Soldato
I believe "Reliable" was the key word here, not broken
Find me: throw away car for under £1000
- Thread starter NVP
- Start date
I believe "Reliable" was the key word here, not broken
Caporegime
Excuse me sir, I've had ample experience of both.
Just read the OP say "MPG isnt important" so my suggestion doesn't make the same amount of sense... I thought we were talking 500 miles a day regularly.
Seen mention of an old Lexus. Yes, but for £1K, no.
OK I'm out.
OP... Leave the cheap and decent cars for those of us who need them. Drive the BMW you maniac.
Soldato
Excuse me sir, I've had ample experience of both.
Buy Broken - Keep Broke
Buy Reliable - Make Broke
Caporegime
Caporegime
If it was me I would just filter Autotrader to less than a grand, petrol, manual transmission and less than 100k miles.
Something like a 2.0 Mondeo or 1.6 Focus.
Something like a 2.0 Mondeo or 1.6 Focus.
Perhaps if you read things correctly you would not think this to be a joke.
No where have I expressed concern over lexus, and I have posted the c180 with the same unexpressed concern - where I hope others to express informed opinion
I'd like a car that I can trust when needed but I can also leave in a ditch if required - so spending more isn't an answer I'm afraid, I already upped from 500 to ensure a reliable purchase.
Regarding my finances - I have not had a job for over 1 year, have 2 children in nappies and a wife who doesn't work.... so no, I am not loaded but I do try to be smart with my money
Having read it again I can hold my hands up and say that I misread it. Also, I hope you find a job soon
I still think you’re better off spending more. The people you see driving around in old cars have probably owned them for ages, are driving them around on a budget or don’t do many miles. More importantly, generally, people selling cars this cheap will be doing so because something is wrong and it’s not worth repairing. Sure, this isn’t the only reason and you may get fortunate but I’d be surprised. Even at the 3-4k range I think it’ll be a case of going to look at a fair few cars to find the diamond in the rough.
Cheers
Diesel over petrol in terms of reliability?If MPG wasn't a concern but dependability was, what would your choice be?Excuse me sir, I've had ample experience of both.
Just read the OP say "MPG isnt important" so my suggestion doesn't make the same amount of sense... I thought we were talking 500 miles a day regularly.
Seen mention of an old Lexus. Yes, but for £1K, no.
OK I'm out.
OP... Leave the cheap and decent cars for those of us who need them. Drive the BMW you maniac.
Pretty much what I'm doing, and gumtree & ebay. So far a 90s citron c5 is the cream of the crop - although that mini is tempting.
Having read it again I can hold my hands up and say that I misread it. Also, I hope you find a job soon
I still think you’re better off spending more. The people you see driving around in old cars have probably owned them for ages, are driving them around on a budget or don’t do many miles. More importantly, generally, people selling cars this cheap will be doing so because something is wrong and it’s not worth repairing. Sure, this isn’t the only reason and you may get fortunate but I’d be surprised. Even at the 3-4k range I think it’ll be a case of going to look at a fair few cars to find the diamond in the rough.
I'm afraid the budget is fixed to "as low as possible" - You definitely can get a decent car for under a grand, just have to find the right seller
Low mileage, low owner, boring cars is where I want to be.
I'm afraid the budget is fixed to "as low as possible" - You definitely can get a decent car for under a grand, just have to find the right seller
You'll definitely find something, people's views on here that it's impossible are bizarre.
Soldato
I wouldn't limit yourself to cars under 100k mileage either. I'd much rather have a newer car with more miles than something older with lower mileage.
Possible sure, I don’t disagree. I’ve had cheap cars in the past. However I don’t do 500 miles a day.
Hmm... I'm not 100% on that. Older = simpler = less to go wrong (?)
Caporegime
I guess I'll stick to my Octavia suggestion then.
As for whether a diesel is more reliable, that will open a can of worms anywhere you ask it, including here.
In the case of an old diesel, when you intend on doing significant mileage, I'd say yes.
Oh you can also run the early 90/110 TDI's on chip fat or biodiesel if you like. They aren't PD engines.
I think the call would change depending on each specific comparison. Generally somewhere middling on both age and mileage would probably be the safest bet.
As for whether a diesel is more reliable, that will open a can of worms anywhere you ask it, including here.
In the case of an old diesel, when you intend on doing significant mileage, I'd say yes.
Oh you can also run the early 90/110 TDI's on chip fat or biodiesel if you like. They aren't PD engines.
I think the call would change depending on each specific comparison. Generally somewhere middling on both age and mileage would probably be the safest bet.
Caporegime
Bit complicated and expensive on the ol' parts for a cheap reliable hack I recon. Same for Volvos, as much as I like them. Both of mine needed suspension bushes/etc to eliminate knocking noises, and neither of them were anything like this cheap.
Last edited:
Cheers Acme, I don't mind an octavia, bit dull to drive but comfy. What years were those engines?I guess I'll stick to my Octavia suggestion then.
As for whether a diesel is more reliable, that will open a can of worms anywhere you ask it, including here.
In the case of an old diesel, when you intend on doing significant mileage, I'd say yes.
Oh you can also run the early 90/110 TDI's on chip fat or biodiesel if you like. They aren't PD engines.
I think the call would change depending on each specific comparison. Generally somewhere middling on both age and mileage would probably be the safest bet.
9000 or even 900?
9-5s are no more complicated than any other petrol car from that era and are simpler than many. They are still port injection and don't have variable valve timing. As to running costs, I've run two 9-5s over the last 11 odd years. One purchased for £950 which lasted 3.5 years of daily use and the other was a touch more expensive at £3.5K but has lasted over 8 and is still my daily. Neither needed much beyond basic consumables other than thermostats and the odd suspension bush. Obviously your experience with running a 9-5 long term may differ from mine.
Good network of indys for servicing, plenty of second hand parts available and OEM parts are still available via Oreo.
Caporegime
My 9-5 Aero just crapped cylinder 4 and is having a rebuild at 153k. I think remap had a lot to do with that. However find a standard lower spec car and you will be fine. I have had nearly 6 trouble free years however.
Caporegime
Mine was a 2003 "BlueLine"
I'm not sure which years they were/weren't available with the 90/110.
A little dull to drive yes, but also not horrible to drive. It was quite easy/relaxed.
Saab 900 and 9000 are into classic car / enthusiast / collector / restoration territory now.
GOD NO to the 207, what are you thinking.
The V40 T4's are good cars, not sure I'd go for that example though. Plenty of other cheap V40/S40's if thats what you want.
Didnt you have to do a significant amount of suspension work too? Subframe bushes and such?
You always used to try and talk me out of getting one.
Last edited:
Caporegime
Yes I got to have the car on fresh suspension for literally a couple of hundred miles. 3rd gear pull into 4th overtaking an Audi A7 and boom oil out the dipstick and compression of 50psi in cylinder 4. Specialist seems to think a cracked piston. Having a refurbished bottom end put on with new chain etc. I could have done it myself but really CBA in this weather!
Doesn't help that 6ft3" of me needs to commute 60 miles a day in a Suzuki city car for a new job at the end of the month