Jump to content

XG30 advice please.


Recommended Posts

Posted

I'm seriously thinking of taking a peek at this:

 

silver%20xg_zpsc1ze6eaz.jpg

 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/2000-Hyundai-XG30-3-0-V6-auto-MOT-STARTS-DRIVES-SPARES-OR-REPAIRS-/222026701237?hash=item33b1d299b5:g:IwwAAOSwG-1WxHng

 

It's only about 15/20 minutes away.

 

The thing is, I know sod all about them.

What do I look out for, should I proceed?

Duff engines/gearboxes/rot?

Have any of you recovery people or mot testers come across these?

Ta in advance.

  • Like 2
Posted

YES.

 

 In 25 years,never recovered one, never MOT'd one. 100% failure to proceed proof, and 100% non fail MOT record. Recommend.Those mirrors are fabulous.

Posted

Another vote for those mirrors, and I'm liking the correctly coloured indicators, sort of round headlamps, there's a hint of running boards, and are those metal hubcaps? Other than the placcy bumpers I don't see anything wrong.

Posted

Hmm...they lost me at "...WE DO NOT ALLOW DIAGNOSTICS MACHINES TO BE USED FOR A VARIERY OF DIFFERENT REASONS."

But they are straight talkers, I'll give 'em that. It could be a cream puff, but I'd be wary of any cheap car I couldn't have inspected on or off-site by a third party. 'Specially in your neck of the woods. Korean cars are what they are, and they ain't what they ain't.

 

But when they're done, they're done.

[/$.02 worth]

  • Like 3
Posted

These are simply massive winner wagons aren't they? No further discussion required.

  • Like 4
Posted

It looks to me like one of those bomb site places that buys anything from the auction then applies a 100% mark up. Could be a heap of shit, could be ok but unlikely to be a pearl.

Posted
  • The mot history reads well, no big things.
  • Vehicle makeHYUNDAI
  • Vehicle modelXG30
  • Date first used13 September 2000
  • Fuel typePetrol
  • ColourSilver
 
MOT history of this vehicle
  • Test date20 March 2015
  • Expiry date19 March 2016
  • Test ResultPass
  • Odometer reading56,947 miles
  • MOT test number3390 5937 5084
  • Advisory notice item(s)
    o/s/rear callier slight weak
  • Test date14 March 2014
  • Expiry date13 March 2015
  • Test ResultPass
  • Odometer reading50,245 miles
  • MOT test number7367 7387 4079
  • Advisory notice item(s)
    Cracks on nearside front tyre wall
    Cracks ion offside front tyre wall
    Cracks on offside rear tyre wall
  • Test date14 March 2014
  • Test ResultFail
  • Odometer reading50,245 miles
  • MOT test number8395 1327 4062
  • Reason(s) for failure
    Nearside Front Headlamp aim too low (1.8)
    Offside Front Headlamp aim too high (1.8)
    Parking brake: efficiency below requirements (3.7.B.7)
  • Advisory notice item(s)
    Cracks on nearside front tyre wall
    Cracks ion offside front tyre wall
    Cracks on offside rear tyre wall
  • Test date5 March 2013
  • Expiry date4 March 2014
  • Test ResultPass
  • Odometer reading47,285 miles
  • MOT test number2768 2406 3024
  • Test date5 March 2013
  • Test ResultFail
  • Odometer reading47,285 miles
  • MOT test number2581 0416 3022
  • Reason(s) for failure
    Nearside Rear Tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm (4.1.E.1)
  • Test date5 September 2011
  • Expiry date13 September 2012
  • Test ResultPass
  • Odometer reading46,096 miles
  • MOT test number6681 6884 1275
  • Test date17 August 2010
  • Expiry date13 September 2011
  • Test ResultPass
  • Odometer reading42,831 miles
  • MOT test number2549 2932 0228
  • Test date17 August 2010
  • Test ResultFail
  • Odometer reading42,831 miles
  • MOT test number2245 1942 0254
  • Reason(s) for failure
    Nearside Windscreen wiper does not clear the windscreen effectively (8.2.2)
  • Test date8 September 2009
  • Expiry date13 September 2010
  • Test ResultPass
  • Odometer reading39,850 miles
  • MOT test number7201 6125 9258
  • Test date9 September 2008
  • Expiry date13 September 2009
  • Test ResultPass
  • Odometer reading36,429 miles
  • MOT test number9325 6325 8269
  • Test date11 September 2007
  • Expiry date13 September 2008
  • Test ResultPass
  • Odometer reading33,334 miles
  • MOT test number3035 3415 7441
  • Advisory notice item(s)
    Nearside Front brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened (3.5.1i)
    Offside Front brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened (3.5.1i)
  • Test date11 September 2007
  • Test ResultFail
  • Odometer reading33,334 miles
  • MOT test number3133 7445 7265
  • Reason(s) for failure
    Rear Brake pad(s) less than 1.5 mm thick (3.5.1g)
  • Advisory notice item(s)
    Nearside Front brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened (3.5.1i)
    Offside Front brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened (3.5.1i)
  • Test date11 September 2006
  • Expiry date13 September 2007
  • Test ResultPass
  • Odometer reading29,939 miles
  • MOT test number9148 9415 6238
  • Advisory notice item(s)
    Front brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened (3.5.1i)
    Rear Brake pad(s) wearing thin (3.5.1g)
  • Test date5 September 2005
  • Expiry date13 September 2006
  • Test ResultPass
  • Odometer reading24,567 miles
  • MOT test number3140 4894 5231
  • Advisory notice item(s)
    Front Brake pad(s) wearing thin (3.5.1g)
  • Like 1
Posted

Encouraging...

 

I've never understood that phrase.

 

It is what it is, it ain't what it ain't.

I suppose my first question should be: 'What ain't it then'?

Me home on Tuesday, Mrs Tet at work Tuesday.

I can see a plan developing here.

 

I think they're cracking looking cars, a sort of a mixture between Yank/German/Jap.

Do these have the Mitsi Sigma engine?

Posted

Maximum Korean waftage. Only for dictator winnas! Go for it and pretend you have a dirty weapon in the boot!

Posted

I liked that one that was for sale over on the blue forum, but the cut springs really put me off.

  • Like 3
Posted

Our Kia Magentis is a reet bargain, not had a moments bother since we bought it a couple of months ago, so impressed I've been looking at xg30's recently myself, but of course cannot justify nor afford another one :-P

Posted

Funny to see all of the love for them, on here.

I advertised my mates on here about a year ago, and noone batted an eye lid.

 

I have it on very good authority, that they are great barges.

Posted

Funny to see all of the love for them, on here.

I advertised my mates on here about a year ago, and noone batted an eye lid.

 

I have it on very good authority, that they are great barges.

 

Ahh. I was looking for that thread.

Can you dig it up again, please?

Tuesday morning viewing it is then.....

  • Like 2
Posted

Funny to see all of the love for them, on here.

I advertised my mates on here about a year ago, and noone batted an eye lid.

 

I have it on very good authority, that they are great barges.

It wasn't approved then, you see.

Posted

I advise that you see it and purchase it at once, without any thought to consequence.

Posted

Thanks for that guvnor.

I remember really wanting that at the time.

Wonder if it's still alive and well.

It is, only 2 advisories and a ticket until October 2016  :-D

Posted

These cars are starting to sound a little bit bombproof.

 

It'll be a wrench letting my V70 go though, brilliant car. Much hard thinking to be done... and Mrs Tet to deal with.

Posted

Buy it, keep it for a bit then sell to me at a massive loss.

 

I'd firmly recommend them based on what I've read - I was very keen on a Magentis/Optima/Sonata before I got the Saab for some Banana Republic Dictator motoring and still hanker after one really. They are worth buttons but really seem to be pretty tough old hectors, the way I look at it this was the time that Kia were trying to get established in the west so they would have a point to prove by over-engineering their products.

 

The Rio we had was a bit crap, but it was chasing a different market by being the cheapest thing on sale. These were chasing the Germans but trying to do it cheaper to win market share. Look at the number of Hyundai Sonata/Kia Optima taxis about (here at least) and you can see that they have earned the grudging respect of professional drivers so there must be something in it.

 

I reckon that with 3 litres of displacement under the bonnet they must be fairly rapid too.

Posted

Looks, well, ugly, but I could look past that. Fuel consumption will be pretty ruinous though.

Posted

'HYUNDAI' written across its arse in big chrome letters. What else matters??

  • Like 2
Posted

These are the motors that really cracked Australia and the US for Kia/Hyundai, helped by them building factories in the US.

 

(A lot of) US folk want a big saloon with a V6 that is comfortable on long trips on straight roads. If it has gaudy style and reliability, all the better. I can't disagree :)

Posted

Hmm...they lost me at "...WE DO NOT ALLOW DIAGNOSTICS MACHINES TO BE USED FOR A VARIERY OF DIFFERENT REASONS."

...

I wouldn't be wanting any old tom dick or harry plugging potentially ruinous bits of kit into any of my motors either. I dunno about other vehicles but I know VAGCOM and T4 (the MG Rover LandRover thing) can do a heck of a lot of damage in the wrong hands.

Posted

It is what it is, and it ain't what it ain't! Can't argue with that.

 

Looking at a Bini from there with HGF. Stopped looking fairly quickly, that's world of pain I don't need

Posted

Some of their stock is pretty laughably priced. Ten year old Golf with 127k on the clock, no MOT and a fucked turbo... £1495, or a £1095 8 year old Corsa with 91k on the clock, been crashed and repaired, dented, doesn't drive and has a tatty piss stained interior. Where do I sign???

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...