Which Car to get advice

Yes, for very sketchy definitions of "car".

Peter

And get you wet when it rains. Hurt you when you make a little mistake. Plus only carry one other person.

I'd nudge you one or two sizes bigger, and drop the two (three) door if possible. You'll find that a three door Focus (a better drive than the above although the Fiesta runs it close) should sell at a significant discount to the five door. But you'll also lose more when you resell it, because few people buy something this size with three doors.

Generally speaking, the larger the car the better value - although Alfa Romeos put this to pot, they're never good value for money.

The mark four Golf is probably going to be too expensive for your budget and in any event, almost all examples are as interesting as watching the rust form on a Fiat.

The Saxo is a puntable little car and is arguably worth considering if it's (a) cheap, as in, much cheaper than your budget, and (b) the 1.5 diesel, which is as good if not better for motorway refinement as the petrol cousins but much more economical.

The previous generation Fiesta (1995 to 2002) is a real hoot to drive. The

1.25 Zetec-SE engine (now called the Duratec 16v) is a gem on the open road. In the city, especially if the car has air conditioning, it can be a real pain at lower engine speeds. That's the only fault I can think of with the donk per se (and it infuriated me when we had one for a few days, see my website, look for the review of the Fiesta).

I've tried to like the Polo and failed. In isolation, they have a decent motorway ride and refinement but they're just not exciting to drive. They have a job to do and they do it, but I prefer to drive something that makes me want to drive it, rather than something that I need to use to go to places. This can either be a good or a bad thing - I suspect it won't make any difference to you, heh! :) Otherwise, I don't like the Polo's high service and repair costs, less-than-you'd-expect-of-a-Volkswagen build quality and snooty dealers.

You could have a look at the Mondeo / Vectra class, going for the diesel or smaller petrol variants. Yes, I know it's bigger but on the long runs providing you pick something in the ordinary range (that is, four cylinder petrol) it should still be economical enough on the long runs. Do consider an LPG conversion, or a pre-converted vehicle. Although the V6 might sound sweet, fuel consumption maymake you weep in the city.

Otherwise, if you're determined to keep small, Saxos are really, really cheap. £2,000 should get you a superb example. The Peugeot 106 is mechanically very similar to the Saxo so have a look for these too.

Not especially likely unless it's an enormous claim. The insuranc assessor normally has a lot of cars to see in lots of different places and not much time to do it.

No to the saxo. Maybe to the Fiesta. They're small, but so is the Polo, and they're a ford, which means they're not all that well screwed together. My experience of VWs has been very good, but it's all of the older ones. A mate has a polo, and the interior is looking a bit tatty, so they're no the be all and end all of build quality they once were. I'd go and test drive them all, and try all the other various VW Polo / Golfalikes (SEATs, Skodas etc. all built on VW chassis with VW parts). Fabia is the polo equivalent, Leon and Octavia are Golf / Bora equivalent. I'd also go and look at the Yaris, which has a very good reputation for build quality and not using much juice.

They plug a diagnostics into the car and compare the code with what should be there.

That's irrelevant. It may reduce the power, increase it or make no difference. Fact is that it's been modified.

As does the new Micra, if you don't mind the looks.

though, like all fords, you can get cheap parts from the Breakers, and they can be serviced with a blunt screwdriver...

This the 150bhp thing?

I've always wondered about it. I've never driven it, but have had races with cars that have that engine. I was in a Fiat 1.8 115bhp thing at the time. Starting from about 10-20mph, and they only started leaving me after 60.

Why's that? They too heavy?

Never? I disagree. They depreciate loads, and that's a good thing.

The other driver isn't trying ;-)

Seriously, the Panzerwagen is booked at something respectably quick for the 0-60 dash (8.5 secs, ISTR). It's certainly enough to give the local Max Tosser population a bit of a surprise.

And?

When I can get over 150mph and 0-60 in less than 3 secs for my £4k, why would I care about passengers and rain?

Depreciate loads, then level out. At around the 10 year mark, you can often buy a Merc or BMW for less than the equivalent Alfa.

Just being cheap doesn't make something good value.

Have you taken it down the strip? Unless you get an absolutely perfect launch, you'll find most of the Max Tosser population will give _you_ a surprise.

It's a fine engine, but it is better as a high gear slogger than a low gear racer. The previous generation Vectra with the 2.0 engine has an identical

0 - 62 acceleration time (8.7 seconds) and the 2.2 version is quicker (8.5 seconds). Both produce less power and the weight difference is only a few donuts, too...

Shame it's so dull, crap sounding, uninspiring and forgettable.

mmmmm.... donuts....

Obviously, someone who has only passing knowledge of the engine and car it's fitted to knows better than the person who's covered around 13k miles in one since January.

Ultimately, the 156 is quicker, but you have to rev it to get it to match the Passat, which doesn't need revving.

But the Alfa makes you /WANT/ to drive it, and alfa reliability makes it even more a tease. The Passat is just a machine, no soul, no charisma (notice the H...), turn the key and it works, but sometimes you just wish it wouldn't so you had to take the alfa....