Just seen this:
Top of the range, 96,000 miles, Full Service History, Mot, Tax,
3 door hatchback in Metallic Blue looks absolutely stunning, Power Steering, 2/Keys, Remote Central Locking, Electric Windows, Driver Airbag, Passenger Airbag, Driver's Seat Adjustment, Driver Seat Height Adjustment, Manual Sunroof, Front Foglights, Adjustable Steering Column, Split Rear Seat, Alloy Wheels, Cd palyer,
Immobiliser, 80 Bhp, Group 2 insurance, 45 mpg
Worth a look?
Luke.
|
|
If the ad is true - yes worth a look......
|
What do I need to look out for?
Ta,
Luke.
|
What reg is it and how much are they asking? A friend has one, an 04 reg top spec 1.2 16v, she paid £3500 for it, its a brilliant car, silent engine, all the electrics work, its done 54k and runs like a brand new car.
These engines seem very good, the service history is important, it would depend on how much they want for it, 96k is a lot though as you need to remember you need to sell it on too.
In my opinion french cars are not as bad as people make out but the simpler ones are the best.
|
|
Think of French cars like French wine. Get a good one, even a good cheap one and it will delight. Get a bad one......and well......it won't. Trouble is it's hard to tell 'till the corks out.
Edited by Humph Backbridge on 20/10/2008 at 23:30
|
|
|
It's an X reg (2000) 1.4 Sport 16V and they want £999
Luke
|
A 1.4 16-valve Sport is group 2...?
|
A 1.4 16-valve Sport is group 2...?
Yeah, I wondered that too.
Luke
|
I'm pretty sure that the Clio Sport was only offered as either a 1.4 8v on early ones or a 1.2 16v on the last of the pre-facelift ones as opposed to a 1.4 16v, which may explain the low insurance grouping. I came close to buying one of these a few years back as it seemed a nice spec but cheap to run.
P.S. I think the Renault 1.4 16v engine of the time was about 95 bhp whereas the 8v was 80 bhp so it is probably this engine. Hope this helps.
P.P.S. I ended up with a (then) 2 year old Clio 1.2 RT which was very reliable and is still missed to this day so I would whole-heartedly recommend the Clio II.
Edited by tom_79 on 21/10/2008 at 00:20
|
|
|
|
The engines will run and run on most French cars, and the bodywork tends to be good as well. It's the electrics that let them down.
So by getting one with nothing in the way of toys, you shouldn't go wrong.
|
We have had a Clio 1.6 RXE from nearly new, now 55k miles and nearly 10 years, virtually nothing has gone wrong, even the aircon still works brill and has never been recharged.
Actually if I saw a mint genuine one, an RXE or Etoile I would be seriously interested, nice ambience inside and good to drive.
|
|
|
|
>you need to remember you need to sell it on too.<
You will never get far with buying a car if you worry about selling one on costing under £1000. But to the point ...
Most Clios have a sunroof, and most of them rattle annoyingly. Also wheel bearings are a notorious weakness. Other than that they are decent cars, provided (like any others) they have been minimally serviced. Also Mk1 Clio manuals said nothing about changing coolant, so garages didn't bother - result, gravy in the system and gasket failures.
|
|
|
>>the service history is important
Not on a sub-£1,000 car it's not. You're applying the standards for a £20,000 car to a £750 car. All you need to know is when the cambelt was last done. If you buy a sub-£500 car you don't even need to know that provided you have AA cover...
Back on track... French cars go on for ever, but their electrics can be dodgy. Manual sunroof = a GOOD thing. Check everything works, buy a multimeter and learn to use it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
some info missing :- year / price / how many owners / engine size ? my best advice - check out HJ's "car by car breakdown" and then check ( WHEN ), u look at it , electric windows - try 3 or 4 times , don't worry about the funny looks from the seller, - it's your money! also the dipstick - it's short, and pulls out at an awkward angle, so the tip can break off ( for the result, see the HJ comment) . I would also check the central locking a few times, electrics can play up, 2 keys is a good sign, and, if the year/price/mileage etc comes out ok, have a look at it ( if its a distance away, grill the seller on the phone, - you can usually determine a genuine seller, ask if you can bring a mechanic to check it over - judge the reaction ) My philosophy on French ( or Italian ) cars is that France or(Italy) is not littered with broken down domestic cars. P.S., nice colour. good luck, stan
|
some info missing :- year / price / how many owners / engine size ?
Answered this above, apart from the number of owners, as I don't know.
my best advice - check out HJ's "car by car breakdown" and then check (
Will do.
Ta,
Luke.
|
|
|
|
|
sorry - started my reply, then got diverted -now i see things have moved on !
|
My aunt has had three of them and would happily buy a fourth. No major faults, and good to drive. Slightly odd driving position from memory, so it might be worth checking you can get comfy.
We bought our first Renault last year and have been delighted with it. French cars can be problematic, but there are plenty of good ones out there. One way to get an idea of reliability is to look at the owner history. An example with lots of owners in short succession is likely to be a dog. An example with the same owner for three years is probably a safe bet, on the grounds that few people would keep a problematic car for that long.
Cheers
DP
|
"Top of the range", "manual sunroof" "group 2 insurance" - don't usually go together!
We had a 1998 1.6RXE for 5yrs, and about 30K miles.
In those days had 1 yr warranty and I bought extra 4yr warranty in a deal which included full AA cover (so the warranty was minimal additional cost) and we could get the cost back if unused at 5yrs.
Only fault was both rear springs "broke" at 4yrs - I say "broke" because it was MOT'd at the village garage one day, then went to Renault dealer and they reported them as broken. Both clean, new breaks..hmmm. Anyway, despite the car being 3yrs out of warranty a quick call to Renault customer services and they agreed to replace FOC - this was critical as it meant we could get the money back on the warranty!
Other than that, there's the Renault bonnet opening thing (make sure the catch is maintained properly), and we had the odd comment about the front painted indicator bulbs not being orange enough. Wind noise from doors was irritating at speed - I always though probably due to upper door seals being set into the top of the roof.
|
Clio 2's are good solid reliable cars. Its needs to have had its cambelt and waterpump changed every 50k miles. Makes sure yours has been done.
|
My main problem with the Mk2 Clio is how ugly I find it -- a blobby, ungainly lump of a car with the curves in all the wrong places. The back-end in particular I find hideous.
Not that this would put me off if the price was right -- driving a 1.6 auto Clio from 1999, my main complaint was the noisy engine and cramped (very cramped -- my knees made contact with the dash when the seat was pushed right back), surprisingly tacky interior -- as bad as anything Korean.
Oh, and the doors -- some car doors, thud, some clang, some sound like a wheely bin. These were a kind of curious combination of the three -- they sounded as if (a) they weren't hung right (even though they were), and (b) there were bits rattling in them -- a bit like closing a door with the window down, except these were with the window up!
Edited by jase1 on 24/10/2008 at 00:39
|
Clio 2's are good solid reliable cars. Its needs to have had its cambelt and waterpump changed every 50k miles. Makes sure yours has been done. >>
That applies to the 1.2, the 1.4 and 1.6 dont need the regular water pump change.
My main problem with the Mk2 Clio is how ugly I find it -- a blobby ungainly lump of a car with the curves in all the wrong places.
There is no accounting for taste. IMO the pre facelift Clio II is a very pure design, lost a little with the facelift, likewise with the Laguna II for that matter.
Re engine noise, the auto gearbox causes the engine to rev more than you might expect though the 1.6 8v engine with manual box is good to drive, torquey, quire a light car and well spaced gear ratios. Both the 1.4 and 1.6 16v engines are crisper when revved hard though even the latter is not as gutsy at low revs as the 1.6 8v.
There is not much leg room in the rear though the interior fit and finish is very good and stand up to years of three kids etc very well.
Re the doors, IME the shut nice and solidly though the catches neeed occasional adjustment.
|
|
|
|
In the last JD power survey, I believe the clio was one of the top french cars for reliability../overall score..although not perfect maybe slightly higher than the average score.
Mother in law has one and no major problems.
|
To be fair, the door closing issue may well have been specific to that car -- it felt well built enough (actually "heavier"-feeling in general, if you know what I mean, than the Laguna I've driven), it just didn't sound it.
I was surprised about the interior though. Yes it was all screwed together very well, and I know that hard plastics tend to be more hard-wearing than soft-touch ones anyway, but some Korean and Japanese car makers get a lot of flak for the perceived quality of the plastics in their interiors and yet the Clio seemed no better to my eyes whatsoever.
On the plus side, it drove well, and the controls were pleasant to use, and these are more important to me anyway. One nice little touch was the indicator ticks that sounded left or right depending on their direction -- neat. If it hadn't been so cramped, I might have had more time for it.
Can't really comment on reliability. I know my dad's wife's one has had a fair few problems with poor starting, but this is likely to be related to its age more than anything else -- forgivable.
Edited by jase1 on 25/10/2008 at 14:17
|
|
|
|
