|
I have come across a Jan 16 issue of Autocar which has an article about updates to the 1.0 Ecoboost engine. The block is 40% lighter at 14kg, carbon fiber is used for the sump and other components, it has forged aluminium con rods and centre cylinder deactivation is being considered for iow power situations when two cylinders will be adequate..No mention of a date of introduction.
|
Like all of the engine developments of the recent past the proof of the pudding will be the results in cars driven by the man (& woman) in the street.
Reliability & longevity cannot be taken for granted - VAG petrol & diesels have faults, even Japanese diesels needing a re-work after 60/70K...................
I'll be sticking to a minimum of 4 cylinders, petrol & at least 1800/2000cc
|
>>
>> I'll be sticking to a minimum of 4 cylinders, petrol & at least 1800/2000cc
>>
Same here, but it's becoming increasingly tricky to find potential bangernomics buys in this category without a blinking DMF.
|
I've chilled out on DMF phobia in contrast to when I bought my car. My 07 Toyota has one and if i hang on to it long term (which I'm thinking) it will need one at some point. I like and it should give it a new lease of life once it has been fitted.
1k of looming maintenance in the next 2 years (DMF and cambelt) of which I'm happy to throw at it.
Almost 100k up (18-20k miles pa) and no oddities of of the ordinary given the mileage and usage.
It does help that 70% of the week it is on the motorway, with little (usually, traffic dependent) clutch usage.
I'm glad it hasn't got a blinking DPF though.
Last edited by: nice but dim on Thu 4 Feb 16 at 19:00
|
If your driving mostly motorway miles, then if your car had a DPF it shouldn't be a problem.
I doubt it would regain that often mostly driven on motorways
|
We've done this; they don't. But never let reason get in the way of a good dose of technophobia.
}:---)
|
|
I'm no technophobe, I sent an email from my phone to my telly in 2001 and streamed music to my phone from my home PC 70 miles away in 2007; but with these little screamers it's difficult to tell yet whether they've made some genuine significant engineering advances or just achieved a different performance/economy/longevity trade-off by throwing more technology at it.
|
>> If your driving mostly motorway miles, then if your car had a DPF it shouldn't
>> be a problem.
>> I doubt it would regain that often mostly driven on motorways
>>
The latest VW diesels don't passive regen at all.
|
Did you mean they only passively regenerate?
"Our advanced diesel engines are much cleaner than older engines. Their diesel particulate filters (DPF) are very effective in cutting emissions, trapping even the finest soot particles produced as the engine burns diesel fuel. The result is a cleaner environment as less pollution enters the atmosphere. The latest generation of filters operate without additives. This makes them maintenance-free for a long time: an initial inspection is not usually carried out until after 90,000 miles. Their lifespan is dependent on factors such as fuel quality, driving style, use and oil consumption. The filter uses a catalytic coating containing precious metals. Passive regeneration converts the particulate matter contained in the catalytic converter into CO2. This process takes place at temperatures between 350 and 500 °C and can run continuously, particularly if you drive your car mainly on long runs."
From V W site
|
>> Did you mean they only passively regenerate?
Whilst I tend to agree there's much scaremongering about DPFs, with VWs track record on emissions I not sure quoting them is going to help allay fears ;)
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 5 Feb 16 at 01:41
|
>>
>> Whilst I tend to agree there's much scaremongering about DPFs, with VWs track record on
>> emissions I not sure quoting them is going to help allay fears ;)
Yer, not exactly spouting from a position of strength or authority are they.
|
I'm not trying to allay fears or otherwise. Just trying to clarify what Bill Payer is saying. His post suggest that VW don't use passive regeneration whereas the VW site suggests the exact opposit i.e. VW do not use an active regeneration cycle as do some makes do but rely solely on passive regeneration.
|
|
Sorry CGN; it was a cheap jibe at VWs current predicament... Though the point about taking what VW say with a pinch of salt still remains :)
|
>> I'm not trying to allay fears or otherwise. Just trying to clarify what Bill Payer
>> is saying. His post suggest that VW don't use passive regeneration whereas the VW site
>> suggests the exact opposit i.e. VW do not use an active regeneration cycle as do
>> some makes do but rely solely on passive regeneration.
Probably where they went wrong then.
|
>> Did you mean they only passively regenerate?
>>
Nope
>> This process takes place at temperatures between 350
>> and 500 °C and can run continuously, particularly if you drive your car mainly on
>> long runs."
>>
The problem is that in normal UK use (ie up to 70ish MPH cruising on the motoway) the DPF doesn't get anywhere near hot enough - it sits around 250C. Apparently it's no good even getting it to 350C, it really needs to be at the high end to work effectively.
VW Germany have obviously realised this (even if VW UK hasn't - I spoke to them about it) and the car will do an active regen when the soot load sensors tell it to, or after 465 miles if it hasn't done one earlier.
|
>> The problem is that in normal UK use (ie up to 70ish MPH cruising on the motoway) the DPF doesn't get anywhere near hot enough - it sits around 250C. Apparently it's no good even getting it to 350C, it really needs to be at the high end to work effectively.
Obviously it should be driven properly, cruising at 100 plus. French, Germans and Belgians to name but three are FAR more adult than we are with the automobile. Mimsing around worrying about lollipop folk, tchah! Makes you ashamed to be British and I'm not joking.
|
>> Obviously it should be driven properly, cruising at 100 plus.
Up a hill. With a caravan behind. That might do it!
The thing is, it doesn't seem to matter if it passive regens as it'll still do an active one every 465 miles anyway.
ETA: Key thing is here, it means the advice to take it for a regular thrashing is irrelevant now. Indeed after 100 mile motorway trip, first short run next day ours started an active regen.
Last edited by: Bill Payer on Fri 5 Feb 16 at 17:35
|
>> All the information here.
>>
That's old now. VW is using the completely new EA288 engine.
"In most of the engine operating ranges, the exhaust gas temperatures are too low for passive regeneration." Fill yer boots here (page 57 onwards for DPF stuff):
pics3.tdiclub.com/data/517/820433_EA288.pdf . Scarily complicated engine!
|
>> I'll be sticking to a minimum of 4 cylinders, petrol & at least 1800/2000cc
I think thats backwards thinking now.
|
|
A tiny highly stressed engine is never going to be durable by recent standards. Is their real world fuel consumption greatly improved considering they have to do the same work as any other engine. It's not backwards its mainly common sense.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 4 Feb 16 at 20:07
|
|
I used two recently as hire cars. One was very good on fuel low 50s mpg, the other mid 30s. It was the same route and nearly the same time. Very odd. Didn't really notice it being overly stressed, it was easy to drive and no real no need to change how i drive normally.
|
>>A tiny highly stressed engine is never going to be durable by recent standards.
Lots of dead Honda S2000s agree.
Not.
|
>Lots of dead Honda S2000s agree.
The S2000 doesn't use forced induction to increase power output, it revs higher. There's a difference.
|
It's difficult to get much of an independent real world idea of engine reliability, as manufacturers with crap engines keep schtum.
www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/picturegalleries/9816454/Engine-reliability-the-top-10-brands.html?frame=2457914
Basically VAG and BMW = worst but doesn't say which engines in particular.
At least anecdotally, the 1.4 super/turbo charged petrol unit is a workshop boomerang.
|
>> It's difficult to get much of an independent real world idea of engine reliability, as
>> manufacturers with crap engines keep schtum.
>>
They don't spend billions on marketing so we can judge their products based on facts :-)
|
|
Wasn't the S2000 launched around 20 years ago? In the last century... does that count as recent round here... ;)
|
>> A tiny highly stressed engine is never going to be durable by recent standards. Is
>> their real world fuel consumption greatly improved considering they have to do the same work
>> as any other engine. It's not backwards its mainly common sense.
>>
My in-laws are averaging 43 mpg from their 100PS Fiesta Ecoboost, and the poor thing rarely ventures out of town. On a trip to the Lakes ljust before Christmas, it returned 57 mpg average (calculated brim to brim)
If you use the performance, they use no less fuel than any other equivalent output engine, but they seem to be far more efficient when used gently. It's a characterful little thing as well.
Too early to tell on reliability I guess.
|
>>
>> >> I'll be sticking to a minimum of 4 cylinders, petrol & at least 1800/2000cc
>>
>>
>> I think thats backwards thinking now.
>>
Indeed, and that's why I grabbed the chance of a 4.2 litre V8 Audi when I could. We'll not see such engines in wide(ish...) spread use again. Unless you go AMG you can't even get an E class with a petrol engine bigger than a turbocharged 1.8!! The S class is available with a 4 cylinder diesel. And BMW are putting a 3 cylinder in the next 3 series...
I quite like the 3 in our Up!, and far prefer the refinement of small capacity turbocharged 4 cylinder petrol engines to the equivalent (power wise) diesel. Though a turbo 6 or NA 8 cylinder petrol are smoother, ether days are either numbered or gone. The Porsche Boxter has a 4 cylinder engine...
|
|
My indie mechanic doesn't rate these at all, cant remember the exact reason but think it was something to do with how its cambelt or chain works.
|
My brother has the Ford 1.0 three pot car.
He has covered plenty of miles in it, up to now the car is running fine after two years.
|
Th test of an engine is not how it runs hen new and under warranty but how it copes with the third owner who does not use oil of the required high spec (costly) and skimps on maintenance and revs it when cold..
..
|
|
Too true, the lease car driver does not give a stuff about long term reliability, the used car buyer does. Someone here recently said they buy cars at about 70K miles as they are well run in. I would not touch a tiny turbo at 70K with your bargepole.
|
>> Th test of an engine is not how it runs hen new and under warranty
>> but how it copes with the third owner who does not use oil of the
>> required high spec (costly) and skimps on maintenance and revs it when cold..
>>
So why should the manufacturer make a car to suit their corner cutting?
|
>> So why should the manufacturer make a car to suit their corner cutting?
>>
>>
>>
Because they have to be practical, they have to respond to how people treat their cars not how they should.
|
"Because they have to be practical, they have to respond to how people treat their cars not how they should."
No they have to react to to the customer who is purchasing the car and give the what they need. If they want hi-tech energy efficient vehicles that is what they will produce. I
If I buy a new car I will buy it according to my priorities, not what some guy who's buys it ten years down the road and doesn't want to spend a penny on maintenance would like.
Most people when buy-in a car want something that they do not have to worry about. they want once a year servicing at the garage at the most and they want fuel efficiency. they will have probably have disposed of the car long before has any major issues.
|
>> Most people when buy-in a car want something that they do not have to worry
>> about. they want once a year servicing at the garage at the most and they
>> want fuel efficiency. they will have probably have disposed of the car long before has
>> any major issues.
However, they also want some form of equity when they dispose of it, and they don't want to find out its worth peanuts when they come to trade in. That will kill future sales faster than you can say Renault.
|
|
It's all about the monthlies these days. We've essentially entered the Car-as-a-Service era.
|
|
Not amongst us oldies it's not. It seems to be the young that are keen to get themselves into debt to try and impress others that they are wealthy.
|
>> Not amongst us oldies it's not. It seems to be the young that are keen
>> to get themselves into debt to try and impress others that they are wealthy.
>>
Ordinarily I'd agree, as one who's always bought cars when I've wanted/needed them. But, cars are just appliances at the end of the day, and increasingly complex ones at that. The world is moving to a usage model, rather than an ownership model. If you're used to paying £30 or £40 a month to have the latest iPhone, paying £150 a month to lease a small hatchback doesn't seem unreasonable... In fact, the £300ish a month I've signed up to for 24 months use of a £40k BMW works out less per month than I've lost by running a Merc with a similar list pice purchased outright 4.5 years ago!!
|
>>lost by running a Merc
I seem to recall my S Class depreciated at around £1,000 per month.
|
>
>> I seem to recall my S Class depreciated at around £1,000 per month.
>>
Nice car though :)
Though you can now lease an S Class for around £650 a month including VAT over 24 months!!
www.contracthireandleasing.com/car-leasing-companies/main-dealers/drayton-contracts/mercedes-benz/s-class/78061035/
|
I've rarely if ever been confident enough to commit to a long or even medium term monthly payment ( other than a mortgage where I had no choice )
Nature of what I do. You can be flying high one year and struggling the next. The good years on average outweigh the bad, and the very good years can be, well, very very good, but now and then things bite you on the bum.
Resultantly, if I could afford to buy a given car with cash, then I have, if I couldn't, I didn't.
|
>> I've rarely if ever been confident enough to commit to a long or even medium
>> term monthly payment ( other than a mortgage where I had no choice )
>>
>> Nature of what I do. You can be flying high one year and struggling the
>> next. The good years on average outweigh the bad, and the very good years can
>> be, well, very very good, but now and then things bite you on the bum.
>>
>> Resultantly, if I could afford to buy a given car with cash, then I have,
>> if I couldn't, I didn't.
>>
And I also agree with that sentiment...except I've discovered, in the case of the BMW, it's sometimes cheaper not to buy with cash...so I'll keep the cash in the bank and pay the few hundred quid a month from income to 'rent' it. If it does all go pear shaped then I've still got the cash :) and terminating the lease will be less than the car will depreciate in its first year I'm sure!!
I'd be reluctant to a lease I car I couldn't afford to buy though, even if I could afford the payments. That S class for example, seems okish on a monthly basis, but never in a month of Sunday's would I fork out the £70oddk I'm guessing they cost...
|
|
Makes sense when you put it like that. Fair enough.
|
>> Makes sense when you put it like that. Fair enough.
>>
It still feels nonsensical - it shouldn't be cheaper, but it allows BMW to get a large number of cars into the market quickly without overtly discounting them I guess.
I'd rather have had the Mb C350e, but I couldn't justify the additional £10k it would have cost me over two years...
|
If you buy new then maybe, but used is my ownership model. It's surprising what one can get for five grand if you know where to look and avoid some of the troublesome offerings (the internet is one's friend in that respect)
I'm happy for others to take out leases, it leaves good second-hand cars for me!
|
>> If you buy new then maybe, but used is my ownership model. It's surprising what
>> one can get for five grand if you know where to look and avoid some
>> of the troublesome offerings (the internet is one's friend in that respect)
>>
>> I'm happy for others to take out leases, it leaves good second-hand cars for me!
>>
Oh I don't disagree - used cars are great value in the UK. And as the market is moving towards the usage model it's increasingly difficult to get great discounts on new cars. Manufacturers choose to achieve the sales by putting increased support into finance and lease deals, guaranteeing a steady flow of new customers and used cars!! It's entirely possible I'll never buy another new 'prestige' car, because they don't want me to!!
|
|
This ' model' limits the s/h market though. Every company user chooser wants a 320d/A4/C220. If i want to buy a used petrol powered mid sized hatch, the choices available at the end of other people's leases are quite limited. And if I want to avoid silver or black the choice is even more limited.
|
>> This ' model' limits the s/h market though. Every company user chooser wants a 320d/A4/C220.
>> If i want to buy a used petrol powered mid sized hatch,
Have you considered ex Motability lease cars? A wide choice available.
www.whymfldirect.co.uk
Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 5 Feb 16 at 22:31
|
>> This ' model' limits the s/h market though. Every company user chooser wants a 320d/A4/C220.
>> If i want to buy a used petrol powered mid sized hatch, the choices available
>> at the end of other people's leases are quite limited. And if I want to
>> avoid silver or black the choice is even more limited.
>>
Ah, but that's where the hire car fleets come in useful...if you're a car manufacturer!! Mid size petrol hatch in off piste colour? I've had Golfs, MB A class, BMW 1 series, Peugot 308(?), Focus and Astra all in petrol variants in the last 12 months. None of them bad cars...
|
You have that right. When I started my own business I was reasonably well capitalised but didn't want to overstretch myself. Having come from a corporate environment where I hadn't owned a car for years ( apart from a Westfield which I may have alluded to before ) I needed to buy a car.
I decided that I wouldn't be precious about it and would just buy the most practical thing I could. Through "Ford Direct" I think it was called, I bought a six month old, 6000 mile Mondeo diesel estate in a rather unpleasant shade of metallic beige. Ok it was the "cooking" model ( LX ) but it did me very well for a couple of years while I got things going. Oh the price? Well that model new at the time would have been around £18k before discounts. I paid £9,500. It was an ex renter.
|
|
I agree but they will be looking to selling a three or four year old. I am not suggesting the reliability is not an issue when buying a car I am simply saying that there is no financial incentive to produce a car that will keep running in ten years time without servicing in accordance with the manufacturers recommendation.
|
It's also about the attitude of the individual. Some folk want to have "new" things regularly and who can gainsay that? I though, prefer to buy things which are likely to provide me with the best solution I can afford and to keep them until they no longer provide that solution.
That in my case applies to clothes, shoes, cars or any other equipment I buy.
I'll actively seek out items I believe will give me long term quality, reliability and service and will willingly pay a bit more for them but have a belief that ultimately they provide the best value in the end. Others see consumer goods as disposable and are happy to buy cheap and often.
Not much wrong with either strategy really, it's just about how you view things.
If I could buy a car which would almost certainly meet my needs in perpetuity I would be happy to do that, I don't for example, care what year marker is on the number plate or whether it's the latest model if it does what I want it to do and does it comfortably, efficiently, reliably and I enjoy driving it.
|
>> It's also about the attitude of the individual. Some folk want to have "new" things
>> regularly and who can gainsay that? I though, prefer to buy things which are likely
>> to provide me with the best solution I can afford and to keep them until
>> they no longer provide that solution.
>>
>> That in my case applies to clothes, shoes, cars or any other equipment I buy.
>>
>>
>> I'll actively seek out items I believe will give me long term quality, reliability and
>> service and will willingly pay a bit more for them but have a belief that
>> ultimately they provide the best value in the end.
I apply that strategy as well.. and to wives as well :-)
|
>>
>>>>
>> However, they also want some form of equity when they dispose of it, and they
>> don't want to find out its worth peanuts when they come to trade in. That
>> will kill future sales faster than you can say Renault.
>>
>>
>>
Exactly. The price a third owner is prepared to pay for a car has a "knock back" effect on new car desirability. If something is going to be a worthless shed after five years savvy new buyers will avoid like the plague.
Think Rover.
|
There is a huge gulf between producing a car that is still reliable at five years old and making a vehicle designed for the third owner who does not use oil of the required high spec (costly) and skimps on maintenance and revs it when cold.
Most modern cars have a life span far exceeding their predecessors if maintained properly,
Why should anyone care about those not prepared to spend money on maintenance?
|
A classic example of that scenario at my workplace. A young lady who works in our office bought her first car about a year ago.
It's a little Fiesta of 2001/2002 vintage. Had been owned by a distant elderly relative of hers from new. When she bought it it was nigh on perfect. Had been maintained to the highest standards despite only having had minimal use for its age. In effect it was a time warp car, appearing to be in pretty much perfect condition.
You should see it now...
One year on and it looks every year of its age, several instances of panel damage, filthy dirty all the time inside and out, never seen a drop of oil or a service, bulbs out, windscreen wipers perished, a very nearly illegal pair of front tyres etc etc.
I've tried ( gently ) to suggest that a little bit of maintainance wouldn't go amiss but she's just not interested. The only thing she is concerned about is whether it passes its MOT this week and how much it'll cost if it doesn't.
:-(
|
|
My step-son keeps getting cars and neglecting them. So it will be a fine car with a smooth enough engine when he gets it. But they often end up sounding like a bag of nails. He doesn't check and top-up oil levels. He thinks the oil light is the warning whereas we all know it's low oil pressure and it will have been low for some time. He doesn't seem to learn.
|
So many cars are 'purchases' on some form of hire purchase scheme or PCP these days and this means the residual value will be important for the deal. If the demand for second hand 1.0 turbo 3-cylinder petrol engines is low then the monthly cost for the new car will be higher and there's a lower guaranteed residual figure.
It will be a while before many second/third hand car buyers work out that if a turbo charged car is not properly maintained then there could be costly repairs. But this is little different for a turbo petrol as it has been for turbo diesels. The turbo petrol engine is probably simpler than the diesels because there isn't the high pressure fuel pump.
|
>> The turbo petrol engine is probably simpler than the diesels because there isn't the high
>> pressure fuel pump.
>>
But the turbo runs hotter and is more sensitive to poor quality oil.
|
> No they have to react to to the customer who is purchasing the car and give the what they need. If they want hi-tech energy efficient vehicles that is what they will produce. I
>>
Yes but that is a separate issue from reliability. There will be many users of a car after you've done with it.
>> If I buy a new car I will buy it according to my priorities, not
>> what some guy who's buys it ten years down the road and doesn't want to> spend a penny on maintenance would like.
>>
I'm sure you do, as does every other buyer.
>> Most people when buy-in a car want something that they do not have to worry about. they want once a year servicing at the garage at the most and they want fuel efficiency. they will have probably have disposed of the car long before has any major issues.
>>
Depends which buyers you mean.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Fri 5 Feb 16 at 11:06
|
He's probably read about the cam belt being internal, running in an oil bath to answer Bobby's mechanics comment.
I think the smart money is now with plug-in hybrids. Petrol is not the answer for short or low mileage journeys as the cat does not get up to temp to work properly. Give it a few years and petrol will be the pollution demon again.
Last edited by: gmac on Sat 6 Feb 16 at 06:59
|
I think all this suspicion of low capacity engines is miss placed. Lets not forget that VW were knocking out the 1.8T unit tuned up to 225 / 240 bhp somewhere around 15 to 20 years ago - still plenty of them running well, and I don't recall any horror stories.
I ran an A3 with the 150 BHP variant that had 225K on it - the engine ran well enough.
.....however, I had a 2008 this week with the 1.2 puretech engine in it - was punchy enough but at 20K ran quite rough and idle was a bit erratic - maybe a one off, and it was a one way rental so local Europcar branch always give you the worst they have to get it out of the local fleet.
In contrast I've had a few leggy 1.0 ecoboost focus's and despite their apparent hard life all ran well
|
A friend had a Peugeot 2008 diesel as a renter for a week or so ( might have been a 1.4 ? )
He normally drives a much more powerful car but said he got on fine with the Pug. No ball of fire but pleasant enough. Very frugal apparently and a comfortable enough thing.
Bit of an odd one though, hard to define who they think their target customer is. Too bland to appeal to the SUV trend, too small to be a practical estate, too expensive to be a bargain.
Having said all that, I'm glad manufacturers still do things which don't seem like clones of other brands. Sort of brings us back to the Cactus really...
|
>> Having said all that, I'm glad manufacturers still do things which don't seem like clones
>> of other brands. Sort of brings us back to the Cactus really...
I think the Squashcow is due for a replacement - something spiky I think
|
You might be right. Although, despite its scars, the Nissan has been and remains very reliable, and she likes it. It's right in its sweet spot too now where the cost of buying it over 5 years ago has long been financially forgotten but it's still providing very good service. Tempted to keep it another 5 years in truth, she only does about 6000 miles a year so even then it wouldn't be at mega miles.
The addition of a new car would be a heart rather than head decision. Not that they are always bad ideas.
The other potential complexity is whether to buy a wee car for my son to learn to drive on next year, whether to change the Qashqai to something smaller for that purpose, or just to stump up for an additional car for him.
Part of me wants him to learn on the Qashqai in truth, I learned on my dad's Volvo 240 and I think starting on a "big" car gets you over that hump of fearing larger cars from the outset.
Plus, by the time he starts learning it'll be coming up for 9 years old and I wouldn't be feeling too precious about the odd ding he's likely to put in the wheels or whatever.
Hard isn't it this car thing?
Last edited by: Runfer D'Hills on Sat 6 Feb 16 at 12:22
|
>> Part of me wants him to learn on the Qashqai in truth, I learned on
>> my dad's Volvo 240 and I think starting on a "big" car gets you over
>> that hump of fearing larger cars from the outset.
These days insurance is the major factor
|
Yes I know, I've not checked it out but it might be sort of OK while he's a learner to just add him to his mum's insurance but after that he'd most probably need a "group 1" sort of car.
He's quite into cars and doesn't discount a classic. Another part of me likes the idea of him cutting his teeth on a car we can fettle with little more than a socket set and which doesn't have ABS brakes etc and preferably with RWD. He'd have to learn too drive that properly which I don't think is a bad thing.
MGB or suchlike maybe. Classic insurance can be quite reasonable even for the young. I think it was our very own Cliff Pope who mentioned that with reference to getting insurance for his daughter.
He also kind of fancies an old Defender, like me he's into his outdoor pursuits ( mainly involving muddy places ) so it could be an option ( or some kind of old Jap jeep maybe )
|
>> He also kind of fancies an old Defender, like me he's into his outdoor pursuits
>> ( mainly involving muddy places ) so it could be an option ( or some
>> kind of old Jap jeep maybe )
Ideal!
However, I just ran a quote for an 18 year old new driver, on a 15 year old defender. (fully Comp)
few were prepared to quote, lowest was 2,800 with 1k excess. next quotes (could only get 10) were 5k and upwards with many demanding a driving monitor box.
|
>> These days insurance is the major factor
Having learners on my policy increased the premium from £275 mark to £600 and nearer £800 after they'd passed. That's for Xantia or Berlingo. Still around that level now for the Roomie with The Lad on there at 21 and three years plus post test.
He's never done any damage but his sister scraped the Xant's n/s rear badly in a panicked reverse off Kislingbury bridge - big agricultural tractor pushed on and forced her to go back.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sat 6 Feb 16 at 13:02
|
Actually ended up with 2 X 2008's this week with a diesel Focus in France in-between.
1st 2008 was the petrol 1.2 - not sure what output but was sprightly enough, although the gearing was quite low - 80 was over 4200 rpm, but it still felt quite happy - didn't feel stressed. I would think this engine in something smaller would be a hoot- it did feel right being driven hard - a bit like the tepid french hatches like the 106 that had to be driven hard.
2nd was Diesel - 1.4 I guess - again quite acceptable, but found it quite fidgety on the motorway - maybe there was more cross winds than I thought.
Not sure I could live with one full time, but they were both OK for a couple of days, and better than I expected
|
>>I think all this suspicion of low capacity engines.....">>
The Japanese have been producing such three pot engines for many years - remember the 999cc K engines in the 1990s which were restricted to 64bhp, although Daihatsu used one in the Charade gtti that produced 99bhp and 0-60mph in 7.7 seconds?
|
>> >>I think all this suspicion of low capacity engines.....">>
>>
>> The Japanese have been producing such three pot engines for many years - remember the
>> 999cc K engines in the 1990s which were restricted to 64bhp, although Daihatsu used one
>> in the Charade gtti that produced 99bhp and 0-60mph in 7.7 seconds?
Longevity wasn't their goal, just as well because few of them made it. Very fragile.
|
|
Maybe Toyota have learned from that, their new four cylinder 1.2 turbo petrol engine has a water cooled turbo.
|
|
I thought most modern turbos were water cooled so they could use an electric water pump after the engine shuts down. Must almost be a necessity with the number of cars with start stop
|
>> >> I think thats backwards thinking now.
>> >>
>>
>> ... Unless you go
>> AMG you can't even get an E class with a petrol engine bigger than a
>> turbocharged 1.8!!...And BMW are
>> putting a 3 cylinder in the next 3 series...
It looks that way, and "economy" is the reason - but that economy as we all know is rather theoretical. Manufacturing cost is another possibility but these engines are highly sophisticated and that might not be such a big factor, if it is one at all.
I wonder if we are being pushed, by legislation and arbitrary measurements not reflective of real use, into engines that are essentially an inefficient solution; and maybe ineffective too, if reliability does go backwards.
It puts me in mind of when "road fund" licence cost in Britain was linked to RAC horsepower. When the measurement was dreamt up, it was an easily measurable and reasonably accurate proxy for actual horsepower, but it led to the manufacturing of very long stroke engines and the perpetuation of side valves rather than the more fuel efficient ohvs because it was based only on the square of swept area, not swept volume. Development therefore went into an engineering dead end.
As for the 3 cylinder engines, yuk. I could not easily live with the ones I have experienced.
|
|
Oops... I need to correct my self. The current three series has a three cylinder engine in its 318i guise!! I quite like the 1.0 un-turbocharged engine in the Up! Sure 75 bhp isn't going to set the work on fire, but it's perfectly brisk enough in normal use and does love being thrashed!!
|
Ford 1.0 three pot update. - Falkirk Bairn
