This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
I think the 172 is a better car that to be fair is not gonna depreciate much more and will be faster etc but its has more chance of breaking I would say.
ST is a nice bit of kit but the 172 is more fun to drive.
The ST is also worth double what your phase 1 is worth and in my opinion its not double the car.
If it was me I would just use the ST whilst he is away, will make a nice change and take the clio off the road. I wouldn't think the clio will depreciate anymore, the ST on the other hand will drop like a stone.
Thanks for all the comments guys all very valid and each to there own.
I have driven the ST plenty of times and can vouch for the drive, relaibility, MPG etc etc
I definatley think its as quick as my Clio but as it sits a little higher the roll through the corners is defiantley more apparent but nothing coil overs cant sort i suppose.
The fuel consumption is somehow worse (even before the mods went on) on the ST, id probaly put this down to its deficit of weight but equally so i wouldnt be buying it to see how good on fuel it is tbh.
This is Mythical tbh mate, i went to a Ford meet with the bro and there were 1986 Sierra Cossie's with a better shine than some new cars, speaking to an owner of a 500 he tells me its never once been sprayed, just treated, waxy-sealed etc
Like anything else, if its cherished it will last.
And by the by, women cant wash cars for shiit tbh:rasp:
The KA does suffer particularly bad.... but its a mid nineties design.. think of the rust willies and valvers etc suffered.
There are some really bizarre comments on this thread, how would taking a renault 5 and comparing it to a 182/197 have any validity?
On topic, its a tough one tbh. I have driven both (still have my 172). Your never going to be able to have an easier decision as you have both at your disposal to test back to back...
If I am honest I would stay with the 172, however if you think you will need more reliability in the next few years then go for the ST. The 172, given its age is bound to break a few times.