Lease vs my 2009 Civic

I always thought they were NA.

I'm only really interested in my monthly car costs so if it doesnt make a worthwhile difference it isnt worth changing, the handling and turbo engine etc are just benefits of the change, I like them though if they were available new in budget I would be interested in one, massive spanner in the works though I completely forgot I could do with 5 doors, silly me :(

At the moment I feel like I'm paying too much for an old car that I dont really enjoy, I knew this when I bought it and I knew I could afford to do it and planned to pay it off in 3/4 years and then sell it and have a decent deposit toward something newer but I didn't know I wouldn't have the patience to see it through

Also I sit in traffic most of the time or am limited to 50MPH on my commute so having anymore than a little eco engine seems pointless, the fun to drive factor is for the weekend when I get to drive on more interesting roads with less traffic

The money I am saving to pay it off can be spent on more interesting or worthwhile things too
 
Last edited:
My Golf on lease is costing me 150 a month with 1000 deposit. Not sure if the deals still available but that works out at 185 over the 2 years.
 
I'm going to have a long think about this but if I wait until I owe less than £5k, sell it, pay off the finance and take out a lease for under £130 on a small turbo engine car I will be better off by somewhere between £50 and £100 a month not including the amount I'm currently saving to pay off my current car

You're missing the part where after you've paid off the finance on your civic you'll have a car worth ~£3-4k, whereas with a lease, at the end of it you'll have nothing to show for the monthly payments

Is the 34 mpg with mostly town/city miles? Quite impressed by that if so.

The 1.8 civic is pretty good on petrol, I get ~41mpg from mine with a 12mile commute of ~50/50 motorway/urban roads, (and that's with putting my foot down when I get to the NSL sections :p) I used to get ~52 when I was doing a longer commute along the m6/m69
 
Last edited:
The 1.8 civic is pretty good on petrol, I get ~41mpg from mine with a 12mile commute of ~50/50 motorway/urban roads, (and that's with putting my foot down when I get to the NSL sections :p) I used to get ~52 when I was doing a longer commute along the m6/m69

For a mid sized hatchback at 140bhp that's pretty good! Is the ride as hard as reviews make out?
 
Is the 34 mpg with mostly town/city miles? Quite impressed by that if so.

Morning commute motorway limited to 50MPH for 5 miles and then a mile on a A road. Return journey is the same but the motorway is bumper to bumper for at least 2/3 miles usually sometimes all 5

Impressive economy really, it'll do over 40mpg on a long run

Mine has 17" wheels and the ride isnt great, its an ES so doesnt have sport suspension either

I had a long think about leasing last night and still cant decide what to do, I'm worried I'll regret the smaller car choice mostly so I'm going to read into PCP if that doesnt suit for the same reasons then I'll just keep my Civic and see what I owe and what its worth next year
 
For a mid sized hatchback at 140bhp that's pretty good! Is the ride as hard as reviews make out?

Nah, it's ok on the cooking models if a bit fidgety


The fiesta doesn't handle much better either tbh despite being a smaller car so I think the OP might be putting the current car down a bit more than it deserves really.

Both have quite a quick rack which helps the sensation of them being chuckable. I'd also take the interior of the civic any day over any fiesta other than the ST - ours marks far too easily and silly little things keep breaking on the Fiesta I.e wheel buttons, DAB aerial mysteriously failed, dry joint innthe steering column. All minor and probably wouldn't happen with a new one, but that just wouldn't happen on the Honda
 
Don't forget that you're paying 175/m toward owning an asset that has value and a use (a car to drive). The 175/m equivalent on a lease also has the equivalent use (a car to drive in) but is otherwise dead money.

The true comparison is the depreciation on the asset, plus the premium associated with the finance setup. As the car is low value this is likely less than 175/m.

I would wager your car losing around a grand a year, so 83/m. I don't know how to calculate the finance premium without a load more info but it's basically the cost of borrowing. Probably no more than 20/m.

You then have to think about the amortised cost of the lease. A 6+23 dead with a headline figure of 175/m is really 211/m. A 9+23 is 233/m.

Once you have those headline figures look at differences in fuel, VED, running costs and insurance. You'll then have a comparable figure. I suspect you will be looking at somewhere in the region of the "175 lease" costing you about 100/m more.

All that's left to do is consider whether that figure is worth it for a new car on the drive :) the fiesta is an excellent car but see whether you can find a golf for similar money. The pistonheads lease thread is a good source of deal info.
 
Nah, it's ok on the cooking models if a bit fidgety


The fiesta doesn't handle much better either tbh despite being a smaller car so I think the OP might be putting the current car down a bit more than it deserves really.

Both have quite a quick rack which helps the sensation of them being chuckable. I'd also take the interior of the civic any day over any fiesta other than the ST - ours marks far too easily and silly little things keep breaking on the Fiesta I.e wheel buttons, DAB aerial mysteriously failed, dry joint innthe steering column. All minor and probably wouldn't happen with a new one, but that just wouldn't happen on the Honda

I've had all the common faults done on my Civic, clutch master cylinder, perished noisy window seal, sagging front bumper, faulty pan roof blinds. They arent without their frustrations either!

I wouldnt say the Civic was chuckable either but like i say, mine is on non sport suspension

I'm not putting the Civic down, it is what it is, the engine is great for a unit that was released ten years the economy is impressive, the car was released ten years ago and still looks great but is it worth £175 a month plus saving to pay it off? Dunno.
 
The only reason I mention handling is that it sounds like you're convinced they're rubbish, but having had both I can confirm that at the very best the Ford is not far away from being the same.

I can't see the change being "worth" it - but if you're determined to change I also don't think you're going to notice much financial impact either
 
I agree with you and you've driven owned both cars so cant argue with experience (A lot of people on here will but not me)

Rubbish is harsh, the ride is rubbish, the handling isn't great

I think I'm just going to pay into the finance to reduce the monthly, then late next year sell or trade in against something else
 
I've had all the common faults done on my Civic, clutch master cylinder, perished noisy window seal, sagging front bumper, faulty pan roof blinds. They arent without their frustrations either!

So in theory with all that done, there's less to go wrong going forward :)


I think I'm just going to pay into the finance to reduce the monthly, then late next year sell or trade in against something else

I think that's probably the best option. You can then consider your options more fully and won't really be any worse off than you are now (i.e. although you won't have any saved deposit money - you will have the civic fully paid off)
 
Yeah, I made use of the 12 month warranty so you're quite right less to go wrong while I concentrate on paying it off

I suppose the original plan was best all along, saved deposit money wont really matter, the money will be in the car.
 
For a mid sized hatchback at 140bhp that's pretty good! Is the ride as hard as reviews make out?

I don't find it too bad, although I have the 16" wheels which are apparently quite a bit better than the bigger ones for ride quality. The only issue I really have is I have to slow right down for speedbumps to avoid hitting the bottom of the front bumper! (This is however not a big deal for me as I used to have a severely lowered Mitsubishi Legnum which would bottom out on a bump in the road :p)
 
I've had all the common faults done on my Civic, clutch master cylinder, perished noisy window seal, sagging front bumper, faulty pan roof blinds. They arent without their frustrations either!

I wouldnt say the Civic was chuckable either but like i say, mine is on non sport suspension

I'm not putting the Civic down, it is what it is, the engine is great for a unit that was released ten years the economy is impressive, the car was released ten years ago and still looks great but is it worth £175 a month plus saving to pay it off? Dunno.

I don't think the saving to pay it off bit should really be taken into account when comparing figures though. It's not an "extra" cost on the Civic, it's an option you are taking. You could just as easily not save to pay it off, and continue on the payment schedule (I am not suggesting you do this).

If you do consider it in your calculations, you should probably also consider the same amount as "saving for a deposit on the next lease" to be completely fair to both scenarios.

But, aside from that, yes, keeping the Civic might be the sensible way to go. It shouldn't really cost much more than the monthly payments due and will be worth something to you at the end. Something a lease wont be. So to find the true comparable cost, you should try to factor in what your civic will be worth in approximately 2 years. While monthly payments may be less on some lease deals, the TCO may well be higher over the same period of time.
 
I don't think the saving to pay it off bit should really be taken into account when comparing figures though. It's not an "extra" cost on the Civic, it's an option you are taking. You could just as easily not save to pay it off, and continue on the payment schedule (I am not suggesting you do this).

If you do consider it in your calculations, you should probably also consider the same amount as "saving for a deposit on the next lease" to be completely fair to both scenarios.

But, aside from that, yes, keeping the Civic might be the sensible way to go. It shouldn't really cost much more than the monthly payments due and will be worth something to you at the end. Something a lease wont be. So to find the true comparable cost, you should try to factor in what your civic will be worth in approximately 2 years. While monthly payments may be less on some lease deals, the TCO may well be higher over the same period of time.

I know what you mean about the saving but if I dont I will have the car for so long that it will be worth peanuts and no longer be the stepping stone I originally wanted it to be.

The deposit for the next lease is spot on and the main reason I am not going ahead, £800 deposit on a smaller car over 24 months is £33 a month, that on top of the £125 and the monthly figure isnt as attractive as it was

I hope to have as much as possible toward paying off the Civic this time next year and either use what I've saved and the equity in the Civic as a deposit or trade it in ensuring I'm contributing a fair amount to the next car
 
Back
Top Bottom