/45 R18 all round), even with the more grippy winter tread pattern, my economy gets closer to 50mpg.
The wrong grade of oil in the engine means that the engine doesn't turn over as efficiently, more fuel is used just to keep the engine running, meaning that you're burning more fuel to get the same level of performance.
If a brake is binding, that wrecks economy too. Easy check, after a trip (carefully) touch the alloys. If one is noticeably hotter than the others then you know what needs looking at.
|
|
Already checked the breaks and tyres, all seem good. Think will have to get the o2 sensors checked, then possibly look at getting an ecomap. All money that could result in zero change, hence concidering changing the car.
It if it's the o2 sermon thought I would expect more problems with the v-tec not kicking in properly (from what I have read) and although I wouldn't say there is a big kick all the lights ping up. All this to try and get more than 26mpg!
Just read another post on PH and people are getting 36-39 on long runs taking it easy, that would be amazing!
|
Already checked the breaks and tyres, all seem good. Think will have to get the o2 sensors checked, then possibly look at getting an ecomap. All money that could result in zero change, hence concidering changing the car.
It if it's the o2 sermon thought I would expect more problems with the v-tec not kicking in properly (from what I have read) and although I wouldn't say there is a big kick all the lights ping up. All this to try and get more than 26mpg!
Just read another post on PH and people are getting 36-39 on long runs taking it easy, that would be amazing!
Given you think the type r is 'not exactly a performance car', getting an ecomap doesn't strike me as a very sensible option. You have already said that you wouldn't mind the poor economy if it was faster, so doing something which will inevitably blunt the performance isn't really going to help.
If you are driving as sensibly as you say, and still not breaking 30mpg then there must be something amiss.
But reading between the lines, I get the feeling that even if your type r was performing as it should, you still wouldn't be satisfied with it. I guess that's understandable with an SRT8 (gruntmaster) as a previous car, but with that in mind, something with a turbo is going to a better choice for you.
|
"So I have started to look at the mini S which seem ok so far f room what I have seen/read."
Hold your horses! There's loads of problems to watch for on R56 Minis. They use the notorious PSA 1.6 diesel plus a 1.4/1.6 PSA/BMW petrol motor that's murder for timing chain failure. To add to the woe you can also get them with BMW's N47 2.0 diesel that again has timing chain issues. There isn't a good engine in the range. Though they are good on fuel and a hoot to drive while they're running.
If you want a small car that's cheap to run and fun to drive then look at a Suzuki Swift Sport, Ford Fiesta 1.6 Zetec S or a Mazda 2 1.5 Sport. All three will hit 45mpg and raise a smile without risking major open wallet surgery via catastrophic failures.
|
|
Thanks for the ideas will check then now
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
