Spec me a student car

tres

tres

tres

Soldato
Joined
16 Oct 2007
Posts
7,511
Location
UK
Hello you lot,

I'm useless when it comes to vehicles. The only vehicles I've ever really owned include a 1 litre Saxo I drove to Mongolia, golf buggies, and a rickshaw I've just driven across India. And boats.

Now it's a proper car decision.

Requirements:

Sub-£1000
1.4l minimum, as I'll be doing a few 5 hour drives here and there
I'm 30 so insurance isn't too much of an issue.
And for a student, so remotely fuel efficient would be great.

Any ideas?
Thanks!
 
sub £1000

Anything with MOT and tax.


and along with Motors tradition


MONDEO.

Personally though I don't know why it has to be over 1.4 just because you are doing long journeys.
I would hazard a guess most of it will be sat at cruising speed on the Motorway, you don't need MASSIF TORQUES!!!1111oneone for that.
A cheaper, more economical, smaller "city" car may be a bit more noisy and harsh but realistically you ain't going to be doing 5 hrs straight anyway.

My own choice if money were that tight, would be something much more frugal if you didn't need the mongdeos load carry capacity..

a 106... you know how reliable they can be having driven one (same as Saxo but with different bumpers) across Europe.
 
Last edited:
233 said:
petrol mondeo unless your doing 25k or more a year
Click to expand...


I keep seeing people say this and to be quite honest it boils my ****
It's a £1000 (or less) ****ter it doesn't have any diesel premium tax on the purchase price, it's not going to break down any more often than the petrol equivalent. they are both inherantly (to all intents and purposes) at the end of their life.


2000 Petrol Mondeo 2.0i > 33.2 mpg

2001 Diesel Mondeo 2.0TDCi > 48.7 mpg

Put £60 worth of fuel in to each and you will go....

2000 Petrol Mondeo 2.0i > 332 miles

2001 Diesel Mondeo 2.0TDCi > 463 miles

That's a difference of 131 miles further travelled in the diesel For every single "tank full" for the same cost.

Road fund licence..

2000 Petrol Mondeo 2.0i > £225

2001 Diesel Mondeo 2.0TDCi > £140

Another saving of £85 every year

Why would you possibly want a petrol car... :confused:
 
Fuzz said:
it's not going to break down any more often than the petrol equivalent.
Click to expand...

Actually it almost certainly is which is the major reason not to bother. A sub £1k TDCi Mondeo is a complete and utter liability. They are ruined - it is, as you say below, at the end of its life.

By contrast a petrol one just.. well, works.

2000 Petrol Mondeo 2.0i > 33.2 mpg

2001 Diesel Mondeo 2.0TDCi > 48.7 mpg

Put £60 worth of fuel in to each and you will go....

2000 Petrol Mondeo 2.0i > 332 miles

2001 Diesel Mondeo 2.0TDCi > 463 miles

That's a difference of 131 miles further travelled in the diesel For every single "tank full" for the same cost.
Click to expand...

This is remarkably simplistic, infact I had to check this post was actually made by you because you are usually on the ball :p

A 2001 Mondeo TDCi will only be doing 48mpg on a nice long easy run. It's not going to be doing it around town or anything like that. Under the same circumstances, a 2.0 petrol Mondeo isn't going to be only doing 33mpg. 33mpg is crap. I used to hit 40+ on Motorway trips when I had a 2 litre petrol Mondeo. I reckon on about 10mpg difference not nearly 20mpg.


Why would you possibly want a petrol car... :confused:
Click to expand...

Because it's simpler and less hassle, and everyone and his dog wants a cheap diesel.

I can't think of a worse car to buy for under £1k on a budget than one fitted with a commonrail turbodiesel engine.

Now, if we go a bit older to something with an oldschool mechanical injection engine, thats a completely different story - something with a PUG 1.9TD or Ford 1.8TD engine for example... completely changes the game. But they are old...
 
Last edited:
Back to the Pug 106 then.. :D

averaging 68 to the gallon (best 74)
Has never broken down in 8 years of ownership (apart from running out of fuel :o )
Quite happily drive it to the bottom of Cornwall without blinking. (3.5 hrs non stop)
There and back on one tank.
Drove it through floods, dove it to bloody cambridge last weekend in that downpour to collect a new engine for the Discovery.. That cast Iron lump got thrown in the boot quite happily.
PERFECT for a student, never wash it, never hoover it and only today I was thinking... hmm better check the oil as I haven't done for a year! but then it doesn't leak or use any so I know it'll be fine. :D
 
You want something comfy for long trips, driving my ZS 300 miles every 2 weeks was like enhanced interrogation. I had to put a subwoofer in to drown out the wind noise.
 
[TW]Fox;25129504 said:
This is remarkably simplistic, infact I had to check this post was actually made by you because you are usually on the ball :p

A 2001 Mondeo TDCi will only be doing 48mpg on a nice long easy run. It's not going to be doing it around town or anything like that. Under the same circumstances, a 2.0 petrol Mondeo isn't going to be only doing 33mpg. 33mpg is crap. I used to hit 40+ on Motorway trips when I had a 2 litre petrol Mondeo. I reckon on about 10mpg difference not nearly 20mpg.
Click to expand...

Just for reference it's remarkably simplistic because I used advertised average fuel consumption figures for both as I have never owned one to know any "real world figures". I certainly wasn't pulling the figures out of my ass anyway. it was all info from Autotrader..
In fact I pulled details of a few others but omitted to post them...
The 1.8TD isn't common rail, shall we use that instead?

1999 Diesel Mondeo 1.8 TD > 44.8 mpg

1999 Diesel Mondeo 1.8 TD > 426 miles on the same £60 of fuel

that's still a difference of 94 miles further travelled in the diesel compared to the 2.0L Petrol

Find one of those without .... ok not a lot of rot in it and you are truly sorted... until it does have a lot of rot in it that is, then you are ****ed :D



If you wanted comparison between the 1.8 Petrol and 1.8 TD then...

2000 Petrol Mondeo 1.8i > 35.3 mpg

2000 Petrol Mondeo 1.8i > 353 miles on £60

which is 73 miles further in the diesel 1.8.

and to bed........
 
Last edited:
SO what we can gather from this consensus is finding something with an old school diesel engine, not much rot in it, something a reasonable size so as not to fatigue poor jonny on his 5 hr expedition through the treacherous lands of the M5 on the way home to mummy for Sunday Roast after a week on Cornflakes and water?
 
We use Peugeots and Volvos at work... and I have to say that the Pugs are just better all-rounders for cost. I believe we picked up a 1.6L Petrol Volvo for the same price as a 1.9L Diesel Pug. Volvo was a horrific vehicle to drive - it was so underpowered it almost made you cry. Pug on the otherhand had enough poke to get you by when you needed it.

Diesel = more eco, nasty soundtrack (in the 2 Litre and lower engines)
Petrol = worse eco, nicer soundtrack
 
Come to think of it, The old 306 1.9D-turbo was a singing little Pumper diesel engine if you can't stomach the size and general crapness of the 106.

Kin ell I did some miles in one of them when I was younger.. :D easily does over a ton ten.. I had some stars to prove it. :D
 
TDCi Mondeo's do have more issues than the petrol equivalent it's true. Add the fact they're more expensive to fix and usually more expensive to buy the petrol would be the better choice.

But saying that, I have just bought a '03 (light facelift) TDCi LX 115 Mondeo. Full MOT, 6 months tax, FSH for about the same as you'd spend on a simfree high end smartphone. So they are out there, if you're willing to put the time in to finding them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom