Ovlov T5

Good to know - I'll have a looksee what's about

The legacy is heaps better built than the impreza. The B4 is a fairly fast car with almost no turbo lag and a lovely interior. I nearly bought one last year.

Fraser

It's an Aero. Full climate control, heated seats in winter, full pressure turbo (2.3 and 225, not 205 if it is an Aero manual), full leather interior, electrically adjusted sports buckets only used in the Aero by Recaro, traction and ABS

It's a about average, maybe a little low but looking at the overhaul, it may have been hammered, the Turbo in mine is still fine even with 135k on the clock. If all that work has been done, then it is probably worth it.

Depends on the class of car. The going rate for a mint ST185 or ST205 Celica is about £4-6k and the newest one of those would be a very late ST205 at 5 years old, the latest ST185 would be a '94. Mine with 136k on the clock was advertised at £2300 originally, and it is average rather than good.

The class of car being 'big old clunker no-one wants' in this case.

You can buy a similarly specced Alfa 164 Cloverleaf 24v for around 1/3 of that price. Not far off the same car under the skin, but infinitely better to drive thanks to the V6 engine.

I can (sort of) understand the Celica, as a coupe will always fetch more than a big hatchback / saloon.

I've just seen a 9000 of that age for £1700 on a dealer's forecourt - no idea of the spec. but there's no way any spec. can be worth so much more.

T5 is the thing to have then - 2-5g should get you a clean, high miler, was following someone today who was driving a >180k mile 850R and it's a fine car.

Not a B4 RSK specifically - but yes to the Legacys and no I'm not thinking Imperza. The Mitsi strikes me as the build-quality Benzes and BMWs used to have; whereas the Subaru 'feels' inside more Vectra grade.

I'd take a NICE Volvo in preference to the Subaru, but the VR4 in preference to the Volvo. Actually no; I'd chop 'em both in for an LS430, LOL!

Er, what ?

Have you ever driven a high-pressure Turbo car ?

In what way is a heavy V6 lump, complete with lack of mid-range shove, "infinately better" ?

The decent-spec Legacys are a far cry from the usual Impreza malarky. Go take a look at some :)

They're silky smooth, sound awesome and look lovely.

Much better than some 4-pot turbot.

But slower and heavier?

Hmmm.....

I wouldn't be so sure about heavier - the Saab engine is no lightweight, as for slower, I'd say 230bhp is 'adequate'.

Which is why I drive a 5 cyl. 25% more valve area than a 4 cyl, less valve train drag and frictional losses than a V6. V engines are a comprimise, I liked my V6 for it's sound and it's massive fun factor at high revs but not for it's inertia and efficiency. Now I have 5 cylinders, low pressure turbo, wider power availability, refinement (remember that V6s need balance shafts too!) and fun.

Plus, turbo motors lend themselves to simple and inexpensive modding...

In news: snipped-for-privacy@karoo.co.uk, Tim S Kemp decided to enlighten our sheltered souls with a rant as follows

Heh, now V6 twin turbos.. that's the way to go ;-)

The V6 I had in mind doesn't have balance shafts......

I love 5cyl lumps, too, though, and have come very close to buying a Fiat with the 5cyl lump on a couple of occasions.

Doesn't bother me these days, some things are better left well alone. Haven't modded a car for several years.

He's dropping subtle hints ;)

So why subscribe to this newsgroup...

Why does anyone? - I can't remember the last time anyone properly modded a car on here.

He didn't say it was "infinately better". He spelt it propley.

Peter