Best 10 year old car, pre-poll research

johndaman66

bobsoice23 wrote: »

VW polo anyone??Bought it as my first car..cheap out to run..easy to drive...

Feel the need to disagree with this much of your post at least. Having had the use of one for a number of months feel the need to comment on how bad I thinks the over-rated german sh!tboxes are. Very rough and rattly, even taking into consideration it is a small car. Not at all cheap to run in 1.0 guise anyway if your doing anything over 50mph as the lacklustre engine will be spinning like a good un. Redeeming aspects here would be relatively cheap motor tax and insurance for most though. Also, extremely noisy and doesn't feel at all safe to drive at speeds much greater than 50mph. Not cheap to run either if your replacing parts every second week as I had to with the one I had for the short stint. Drove a 1.0 litre Yaris of roughly the same vintage as the Polo. The Polo just wouldn't hold a candle to the Yaris. Yaris is a superior car in pretty much every aspect I can think of.

bobsoice23 wrote: »

looks pretty good.

Will agree with you on that point though. As small cars go either the 00 Polo or 00 Fiesta were in my opinion the best lookers of around that vintage. I suppose you could argue that thats a subjective observation.

Sitec

Hector Mildew wrote: »

Toyota Prius, based on this article and this thread

The main reasons are:

• Reliability
• Cost of ownership (fuel economy and low maintenance)

The links above refer to the first generation Prius The newer models are further improved. I have one since 2005, it's still running as new and beats the mpg in that article by a good bit.

Cost of production fail.

Cost of recycling fail.

johndaman66

sk8board wrote: »

how about the Megane, just the 99-02 version - probably the last of the (relatively speaking) reliable Renaults.

You are joking me right? Fu*k me the successive models must have being fairly bad if thats the case. Started out driving a 96' Renault Megavan and even the Polo I was just talking about would have being a godsent in comparison.

Plug

Bigus wrote: »

UNMODIFIED owned by an aul wan and you'd have a car for life

But later that day you'll have to invest in a new clutch:)

ninty9er

Opel Astra 98-04

The 1.4 has head gasket issues, but the other models in the range don't. In general they are more sturdy than any competitor, handle well, are cheap to run and offer a sustainable level of comfort. I've just replaced mine with a Mondeo, but have had to go back to it due to an electronic fault that needs addressing in the Mondeo.

I've driven various cars such as the Golf (Mk IV and V), Focus (Mk1 and 2), Corolla, Yaris, 323 and none of them compare in the "planted to the road" stakes.

Sitec

zilog_jones wrote: »

They're both based on the Honda Domani (which was a saloon only), which in turn was based on the EG Civic.


But the W210 was a bit rubbish though, I don't think it should be included.


A bit too many bad points for a "best" car, no?


Engine is good, everything else pretty crap (interior, safety, handling, etc.). And holding their value is bad for us!


Did you really just say that? I've been in nicer vans!

I don't think so. The later VVT engines are very similar to Toyota's 2SZ-FE, and they were sold as the Toyota Duet in Japan but that's where the similarities end for the first generation. Supposed to be rubbish to drive too.

Another vote for the Mk. 4 Fiesta, but the 1.25 Zetec-SE engine and not the crappy old 1.3! Great fun to drive, cheap to run, cheap parts, etc.

Not really, great car. Power to weight ratio is funny.Reliable. Recession buster in my eyes.

Hector Mildew

Sitec wrote: »

Cost of production fail.

Cost of recycling fail.

Backup statements fail

There have been a many claims that hybrids are costly to produce and recycle compared with other cars (including hummers!), mostly these claims are untrue for the reasons discussed in this paper: http://www.pacinst.org/topics/integrity_of_science/case_studies/hummer_vs_prius.pdf

Anan1

johndaman66 wrote: »

You are joking me right? Fu*k me the successive models must have being fairly bad if thats the case. Started out driving a 96' Renault Megavan and even the Polo I was just talking about would have being a godsent in comparison.

In terms of what you pay for what you get, i'd put an 01 Megane well ahead of most cars.

mooman

I'm probably biased but I don't think you can get more car for your money than an Alfa 156. Mines 10 years old with 100k miles, 4 electric windows, air con, sunroof, fancy seats and only cost €900.

Reliability: Had to change 2 bushings for the NCT cost €12 and €30 labour in the year I've had it. Much more reliable than the Golf I had before it.

Economics: Does about 30-35mpg which isn't bad for a 1.8, insurance is alright I'm 22 and it was €600 this year which I'm happy with, don't really know what part costs are like because it's so reliable:D

Safety: Probably safer than a Corolla but not as good a a Megane, has 6 airbags and obviously 5 seatbelts:D

Popularity: Not as popular as it should be. A lot of people said I was mad to buy it based on a reputation gained in the 70's.

Looks: Nothing mentioned in the thread so far can compete imo:cool:

johndaman66

Anan1 wrote: »

In terms of what you pay for what you get, i'd put an 01 Megane well ahead of most cars.

I take your point Anan1 but I think your methodology falls short of addressing the overall cost of ownership. Fair enough if your just going to drive it until something thats going to cost major money to repair or replace gives up the go and then park it up...But if that happens a couple of weeks after you buy it the 01 Megane may not seem so cheap then. Speculate to accumulate and all that, I'd much prefer to relatively speaking spend a fair whack extra for peace of mind of knowing I've a half reliable car sitting on my drive rather than a heap of junk Renault.

BrianD3

johndaman66 wrote: »

I take your point Anan1 but I think your methodology falls short of addressing the overall cost of ownership. Fair enough if your just going to drive it until something thats going to cost major money to repair or replace gives up the go and then park it up...But if that happens a couple of weeks after you buy it the 01 Megane may not seem so cheap then. Speculate to accumulate and all that, I'd much prefer to relatively speaking spend a fair whack extra for peace of mind of knowing I've a half reliable car sitting on my drive rather than a heap of junk Renault.

IIRC from previous posts you've experienced one Renault Megavan that you bought used and gave problems with the head gasket etc. And because of that, all Meganes are junk, all Renaults are junk and possibly all French cars are junk.

As a counter to your Megavan anecdote, read my account above of the Megane Mk1 that we've owned from new for over 10 years and how little has needed doing on it in that time. 10 years

When a car is owned from new, a better evaluation of how good it is can be made as you know it hasn't received dogs abuse from a previous owner. Vans like the Megavan are particularly subject to abuse.

DamienOB

Going to be shot down for this:

Fiat Punto?

They're going for peanuts nowadays, easy to drive (learning anyway), and not too bad on petrol!

Was my 1st car, €600 and not a bother with it

dnme

What would you say to a cut off here. Perhaps a date and time after which no more submissions. Then we whittle the list down to say 10 and then do the poll?

What do you think of this suggestion?

zilog_jones

colm_mcm wrote: »

Granted the sirion 1 is nasty, Its so long since I drove one, maybe I don't remember how dreary they are. Sirion 2 is a great yoke, never got why they never took off, combined sales of the perodua myvi/sirion/justy are laughable, no effort was ever made to market them in europe.

I think you answered your own question there - poor marketing was Daihatsu's main problem here, along with poor dealer network. Maybe once Toyota became majority owners of the company in 1999 they were more reluctant to sell products that competed with themselves in Europe? (In Japan, having redundant marques and models seems like standard practice)

Daihatsu and Suzuki always seemed like a class below the other Japanese marques, and as the Koreans slowly became serious competitors in the industry I think it became a lot harder for them on the global market. They both had the small 4x4s going for them but it seems that has become much more of a niche than it once was.

I'd also like to vote against the VW Polo - the 1.0 engine and gearboxes are woeful, build quality is nothing special (they're not even German ), they are known for becoming rust buckets and thanks to badge snobbery at 10 years old they are overpriced for what you're getting.

Same for the Golf IV - I am looking at buying a car around 10 years old in the next couple of months, and the last thing I want is an overpriced poverty-spec Golf that sounds like a tractor - and I'm talking about the 1.4 petrol! Those engines do not last, and didn't have enough power in the first place. TDI is a bit better in that respect, but what's the point when I could get a larger Octavia for less?

bobsoice23

Maybe there's a drastic difference between a 1 litre and 1.4 which I have but I can't find any faults with the polo..perfect first car in my opinion.

zilog_jones

Is yours the 2000-2002 facelift model? They had improved a lot in the bodywork department (galvanised steel, build quality, etc.), and the 1.4 can be 60, 75 or 100 bhp (not sure how much yours would be) as opposed to the 1.0's 50 bhp which really is not sufficient for a car of that weight (60 bhp is barely enough either).

But considering we need to narrow this list down a bit I'd still consider the Fiesta and Yaris much better competitors.

@dnme: How about separating into size categories if we get enough suggestions? At least the Octavia can't beat everything that way

johndaman66

BrianD3 wrote: »

IIRC from previous posts you've experienced one Renault Megavan that you bought used and gave problems with the head gasket etc. And because of that, all Meganes are junk, all Renaults are junk and possibly all French cars are junk.

As a counter to your Megavan anecdote, read my account above of the Megane Mk1 that we've owned from new for over 10 years and how little has needed doing on it in that time. 10 years

When a car is owned from new, a better evaluation of how good it is can be made as you know it hasn't received dogs abuse from a previous owner. Vans like the Megavan are particularly subject to abuse.

You are correct in that I owned one Renault BrianD3 and I was plagued by problems with it but you are incorrect in making the point that I suggested all Meganes and possibly French cars are junk as a result of this one experience I had. I am drawing my judgement on them based on he experiences of friends and work colleagues also. I have a friend who's mother bought a 2003 Nissan Micra (Renault mechanicals) when it was only a few months old and little more than delivery mileage on it really. She too was plagued by head gasket failure, ecu failure, at best unpredictable electrics at times etc. A colleague at works wife had a 2002 Renault Laguna and it just had to be parked up with all the costly problems with it, that was a few years back, it was by no means an old car at that stage. Cousin got a 1998 Renault Laguna as a courtesy car for a spell and it was a dog of a thing. So no, I'm not basing my judgements based solely on my own personal experiences. Now thats not to say that there aren't people out there who had a good experience as a Renault owner but I sure as hell never discussed as such with anyone. In fact I can recall more such stories to add to the above if you so wish. Furthermore when I was seeking to get the headgasket repaired in my Megavan it was very few garages that were willing to take on the job. Many told me in a polite sort of way (some not so polite) that Renault were junk and these were mechanics working with a range of different models on a daily basis....best placed to judge perhaps?

Furthermore, I never suggested that all French cars are junk, just that many are. I appreciate that Peugeot in particular have made some particularly strong and robust diesel engines up to present day and in some cases are down right under-rated. There are more going back through the years no doubt.

BrianD3

johndaman66 wrote: »

Furthermore when I was seeking to get the headgasket repaired in my Megavan it was very few garages that were willing to take on the job. Many told me in a polite sort of way (some not so polite) that Renault were junk and these were mechanics working with a range of different models on a daily basis....best placed to judge perhaps?

Not really best placed to judge. The fact that they didn't want to do a head gasket and dismissed Renault as junk says more about them than it does about Renault.

Actually mechanics and others working in Da Trade are some of the worst source of lies and bullsh*t when it comes to cars, tyres, oil etc. Closed minded, lazy individuals who only want to do routine, easy jobs like oil changes on Corollas that they've done a hundred times before. Any decent mechanic should be able to do a head gasket on a Megane and stand over his work.

johndaman66

BrianD3 wrote: »

Not really best placed to judge. The fact that they didn't want to do a head gasket and dismissed Renault as junk says more about them than it does about Renault.

Actually mechanics and others working in Da Trade are some of the worst source of lies and bullsh*t when it comes to cars, tyres, oil etc. Closed minded, lazy individuals who only want to do routine, easy jobs like oil changes on Corollas that they've done a hundred times before. Any decent mechanic should be able to do a head gasket on a Megane and stand over his work.

Well seemingly not a small job on Megavan anyway compared to cars such as corollas, fiestas, civics etc which I distinctly remember mentioned to me at the time. And unlike the afore mentioned cars highly likely to give up the go soon after again...probably all of them were able to do the job but not readily willing to do so in account of this....thats the general impression I got at the time. I would dismiss the opinion of one or two mechanics perhaps but after calling to 10 or 12 it was clear that there was a distinct pattern of response which I wasn't going to dismiss....that being that Renault are junk. Besides if it was going to be a more drawn out and tougher job on Megane it was always going be a more expensive job than a Corolla anyway which sort of highlights the cost of ownership and perhaps makes your point a moot one.

I cant say you satisfactorily countered the debate when you did not acknowledge the points I made regarding friends and work colleagues Renault cars being trouble prone or the fact that I never met a satisfied Renault owner but plenty of dissatisfied Renault owners

dnme

dnme wrote: »

What would you say to a cut off here. Perhaps a date and time after which no more submissions. Then we whittle the list down to say 10 and then do the poll?

What do you think of this suggestion?

?

BrianD3

johndaman66 wrote: »

I cant say you satisfactorily countered the debate when you did not acknowledge the points I made regarding friends and work colleagues Renault cars being trouble prone or the fact that I never met a satisfied Renault owner but plenty of dissatisfied Renault owners

Well if your friend's mother's cousin had problems with a 2003 micra or a 2002 laguna or a 1998 Laguna - that is of little relevance to whether a Megane mk1 phase 2 is a good ten year old car or not.

And the Megane mk1 phase 2 is the car that myself, sk8board and Anan1 were talking about. Your response was to start talking about about "a heap of junk Renault". You've failed to adequately debate this specific car. I even put 10 years in bold to highlight how long our one has been trouble free for. Got a response to that? Or just going to keep repeating what some mechanics told you about "Renaults" and the "impression" you got from them.

PS I'd love to know what is so special about the Renault Megavan engine that makes it such a big deal for a mechanic to do his job properly.

maidhc

Ok my top 10, 10 year old "normal" cars:

Toyota Avensis D4d
Ford Focus 1.6 Ghia
Ford Mondeo 1.8 Zetec
Peugeot 406 HDi
Audi A4 TDi
Nissan Micra
Ford Fiesta 1.25
Skoda Octavia 1.9 TDi
Nissan Primera P11
Toyota Yaris 1.0

johndaman66

BrianD3 wrote: »

Well if your friend's mother's cousin had problems with a 2003 micra or a 2002 laguna or a 1998 Laguna - that is of little relevance to whether a Megane mk1 phase 2 is a good ten year old car or not.

And the Megane mk1 phase 2 is the car that myself, sk8board and Anan1 were talking about. Your response was to start talking about about "a heap of junk Renault". You've failed to adequately debate this specific car. I even put 10 years in bold to highlight how long our one has been trouble free for. Got a response to that? Or just going to keep repeating what some mechanics told you about "Renaults" and the "impression" you got from them.

Just to clarify for you I said my friends mother had severe trouble with the 2003 Micra, a work colleagues wife had to park up a 2002 Laguna and a cousin got a courtesy 1998 Laguna for a spell which was an absolute dog of a car. I myself had serious continued trouble with a 1996 Renault Megavan for the spell I had it. Now a Megane mk1 phase 2 would have shared many components with this along with the 16 valve engines which more than covers the 10 year old Megane well enough in my own book anyway. Renault were producing downright bad cars before MK 1 Phase 2 Megane and after MK1 Phase 2 Megane....to me a MK1 Phase 2 Megane is more of the same, particularly as so much is shared with the phase 1, until somebody actually convinces me to the contrary. You fail at providing me with specific evidence that they are in fact a decent car so based on my experience and that of others Ive heard from the evidence is overpowering that they are a a poor car. On the Renault marque there are more bad stories I heard down through the years but memory not super with me either.

Also, "some mechanics"?....10 to 12 mechanics who were in no way affeliated to one another and don't believe Ive ever heard a mechanic speak good of the Renault marque....that'll do for me.

BrianD3 wrote: »

PS I'd love to know what is so special about the Renault Megavan engine that makes it such a big deal for a mechanic to do his job properly.

Cant answer that for you really. Although I do certain routine maintenance in cars I'm certainly not a mechanic. I'm sure a friendly mechanic with experience in most marques would give you more detail or a basic mechanics course may answer that question for you. It may not have even being the work involved but the fact that the incidence of failure following the repair work is pretty likely. Garages like any other business have their reputation to uphold and if I were to assume that their repair was shoddy following a subsequent failure and communicated as such to others it obviously would not bode well for them....there may be more to it than that though. Mechanics will often tell you that there are certain engines or even cars that they simply do not like working on fir certain reasons which I believe is at least the half expected norm in the industry. I'm just throwing out certain possibilities to you as I cannot answer your question...

BrianD3

johndaman66 wrote: »

You fail at providing me with specific evidence that they are in fact a decent car

Actually I have provided you with specific evidence on this car. To quote my first post

have an RXi in the family since new. Safer and with better ride than many of the cars nominated. Excellent seats and a relatively decent 95 bhp from the 1.4 16v in a light car.

In over 10 years we've owned it the only problem has been the door open warning light stays on when all doors are closed. The car has lasted very well, all the suspension and steering components are original, original clutch, original cat, original plug coils, original brakes apart from the front pads. The only other things that have been replaced are the battery and timing belt/wpump and the (original) exhaust back box is now on its last legs with rust

I also have a 96 phase 1 Megane and guess what - it's been good too. Owned long term. I think I'll trust my own judgment on how good a car it is.

Overall I think I am in a much better position to comment on these cars than you are with your limited experince of a 2nd hand Megavan that may well have been abused before you got it. Most of the other stuff you've posted like the story about the 03 Micra that someone owned is irrelevant.

FYI the main difference between the two phases is reliability was improved as it usually does with a facelift. The immobiliser was made more user friendly and new engines were introduced. The 1.4 16v and 1.6 16v were in the phase 2, not the phase 1.

dekbhoy

BMW E39 FANTASTIC looking car and very reliable , be tax and fuel are pricey but very comfortable quick and millions of extras for a very reasonable price

coolbeans

Sitec wrote: »

Cost of production fail.

Cost of recycling fail.

Pub talk is easy. Back it up.

sk8board

BrianD3 wrote: »

Well if your friend's mother's cousin had problems with a 2003 micra or a 2002 laguna or a 1998 Laguna - that is of little relevance to whether a Megane mk1 phase 2 is a good ten year old car or not.

And the Megane mk1 phase 2 is the car that myself, sk8board and Anan1 were talking about.

thank god, for second there I though I'd have to read all that nonsence and no-one would have said the above...

a '96 megavan is a heap of junk I've no doubt, as was the Phase 1 megane in general.

bottom line, myself and a few others are pitching that the megane I Rxi 99-02 (phase 2 only) is a decent 10 yo car for the money...

lets move on eh ... its just an internet forum

johndaman66

BrianD3 wrote: »

Actually I have provided you with specific evidence on this car. To quote my first post



I also have a 96 phase 1 Megane and guess what - it's been good too. Owned long term. I think I'll trust my own judgment on how good a car it is.

Overall I think I am in a much better position to comment on these cars than you are with your limited experince of a 2nd hand Megavan that may well have been abused before you got it. Most of the other stuff you've posted like the story about the 03 Micra that someone owned is irrelevant.

FYI the main difference between the two phases is reliability was improved as it usually does with a facelift. The immobiliser was made more user friendly and new engines were introduced. The 1.4 16v and 1.6 16v were in the phase 2, not the phase 1.

At best I'll agree to differ with you, every man to his own thing and all that. Maybe the fact of the matter is that you were just lucky but I speak not from my own experience but that of others also, as I pointed out already on a few occasions. I don't see the relevance of you dismissing my stories of other Renault models but there you go...Its not like they are extraordinarily different cars. Furthermore I know that much components are shared between Phase 1 and Phase 2 and that certain engines from Phase 2 can also be found in Phase 1.

I don't particularly want to be arguing with you anymore. All I'll say on the matter now is that if I knew of anyone intending to buy a 10 year old Renault, Megane or otherwise I'd advise them to steer well clear.

Sitec

coolbeans wrote: »

Pub talk is easy. Back it up.

http://cnwmr.com/nss-folder/automotiveenergy/DUST%20PDF%20VERSION.pdf

Hector Mildew

Sitec wrote: »

http://cnwmr.com/nss-folder/automotiveenergy/DUST%20PDF%20VERSION.pdf

Seriously flawed as, amongst other things, the estimated life miles are way out, see:

http://www.ctvbc.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110125/bc_olsen_prius_reliability_110125/20110125?hub=BritishColumbiaHome

and, as I previously linked....

http://www.pacinst.org/topics/integrity_of_science/case_studies/hummer_vs_prius.pdf