Realistic Running of a Daily Shitter

[willswitchengage]

I do twenty miles a day in mine, there is a bus to work but it's hourly, travels only in peak periods, costs £6.50 return and involves a 15 minute walk at the other end. So, it's car vs bicycle... Reliability is good, but fuel consumption is atrocious and it generally feels too temperamental for the aggressive mongery of commuter traffic. Gonna probs try and sell when I renew the MOT in September

[dollywobbler]

I don't get the 'spartan and uncomfortable' thing. Though I do own a 2CV...

 

The Fiesta has seats that are pretty good and deliciously light controls. Driving one is about as difficult as making a cup of tea. Even the 1-litre is pretty perky, though a 1.1 has a useful extra dose of horses.

[Angrydicky]

Nailed it. Irrespective of reliability, the suspension, seats, and brakes of your average FIAT 1100 or Ford Angular are just not suitable for day-to-day driving in modern traffic. Parking spaces are pretty tight, and you don't want to be using a heavy, unassisted steering worm. Of course, you can probably uprate/upgrade some of the above, but then it'd massively weaken the economic argument in favour of running shite. Furthermore, you'd need to change the oil every 2k, rebuild the engine after about 100k and do some minor maintenance work every other week.

 

 

You really do talk some bollocks. I drive a 1960 car as my daily and don't have any problems with using it as such at all. The non-power assisted steering isn't an issue at all, obviously it's a little bit harder to park but I must emphasise the word 'little'. It's heavy if you're used to power steering but I don't find it a problem. As long as you plan ahead, leave decent stopping distances when braking and be prepared for regular maintenance such as fluids, tyre pressures and the odd bit of welding, plus the 3k oil change intervals it really isn't a problem. Loads of people I know do huge mileages in 50's and 60's cars and in my opinion the only slight shortfalls are the crap heaters/demisters, the rust and the lack of power (making moving out at some very busy roundabouts and junctions a problem) but I have very few complaints overall.

 

Have you ever owned, driven or parked a pre 1970's car?

[Luxobarges_Are_Us]

Nailed it. Irrespective of reliability, the suspension, seats, and brakes of your average FIAT 1100 or Ford Angular are just not suitable for day-to-day driving in modern traffic. Parking spaces are pretty tight, and you don't want to be using a heavy, unassisted steering worm. Of course, you can probably uprate/upgrade some of the above, but then it'd massively weaken the economic argument in favour of running shite. Furthermore, you'd need to change the oil every 2k, rebuild the engine after about 100k and do some minor maintenance work every other week.

 

 

You really do talk some bollocks. I drive a 1960 car as my daily and don't have any problems with using it as such at all. The non-power assisted steering isn't an issue at all, obviously it's a little bit harder to park but I must emphasise the word 'little'. It's heavy if you're used to power steering but I don't find it a problem. As long as you plan ahead, leave decent stopping distances when braking and be prepared for regular maintenance such as fluids, tyre pressures and the odd bit of welding, plus the 3k oil change intervals it really isn't a problem. Loads of people I know do huge mileages in 50's and 60's cars and in my opinion the only slight shortfalls are the crap heaters/demisters, the rust and the lack of power (making moving out at some very busy roundabouts and junctions a problem) but I have very few complaints overall.

 

Have you ever owned, driven or parked a pre 1970's car?

 

Looks like you've taken this a bit personally. I've driven and parked a couple, and am not in a massive hurry to get one (I'd consider a DS/ID, but these were far ahead of their time anyway). I agree 3k oilchanges are alright, but engine work is a pain and I'm sure I've read about suspensions that need greasing every 1k and other random stuff like that. You can leave all the braking distance you want- it won't stop people from being cocks and invading your lane before proceeding to brake. Seating, steering and suspension are things which you could live with, but you'd have to make some very obvious sacrifices in comfort and ergonomics, which isn't a good idea when you're doing loads of miles. One has to bear in mind that the average mileage back in the day was a lot lower than it is today. You're welcome to think that sitting in a semi-knackered bench seat without head restraints for 17,000 miles per year is good for you, but I think you'll find a lot of people who disagree.

[DSdriver]

It's been a year now since I sold my '96 Volvo 940 Estate and bought the '70 DS Safari. Strange but true, the Citroen has been more reliable, it has only failed to proceed once when a hydraulic fluid return pipe burst. The Volvo was habitually breaking down with dodgy electrical components.

Of course nobody in their right mind would have a Citroen DS as their only car so we have another DS, a saloon and as a final back-up a little pug 206 on a W reg so still quite old.

At least you can work on a old car yourself, modern shit needs diagnostic computers and when you look under the bonnet everything is covered up and requires special spanners.

[Negative Creep]

I've used my Bluebird as a daily ever since I bought it. What with it's power steering, mega comfy seats and great visibility it makes a brilliant daily commuter. That an it utterley refuses to break down

[Luxobarges_Are_Us]

I don't get the 'spartan and uncomfortable' thing. Though I do own a 2CV...

 

The Fiesta has seats that are pretty good and deliciously light controls. Driving one is about as difficult as making a cup of tea. Even the 1-litre is pretty perky, though a 1.1 has a useful extra dose of horses.

 

Of course, things like ride quality/comfort are mostly about a person's frame of reference. If you took someone out of an Insigina and put them into the mk1 Fester, they'd probably be incensed by the lack of things like cupholders. In terms of light controls and power, you're right. I owned an 1.1 mk2 for a short while and it positively surprised me in the power department.

[Micrashed]

I agree 3k oilchanges are alright, but engine work is a pain and I'm sure I've read about suspensions that need greasing every 1k and other random stuff like that.

That doesnt really phase me, I cut my teeth on BL tin from the 60's 70's and 80's grease nipples hold no fear for me. Nor does oiling the damper on an SU.

Obviously when I last used these type of cars they were newer than what they are now. So buying an 80's motor again means buying something 20-30 years old rather than something 10 years old.

Mk1 Fiesta isnt a lot less spartan than the interior of my K11, believe me.

[cms206]

I don't run stuff as old as many of you and I do, admittedly, change my cars frequently; the current fleet is the Autoshite Bike 1988 Volvo 745 and the ex Pete-M 1991 Vauxhall Senator. The Senator's a bit poorly just now so I'm generally using the 745 as a daily but being honest, even with stupidly huge cars, big engines and automatic 'boxes, I'm still not spending as much on both of my cars - including fuel, parts, service items, tax and insurance - than my mate spends on his 59-plate 1.2 Clio. Prior to these I ran a 1989 Vauxhall Cavalier SRi as a daily, and when it's back on the road the Volvo will definately go (if it's still here) and the Senator'll take up second place in the fleet as a backup.

 

Modern cars don't really interest me. I'm over the moon with a car if I get front electric windows, a decent heater for winter, a bit of poke, a stereo radio/cassette and enough room for my 6ft 2in, 16 stone frame to move about. To be honest the only thing I really dislike not having in a car is a sunroof - I'm generally quite easy pleased.

[Negative Creep]

Must admit I do wish I had air con. Howver the chances of finding anything pre 1995 with a working system ("just needs a re gas" does not count) are about as high as The Sun hiring a journalist

[pompei]

I used to alternate between a scruffy Fiat 127 Palio (the comfy one with lovely velour seats!) and my Honda CRX. The 127 had the 1050 engine and had plenty of poke for everyday use. It was brilliant and I really wish I hadn't been pressured into selling it (only got £50 for it ) by She Who Cracks The Whip.

[dollywobbler]

I must admit that more modern shite tends to have better heating/ventilation, which makes life much more bearable. I also agree that the invention of the sealed balljoint did wonders for progress. Grease points are a pain in the arse, especially in the grimmer months if you don't have a garage (or your garage is full of something else). That's why I reckon a Fiesta is about spot on. Ridiculously simple, low maintenance and efficient. Wouldn't rule out a Mk2 - some of those even had five speeds IIRC. A 1.6D would obviously autoshite gold. It's keeping corrosion at bay that's the constant menace really. That's why we're getting rid of the Mini, and why my BX Mk2 is heading for the scrapyard...

[HMC]

I think its vehicles from the mid 80s to early 90s that are in the sweet spot for daily use. Boring but practical factors such as rust proofing and crash protection, heating and ventilation on an upward curve and in that period electrics and management systems had yet to become overly complex. Most car were relatively simply engineered and hence are easy for us to diagnose and repair, yet ad the same time not dissolving before our eyes or having macochistic service requirements. Hence I arive at my w124 200te and w126 560sec. The ecomomy of particularly the latter, whilst poor, in my mind is offset by the avoidance of much higher purchace costs and often eyewatering depreciation. Plus i just like them!

[Angrydicky]

Nailed it. Irrespective of reliability, the suspension, seats, and brakes of your average FIAT 1100 or Ford Angular are just not suitable for day-to-day driving in modern traffic. Parking spaces are pretty tight, and you don't want to be using a heavy, unassisted steering worm. Of course, you can probably uprate/upgrade some of the above, but then it'd massively weaken the economic argument in favour of running shite. Furthermore, you'd need to change the oil every 2k, rebuild the engine after about 100k and do some minor maintenance work every other week.

 

 

You really do talk some bollocks. I drive a 1960 car as my daily and don't have any problems with using it as such at all. The non-power assisted steering isn't an issue at all, obviously it's a little bit harder to park but I must emphasise the word 'little'. It's heavy if you're used to power steering but I don't find it a problem. As long as you plan ahead, leave decent stopping distances when braking and be prepared for regular maintenance such as fluids, tyre pressures and the odd bit of welding, plus the 3k oil change intervals it really isn't a problem. Loads of people I know do huge mileages in 50's and 60's cars and in my opinion the only slight shortfalls are the crap heaters/demisters, the rust and the lack of power (making moving out at some very busy roundabouts and junctions a problem) but I have very few complaints overall.

 

Have you ever owned, driven or parked a pre 1970's car?

 

Looks like you've taken this a bit personally. I've driven and parked a couple, and am not in a massive hurry to get one (I'd consider a DS/ID, but these were far ahead of their time anyway). I agree 3k oilchanges are alright, but engine work is a pain and I'm sure I've read about suspensions that need greasing every 1k and other random stuff like that. You can leave all the braking distance you want- it won't stop people from being cocks and invading your lane before proceeding to brake. Seating, steering and suspension are things which you could live with, but you'd have to make some very obvious sacrifices in comfort and ergonomics, which isn't a good idea when you're doing loads of miles. One has to bear in mind that the average mileage back in the day was a lot lower than it is today. You're welcome to think that sitting in a semi-knackered bench seat without head restraints for 17,000 miles per year is good for you, but I think you'll find a lot of people who disagree.

 

Oh I see what you mean about the sacrificing comfort, but surely it's worth that to be driving something that you are genuinely interested in rather than some TDI yawnmobile?

 

I don't give a fuck about headrests, and cocks invading your lane - well, you've just got to be more on the ball. Driving a car of this age makes you a far better driver IMO as well. Much more alert.

 

Oh yeah, just because the seat's old - doesn't mean it's knackered. Same goes for the suspension or whatever. Suspension needs greasing every 2-3k.

 

To be honest, I don't think you are even qualified to spew all your pub-bore nonsense, seeing as you've never owned a pre-1970's car or lived with one for any length of time.

[Luxobarges_Are_Us]

I agree 3k oilchanges are alright, but engine work is a pain and I'm sure I've read about suspensions that need greasing every 1k and other random stuff like that.

That doesnt really phase me, I cut my teeth on BL tin from the 60's 70's and 80's grease nipples hold no fear for me. Nor does oiling the damper on an SU.

Obviously when I last used these type of cars they were newer than what they are now. So buying an 80's motor again means buying something 20-30 years old rather than something 10 years old.

Mk1 Fiesta isnt a lot less spartan than the interior of my K11, believe me.

 

Well, there you go. You've answered your own question. GO FOR IT!

[oldford]

I run my 1991 Sierra 1.8 as a daily, they were good enough to use then, so why not now?

[Luxobarges_Are_Us]

Oh I see what you mean about the sacrificing comfort, but surely it's worth that to be driving something that you are genuinely interested in rather than some TDI yawnmobile?

 

But that's the entire point of this thread.

It's one thing using a car as a toy and another using it as a tool for one's work. If you live in a city centre, walk to work, have a garage and only take the car out in the weekends, you'll be fine owning an Hispano-Suiza as your only vehicle. If, on the other hand, you drive 800 miles a week as an espresso machine technician for Costa Coffee, even a diesel W124 could prove too outdated (e.g. you can't afford to risk having to wait for 10 days for GSF to get hold of some obscure part that's only made by one supplier somewhere in the Polish hinterlands).

 

 

To be honest, I don't think you are even qualified to spew all your pub-bore nonsense, seeing as you've never owned and lived with a pre-1970's car for any length of time.

 

The logical extension of the above opinion is that only those who have survived torture/domestic violence/cancer/insert horrible thing should be 'qualified' to talk about it. GR9 4 KIM JONG UN!

[scruff]

Yeah, go for it! My ex girlfriend was running a Mk1 Fiesta as her daily a decade ago. Good memories (girl and car) and compared to some shite around it shouldn't feel much older than your Micra.

[dollywobbler]

Angry Dicky in living up to name shocker!

[Albert Ross]

Just read this little lot. Yeah, I drive a 2 ton 60 bhp diesel "4x4" as a daily, which has unassisted single-circuit drum brakes, unassisted recirculating ball steering with 6 track rod ends, and it's just fine. You guys that are grumbling about lack of comforts etc need to get a grip. It has a blast furnace for a heater, three front seats, acres of space for carting shit about, and a 1 ton carrying capacity. Suits me!

[Pete-M]

My two aren't 20 years old yet, but they'll both be 20 on 17th November 2014.

 

The Impreza has been faultless so far, and the Jag would have been if it hadn't shat the seals in the PAS rack.

 

I used the 604 as a daily for a few weeks, other than failing to proceed once when the fan belt was a bit loose - the battery couldn't hack the headlights, wipers, heater with the 'belt loose - it behaved splendidly. Problem with the 604 STi is when there ain't much charge in the battery it didn't have enough oomph to power the starter and fuel pump at the same time...

[scruff]

recirculating ball steering

 

Poof!

[DSdriver]

A tip for those who are not used to non-assisted steering: Don't struggle trying to turn the wheel when the car is stationary, there is a lot less friction if it is moving, even slowly.

[Mat.T]

My 1986 Saab 900 carb seems happy to do 10k a year. Oil changes at 5k as well as keeping the daft front handbrake calipers greased up and touch wood no problems!

[SambaS]

From November 2008 I've ran various Talbot Sambas, the XR3, A Monza and for some months of this year the Polonez was my sole method of transport. I would happily (and did) drive to anywhere in the country without thinking of breaking down, the only one to let me down and end up on a recovery truck was the Opel when it broke a rocker.

[meshking]

I'm reading this with interest. My "daily" at the moment is a 1975 2cv. However, my more regular daily is one of these badboys:

 

 

Usually to be found sipping a g&t, not piloting it.

 

However - I've got an eye out for a suitable car that might be more suitable to the irregular commute, which is either M-way or A road. I've done my time driving the citroen a-series on m-ways in rush hour and don't want to go back to that. Currently considering a mazda tribute or ford maverick, which whilst not old (10 years or so) are seemingly heading for shite territory.

 

I have considered a early 90s saab as a suitable alternative, just waiting for something interesting like a flat front 9000 to turn up.

[Justin Case]

I can see nothing to stop anyone using a car from the 70s onwards as a daily, provided of course that is in good nick. I have owned two 1970s cars, an Avenger 1600 auto and a Saab 99 2 litre. This was when they were just middle-aged secondhand cars and getting on a bit, and not 30+ years old, but neither gave any trouble and were easy to service and repair. Also, unlike cars from the 60s or earlier, they could probably keep up with motorway traffic although by todays standards they would be struggling on even moderate hills. Seats were a bit basic (no headrests) although you could easily fit seats from a later car, but you did get servo disc brakes, seat belts and decent lights so safety shouldn't reallly be a problem, especially with the Saab. Neither had power steering, but the Avenger being RWD had lighter steering than some moderns with power steering. On the other hand I would probably not be happy with anything much smaller in todays conditions, too sluggish, cramped and vulnerable for me.

 

The only problem I can see is spares, there is a severe lack of Hillman dealers in my part of the world It may be possible to stock up from autojumbles and scrapyards, but you are unlikely to be able to put your hand on everything that you may need.

[Spiny Norman]

There was a point during my ownership of my 1969 Volvo Amazon when my Rover 600 turbo did the usual kettle thing and I had to use the Volvo as a daily for a few weeks till I sorted out another car, and it was just fine.

 

Yes the steering was heavier than the power assisted systems I'd become accustomed to but I found I had these things called biceps in my arms and after a few days of hauling the tank in and out of Glasgow's tightest parking spaces I got quite used to it. Being an Amazon it had the most spectacular heater meaning that despite it being one of the coldest winters in recent history I had to wind down the window after a mile or two otherwise I'd cook. It started first time every time in sub zero conditions, and was quite happy whether it was going on a quick run to the shops or a razz up to Perth or over to Edinburgh.

The only thing I'd have done to it to make it a bit more comfortable would have been to fit some sound proofing, but other than that it was great.

[ruffgeezer]

I'm currently running Trev the C15 as my daily,

 

I got him for £250 from MrScruff and his mot work cost me £72, I will be genuinely sad when I have to move him along, I can do a week's driving on £15 of diesel, once I sort the window winder out, he'll be perfect

[sporty-shite]

I reckon a Mk1 Fez is a perfect choice. True, it's no motorway mile-muncher, but they're GR11 around towns and A roads, super-simple to maintain, good parts availability and (IMO) a damn good looking little thing.

 

For perspective, I ran a MK2 XR2 as a daily, including all family duties with two small children, with no problems at all. Before that there was the 635 (26 years old) a Golf Clipper (20 years old) and quite a few others. I've just parked the 480 up as the tax has run out, but that has done full family duty for the last 6 months, with only one breakdown (failed distributor cap), and will shortly be bringing a 23 year old Scirocco into service.

 

Running an older car is no big thing. Yes, you may have to keep more of an eye on them, maintenance-wise, but we're all shiters, aren't we? It's what we do.