Bangernomics car of the week/day - Part II

Saab Ed

Anyone looking for a track car ?


http://cars.donedeal.ie/for-sale/rallycars/4695407

johndaman66

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

http://cars.donedeal.ie/for-sale/cars/4701511

ready to roll for
Not bad 5 door

That car is on for right good money if the seller is being honest.

johndaman66

Limerick man wrote: »

As regards a 2.0 turbo being the same as a 1.6 on fuel, frankly that's utter bollox.

You see people spouting that kinda crap in ads all the time. They might say the 2.0 litre petrol passat is easier on juice than the 1.6 and 1.8 for example. While the 2.0 litre engine might be better suited to a body the size of the Passat I frankly need to agree with you...making such comments is more often than not utter bollox

Gotya

johndaman66 wrote: »

That car is on for right good money if the seller is being honest.

That's way to good to be true.....


I'm wondering if this is the same guy i rang about a car around 5 weeks ago, that phone number is ringing a bell in my head. If anyone does ring him, leave me know if he says it's his wife's car..

davycc

Gotya wrote: »

That's way to good to be true.....


I'm wondering if this is the same guy i rang about a car around 5 weeks ago, that phone number is ringing a bell in my head. If anyone does ring him, leave me know if he says it's his wife's car..

Well im guessing the pic in the ad isnt the actual 306 & its been stolen from google images?..it clearly has only a uk style tax disc & no nct or insurance discs & the reg plate looks like uk too even though someone has a go to hide it;)

Gotya

davycc wrote: »

Well im guessing the pic in the ad isnt the actual 306 & its been stolen from google images?..it clearly has only a uk style tax disc & no nct or insurance discs & the reg plate looks like uk too even though someone has a go to hide it;)

The guy i rang about a VW Passat a few weeks back, seems very doggy to me. In the end i didn't even go look at the car, i felt like i was being "set-up" (i would've had cash in pocket). I'm not even a paranoid person but things just didn't add up.
That http://cars.donedeal.ie/for-sale/cars/4701511 seems to be wrote the very same, i.e CAPS, how it's worded (moving abroad, call anytime, even how he has the millage wrote, ect..) and as i said i'm ALMOST sure that is the same phone number (not 100% sure however).

He is even looking for ONO, when it's priced at 450e? driving prefect/mint condition.. Just doesn't add-up for me.

I could be 100% wrong and this could be genuine. If anyone does go buying it do leave us know how you get on.

davycc

Gotya wrote: »

The guy i rang about a VW Passat a few weeks back, seems very doggy to me. In the end i didn't even go look at the car, i felt like i was being "set-up" (i would've had cash in pocket). I'm not even a paranoid person but things just didn't add up.
That http://cars.donedeal.ie/for-sale/cars/4701511 seems to be wrote the very same, i.e CAPS, how it's worded (moving abroad, call anytime, even how he has the millage wrote, ect..) and as i said i'm ALMOST sure that is the same phone number (not 100% sure however).

He is even looking for ONO, when it's priced at 450e? driving prefect/mint condition.. Just doesn't add-up for me.

I could be 100% wrong and this could be genuine. If anyone does go buying it do leave us know how you get on.

donedeal mint is the 1%:D especially for 450e it does not add up at all for me either

Pique

Limerick man wrote: »

As regards a 2.0 turbo being the same as a 1.6 on fuel, frankly that's utter bollox.

If they were, then Subaru Engineers are either utter magicians (to get a 2L turbo only use the same fuel as a 1.6 n/a) or utter morons (to get a 1.6 n/a use the same amount of fuel as a 2L turbo).

I think that would be physically impossible, tbh, considering they are the same basic engine design and era.

Max Power1

Pique wrote: »

If they were, then Subaru Engineers are either utter magicians (to get a 2L turbo only use the same fuel as a 1.6 n/a) or utter morons (to get a 1.6 n/a use the same amount of fuel as a 2L turbo).

I think that would be physically impossible, tbh, considering they are the same basic engine design and era.

Perhaps due to the overstressing of the 1.6 n/a wrt the body weight?

The 2.0 would operate under less load and in non stop-start scenarios be as economical if not moreso

L-M

No, just no. That is such a stupid argument that I've heard so many times over the last 6 years on baords.

MAYBE, maybe if it was a 1.0 Litre in a Range Rover it might make a difference.

166man

Limerick man wrote: »

No, just no. That is such a stupid argument that I've heard so many times over the last 6 years on baords.

MAYBE, maybe if it was a 1.0 Litre in a Range Rover it might make a difference.

As a note of comparison, Dad's old 166 2.0 Twin, would average around town about 27mpg and get mid thirties on the motorway. Granted it's not a turbo but my 1.6 156 get's nigh on the exact same figures. I'd be fairly certain that the 2.0 156 would be near enough the same.

L-M

166man wrote: »

As a note of comparison, Dad's old 166 2.0 Twin, would average around town about 27mpg and get mid thirties on the motorway. Granted it's not a turbo but my 1.6 156 get's nigh on the exact same figures. I'd be fairly certain that the 2.0 156 would be near enough the same.

Big difference in fuel consumption with a turbo car. Also I'm sure if you sat down and did exact figures there would have been a difference between the 2.0 and 1.6.

unkel

Limerick man wrote: »

Big difference in fuel consumption with a turbo car.

+1

The whole purpose of a turbo is that it allows you to burn more fuel at the same time

166man

Limerick man wrote: »

Big difference in fuel consumption with a turbo car. Also I'm sure if you sat down and did exact figures there would have been a difference between the 2.0 and 1.6.

There is indeed a big difference. But I have done the exact figures so I know what the fuel economy is like.

To say the whole theory is bull is fairly ridiculous, as I just proved.

L-M

166man wrote: »

There is indeed a big difference. But I have done the exact figures so I know what the fuel economy is like.

To say the whole theory is bull is fairly ridiculous, as I just proved.

The theory on boards is that the better engine will be better on fuel, which it won't be.

Also, my argument was a 2.0 turbo versus a 1.6 Subaru, which I know for a fact is bull because the the moment there's a 2.0 wrx and a 2.0 RX outside my house, one of of those used to have a 1.6 and I can't say for a fact there is a massive difference in fuel economy.

Also, you're Dads 2.0 which was presumably newer at the time is bound to be better on fuel than your 15 year old 1.6.

MidlandsM

any bangers lads?

166man

Limerick man wrote: »

The theory on boards is that the better engine will be better on fuel, which it won't be.

Also, my argument was a 2.0 turbo versus a 1.6 Subaru, which I know for a fact is bull because the the moment there's a 2.0 wrx and a 2.0 RX outside my house, one of of those used to have a 1.6 and I can't say for a fact there is a massive difference in fuel economy.

Also, you're Dads 2.0 which was presumably newer at the time is bound to be better on fuel than your 15 year old 1.6.

I don't think the theory is that it will be better, just that it will be much closer than otherwise thought looking solely at engine size.

I actually agreed with the idea of a 2.0 Turbo being as economical as a 1.6 as a load of bull too btw.

Dad's was the same 2.0 litre engine which came out in the 156 in 1998 so while the ''age'' of the car was the same the engine has been around for quite some time. My figures also back up my claim that his 2.0 was just as economical as my 1.6.

Finally, my 156 is 12 years old, not 15 as you incorrectly pointed out.

166man

MidlandsM wrote: »

any bangers lads?

This is a forum Midlands, it's where people discuss things. Just because it's bangernomics does not mean that each and every one of the 500 odd pages has to be filled with the latest bangers from donedeal.

We're clearly discussing this as it's an interesting theory. If you want bangers, go to donedeal and search for cars less than €2k.

Job done.

As someone with little knowledge regarding the world of cars/'bangers', I quite like the small ramblings and discussions that go on in the thread. Can be quite informative for people looking at cars without really knowing what it is exactly they're looking at (though obviously loads of pages with just chat and no links at all kind of defeats the purpose).

Just my own 2c (as someone who views the forum a bit, but rarely posts much).

Alanstrainor

Cleaned up a few posts there. Can we just post cars, and have some discussion here and there. Don't want to have things too black and white in here.

Keep 'm coming.

dgt

MidlandsM wrote: »

any bangers lads?

Um, this might explain the lack of bangers..... :pac:



jjjjj.jpg

Supergurrier

Gah you swooped in before i could

Ded_Zebra

dgt wrote: »

Um, this might explain the lack of bangers..... :pac:

https://us.v-cdn.net/6034073/uploads/attachments/364198/244686.jpg

jjjjj.jpg

Well aren't you a good student with WebCourses and DIT as bookmarks :P


Back on track

http://cars.donedeal.ie/for-sale/cars/4686587

dgt

Not really, that's the link for the old webcourses

Where are all these E34s with metric boots emerging from :pac: Had a replacement mirror too...

W123-80's

Bit of haggling to do on the price. Lovely cars.
6 months test.
http://www.carzone.ie/search/Mitsubishi/Galant/2.0-GLS/201309212674284/advert?channel=CARS

Ded_Zebra

dgt wrote: »

Not really, that's the link for the old webcourses

Where are all these E34s with metric boots emerging from :pac: Had a replacement mirror too...

Fair enough :pac:

The E34 is clean looking though for 230,000 miles, especially the interior.
How do you know the tyres are metric?

dgt

Ded_Zebra wrote: »

Fair enough :pac:

The E34 is clean looking though for 230,000 miles, especially the interior.
How do you know the tyres are metric?

I've seen enough of those cars to know those are metric wheels that's also a vanos engined car

Some Jags have metric wheels too. I think it's more aimed at the American market.

They're an odd size, 230/60 r390 iirc

Needless to say, I have a spare set of normal 15s for my one as well as the normal set on it

Beware of the metric wheels!!!

Ded_Zebra

Just had a quick search there and couldn't find anywhere selling those tyres. They must be a shocking price.
Were they available with "normal" and metric wheels at the same time. Is it possible to stretch normal tyres onto them?

dgt

Ded_Zebra wrote: »

Just had a quick search there and couldn't find anywhere selling those tyres. They must be a shocking price.
Were they available with "normal" and metric wheels at the same time. Is it possible to stretch normal tyres onto them?

I wouldn't recommend that....! It's way too tight, the metric tyre is slightly bigger so not a hope of fitting a 15 on it properly.

Tyres for my car aren't cheap at the best of times, I've heard of people quoted nearly €300 per tyre with those metric tyres :eek:

The best thing if you end up with a car with those wheels is to get a set of 15s aka BBS style wheels and use them instead. Far cheaper than rooting with the other setup! They have a different centre cap and slightly different design yet both look very similar without the caps

The 15s


Yes, shameless plug again

Ded_Zebra

A change of wheels would be in order then :eek:

I got a half way decent insurance quote for an E34 520 so I've beed thinking about it