Jump to content
Hendry

Small Cars- Cheap To Run BULLSHIT!

Recommended Posts

The 53 plate Yaris I had was odd as no matter how I drove it I got 43 mpg. That was a 1.3, which was the larger engine of the two available. 2 litre Accords however drink fuel like its going out of fashion and that was the middle range engine. Volvo is the smallest engine in that range and averages 27-28 but has also cost a fortune in maintenance whereas the small Toyota cost buttons until the timing chain needed done. Honda needed a headlight bulb. As for deprecation, I got more than I paid for the Yaris from the insurance company and the 740 can only go up so that doesn't matter either. Honda was a swap so I lost nothing.

Conclusion? I'm a rubbish example as car running costs only begin to matter to me when they really start to sting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a case of choosing the right car for you, rather than just following the crowd.

 

My Kia Rio does about 50 mpg, costs £330 a year to insure, £30 tax and probably about £500 in depreciation this year. Considering I do 15k miles a year its saved me quite a bit over the primera it replaced which I was lucky if i got 30mpg from, cost about £150 more to insure and about £200 a year more for road tax. Sure it's not big enough when we go away with the kids but we have my wifes astra for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the current 'small' cars are so heavy, no wonder their little engines chew through fuel.  Driving technique has a lot to do with it I think..

 

I don't drive 106 diesels for the fun of it !  I drive them because they always achieve 57-60mpg with everyday use.  That is through tank-to-tank calculations, for the past 6 years..  I have a 106 van, my partner a normal 3-dr hatch.  Many people pass comment on our cars, (too old, unsafe?, no PAS, treat yourself etc etc) but what they don't realise is, we drive these £400 cars because we want to, not because we can't afford something better!!

 

Secret formula-

Light weight,

Suitable gearing,

skinny tyres,

small frontal area (only important over 60 mph)

:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget DW that your Sirion isn't very heavy, mine is just over 800kg, and I'd expect yours to be similar.

Indeed so, but the Golf was less than 900kg IIRC. Sirion also benefits from cheaper road tax (albeit not post-2001 cheapness) and so far all I've had to spend on it is £140 for a set of winter tyres, and the cost of some oil and a filter. It's not often I get cheap motoring right!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 3.0 24v auto Senator averages 38mpg on a run when it works; conversely the council estate 740 2.3 auto's best was 32.6mpg for the 840 mile round trip that was Shitefest 2012. The 940 turbo is much better on pez surprisingly but will also do 100mph at just 3500rpm.

 

Most of my cars have been 2.0+, but both my old 1.8i Cavalier and the 1.6 carb Montego do about 36mpg on average; by far the worst was an average of 25mpg from my old 1.5 Proton Saga 12v.

 

Sent from my GT-S5830i using Tapatalk 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We bought a new aygo 1.0 on the scrappage scheme ( I know I know) and it never bettered 45mpg and my old vectra dti estate did better. Never mind cos I actually made a profit on the aygo!

Got a petrol saab now anyway and wouldn't change it for anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See I think that's the other problem with modern small engined cars, the weight.

 

Ok so a mk2 Clio/Corsa B/Fiesta mk5 etc would have been epically cheap on fuel and do much better mpg but that's because they weighed the same as an empty crisp packet, modern small cars weigh loads more due to buyers demanding all the mod cons normally only reserved for night cars, plus all the safety shite of reinforced crumple zones, half a dozen airbags at least, abs, traction control, eba, ebd etc etc

 

And it's only going to get worse as manufacturers have all decided their stop gap until they figure out how to get a decent range from electric cars is forced induction/supercharging of small block engines so they produce the same bhp and torque etc as bigger engines while being cleaner and apparently better on the environment, but they are under much more stress reducing mpg and increasing unreliability, don't fancy owning a 1.4 TSi 170 bhp Golf for that very reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, I suspect that I have cocked up picking a 1.6 Scirocco over a 1.8

although I was swayed by going on a skid pan course with a selection of Sierras.

1.6 wank,

2.0 overpowered

1.8, a reasonable compromise

 

Yes

 

On oil over water.

 

In real life....

Was the 2.0 a twincam or Pinto?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I'm that arsed about MPG. 

My XUD engined (spoken of in hushed, reverential tones here) 306 never did more than 38 MPG. Amazon's shit on fuel, so is the 460 if you get a move on. 

C4 does between 48-58 depending on how you drive it. Yes, yes, yes, a VAG TDi with its millimetric power band is better on fuel, but I don't have £20k+ to spend on something so willfully dull and Waitrose. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with a lot of you, BUT my missus has a 52 1.0 yaris...

 

She does 300 mile a week going to work, she don't like cars at all, so it's pretty much perfect for her.

 

I can't think of a better car for her to use??? Bigger would surely mean more money? I love big cars and have often run them and I run a stag to work as often as I can afford to fuel it.

 

But she would probably chop my cock off if I said " yeah sold the yaris, got you a marina instead"

I think thats what it comes down to for some people Dan. Some people want a car that runs and can take them to work and back and nothing more. But you've also got people like us who like big cars and can afford to run them. Then you've got those who buy smaller/diesel cars just to brag about them on how much money they are saving. I think the point being made on this thread is that, if you like your cars but want to save money, you can buy something you like and still have a car that sips fuel rather having to actually 'downsize' as such.

 

small cc= smaller insurance (thats the only reason i can think of spaxos,corsas and festers being saught after)

Thats what everyone thinks, but there are also many other factors in insurance that can push up/lower the final price. Many people, as you pointed out, still go and buy these cars in the mistaken belief that they are generally cheaper to run, but what they find is that thier insurance is sky-high due the area they live in/car not garaged etc....

 

Personally, I have never been that arsed about MPG. I buy a car because it makes me happy. That really is the only justification anyone should ever need when buying a car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we go anywhere far away we take the Sandero. yeah there's the initial purchase price to factor into the equation, but it does a genuine 65-70 mpg and is free to tax and buttons to insure. planning on keeping it forever anyway so don't care about depreciation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My XUD engined (spoken of in hushed, reverential tones here) 306 never did more than 38 MPG. 

 

This really baffles me. I used to thrash my 306 DTurbo all over the place, and it consistently returned 45mpg. The silver BX turbo diesel that Minimad now has would break 50mpg no bother - 56mpg the best I recorded in it. My mate does often drop below 40mpg in his BX turbo diesel, but that's because it's a Xantia 1.9 with the fuelling set at levels which produce quite a lot of smoke and very large doses of boost. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've drifted onto MPG but supply and demand has an effect too. Theyll always be more punters after a smaller, cheaper to insure car- im always suprised how eventually shabby a fiesta or corsa bottoms out much further up the used car market than, say, a tired mondeo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've drifted onto MPG but supply and demand has an effect too. Theyll always be more punters after a smaller, cheaper to insure car- im always suprised how eventually shabby a fiesta or corsa bottoms out much further up the used car market than, say, a tired mondeo.

Cost of parts come in to it too. Citroën AX leads, plugs, rotor arm, oil and air filter and cap cost less than the leads for the 2 litre Rover. This is the danger with Jags and the like, Mondeos may differ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's some truth in what people have said about differing fuel economy in cars sharing the same body but which were fitted with a range of engines. In the Allegro, for instance, the 1100 unit uses marginally more fuel than the 1300: 32 vs 33 MPG. And on that particular 1300 I'd fitted a slightly richer needle. On a motorway run I sometimes got 40 MPG out of the 1300, I can't yet say what the 1100 does on the motorway as I haven't had the opportunity to calculate it.

 

My first 1300 regularly returned 35 MPG, so it shows that power to weight ratio does indeed have a lot to do with it. On the other hand, those E-Series engines they fitted were quoted as giving mid to high 20's in the manuals, but I haven't owned one so don't like taking such data as Gospel. Certainly the manufacturer fuel consumption figures back then were much more accurate than the OMG85.3MPGEXTRA-URBANCYCLE bullshit they publish now.

 

Similarly, in the Pitman's Allegro 1500/1750 owner's manual (still written by that legend Staton Abbey in the mid-1970's), in the hints on buying a used Allegro, he says the larger engined cars would be expected to have a longer engine life as they won't have been worked as hard as the A-type engines. But - from what I have heard the 11/1300 is the more durable lump!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had to use my wifes fiesta zetec for a 40 mile round trip to work.

 

At motorway speeds the engine was turning over at nearly 4k RPM. I did'nt work out the fuel consumption, but it used far more than my diesel vectra.

 

A timing belt replacement would set me back £220.

 

Even fiestas can be expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me with the mileage I do it is fuel costs and unexpected repairs that I don't want to do myself that are the killer; so I am one of those sad people who runs a small new car for peace of mind. For me it's buy cheap and get rid before the warranty runs out, when I first did this I was doing about 25k miles a year now I've cut down a bit so it's around 18k - 20k.

 

The figures for my recently departed Fiat Panda over the three years and 58000 miles I owned it.

£3800 depreciation - £6000 purchase cost (the base model) less £2200 trade in value at just under three years old.

£90 three years VED

£520 three years service costs

£420 three years replacement tyre costs

£720 three years insurance cost incl. business use and a couple of named drivers

£6750 petrol @ 50mpg average (It never seemed to go under 50 but did do a little more on longer runs)

 

So that's £12,300 over three years or about 21 pence per mile; however I do get paid for work mileage and over the three years got £3495 back from work so in real terms it cost about 15 pence per mile.

 

I appreciate that £3800 would pay for a lot of repairs and/or hire cars for breakdowns so you can call it a stupid tax if you want to, but, it's what suits me at the moment. I used to run older cars as my everyday transport, but at the moment I'm not up to carrying out the maintenance/repairs required; if I didn't need the transport for work I wouldn't have a new car.

 

To make up for being sensible I have older cars that I hardly use and it doesn't matter if they won't go, or use loads of fuel and generally any money I save by running a small new car I waste elsewhere. The Panda has been replaced by a Suzuki Alto base model, with zero VED and is slightly better on fuel, but will need extra servicing, it'll be interesting to see what this one costs me over three years. (I got it in September it already has nearly 7000 miles on it)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shep, so would I if I could afford to; however to put it in perspective at one point several years ago I was running a Jeep Cherokee and put £4k of petrol through it in six months, there are other things to spend money on rather than petrol.

 

My first Panda replaced my Volvo 240DL which, while it didn't depreciate, did require expenditure on maintenance over and above servicing and only did half the mpg of the Panda. In the Volvo's last year with me I had the exhaust replaced, also the starter, alternator, radiator, battery and tyres. Just on fuel costs I could afford to buy the Panda and throw it away after three years and would still have saved money. In hindsight I should have kept that Volvo as well as the Panda, as the two that I have had since were not a patch on it..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My '03 Bora TDI rattles* along at 60mpg all week (bout 700 miles on motorway/b road), its re-mapped, comfy, handles well and I drive like a goon, all day, every day.

 

Despite being able to buy a much newer car for my work, why bother, its actually the best car I think I have every owned!  

 

*Quite literally, the DMF is fooked 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shep, so would I if I could afford to; however to put it in perspective at one point several years ago I was running a Jeep Cherokee and put £4k of petrol through it in six months, there are other things to spend money on rather than petrol.

 

My first Panda replaced my Volvo 240DL which, while it didn't depreciate, did require expenditure on maintenance over and above servicing and only did half the mpg of the Panda. In the Volvo's last year with me I had the exhaust replaced, also the starter, alternator, radiator, battery and tyres. Just on fuel costs I could afford to buy the Panda and throw it away after three years and would still have saved money. In hindsight I should have kept that Volvo as well as the Panda, as the two that I have had since were not a patch on it..

 

I count myself lucky with TV2 (my daily since 2009), as although it only does 32-33 mpg overall, it otherwise hasn't cost me very much to run apart from servicing and the normal legal argleblargle since I've owned it, mainly because I've done most of the mechanical repairs it's needed on a DIY basis. Of course, if it does start to need expensive professional repairs (which it surely will, as it's done almost 200,000 miles), I'd consider getting something else, like a decent 1.8 V40.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My '03 Bora TDI rattles*

*Quite literally, the DMF is fooked 

 

Solid flywheel conversion time ... This is assuming it's a 5spd box, it may be different for 6spd.

G60 flywheel (s/hand ebay) and VR6 clutch from ECP or wherever.

Some bolts from VW:

Flywheel Bolts x6 - N90206103

Compression Plate Bolts x6 - N10101001

 

Cheaper than a new clutch and DMF ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to bore people, but we would need to look at mass, resistance, inclines and work done and energy lost to be more accurate. Personally,  I  can't be bothered, so I just do it by guestimate and how I sorta feel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would rather own a large car with relatively high fuel consumption which is nice to drive than a small car with relatively low fuel consumption which is horrible to drive.

 

If I was doing 25k miles a year I'd look for a small car that was fun to drive as well. Chucking a tiny hatchback around can be quite a giggle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...