Hyundai Coupe 1.6 v 2.0L on €??

headaball21

Hey, Im thinking of buyin an 02 Hyundai Coupe, I really like the 2.L but ive got nothing but grief from everyone sayin its gonna cost me a fortune on petrol and all the rest of it! So I dont know wat to do!
Ive worked out the extra cost of buying a 2.0 and in a year it will cost me an extra €1000 including ins tax and petrol, which personally I dont mind seen as tough Im saving €2000 on the expected askin price.
I drive ~50 miles a week to work.....
I dont know wat to do .....help?
Will I be sorry?

H

r3nu4l

What do you want from the car? The 1.6 is fine if you want a coupe with no guts. The 2.0 will certainly be better but I don't know enough about the Hyundai Coupe to talk about that model itself.

By the way, 50 miles a week commute to and from work? Really? I want your commute! Mine is 80 miles a day

robbie99

Go for it. You've already calculated how much extra it will cost. If you can afford it you're going in with your eyes open so you're unlikely to regret it.

headaball21

robbie99 wrote: »

Go for it. You've already calculated how much extra it will cost. If you can afford it you're going in with your eyes open so you're unlikely to regret it.

Ohh im so excited Tanks for the comments
Cheers:P
H

bazz26

The 2.0 litre is not that much quicker than the 1.6 litre in the real world so I could not see the justification in buying one to be honest. The Coupe is all about looking sporty which is fine but if you want something with a bit of performance then something like a Celica will do it better.

On another note the 2.0 litre Coupe is very hard to sell in Ireland so might be worth thinking about before buying one. Prepared to run it into the ground.

Gulliver

headaball21 wrote: »

Ohh im so excited Tanks for the comments
Cheers:P
H

Definitely go for the 2.0. I worked it out that the 1.6 isn't that much of a saving on fuel using published MPG. In reality both the 1.6 and 2.0 are less economical than the official figures.

Enjoy! (you'll probably want the black 05 headlights - get searching ebay now!)

Gulliver

bazz26 wrote: »

The 2.0 litre is not that much quicker than the 1.6 litre in the real world so I could not see the justification in buying one to be honest. The Coupe is all about looking sporty which is fine but if you want something with a bit of performance then something like a Celica will do it better.

On another note the 2.0 litre Coupe is very hard to sell in Ireland so might be worth thinking about before buying one. Prepared to run it into the ground.

Bah humbug!:P True, it doesn't have the performance of the Celica, but it's still a nice drive. You won't be able to sell it either:(

B00MSTICK

I assume you've taken each model for a test drive?
If you think the 2L is worth the extra then go for it.

You're buying for you not someone else!

E92

Don't mind the nonsense about a bigger engine being dearer to run - because it will have a lot more power you won't need to press the accelerator half as much and hence it turns out that outside of city driving, the larger engine will probably end up using *less* fuel than the smaller one as it will have an easier life due to the added power it produces.

The only thing that is dearer about the larger engine is the road tax and insurance, depending on your age. That's it.

What I will say is that Hyundai Coupés aren't very desirable, and that most people buying these will only be interested in the looks, and therefore will only want the 1.6 when you want to sell it on. That and the popular but 100% incorrect myth about larger engines ruining you on fuel costs doesn't help the resale value of the 2.0.

of course in the UK and in any normal country they'd laugh at someone only buying a 1.6, and the 2.0 and even the 2.7 V6 are what's favoured but we are rather sad in this country and love our pint sized engines for no good reason really.

If you're getting a good deal on the 2.0 then there is absolutely no reason to pay more for an inferior engine. Why would anyone pay more for something that is not as good?

Stephen

Having had a 1.6 in the past myself, I say go for the 2.0. It has around 130-140bhp whereas the 1.6 has around 100-110.

Eoin

E92 wrote: »

we are rather sad in this country and love our pint sized engines for no good reason really.

Or 2.81560521 imperial pint-sized engine in this case.

Anyway - performance isn't always at the top of the list for everyone. Some people are happy with an A to B car, and any additional power would probably be completely wasted on them.

Will you be going for a V8 e39 next year yourself?

tin79

i would agree with bazz26. i have been in both the 1.6 and the 2.0 when my girlfriend was buying one. i found there to be very little difference in performance.

there was a a little bit of extra in the 2.0 but not enough to make me want to get one given the extra cost, difficulty in selling on, higher tax and higher insurance. i would doubt there would be much difference in fuel consumption though really.

she went for the 1.6 in the end. the coupes are fine for what they are, they look good but if you are looking for a performance car i wouldnt get a coupe.

Barr

Saving 2 k and your getting a more poky , better equiped car ..its a no brainer for me.

There would not be a substancial difference in runing cost between a 2.0 and a 1.6 that would negate for initial outlay .

E92

Barr wrote: »

Saving 2 k and your getting a more poky , better equiped car ..its a no brainer for me.

There would not be a substancial difference in runing cost between a 2.0 and a 1.6 that would negate for initial outlay .

+1000.

It really is a no-brainer for anyone with any bit of interest in cars really. It's not like we're comparing the running costs of a 1.6 with a 3.5 litre V6 or something with a large engine like that, where the financial penalty of running that size of engine is quite considerable.

The only "cost" of the bigger engine is the fact you'll be spending the grand total of €162 extra per year or barely €3 a week more on tax, plus insurance depending on age.

robbie99

E92 wrote: »

The only "cost" of the bigger engine is the fact you'll be spending the grand total of €162 extra per year or barely €3 a week more on tax, plus insurance depending on age.

Don't mean to be picky here but OP as already done the calculations and when you add in the insurance and fuel consumption it's €1,000 extra per year. (€20 per week.)

E92

That's fair enough, but I'd be interested to know how the extra €1,000 breaks down. I know that €162 is on tax, so where does the other €838 come from.

Because using official mpg figures to work out the extra fuel cost can often have no relation whatsoever to the real world mpg figures.

The EU tests involve driving the car extremely gently, putting practically no load on the engine at all(and thereby requiring an extremely limited amount of performance from the engine) so it's hardly surprising that smaller engines do well in these tests.

As we know from hybrid cars, the tests can often have no relation to what happens in the real world.

The only real extra cost of a larger engine I can see is the fact it will be harder to sell on, which the OP clearly realises, and after that it's really down to age and hence the cost of insurance. Obviously the younger the OP is the more the insurance will go up because of the bigger engine, but there are people not even 20 driving cars with a lot more power than even the 2.0 Coupe as well.

I wouldn't say even the 2.0 was particularly powerful, certainly not compared to a Levin, 20V Corolla, Civic SiR, Integra etc.

Mossir

buy a Toyota Celica

Barr

Mossir wrote: »

buy a Toyota Celica

Thats all very well but comparatively speaking the celica is far more expensive than a coupe of an equivelant year.

If the op is looking for value for money the 2.0 Coupe is a good choice as the 1.6 is inflated due to the Irish mentality of anything over 1.6 incurs high running costs - which simply aint true.

robbie99

I guess the OP is looking at a manual rather than an auto. According to Parkers, 1.6 is rated at 37 mpg. 2.0 is 35 mpg. Not much difference - let's say 6% worse mileage with the 2.0. When I had my 1.6 coupe I was getting 26 mpg. Whenever I was on an economy buzz I could achieve 30 mpg. 9,000 miles a year was costing me in the region of €1,500 in petrol. If I apply that 6% to my own driving I'd expect to pay an extra €90 (let's round it up to €100) for petrol.

2009 motor tax rates are €445 and €614 for the 1.6 and 2.0 respectively. That's a difference of €169.

Now the insurance. I'm guessing that headaball is 21, living in Dublin with one years no claims. Quick quote from FBD (Third Party only) is €1,388 on the 1.6 and €1,481 on the 2.0. Difference is €93 :eek:

That adds up to a lot less than €1,000. Hmmm.

bazz26

Normally I am all for choosing a higher capacity engine over the smaller pint size one but in the instance of the Hyundai Coupe the 2.0 litre in the real world from a performance point of view is not worth it unless it is going very cheap. The 1.6 will do the same job as the 2.0 in most real world day to day driving in this country anyway.

If the OP really wants a 2.0 litre sporty type car then the Coupe is not the one imo I would be looking at. There are other choices out for similar money such as maybe a Peugeot 406 coupe or a BMW 318Ci.

B00MSTICK

*cough* FTO *cough*

headaball21

Ok heres my breakdown .....the diff in tax from 1/2/08 figures on motor tax website is €162, My insurance on 2.0 L extra on top of my current premium is €230 compared to €142 on a 1.6. So far for tax + ins thats €250 in diff.Then petrol on ave with a 1.6 say it cost around €45 a week for the year thats €2340 So the total cost for the year with the 1.6 is €3350.
On average with the 2.0L say the petrol was €60 a week in the year thats €3120, So the total cost of the 2.0L is at €4389 for the yr. Thats a difference of €1030 between the 1.6 and 2L for the year. Bear in mind these are just ave's on petrol obv I dont know exactly how much Ill be spending ...... but I just worked this out for myself so Id have an idea. Im not a big prformance car buff type thing but I at least wanted to buy a 1.6 L drove one before for a few months and wouldnt go back. The 2.0L in my opinion is a slightly nicer car albeit slighty the same but the interior is leather which ye cant get with a 1.6

E92

headaball21 wrote: »

So far for tax + ins thats €250 in diff.

And that is going to be it really.

Only €250 extra a year to run the 2.0.

There is no way a 2.0 will be 33% more expensive(you said you think a 2.0 will be €60 on petrol a week compared to €45 a week for the 1.6) on petrol than a 1.6.

The only way a 2.0 would be that much more expensive to fill up is if there is something seriously wrong with the engine.

The official EU tests are often very inaccurate, and because they drive the cars in these tests so gently with no relationship whatsoever to what goes on in the real world they are obviously going to favour smaller engined cars.

I hope you're not using these to base projected fuel costs.

In reality is impossible to say how much more you will spend on fuel by choosing the 2.0. Unless you have driven them back to back over the same roads at the same speeds and the same driving style it is absolutely impossible to tell. There are just so many factors that can vary fuel consumption.

It certainly would not be beyond the bounds of possibility that you might spend less on fuel for the bigger engine. It is equally not unreasonable to suggest that you may spend 10-15% more on petrol by choosing the 2.0.

Nobody can tell you that.

The official mpg figures are a very rough guide, and by all means use them, because they give an indication as to what you might expect, but don't for a second treat them as Gospel. They're done under very specific circumstances and are designed to give people information as to what is economical and what is not, but they are done in circumstances that have SFA to do with real world driving.

In out of town driving, you don't average only 63 km/h, do you? Neither do I, but we're supposed to believe that this actually happens going by what the official tests think constitutes out of town driving.

headaball21

Yes it only a €250 difference with regard to my insurance (considering ill be getting a discount) and tax on the 2.0 compared to the 1.6. I have 1 yr no claims bonus and im female so I suppose that helps :P

With regards to the petrol ok im just estimating im not going by any official figures im just trying to prepare myself for the worst case I cant see my petrol being that much myself but ya never know

Biro

headaball21 wrote: »

Yes it only a €250 difference with regard to my insurance (considering ill be getting a discount) and tax on the 2.0 compared to the 1.6. I have 1 yr no claims bonus and im female so I suppose that helps :P

With regards to the petrol ok im just estimating im not going by any official figures im just trying to prepare myself for the worst case I cant see my petrol being that much myself but ya never know

If you put €45 into the 1.6 in a week, then the 2.0 will cost you €50 or even a bit less. The difference is feck all. If leather is the only reason for going for the 2 litre, then you can get leather in some 1.6's, but it's rare enough. Plenty of them in the UK with leather. The only difference between the 1.6 and 2 litre visually are the twin exaust pipes versus 1 on the 1.6.

colm_mcm

Just buy some thing else. the 2.0 is slow too. there are much better options out there if you want to tax a 2.0.

dattsbud

I just bought a 2ltr and I couldn't be happier. Yeh, it is a bit of a gas guzzler but I was driving a 1.3 before so is to be expected. Still, not as bad as I thought. Still got about 130km from €25 petrol.
My insurance, fully comp female age 36, only cost me an extra €100 (total of €380/yr). So I would suggest shopping around for a better insurer. Tax will be a killer but the comments and looks the car gets already make it worth it.:p And there's still room in the back for passengers (not many of the other "sporty" cars can offer that or any room in the boot).
I did want a celica, but they are almost double the price for same years. Worth it if you can afford it, but I couldn't. Still, I shopped around for months and couldn't be happier. The harder they are to sell means the bigger the bargaining power you have when buying!:D
I'M STOKED TO SAY THE LEAST!!!

Esel

^ Baxtard, making me read a year old thread.! :mad:

Gary ITR

Don't bump old threads

Locked