A Comfortable Car & Cheap To Run

always looking for 6th

Yeah, I know what you mean about that, but I can't say it bothers me at
all.

Fair play, I'm quite happy to get anything over 30mpg. Different
standards I suppose. The first car I had was a 350 V8, so fuel
consumption isn't something I get too stressed about.

My dad hasn't had any problem with that. Again, I'm not quite sure he'd
be too bothered.

Quite an apathetic lot really ;-)

Cheers.

 

What was it you didn't like about the Mondeo?

Everything, lack of room mainly, although I am rather large, the
interior of the car (at least for the driver) is disproportionally
small to the exterior lardiness of it. Therefore, as you can
appreciate, it wasn't terribly comfy for long journeys.

I don't think I would say it was well built either, all the plastic
bits squeaked, the air con was crap, just all the little niggling
things that let it down. Rubbish radio also!

I can see why people would like it if they were averaged sized and got
a good one, but I must have got a dog or something. Oh, and the wish
bones needed doing after some short time.

It might have been cursed (obviously) because it got written off by a
kid in a 106 in January. I didn't mourn.

No, it was a 1.8LX but said it was an Aspen on the book. I didn't like
it, but It wouldn't prejudice me against all Fords or anything.

Cheers.

 

but returns a shameful 33mpg.

I don't think Richard's the overly fuel consumption obsessed type - he was
just pointing out that, for something with not all that much go, you'd
expect better economy. Especially when something like the brilliant Mk2
Golf GTi is much better on fuel.

"What do we want?"

"Nothing."

"When do we want it?"

"Whenever."

That was a party political broadcast on behalf of the UK Apathy Party.

Peter

 

Don't get me wrong - I'm not economy minded when I choose or drive cars,
and I generally don't get bothered by poor economy. I do find 1.6 mpg
shameful for a 1.6 injection car, though, when the Government and
everyone else are going mad for NEW CARS to save the environment - when
my 16 year old Golf got 45mpg and offered better performance.

Richard

 

Googled data varies slightly, but a Mk2 GTI weighed in somewhere around
the 950kg mark - about the same as a 1.0 litre Lupo (should that be
Lardo?) weighs today.

Your Beetle cabrio is more like 1385 kg. That's pretty much a 50%
weight increase, and goes a long way to explain the economy deficit.

Ian

 

RichardK () gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

Umm, yes, I think I would, too.

 

Don't get me wrong - I'm not economy minded when I choose or drive cars,

Oh ok.

Yeah, I would.

Oh bleeding hell yeah, I know what you mean. It's farcical really.

Cheers.

 

Don't get me wrong - I'm not economy minded when I choose or drive cars,

Granted, but OTOH engines are supposed to have improved in terms of
technology and become more efficient than they used to be. Things obviously
didn't weigh up properly.

Peter

 

Fair play, I'm quite happy to get anything over 30mpg. Different

On that point, I would agree with you wholeheartedly. One point six miles
per gallon would be absolutely horrendously dissapointing on something like
a V12 Jag, let alone a 1.6 Beetle

Peter

 

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember RichardK

Tanks get better mpg.

 

Oh, I know. But all the extra weight is for stuff I don't want - SRS,
crash protection (I don't recall the old Beetle having much of that),
emissions control crap. I mean, it even has plastic wings.

No wonder I expected the 1.4 A140 to be a slug, but it is probably quite
light really. Plastic wings, tailgate, quite light seats.

Richard

 

Bah. I'm tired and trying to get organised to drive a Transit to
Cambridge and Nuneaton.

33mpg, of course.

Richard

 

Yes it's a good enough engine, but it lacks brilliance.

Much better than the 1.6 and 1.4, heh.

 

Grimly Curmudgeon () gurgled happily,
sounding much like they were saying :

To quote SteveH elsewhere this evening, in ref to a certain Pinquecento -
"Give it 'ere, I'll show you"...

 

Or with the 1.8T.

But an Octavia is screwed together better and will hold it's value much
better. Interior space, yeah, I can see that, but that's because the
Mondeo is a *huge* car these days, even the MkI/II was a lot bigger than
an Octavia. Ride and handling are quite subjective and personal - I find
my Passat rides and handles very well - ride is better than the 156, but
it doesn't handle anywhere near as well, though. But that's more because
the 156 handles exceptionally well, whereas the Passat / Mondeo etc are
all around the 'average' ball-park.

 

Fair enough - I'm not exactly huge, and only 21, so I've never found an
issue there.

Air Conditioning is brilliant - icy cold and the only squeeks I'm getting
are from the leather (Driving me insane). Radio is indeed absolutely shite,
which is why I've replaced it now.

Hmm, mines a Ghia X so I guess its a bit nicer although we did have a 2.0 LX
as the family car from 6 months old until 4 years old - the only bad thing
it did was shed a ridiculous amount of value. Everything else about it was
faultless, not a single thing went wrong and it didn't have any rattles
after 50k when it was sold.

Depreciation is absolutely savage - but thats why I got mine. I'd never had
found a fully loaded 4 year old car for under £3k otherwise.

 

Most do gallons per mile...

 

But the Mondeo took the Peugeot 405's brilliance in the handling department
and _made_ it average. It redefined the class average...

 

What's wrong with it using oil ?

Why not ? Just top up as and when required.

 

Maybe some people are too lazy or forgetful to check their oil?

<can of worms>