Petrol or diesel.

junii

Im looking for a car and I want to go 1.4 or under to save on insurance.

Most diesels seem to be 1.8 or bigger though.

Would I save in the long run if I got a diesel rather than a petrol... considering the insurance would be more for the diesel but more MPG.

Cheers.

Anan1

junii wrote:

Im looking for a car and I want to go 1.4 or under to save on insurance.

Most diesels seem to be 1.8 or bigger though.

Would I save in the long run if I got a diesel rather than a petrol... considering the insurance would be more for the diesel but more MPG.

Cheers.

Depends how much mileage you're doing.;)

mike65

Dont forget road tax as well.

Mike.

_Kaiser_

I kinda fancy this myself: http://www.carzone.ie/usedcars/index.cfm?fuseaction=car&carID=460762

I think with the mileage I do (Dublin-Navan daily) and the crappy road quality around there I "need" it

(now all I need is 17k!)

Lex Luthor

I think the new astra has a 1.3 diesel

kluivert

Toyota Corrolla 1.4 D4D is what you are looking for.

junii

kluivert wrote:

Toyota Corrolla 1.4 D4D is what you are looking for.

My budget is under 1k. I hope to not to pay much more if possible than e700.
That toyota is a new car isn't it? (way out of my price range)
What older cars come in 1.4D do you know?

Also, is it just me or has diesel technology become much better in the last few years. I remember driving an older mondeo diesel (94+ model) and they were abit sluggish and unresponsive; then I drove a newer mondeo and a focus (about 01 yr) and the difference was phenomenal.

Aswell as that, if I was getting a petrol is there much of a difference in petrol consumption between a 1.2 and a 1.4?

Mike65: Yes, I nearly forgot about tax...
Anan1: I would say probably about 250 average a week.
Cheers.

kluivert

My 1.4 1999 astra does 380 miles to a tank fill of 45e a week.

Do you really need diesel, I do 350 miles a week. 1.4 is grand for this.

junii

I dont need diesel but if you could do the same mileage for e35 of diesel it means you could save e520 a year. Now I dunno about you but that would pay for 1/3 of my insurance premium.

Anan1

junii wrote:

I dont need diesel but if you could do the same mileage for e35 of diesel it means you could save e520 a year. Now I dunno about you but that would pay for 1/3 of my insurance premium.

Unfortunately for you, everyone does the same calculation. this makes diesel cars considerably more expensive than their petrol equivalents.

BrianD3

ABout 15 years ago the Daihatsu Charade came in a 1.0 litre turbo diesel. There are a couple in the buy and sell right now for around 700 quid. IIRC these diesels can do 80+ mpg

bazz26

If you only have a budget of €700 then any diesel car you are looking will be an early 1990s and will have been driven to the moon and back at this stage.

The old Ford Mondeo 1.8 TD or Escort come to mind. Also Opel had a 1.7 diesel engine in their mid 1990s Astra and Vectra. These are old school diesels where in order to get any decent power they needed to have larger capacity than the equivilant petrol engine.

junii

bazz26 wrote:

If you only have a budget of €700 then any diesel car you are looking will be an early 1990s and will have been driven to the moon and back at this stage.

The old Ford Mondeo 1.8 TD or Escort come to mind. Also Opel had a 1.7 diesel engine in their mid 1990s Astra and Vectra. These are old school diesels where in order to get any decent power they needed to have larger capacity than the equivilant petrol engine.

I suppose theres no chance of gettin' an old 1.4D that will be any way good for e700 then. Id say I may hold off a while and put together more money; a guy in another post of mine reckons I may get a decent 96 Rover 414 for about e1500. Are Rovers an economical car?
Perhaps I may get a more decent diesel for e1500... Do you think?


Anan1: I assume your saying that new diesel cars are a little more expensive than the petrol counterparts; does this apply just as much in the second hand market?

maidhc

It is not possible to get a clean diesel for €700.

The problem is though if someone has a really well looked after diesel of that age they will easily sell it to someone they know, or hand it on to someone else.

Clean Mk1 Mondeos are now thin on the ground, Escort TDs are very rare, and neither are fast, although probably no worse than a 1.6 petrol.

Watch out for Peugeot 405s and Fiat Mareas too.

zilog_jones

Toyota Starlets (Mk. 4 and 5) were available in Japan with 1.5 litre diesels - I've seen some imports of them around here (some on carzone.ie too).

SouperComputer

dont need diesel but if you could do the same mileage for e35 of diesel it means you could save e520 a year. Now I dunno about you but that would pay for 1/3 of my insurance premium.

Have you gone and gotten an insurance quote on these diesel cars?? Also bear in mind:

*Road tax is higher on diesel
*Front tyre wear "can" be heavier as the engines are generally heavier
*Most diesels that are in your price and insurance range are non-turbo and possibly senile in acceleration

Basically, its like the guys said, you will only save money if you are doing high miles.

zilog_jones

How does insurance fare with diesels? Is it generally the same as the petrol equivalents, or do they charge more just because of the larger size?

prospect

zilog_jones wrote:

How does insurance fare with diesels? Is it generally the same as the petrol equivalents, or do they charge more just because of the larger size?

Diesel & Petrol cars of the same engine capacity should cost exactly the same to insure*. They do cost the same to tax.

*Although turbo charged diesels may cost more than non turbo charged petrols.

Big Nelly

Kaiser2000 wrote:

I kinda fancy this myself: http://www.carzone.ie/usedcars/index.cfm?fuseaction=car&carID=460762

I think with the mileage I do (Dublin-Navan daily) and the crappy road quality around there I "need" it

(now all I need is 17k!)

Wonder where you got the idea to buy a Passat from? some people have no imagination

Anyway back to OP, I would go with diesel, drove a petrol for a number of years and changed to diesel over a year and a half ago and would never change back, started with a 90Bhp Passat for a year and then moved to the 130Bhp model to get some extra power. Love it and as I said would never change back to Petrol.

Kermitt

OP - Unfortunately with a budget of less than a grand you don't really have the option to be picky. Very rare you'll find a diesel in your price range that hasn't seen 150k and then some. If you bought and old 2l Dx carina for instance, your tax would be close on €600 - almost as much as you said you're willing to pay for the car. Spend a bit more if you can - get a small car, they're economical ,and don't drive it hard. I used to get 45-50mpg from my old Polo.

zilog_jones

prospect wrote:

Diesel & Petrol cars of the same engine capacity should cost exactly the same to insure

But diesel engines are nearly always bigger than equivalently-powered petrols, especially in the case of old pre-common rail stuff an non-turbos.

E.g. an old E90/E100 series 1.8 litre diesel Corolla is by no means comparable in performance to a 1.8 petrol - it has less power but slightly more torque than the old 12-valve 1.3 (the 16 valve 1.3's are better in both aspects). And on closer inspection, there were no 1.8 petrol corollas back then. What would the insurers do? Give a quote similar to the 1.6 petrol which has nearly twice the power?

Gurgle

junii wrote:

Im looking for a car and I want to go 1.4 or under to save on insurance.

Most diesels seem to be 1.8 or bigger though.

Insurance companies rate a diesel vs the equivalent petrol.
e.g. a 1.6 diesel would be roughly comparable to a 1.3 petrol.

Its the bloody beuracracy of the government that tax them the same way, a 1.3 is €272 per year, a 1.6 is €391.

junii wrote:

Would I save in the long run if I got a diesel rather than a petrol... considering the insurance would be more for the diesel but more MPG.

Diesel is cheaper to run, but more expensive to maintain and it must have its regular servicing. If you're doing say 20k+ miles per annum go with diesel.

For God's sake do not buy a '96 Rover 414.
They were grand when reasonably fresh but as they approach the 10 year mark they deteriorate rapidly, engine and body.

Dublin-Navan is not serious mileage, probably not enough to justify the extra cost of maintenance and tax on a diesel engine.

Go buy a 95-ish Corolla, change the oil & sparks then drive it until it dies. It will take years to kill it. Seriously, they don't need servicing or anything. Nothing cheaper to run

prospect

If you own a n/a 1.6 petrol car, and switch to the same car with a n/a 1.6 diesel engine, your insurance should not change.
If the value of the car increases, it may have an effect on the premium, but the fact it is a diesel means nothing to the insurance companies.

junii

Gurgle wrote:

Go buy a 95-ish Corolla, change the oil & sparks then drive it until it dies. It will take years to kill it. Seriously, they don't need servicing or anything. Nothing cheaper to run

That sounds like a very good plan. I hate the saloons though. Can you get a hatchback in 95...

I think I could manage oil change, air and fuel filter myself, what else is there to a service? Is it possible to bring it to a mechanic and just say look I serviced it myself but will you take a spin in it just to make sure theres nothing wrong with it.

zilog_jones

junii wrote:

That sounds like a very good plan. I hate the saloons though. Can you get a hatchback in 95...

Yes, there were 2 hatchbacks available around then:

The smaller 3-door hatchback (Corolla FX in Japan):

EDIT: on closer inspection there's also 5-door versions

And the larger 5-door hatchback, sometimes badged the "Corolla Sprinter" or maybe "Corolla Executive" (unreleased Toyota Sprinter Cielo in Japan):

alias no.9

prospect wrote:

If you own a n/a 1.6 petrol car, and switch to the same car with a n/a 1.6 diesel engine, your insurance should not change.

That my friend is bollix. My current motor is a 1.8 petrol, my previous was a 2.0 turbo diesel and the one before a 1.4 petrol. From the 1.4 petrol to the 2.0TD there was a very marginal increase but changing from the 2.0TD to the 1.8 petrol there was a significant increase. Both changes were mid year so additional NCB was not involved.

To the OP, avoid the rover 414 if you're going to be doing a navan dublin commute, overheating is a big risk usually resulting in head gasket failure and cylinder head warping, stop start, heavy traffic, is the worst sort for inducing this kind of failure. There were a number of smaller diesels in the early/mid 1990's. These include...

The Daihatsu Charade 1.0TD has already been mentioned
The Opel Corsa had 1.5D and 1.5TD options
The Peugeot 106 originally had a 1.4D and later a 1.5D
The Citroen AX had the same 1.4D and later 1.5D
The Citroen Saxo had the same 1.5D

but here's the wildcard (and I'll probably get flamed for even suggesting it)

It's a horrible nasty design with terrible residuals, unloved by virtually everybody which means if you find one, they'll probably pay you to take it away. It does have some good points, it borrows the 1.4 peugeot/citroen engine in it's earlier incarnation and the 1.5 in it's later incarnation, and thanks to it's rather unique hydragas suspension, it's extremely comfortable and floats along the road... what is it?

The rover metro / rover 100.

Gurgle

alias no.9 wrote:

The rover metro / rover 100.

Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
*breath*
Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

prospect

alias no.9 wrote:

That my friend is bollix.

slight over reaction there.

Fuel type has little or nothing to do with inssurance (directly). It is all about engine capacity and power output.

If what you are saying is correct, then my 150bhp 1.9JTD car would be cheaper to insure than a bog standard n/a 1.8 petrol?

So once again, fuel type has no real bearing on insurance;
Engine capacity, power output, value, age & catagory are what counts, although these are usually determined by the fuel type.

All in all, if you had two cars, one petrol & one diesel. They were both new, and both cost €30,000 and they were both straight 1.9L engines, and they were both 100bhp, then the insurance would be the same.
If the petrol was 120 bhp, and cost €10 more, then it would be more expensive, and vice versa.

zilog_jones

alias no.9 wrote:

That my friend is bollix. My current motor is a 1.8 petrol, my previous was a 2.0 turbo diesel and the one before a 1.4 petrol. From the 1.4 petrol to the 2.0TD there was a very marginal increase but changing from the 2.0TD to the 1.8 petrol there was a significant increase. Both changes were mid year so additional NCB was not involved.

Good. So insurers aren't as crooked as those motor tax jerks.

The Daihatsu Charade 1.0TD has already been mentioned
The Opel Corsa had 1.5D and 1.5TD options
The Peugeot 106 originally had a 1.4D and later a 1.5D
The Citroen AX had the same 1.4D and later 1.5D
The Citroen Saxo had the same 1.5D

There's also the 1.5D Starlets I was on about, and have since discovered the Toyota Corolla II, Tercel and Corsa are also available with that engine. Here's a Corolla II:

Imports only, but there's a good few around (not sure how many diesels). Old imports also = dirt cheap. The Tercel and Corsa hatchbacks look similar.

...It's a horrible nasty design with terrible residuals, unloved by virtually everybody which means if you find one, they'll probably pay you to take it away...

Let's not forgot it's the only car to ever get a 1-star EuroNCAP rating, so it's a death trap too! Lucky they didn't test the original Mini, which was also still for sale at the time...

alias no.9

prospect wrote:

slight over reaction there.

Fuel type has little or nothing to do with inssurance (directly). It is all about engine capacity and power output.

If what you are saying is correct, then my 150bhp 1.9JTD car would be cheaper to insure than a bog standard n/a 1.8 petrol?

So once again, fuel type has no real bearing on insurance;
Engine capacity, power output, value, age & catagory are what counts, although these are usually determined by the fuel type.

All in all, if you had two cars, one petrol & one diesel. They were both new, and both cost €30,000 and they were both straight 1.9L engines, and they were both 100bhp, then the insurance would be the same.
If the petrol was 120 bhp, and cost €10 more, then it would be more expensive, and vice versa.

Possibly an overreaction. You originally said

prospect wrote:

Diesel & Petrol cars of the same engine capacity should cost exactly the same to insure*. They do cost the same to tax.

*Although turbo charged diesels may cost more than non turbo charged petrols.

and then

prospect wrote:

If you own a n/a 1.6 petrol car, and switch to the same car with a n/a 1.6 diesel engine, your insurance should not change.
If the value of the car increases, it may have an effect on the premium, but the fact it is a diesel means nothing to the insurance companies.

It was only when challenged that you mentioned power output. What I'm saying is that your earlier statement that the same size petrol and diesel engines cost the same to insure is completely inaccurate given my experience of paying very little extra for a 2.0 turbo diesel compared to a 1.4 petrol, thats a huge increase in cubic capacity (> 40%) plus a turbo. Following this I had a significant increase in premium when loosing the turbo and 10% of the cubic capacity switching back to petrol. For the most part, power output will determine the insurance. If I had stated that the 1.4 petrol had 82bhp, the 2.0TD had 88bhp and the 1.8 petrol 144bhp, you'd see what was driving the insurance premium, power, not cubic capacity.

Eoin

Strangely I wasn't charged any extra from switching from a 1.6 Alfa 156 to a 2.0 turbo diesel BMW - the increase is only 16BHP or so, but I expected a loading all the same.