Decent performance diesels?

hmmm under 6 grand... not much really - 5 cyl Audi motors (including old Volvo 850 Tdi) might get in there. BMW 525D probably if you go back far enough.

Early E 300 Turbodiesels are getting into that range if you're not mileage sensitive. Rover 420 (the high output one) diesels go better than they should.

Other than that lot it's french unfortunately.

*cough* Golf TDI *cough*

That, or an Octavia.

You can pick up high mileage Audi/VWs with the 2.5 TDi for

VW's 1.9 PD lump is plenty nice. Find a 130/150 unit, and it can be tweaked upto 180bhp-ish without much work.

Same applies to PSA (Peugeot/Citroen)'s HDi units.

There isn't really anything else that's down to your price level yet.

The V6 VW Audi engine makes either 155bhp or 180bhp IIRC. My VW engine is the 130bhp version of the 4 cylinder PD job - fine when in top and cruisng but not at all smooth in the intermediate gears. I beleive the 150bhp version is even coarser.

As others have said, 6 grand won't really get you into a car with one of the V6 engines. The 4 cylinder engines are all very well and good and extremely easy to live with, but they are a bit gruff. I would look at an Omega 2.5 or a BMW 5 series 525TDS - the one with the intercooler. Ideally one with evidence of fastidious previous ownership and a wodge of obsessive service records and bills.

They're nice engines, but really aren't very economical at all, which kinda defeats the point of a diesel. And the injectors are well known for being problematic. The 2.5TDI 5-cylinder would definitely be the one to go for - power (140bhp as standard, chippable to 170bhp or so), decent economy, and relatively cheap. Not as cheap as a 2.5TD Omega/5-Series, but much much better IMHO.

Peter

-- "The truth is working in television is not very glamorous at all. I just go home on my own at night and sit alone and eat crisps."

wrote

Why does mileage have anything to do with the engine? A diesel car may have more longevity in its engine than its petrol equivalent but the rest of the car is going to tire out just as badly.

Really, with modern petrol engines being as reliable as they are now, up to

*at least* 150/175k there should be no difference in the quality of equally well maintained petrol diesel cars of the same model and spec.

as

Yes, to an extent, but things that aren't wearing replaceable parts aren't too difficult to keep in good condition. Most things on a car are replaceable - suspsension bushes, brake pipes, brake pads/discs/calipers, fuel lines, CV joints, shock absorbers, balljoints etc etc. There's no reason at all why a very well maintained car with 300-400k on the clock shouldn't drive pretty much as new, if care has been taken to replace everything as it wears out (hopefully before). Obviously as a car ages, then the cost of just a few of these wearing parts may well exceed the value of the car, but if a car is bought with a view to keeping it up to an extremely high mileage (I'm thinking these million miles Saabs/Volvos/Mercs you hear about) then that's just par for the course. The only thing not covered by my list is bodywork, but again, if it's properly galvanised/rustproofed, and *properly* cleaned regularly, and the rustproofing checked and reapplied if neccessary, then the only potential thing to mess up the bodywork is little dings, dents, scratches and stonechips, none of which tend to have much of an effect on how the car drives or how long it'll last.

Now obviously an engine with 400k on the clock, even if it's had the oil changed every 3000 miles from new, isn't going to feel as tight and new as a much lower mileage engine, but there's a whole world of difference between that and an engine being knackered and fit for the scrapyard. In any case, a car with 50,000 miles on the clock that's consisted of 50,000 1-mile journeys is probably likely to be in far worse a state as far as engine wear goes than one with 400k on the clock that's done 4,000 100-mile journeys.

Yep, all very true. Though for someone doing lots of miles, the diesel would be the better option as far as running costs goes - especially with modern diesel engines being much better than they used to be.

Peter

-- "The truth is working in television is not very glamorous at all. I just go home on my own at night and sit alone and eat crisps."

I bow to your obviously superior knowledge ;-)...

LOL! Me and knowledge in the same sentence. Cool!

Seriously though, IMHO anyone considering a 2.5TD Omega or 5-Series would be better off just going for a 2.5 litre petrol, though I'd not have a 2.5V6 Omega unless it had had the cambelt and all tensioners done (at a main dealer) and was very cheap. A BMW 525i OTOH would be a very nice car, and preferable in pretty much every way to the 525TDS.

Peter

-- "The truth is working in television is not very glamorous at all. I just go home on my own at night and sit alone and eat crisps."

Won't find a good one for that money, however, my brother did find a 3=20 year old one with 190k on the clock (had been a 24/7 taxi) that was a=20 finance snatchback for =A32.5k.

It had full service history, averaging a full service every 6-8weeks.

Was due a cambelt (he got it done by a mate), and needed some wear and=20 tear items, but he drove it without a problem for 2 and half years=20 (other than a popped off turbo hose), got the service history upto date=20 and sold it for =A34k. Drivers seat had a well worn indent, but other than= =20 that, didn't look or drive at all like a 200k car.

He only used it for localish journeys, so he didn't throw much mileage=20 on himself, so when he sold it, it looked very high mileage rather than=20 super starship.

Offered it me for =A33.5k before he sold it. But I knew what he paid, and= =20 didn't want to spend that much straight out anyway.

--=20 "Sorry Sir, the meatballs are Orf" The poster formerly known as Skodapilot.