I know it is insane, but something keep lunging me toward the buy now button

In news: snipped-for-privacy@news.individual.net, Sleeker GT Phwoar decided to enlighten our sheltered souls with a rant as follows

Doesn't sound anywhere nice as the Alfa though.

You'll scrape 30 from a 164... but it'll sound great

I've even been thinking of an old smoker of an XJ with Auto. I know I'm stupid, but if I'm going lope along the motorway daily, I might as well do it in class and style.

I know. Its the heart/head thing.

I'm going back to Saab, those things really are reliable.

Oh they do. They really do. Nice and thobby at idle. Deep and growly at idle, and even through a standard exhaust a loverly thundering overun in 3rd coming into a roundabout.

That's the dream. But the reality is you'll be sitting beside it with the bonnet up.

Fraser

I know, I know. Was thinking of an Early ford based XJ than a real 6 pot=20 Jaguar.

Locally =A33.5k will get a 1996 3 owner 4.0 Sport Manual with a lot of=20 miles (197k). Of course it is the manual box that makes it cheap. Jags are one of=20 those cars that work well as an auto.

Or =A34295 will get me JAGUAR XJR 4.0 Supercharged, M reg. aqua metallic, full black leather,=20 air con, cruise, ebony veneer, alloys, EW x 4, computer more, stunning,=20 px welcome @ screen price. . . Moston Car Sales (opp. Chester . . . .=20 (trade)

If I was going cheap for a jag, it would need to be arround the =A3500=20 mark, so at least I stood a fair chance of getting a decent scrap weight=20 weigh back off it.

--=20 Carl Robson Car PC Build starts again.

Homepage:

Been modded by a semi-rich chav by the looks of things.

Shouldn't be rusting.... unless it's had a prang or two.

Heh. I keep looking at 944s and 924s when I change cars, but the cheap ones tend to be cheap for a reason.

Those prices will get you a tidy 924, but I wouldn't touch a 944 at those prices with a bargepole.

£4k should see something reasonable - if you want a really good one look at spending closer to £6k and more.

Absolute bollocks.

You'll just about get those figures from a super-economical BMW 330d with a mere 204bhp of Diesel power.

If you're expecting any more than ~20mpg from a 300bhp Turbocharged Petrol car, then you're very much mistaken ! For what it's worth, my trip-computer says I'm currently averaging 25.2mpg - and I'm 90bhp down on the above.

trip-computer

But your engine's a 3 litre V6 one, is it not?

Ok, a turbocharged engine will use shitloads when driven on full boost all the time, but in general use it won't be (especially on the motorway at vaguely sane speeds, and in town traffic), so you'll be able to take advantage of the smaller size engine.

Peter

If he drives even VAGUELY quickly or enthusiastically (i.e. if it ever goes on boost or the pedal ever gets more than 1/10th down), he won't get anywhere *near* those figures. Its rare i get 40mpg from my 206, and thats only on a run when i drive like a gay :-) (once got 46.6 on the run to leeds - booya)

It is, and it offers almost identical economy to my previous 2.0 16v Turbo, making about the same power.

It requires X fuel and Y air to make ~200bhp. Whether that is supplied by 6 cylinders, or 4 cylinders and a Turbo, doesn't really affect consumption. The Turbo is obviously more economical when it's not on boost (kinda like switching 2 cylinders off on the V6), but people who buy 200bhp Turbocharged cars, don't pootle around off boost.

It doesn't work like that. I've owned both, and the difference between them is pif-all :)

After a little thought, and seeing how everyone just recommends what they have or want anyway, i thought it only sensible to suggest you sold your house, and bought this -

Nom, doing my weekly commute, in old 900 T16, doing the same route, times etc that get me 25mpg in the Celica, I would get 27-29mpg depending on time of year, lights air density (yes a warm spring week that still needed as much lights etc did make a huge difference to the freakishly cold weather the week before).

A good run in the Celica gets me 28-3MPG, a good run in the Saab got me

32-35mpg.

That was using the proper method of top off the tank, 0 the trip, drive where you are driving, check mileage, top off tank and see how much you have used, then calculate miles driven/gallons used. Usually worked out roughly the same each time distance, between 180-190 miles between fills. Commuting over a week, motorway run over a day.

And the better mileage was in the 20 year old 135k mileage Saab with really basic fuel injection that based fueling on rpm, no lambda or MAP sensor.

Maybe the 9000 figures are for more like the standard Aero 225bhp manual. But people who have Hirsch'd/Maptun'd/Speedparted their Saabs report that driven normally to how they would normally drive before the changes, economy stayed the same, or improved. It was only when really thundering along that things changed. Saab 9000 Aero manuals are geared totally different (much higer), have different turbos, and a different fuel/ingition map compared to other full pressure 2.3 9000's.

Sounds about right - Celica is heavier, and features extra 4x4 transmission-loss. I'm suprised it did as well as that actually, considering it makes more power (doesn't it ?).

For obvious reasons, the 300bhp Saab is gonna be way down on both, unless you never use the performance. But you aren't gonna buy a 300bhp car, and never use the performance...

In news: snipped-for-privacy@individual.net, DanTXD decided to enlighten our sheltered souls with a rant as follows

My ol' Cosworth once astonished me by managing to do around 45 mpg on the way back from Leeds one afternoon. Steady cruise at around 90ish, light throttle all the way - with the occasional bit of silliness, but jeez. 500 bhp ain't meant to do that kind of fuel consumption.

Are you sure Paul McKenna wasn't about, and he hadn't just hypnotised you into not realising he'd borrowed the Cossie and left you with a Xantia TD?

Peter

In news:FAvHe.379$ snipped-for-privacy@newsfe2-win.ntli.net, AstraVanMan decided to enlighten our sheltered souls with a rant as follows

Bloody thing used to average 15 mpg if I drove it normally - flat out everywhere, 27 on the motorway was the norm, but this one day it did 45ish (I think it was 44.7 after I worked it out), but ferchristsake...

Nice !

I once got 400 miles from a tank in the TI. A fillup was just over £40, so I guess it had a 55l tank ?

So I make that, er, about 33mpg (based on a 12.1 gallon tank). Doh. I thought I was doing well too !

RAC WARRANTY & INSPECTION OPTIONAL EXTRA !!!

On an 88 grand car !