Family car for £5-6k, recommendations please
- Thread starter broona
- Start date
And just to throw something else a little different into the mix, any opinions on the 2.0T FSI Skoda Octavia VRS, clicky?
Same size and MPG as my current car (thought they were bigger?) but with a little turn of speed, how reliable are they?
Quite like the non turbo'd Octavia's too, any good, or is the Focus estate a better car?
Same size and MPG as my current car (thought they were bigger?) but with a little turn of speed, how reliable are they?
Quite like the non turbo'd Octavia's too, any good, or is the Focus estate a better car?
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 280
Have you had a look at the Honda 2.2 CDTI accord's?
cheap to run & tax. Very comfy on motorways too + you get the famed Honda reliability.
cheap to run & tax. Very comfy on motorways too + you get the famed Honda reliability.
The octavia VRS is going to be better to drive than a focus 1.6 estate
But it's got 18 inch alloy wheels, costs a lot to fuel and tax. It costs significantly more to run than a 1.6 focus
If you have the money to run these sorts of cars, there are more cars you can be looking at than a 1.6 focus
But it's got 18 inch alloy wheels, costs a lot to fuel and tax. It costs significantly more to run than a 1.6 focus
If you have the money to run these sorts of cars, there are more cars you can be looking at than a 1.6 focus
Again, a little too big, appreciate it's only 20cm or so longer than the other cars I'm looking at, but that makes a huge difference where I park.
I'd be happy with a car that costs as much to run as my current 2.0 petrol, group 11 insurance, group k tax, 17" alloyed Primera, but I'd prefer it to cost less to run if possible.
A car's essential to me, and I'd like the best I can get for my money, but obviously don't want it to cost the earth to run.
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 280
Can I suggest a Honda Civic then? they've got loads of space for the family and are quite hard wearing.
I don't think I'd be able to get the dog comfortably in the boot, worth a look though.
Had a couple of French cars recently, and I think I'd prefer something different this time around.
I like the A4, but I think you generally get more car with the Octavia, it should be newer and higher specced for the same money.
A quick Google suggests my dog may fit reasonably comfortably in a Civic, surprising!
Found a decent looking one locally too, it's a diesel which I don't really need, albeit a cracking diesel by the reviews, but it's an idea of what you can get, clicky!
The Civic boot really is massive - easily large enough to fit a large lab size dog in! Looks like a good example - have seen cars with that engine on over double the mileage without any major problems.
The 1.8 petrol is a decent enough engine too, should return around 38-40mpg and is responsive enough at the top of the rev range.
The 1.8 petrol is a decent enough engine too, should return around 38-40mpg and is responsive enough at the top of the rev range.
Stay away from stuff like the VRS then. It's effectively a large hot hatch, and comes with the costs associated with hot hatches. The octavia VRS is group 18 for insurance and is going to use a lot more fuel than a 2.0 N/A petrol.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Of course it isn't.
It's Group 30 under the new scheme. The old scheme has been out of use for some time but it wasn't an 18.
Shall we point it out or leave you to figure out the rather spectacular mistake you've made there?
edit - You've noticed it
It's hardly their fault that you looked up the wrong car is it?
face palm time
Double face palm as that figure isn't even correct. Theres no way the old MK1 Fabia VRS diesel was group 18.
I would have thought the Fabia is IG18 under the new 50 group system isn't it? Which is what Parkers will be quoting.
It is 18 for the Fabia, Parkers quote the new system.The MK1 Fabia VRS was group 9 or thereabouts, theres no way it was group 18.
so
A) i looked up the wrong car
and
B) the car i did look up had the wrong value
I just double checked this with my own car, which is listed as IG29, so they're using updated groupings, as there was only the 20 groups when my car was in production.
So all in all, the only fail here has been from you
Ah that makes sense then.
According to this
http://www.vrsworld.co.uk/skoda_vrs_specs.html
The 2005 VRS was group 16 under the old scheme.
According to this
http://www.vrsworld.co.uk/skoda_vrs_specs.html
The 2005 VRS was group 16 under the old scheme.