Another spec me a [sports] car. £6-£7K

Ahleckz

Ahleckz

Ahleckz

Soldato
Joined
7 Nov 2009
Posts
19,879
Location
Glasgow
I posted a thread a month or two ago, got drunk and decided I was going to buy an Aston. This isn't going to happen, and this is a proper thread.

I don't really want to spend more than £7k, as insurance is an issue (young, and dodgy post code) and I want to have a couple of grand for repairs and stuff. So really a total pot of £10k would be the total upper of the limit. A 350 costs £1400 to insure, a MX5 around £950.

I'm after something quite fun, that is chuckable in the corners but will be comfortable for longer trips (so no 7's!). Soft top/hard top doesn't really fuss me.

I test drove a 350z yesterday, and plan to drive a MX5 soon as well as a Z4.

Fuel costs aren't a huge worry (I wouldn't be driving 350z's if they were!) but I wouldn't want to get anything with a lower consumption than that of the 350.
I'm concerned about the costs of dealing with a broken BMW.
The MX5 would be the *sensible* choice. It provides most of what I want, but I'm not sold on the looks and part of me thinks that whilst I have the chance I ought to get something less sensible.

So really, I'm just after some advice as I'm quite ignorant and what I should be looking for when driving said cars, and issues (though I've done research) and perhaps any other cars which I haven't considered.

There'll be no finance involved.

So, if you kind motors people would be so kind to offer any advice. And no, Robbo, I won't be buying an Aston.
 
If it was for me then the 350z or S2000 would be a no brainer, both are in a whole other league to the mx-5. I would consider how likely you are to wrap something like a 350z on a rainy day though if you're a younger and (I assume) less experienced driver, something like the mx-5 or mr2 might not be a bad place to start.

If you've driven a 350z then be prepared for a huge shock in terms of straight line grunt when driving the mx-5. The trade off is that the little mazda is really very controllable, you'd be doing well to have a big accident. An Mr2 is more precise - better handling car imo than the mx-5 with the weight over the middle but you need to be careful in the wet. If the back end goes it's often more luck than skill that will save it.

Also be careful if looking at the Mr2 - ideally you don't want anything older than 2005 due to potential engine troubles, though the budget would easily see that anyway (plus my 2001 car was fine, but it's a chance I was willing to take on a £2k car).
 
Last edited:
350Z - Quicker than MX-5. For £7k, would be looking at 2003-2004.

MX-5 - convertible for the summer, For £7k, softtop would be 2007-2008, and if you stretch a bit 2009-2010 with original warranty. Hardtop would be difficult for that price.

Z4 - Quicker than MX-5, and again looking at 2003-2004 model. Ride is much harder than MX-5 IMO.

S2000 - Expensive insurance. 2004-2005 model.

If you have only driven front wheel drive cars, any of these will be a vast improvement in fun. I would just test drive each car, preferably in the same weather conditions to make things fair, and whichever you like best, go with that.
I don't think any of them are really designed for long distance driving, but I only needed a small amount of unfolding ;) when I drove from Essex to Hull and back in a day in my MX-5
 
You can get yourself a nice Z4 for 7k. Still love mine after nearly 2 years of ownership :)

Insurance is a bit crazy on the S2K's and the fuel economy on the 350Z is insane (although it is a very fast car).
 
If it was my money I would be spending it on a Subaru. Although depending on your circumstances insurance may be mental.
 
Similar decision I went through earlier this year (my budget was a bit higher, I also looked at Boxsters), and some good information in my thread: http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18338496

From my research I think your reserve for repairs and stuff would cover potential issues with a Z4, the engines are fairly simple N/A ones compared to other BMWs and the roof motor failing (design flaw, it gets wet) is the only particularly expensive common fault. Depending on the mileage you can get a warranty for £40-60/month.
 
jimg1.jpg


Left-field alternative. 1992 onwards Chevrolet C4 Corvette.

Cons: All left-hand drive.

Pros: Faster than a 350Z. Faster than an MX-5. Similar fuel consumption to a 350Z, maybe better on the motorways. Effortless cruiser. Well equipped. Capable in the bends. Roof panel comes off for sunny days. Cheaper to maintain and service. Cheap to insure. Different. Massive amounts of presence.
 
Last edited:
1992 corvette is considerably older too. And for a younger driver, it would lack the kind of electronic aids that will be needed for when the going gets tough.

One of the main reasons I went for a 350Z over a Supra TT is because the 350Z is a lot more progressive, handling, power and it is a lot more modern. So I had the comfort of airbags, ESP, traction control.
 
NathWraith said:
1992 corvette is considerably older too. And for a younger driver, it would lack the kind of electronic aids that will be needed for when the going gets tough.

One of the main reasons I went for a 350Z over a Supra TT is because the 350Z is a lot more progressive, handling, power and it is a lot more modern. So I had the comfort of airbags, ESP, traction control.
Click to expand...

Meh. It has airbags, traction control, four-wheel ABS backed by powerful brakes, an incredibly resiliant chassis and safe cockpit, quick ratio steering and many have electronically adjustable suspension as well. They've all got LSDs too, although you could view that as a pro or con on that front...

There are minor differences between years though, but the above is correct for most '93 on models.

They also have an abundance of traction and the ability to put that power down well - the throttle's not a switch :p

Hell, I even drove mine around in winter conditions without any troubles. I was a 'younger' driver at the time as well :D

IvanDobskey said:
I can't imagine the running costs on a 1992 corvette to be all that sensible
Click to expand...

All it needs is tyres, brakes and fluids. No cambelts, extremely tough powertrains, very reliable. I used to average about 25-28mpg out of my 300BHP+ LT1 as well, and that was an automatic. 0-60mph in 5.5s. Easily maintained by any local garage or specialist, although you can do the majority of it yourself. They're built to be used daily and cover lots of ground, so they don't mind being used.

The only pain is the plugs on later LT1 models, as pictured. The service interval for them is every 60,000 miles and you need a ramp to change them as they're under the exhaust manifolds. Doesn't cost much to have them done, though.

Insurance can be very cheap too, although that is - as always - dependant on the person.
 
Last edited:
Yea, don't really want a classic or something of the age of that Corvette. I don't have the mechanical inclination to give it the care it would likely require. Plus, being under 25 I would have trouble getting a classic policy. Whilst I'm happy to do some of the stuff myself, oil changes and the like, I live in a flat so access would be a problem. Though I'm sure I could store stuff in my Mum's garage 40 miles away and do any work there.

I think if I bought an MX5, I'd be planning dropping the budget somewhat. I don't think that they are special enough to warrant £7k on but perhaps I'm being unfair.
The S2000 is silly insurance money, so I'd have to drop the car budget and get an older/more milage example and don't think I want to do that.

So, the best option would go and test drive each and decide based on that? But my budget should get me into a decent, albeit older, model? Any particular issues I should look out for when looking at the cars?
 
You don't need to care for it per se, just check the fluids - as you would with any other car. It is, for all intents and purposes, just a "modern" car after all. Just happens to be a bit older :p

You wouldn't need a classic policy - I didn't have it on one at the time :)

But anyway, at the end of the day, you'd have to want one :)

Have you had a chance to drive an MX-5 yet? Probably well worth doing. If you enjoy it, it's a damn sensible choice. I only say 'if' because my colleague drove one recently and really didn't get on with it - different strokes for different folks and all that...
 
IvanDobskey said:
I can't imagine the running costs on a 1992 corvette to be all that sensible :p
Click to expand...

Funny enough, I've always read that they are fairly simple to maintain etc seeing as it is just a big old V8 and any mechanic and his dog could work on one. :D

Not that I would personally know. :o
 
I don't like the looks of the MR2, parent's had one (mother put it into a field) and whilst I didn't ever get to drive it it wasn't a particularly nice plcae to be.

I really can't think of anything else bar the 3 listed in the OP. Head says MX5, heart is going over to the 350 but isn't particularly strong.
 
Fair enough, though they are much the same inside as the mx5 imo. I think the mazda makes the most sense for you, use it to learn how the handle rwd in both the dry and wet then splash out on a 350z in a couple of years. Power isn't everything especially if you have decent roads where you are
 
What was your thoughts when you test drove the 350Z? Fuel consumption put me off! Had my heart set on one.

I was also between a few of those cars you mentioned, Z4 also. Ended up shying away and looking at hot hatches... More comfortable, practical and still just as quick, if not quicker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom