completely OT -cheap cars

Monty Dog

New Member
Location
Fleet
I know that they'll all built in the same factory - I test drove the Aygo a month or so back, but it had the semi-auto gearbox and it was just awful - it lurches every time it shifts and doesn't make for smooth progress. I bought a Smart instead - feels a lot more solid and the paddle gearshift makes driving a bit of fun.
 

mosschops2

New Member
Location
Nottingham
Monty Dog - last time a drove a Smart (5 yrs ago?) the gearbox lurch was awful - although otherwise really quite liked it.

I'm amazed you found a car which had a worse auto-gearbox!!!
 

LLB

Guest
[quote name="]

It's the same car Linf. The Peugeot has the same engine. I'm pretty sure that the Citroen does, but would like it confirmed.

Citroen residuals have little to do with the quality of the specific car, and everything to do with the general Citroen reputation, as displayed by you here.

I like the idea of the Smart but it's more expensive, has 2 less seats, and fuel consumption is comparable. A C1 would mean that we could use the bigger car even less.
Its the badge and reputation which knocks the residuals, not the engineering.

I've got a Xantia on my drive, it was an expensive car to run as the suspension went wrong on a number of occasions.
 

cisamcgu

Guru
Location
Merseyside-ish
The Citroen C1, Toyota Aygo and Peugeot 107 are basically the same car.

Can anyone confirm that the Citroen has the same 1.0l engine as the other 2. I'm on the lookout, and would like to pay Citroen prices for a Toyota. I'm not bothered about residual values.

Citroen cars are cheaper, but yes have worse residuals. They are cheaper, not so much for lower quality engineering, but because Citroen discount heavily. I believe the engines are the same, and if, as you say, you don't care about resale value, then get the Citroen (IMO)

Andrew
 

gbb

Legendary Member
Location
Peterborough
Yup, i think thats what Clarkson said....same cars in every way except the badge....therefore, buy the Citroen, which IIRC was the cheapest.
 

bonj2

Guest
why don't you get an older car, rather than losing several grand as soon as you drive it off the forecourt.
 

Monty Dog

New Member
Location
Fleet
I bought the Smart because it was actually cheaper than the Aygo by a thousand. The local Smart dealer has a pile of pre-registered ones he was selling off cheap - it had 7 miles on the clock. I was after the auto because my wife drives it too. The Smart lurches a little lumpy in full-auto, but the paddle shift is semi-auto and is pretty smooth. Having bought £20k+ cars new and taken the hit on depreciation, it's nice to pretty well 'fix' the cost of my motoring - I can buy and run the Smart for a year for the price of the depreciation on previous cars!
 

bonj2

Guest
[quote name="]
bonj' said:
why don't you get an older car' date=' rather than losing several grand as soon as you drive it off the forecourt.[/quote']

Because this is one of the situations where you don't.
Such as?
It isn't your money so you don't care? Well why don't you just get the yaris /aygo anyway then?
Have a look at the car market Bonjy. You'll see what I mean.

And have a look at the thread you're replying to while you're at it. You'll see then that your last comment is unnecessary.
You're not that bothered about residual values. Yes, I know, I can read.
But the fact that you say "I want to pay citroen prices for a toyota" implies that you are bothered about the initial purchase cost.
Hence my pointing out that the older you go the better car you can pick up for your money, or the less you'll have to pay for the same car - as pretty much all cars go down in value. You haven't explained why you don't want to do this. The reason most people don't is that they're scared there might be "something wrong with it", but if you just take a little bit of time to get clued up on a few basic things to look out for, you can vastly reduce the possibility of buying something which needs a lot spending on it.

If you don't want to talk about it and you've already made your decision then fair enough, I'm just trying to pass on some genuine advice from my own experiences.
 

bonj2

Guest
Thanks for your genuine advice Bonjy, but I was buying, selling and working on cars when you were still pedalling yours around the back garden.
oooh, get you.

Here's a little bit of advice for you. If you play your cards right and know what you are doing you can pick up a brand new small car, run it for a year (with no servicing costs) and then sell it at pretty much the price you bought it for.
There's not many cars you can do that with.
A bini is apparently one example, or once was at some point. But I doubt you could with a generic supermini, especially a mass produced one with no waiting list. But if you think you can, good luck to you.
Also, it depends what you mean by "pretty much the same". For instance my bro has just bought a car for about ten grand and is probably going to sell it for around 8 grand in three years, which 2 grand for 3 years of motoring is not bad considering how nice (not to mention fast!) a car it is. But 2 grand is more than my vehicle cost to buy outright, so I don't have to worry about residual values, I just have to make sure I keep it mechanically sound, which is nice really not having to worry about depreciation or having perfect bodywork - if it gets chipped I'll just slap a bit of hammerite on it.
 

bonj2

Guest
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bini

Sorry, but you're wrong again. It's quite possible.

Car dealers rely on the ignorant paying full price for a new car. There's no need.
Sure, you can haggle for a good deal. But I think to be able to sell it for the same price in a year you'd have to be fairly lucky, and I don't think you'd be able to guarantee that you were going to do so.
But like I say, it's probably not impossible - so good luck to you.

You need to do a bit more research. I did forget though, you're only interested in cars with huge engines. :eek:
Erm,... no.
 

bonj2

Guest
bonj said:
Sure"] I think [/b]to be able to sell it for the same price in a year you'd have to be fairly lucky, and I don't think you'd be able to guarantee that you were going to do so.
But like I say, it's probably not impossible - so good luck to you.
There you go again with your thinking.

If you looked into it rather than thinking then you'd see that it is possible to run a new, small car at very low cost. It's nothing to do with luck.
Hmmm... maybe at very low cost yes, but NO depreciation cost is pretty much very unlikely.
 

bonj2

Guest
bonj said:
Also, it depends what you mean by "pretty much the same". For instance my bro has just bought a car for about ten grand and is probably going to sell it for around 8 grand in three years, which 2 grand for 3 years of motoring is not bad considering how nice (not to mention fast!) a car it is. But 2 grand is more than my vehicle cost to buy outright, so I don't have to worry about residual values, I just have to make sure I keep it mechanically sound, which is nice really not having to worry about depreciation or having perfect bodywork - if it gets chipped I'll just slap a bit of hammerite on it.
bonj said:
There's not many cars you can do that with. A bini is apparently one example, or once was at some point. But I doubt you could with a generic supermini, especially a mass produced one with no waiting list. But if you think you can, good luck to you.
I note that you're back to your old routine of editing posts after they've been replied to. So I'll just remind you of the part above. The second bit is what you originally posted. The first is what you changed it to.
Yes, WHILE you were typing your reply! Give me chance...
At the time when I started editing it, you hadn't posted any reply.
 
Top Bottom