Need to buy a car. Need advice.

Andrew S

Hi everyone!

I'm looking to get some advice on a good, reliable car to buy.

I'll give you some details first.

Most importantly, my budget is 12,000EU (hoping for a 2010-2012 car)

* I drive a lot, about 70km per day (Diesel is a must)
* I drive on good roads (N22 to be exact, 90-100km/h all the way and dont need to drive into the city at all)
* Absolute Max engine size = 1.4 D (for insurance costs)

I've had a look at few cars but I'm not sure which to go for. I currently drive a 2005 Volvo S40 1.6hdi (tax high and insurance expensive after renewal)

What I looked into and thoughts:

2011-2012 Toyota Auris 1.4D (5door)
- Seems the best choice, not overly covered in electronics.
- Toyota reliability
- 6 gears for efficieny.

2010-2012 Opel/vauxhall Astra 1.3 CDTI
- A LOT of people say it's underpowered for it's size
- Lots of electronics (Can be problematic?)
- Expensive repairs/parts

Looking for some opinions on reliability, recommendations and any alternatives.
Is 1.3 cdti enough?
Is an Astra a good investment or will I regret it? Seems there's very few on sale with over 80k Miles on it but a bunch of Auris that seem to make it past 200k KM

Any comments and help appreciates!

Andrew

Nuw

Hey Andrew,

I'd go Toyota all the way between the two, but that's just me, the astra is probably better to drive, but for the type of driving you do, probably won't matter so much.

Try both and see for yourself

another suggestion: hyundai i30 1.4D, surprisingly "nippy" (don't get me wrong, it's not fast, but in real world, it works better than the astra)

you also get better trim levels and less mileage if you go a class below (fiesta, corsa... that kind of things) and in fairness, they're quite comfy given the size, the corsa with the 1.3 actually makes a good runner IMO.

Andrew S

Nuw wrote: »

Hey Andrew,

I'd go Toyota all the way between the two, but that's just me, the astra is probably better to drive, but for the type of driving you do, probably won't matter so much.

Try both and see for yourself

another suggestion: hyundai i30 1.4D, surprisingly "nippy" (don't get me wrong, it's not fast, but in real world, it works better than the astra)

you also get better trim levels and less mileage if you go a class below (fiesta, corsa... that kind of things) and in fairness, they're quite comfy given the size, the corsa with the 1.3 actually makes a good runner IMO.

I was thinking about fiestas/corsas too but coming from a Volvo S40 I'm sure you'd understand the pain of doing so

Hyundai i30s look pretty good, are Korean cars as reliable as Japs?

Just looking at a 3d i30, 131 plate for €10,350 with 59,652 m on the odo.
Seems reasonable

Nuw

Andrew S wrote: »

I was thinking about fiestas/corsas too but coming from a Volvo S40 I'm sure you'd understand the pain of doing so

Hyundai i30s look pretty good, are Korean cars as reliable as Japs?

Just looking at a 3d i30, 131 plate for €10,350 with 59,652 m on the odo.
Seems reasonable

Yeah I know the feeling

Get a test drive in one of these smaller box anyway, I'm pretty certain you'll be surprised by the comfort they managed to squeeze out of them.

One thing worth noting, hyundais come with 5 years warranty and Kias with 7 (if memory serves). So you're looking at a 3 years old car that is still under warranty (provided any service has been done by an authorized mechanic if not by the main dealership).

Kia Rio from the same age is actually the same underneath as the i30, might worth a look.

As far as I'm aware there haven't been any horror stories with them, and in any case, you'll have a few years manufacturer's warranty on them should anything arise.

Pretty safe bet if you ask me...

Nuw

Come to think about it the hyundai i20 comes with the same 1.4D than the i30 and will probably suit you well, it's the smaller one but "feels" bigger than it is. The cabin would actually feel as big as the S40.

It's also very easy on insurance and diesel, nippy enough and comfortable.

colm_mcm

Does having a small engine in your case actually make your insurance much cheaper than 1.6, which is already small
And if it does, by how much?
You'd want to be saving a lot to drive a 1.3 diesel miserybox.

Andrew S

colm_mcm wrote: »

Does having a small engine in your case actually make your insurance much cheaper than 1.6, which is already small
And if it does, by how much?
You'd want to be saving a lot to drive a 1.3 diesel miserybox.

Unfortunately, yes.

I'm 24 and I bumped someone last august so lost a 3 years no claims bonus...
Funny thing is my volvo has a cracked license plate, their car had 2.6k worth of damage done (it was a new mini transit van) which unfortunately I didn't have the cash to cover (would have been cheaper than dealing with the insurance costs now..)

Insuring the volvo would cost me upwards of 3.6k,
Insuring a 1.4 Toyota Auris I've found for as low (if you can say that) as 2.3k.

So yeah, quite big difference.
I'll only be using the car for about 3-4 years and then getting a newer volvo again once insurance is reasonable.

Also, my fiance who's a first time driver will be getting insured on it too so costs will be lower on smaller car.

grogi

Andrew S wrote: »

I'm 24 and I bumped someone last august so lost a 3 years no claims bonus...

Really don't envy you. You seem like a sensible lad, good luck...

Did you have NCB Step-Back protection? If so, it would land you in 1 year NCB now (it did for me couple of years back).


Check the 1.2TSI. They are not diesels, but return a very good economy if you drive them properly (shifting early). And you'd not feel you are driving a moppet.

colm_mcm

Andrew S wrote: »

Unfortunately, yes.

I'm 24 and I bumped someone last august so lost a 3 years no claims bonus...
Funny thing is my volvo has a cracked license plate, their car had 2.6k worth of damage done (it was a new mini transit van) which unfortunately I didn't have the cash to cover (would have been cheaper than dealing with the insurance costs now..)

Insuring the volvo would cost me upwards of 3.6k,
Insuring a 1.4 Toyota Auris I've found for as low (if you can say that) as 2.3k.

So yeah, quite big difference.
I'll only be using the car for about 3-4 years and then getting a newer volvo again once insurance is reasonable.

Also, my fiance who's a first time driver will be getting insured on it too so costs will be lower on smaller car.

Have you priced newer 1.6 cars too? Could be the age of the Volvo going against you too.

youre spending a lot to save a relatively small amount.

Andrew S

grogi wrote: »

Really don't envy you. You seem like a sensible lad, good luck...

Did you have NCB Step-Back protection? If so, it would land you in 1 year NCB now (it did for me couple of years back).


Check the 1.2TSI. They are not diesels, but return a very good economy if you drive them properly (shifting early). And you'd not feel you are driving a moppet.

Unfortunately no, I'm at 0NCB now so it is pretty bad.. and unfortunately Diesel is a must since driving 70km per day on a petrol of any size would be less efficient over a longer period of time.. Also, diesel engines tend to last longer

Andrew S

colm_mcm wrote: »

Have you priced newer 1.6 cars too? Could be the age of the Volvo going against you too.

youre spending a lot to save a relatively small amount.

I've checked a 2012 volvo 1.6D and seems to get the same insurance quote.

Though then again if I get it quoted from the automatic system it may be only looking at engine size.
Once I'm within 3 weeks of my renewal (end of may) I'll be looking in detail what kind of costs the 1.4 vs 1.6 engine size makes.

Also, I'm actually updagrading because of the high tax, better fuel economy and my volvo has 155k miles on it
So not just to drop engine size or I'd just get a 2004-5 1.4d for like 2-3k

grogi

colm_mcm wrote: »

Have you priced newer 1.6 cars too? Could be the age of the Volvo going against you too.

youre spending a lot to save a relatively small amount.

You're right. That claim might look a lot like a fraudulent as well - an oldish car with virtually no damage and a lot of damage to a much more expensive car.

I'm not saying it is - but it might seem like.

Andrew S

grogi wrote: »

You're right. That claim might look a lot like a fraudulent as well - an oldish car with virtually no damage and a lot of damage to a much more expensive car.

I'm not saying it is - but it might seem like.

heh, nah it's just the way that I hit him.
didnt react to stopped traffic on a 100km/h road on a bend.
Slowed down as much as I could and think I hit him at about 30k/h

He had a dented door and the floor was a little bent out of shape in the back (transit van)
So naturally when it was evaluated, they added on the cost of every small little thing that there'd be no way of proving it wasn't me.

Also, I do drive a Volvo after all.. Volvo and tank usually get used in the same sentence

grogi

Andrew S wrote: »

I've checked a 2012 volvo 1.6D and seems to get the same insurance quote.

Though then again if I get it quoted from the automatic system it may be only looking at engine size.
Once I'm within 3 weeks of my renewal (end of may) I'll be looking in detail what kind of costs the 1.4 vs 1.6 engine size makes.

Also, I'm actually updagrading because of the high tax, better fuel economy and my volvo has 155k miles on it
So not just to drop engine size or I'd just get a 2004-5 1.4d for like 2-3k

Everything makes the difference for the quote. The capacity is used to determine the value of the car and its performance. But a 1.6 does not equal 1.6.

You'll notice things like the value you put in the quote, mileage, age of the car and even profession of the drivers do change the quote.

I always advice to check AA for car insurance - they always produced a very competitive quotes for me and I had my share of troubles.

Are you only buying a new car to save tax and insurance?

What will the overall cost of buying a new car be over several years (tax, insurance, depreciation, maintenance? Etc.) vs keeping your current car?

MajorMax

I'll probably get slated for this by the motorheads on this forum, but I'm planning on replacing my 2009 Mazda 3 next year with a Dacia Duster.

I like the MPG, the road tax is cheap (yearly tax is approximatly what I pay quarterly ATM) and the price is very good. I drive 30,000-40,000 Km per year and I want something cheap & cheerful.

Andrew S

Deleted User wrote: »

Are you only buying a new car to save tax and insurance?

What will the overall cost of buying a new car be over several years (tax, insurance, depreciation, maintenance? Etc.) vs keeping your current car?

Not sure to be honest. It's definitely more expensive to buy a newer car but I also want to get a newer car overall.

Yearly its 300eu on tax, and probably about 3-4k saved on insurance by the time my NCB is back.
Fuel economy would probably increase a little too which would help when driving about 70km a day.

+ who doesn't like the feel of a new car

An 05 volvo is worth somewhere between 2000-3000 and if I put any more miles on it, it'll likely never sell too.. it's at 155k M now

Andrew S

grogi wrote: »

Everything makes the difference for the quote. The capacity is used to determine the value of the car and its performance. But a 1.6 does not equal 1.6.

You'll notice things like the value you put in the quote, mileage, age of the car and even profession of the drivers do change the quote.

I always advice to check AA for car insurance - they always produced a very competitive quotes for me and I had my share of troubles.

You Sir made my day.

Tried AA..
2012 Volvo S40 1.6D worth 17000 gave me this:
Comp - €2300
3rd party - €1,922.71

2011 Toyota Auris 1.4D worth 10000 gave me:
Comp - €1,869
3rd party - €1600

So AA is looking MUCH MUCH more reasonable.

While 2300 is still high, if I was to get any car worth above 10,000 I'd probably want to get comprehensive insurance.

So maybe a 1.6 is not out of question just yet.
THANKS!

grogi

Andrew S wrote: »

You Sir made my day.

Tried AA..
2012 Volvo S40 1.6D worth 17000 gave me this:
Comp - €2300
3rd party - €1,922.71

2011 Toyota Auris 1.4D worth 10000 gave me:
Comp - €1,869
3rd party - €1600

So AA is looking MUCH MUCH more reasonable.

While 2300 is still high, if I was to get any car worth above 10,000 I'd probably want to get comprehensive insurance.

So maybe a 1.6 is not out of question just yet.
THANKS!

And if you get AA membership (I think it is €79/year) you'll get additional 5% discount...

duffman3833

1 thing i learned when i changed car a while ago was more common cars seem to be higher price when it comes to insurance in some cases. I had a 04 vw golf 1.9tdi (105bhp) and i got a 07 bmw 118d (120 odd bhp) and when i got quote, it was cheaper to insure than the golf, got €60 back when i bought car. So i asked why cheaper, its a BMW, bigger engine, more power and newer. The girl on phone said it was because it was less common and less accidents in those cars so they see them as less of a risk than the golf. Just thought id share

Andrew S

duffman3833 wrote: »

1 thing i learned when i changed car a while ago was more common cars seem to be higher price when it comes to insurance in some cases. I had a 04 vw golf 1.9tdi (105bhp) and i got a 07 bmw 118d (120 odd bhp) and when i got quote, it was cheaper to insure than the golf, got €60 back when i bought car. So i asked why cheaper, its a BMW, bigger engine, more power and newer. The girl on phone said it was because it was less common and less accidents in those cars so they see them as less of a risk than the golf. Just thought id share

That specific case is because a Golf 1.9 TDI is a common young person's car.

Both Toyota Auris and (any) Volvo are considered safe cars

duffman3833

Andrew S wrote: »

That specific case is because a Golf 1.9 TDI is a common young person's car.

Both Toyota Auris and (any) Volvo are considered safe cars

this was a few years ago, but im now on a mazda 3 1.6d and its cheaper than the more common focus which is basically the same car

Andrew S

Any other thoughts about the original topic?

1.4 Diesel car that is reliable?

Mainly looking at [2012 Toyota Auris 1.4D] vs [2012 1.3 CDTI Opel Astra]

Personal experience perhaps?

ptyloch

Andrew S wrote: »

Any other thoughts about the original topic?

1.4 Diesel car that is reliable?

Mainly looking at [2012 Toyota Auris 1.4D] vs [2012 1.3 CDTI Opel Astra]

Personal experience perhaps?

Not a diesel but maybe you'd be interested? I have no experience with this make or model but found it interesting, 10k for a 2014, not bad.

https://www.donedeal.ie/cars-for-sale/renault-fluence-electric-car-fluence-dynamique/11019907


Maybe try and get a quote just for comparison?

grogi

ptyloch wrote: »

Not a diesel but maybe you'd be interested? I have no experience with this make or model but found it interesting, 10k for a 2014, not bad.

https://www.donedeal.ie/cars-for-sale/renault-fluence-electric-car-fluence-dynamique/11019907


Maybe try and get a quote just for comparison?

The caveat is that you don't own the battery... You rent it from Renault - for around €100 a month... Plus it is painfully slow to charge.

Andrew S

ptyloch wrote: »

Not a diesel but maybe you'd be interested? I have no experience with this make or model but found it interesting, 10k for a 2014, not bad.



Maybe try and get a quote just for comparison?

This thing would not make it to work and back I live about 35km from work ^^

Also, I was told to avoid French cars like the plague if I want reliability.
Seems electronics are a big nono on French cars.

Getting a fully electric French car is asking to get stuck somewhere

grogi

Andrew S wrote: »

This thing would not make it to work and back I live about 35km from work ^^

Its range is rated 185km...