1st Car Options
- Thread starter Saint
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 940
- Location
- Manchester
If your looking at a Focus, dont rule out an Astra. They are not quite as good and don't look cool but I just picked up a 51 plate 1.8 SRi for under 2 grand. Personally I had a Fiesta 1.25 Zetec as a first car, pretty decent but a bit small.
Nowhere near as good and there's absolutely no reason why you should buy one over a Focus for the same money.
Associate
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 2,211
Postcode, probably. I've found that's the biggest factor in insurance costs. If I move to the other side of town, my insurance premium gets halved!
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 940
- Location
- Manchester
That was kind of my point, you can get a much better specced one for less money.
Nowhere near as good? Absolute crap.
Only plus point of my Focus over my Astra was that it handles slightly better when pushing it and it looks better.
Astra is a nicer everyday drive and faster.
Faster than what? As for an nicer everyday drive, I don't see it. The Focus rides better, handles better, engines are smoother, gearchange is better and the steering has much better feel to it. In fact the Astra is utter trash.
The current and last two Astras are well known to be good cars, aside from a distinct lack of power from the smaller engines and awful interior, they are excellent cars imo.
Although Vauxhall aftersales is shocking.
I would say, look harder, it was the case back when I passed my test in the mid 90's that certain cars were massively more to insure than others.
To insure a 1.6 escort when I passed my test at 18? £1000 tpft.
To insure the 2.8 V6 Granada Ghia I eventually bought the week after I passed my test? £198 fully comp.
Today, to insure my Neon R/t for myself and my wife, is £210 fully comp.
For us to insure the Fiesta together? £250.
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 940
- Location
- Manchester
Stop being such a little fanboy, to call it dire is ridiculous.
As for your faster question, I'm comparing a 1.8 of both.
As for your faster question, I'm comparing a 1.8 of both.
About 8 more bhp and a slightly faster 0-60 time, not that most people could actually tell the difference.
As for the fanboy comment, I suppose the motoring press who seem to agree with my points are fanboys too. If you are happy with your purchase that's great but if someone wants a Focus they should buy one, not look at the poorer competitor.
As for the fanboy comment, I suppose the motoring press who seem to agree with my points are fanboys too. If you are happy with your purchase that's great but if someone wants a Focus they should buy one, not look at the poorer competitor.
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 940
- Location
- Manchester
8.5 seconds compared with 10? Most of the motoring press agree that the Astra is a decent car too...
I'm comparing 2 cars I've owned, I like both. I don't think the Focus is worth the (considerable) premium for a less well specced, slower car.
I'm comparing 2 cars I've owned, I like both. I don't think the Focus is worth the (considerable) premium for a less well specced, slower car.
8.5 Seconds? Where are you getting that from?
http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/specs/Detail.aspx?deriv=14881
Wow, just 113 bhp from a 1.8 engine that was still made up to 2004?
One would suspect that is down to tuning for emissions and MPG rather than an engine that is stretched at it's limit for BHP.
Meh I hate emissions laws, I mean it's laughable, A 1993 Corolla liftback with a 1600cc engine has 113 bhp, like a 1.8l 2003 ( okay, it's a 98 model, bus still) astra, yet has better MPG ( 38 instead of 36). At least it has more torque.
Engines should be tuned for as much power as possible while maintaining reliability, not (co2) emissions
.
Last edited:
Engines should be tuned for as much power as possible while maintaining reliability, not (co2) emissions
I disagree. Get the people who don't care for driving in the most economical cars so enthusiasts can burn away at will
I disagree. Get the people who don't care for driving in the most economical cars so enthusiasts can burn away at will
Emissions aren't the same thing as economy
. Often they are closely related but I'm just saying I think CO2 on it's own shouldn't even be a point of interest in a car, and find it a shame governments actually moan about this.Economy, reliability and performance are important in my eyes.
Co2? Bah.
Last edited:
