What to do... (non-sport content)

[JamesWilson]

Hi clio'ers I'm a bit stuck and need some advice.

Option 1: 53 Plate clio, 27,000 miles, 1.2 16v dynamique with electric pack and cool pack. Runs well, car is pretty immaculate, it has been my mams from new i've been a named driver. She said I can have her car for £2000, insurance would cost £1600, so overall £3600

Option 2: 04 plate clio, ~74,000 miles, 1.4 16v dynamique, with a dvd player. Car looks fairly clean, needs cam belts doing soon. He wants £2000 for the car, insurance is about £1700, so £3700 + cost of cam belt change.

Personally I want the power of the 1.4, but the 1.2 is so cheap. I could put a couple of mods on like brakes, coilovers, exhaust and panel filter. Would push my insurance up about £200.

What would you choose? and why?

Thanks
James

 

[Greeny.]

1.2 for me, better resell value as well with the lower miles, im surprised the insurance is only £100 cheaper for the 1.2?!

 

[JamesWilson]

I think its because I'm 19 and been driving for a year so I'm not a just passed learner in a 1.4.

 

[MikeB]

1.2 16v for me very very cheap to run, not far off a 1.4 anyway.

 

[Kneel]

The insurance between 1.2-1.6 isn't really that much different. For me I'd choose the 1.2. You know the cars history and condition. Its not a big difference and the lower miles will be more attractive when you sell it on. Also cambelts aren't cheap..

 

[JoeyD]

Look for a dCi 80 IMO...
Petrol non-sports make no sense!

Out of those two, I'd probably get the 1.2

 

[JamesWilson]

On a side note, 1.2 twingo gt engine seems like a good conversion to do

 

[Martin_172]

id go 1.5dci wouldnt bother with any petrol non sports

 

[JamesWilson]

id go 1.5dci wouldnt bother with any petrol non sports

Why not ? Its probably one of the most popular cars around today the 1.2 16v

 

[Kane.]

Diesels just sound like tractors lol.

 

[The_Pirate]

Stick to what you know

 

[JCC]

I'd pick the 1.2, you know how it's been treated and how it's been maintained from new, it's the logical choice. The tiny bit of speed/power difference doesn't warrant the extra risk buying the 1.4 you know nothing about, they're both slow anyway.

If you decide you don't want the 1.2 then buy a DCi.

 

[jack_kemp]

1.2. No question.
- you know the car
- it's cheaper
- better resale value
- don't need to do any work to it.

 

[Brett]

I'd buy the 1.4. It has a better standard suspension setup and is not painfully slow unlike the 1.2, just my $2 but I can't stand engines that are absolutely gutless.

 

[Beef-Mc]

Stick to what you know

So true.

 

[Martin_172]

Why not ? Its probably one of the most popular cars around today the 1.2 16v

slow and rubbish on fuel

it was more popular than the diesel as it was about £1k cheaper when new.

 

[S TAYLOR]

slow and rubbish on fuel

it was more popular than the diesel as it was about £1k cheaper when new.

RUBBISH ON FUEL I THINK NOT ...... Compared to a DCi maybe but i can easily see 47-57 mpg

 

[SimonR.]

Go for the 1.2 mate, you know what it's like. Also the 1.4 ain't fast :L

Re-look at insurance quotes though, sounds like you're in the same boat as me, (19 & 1 yr named driver on mums car) my insurance was just under a grand with admiral on a 1.4. Give them a call

 

[SimonR.]

RUBBISH ON FUEL I THINK NOT ...... Compared to a DCi maybe but i can easily see 47-57 mpg

How?? I get 37 on the 1.4

 

[Kane.]

Obviously driving like a 90 year old, i drive like a granny and i dont see near them figures.

 

[Daniel]

My sisters 1.2 would get 44mpg with her driving it. Pretty bloody good imo.

Stick to the 1.2 purely for the fact it will be easier to sell in the future.

 

[JamesWilson]

Go for the 1.2 mate, you know what it's like. Also the 1.4 ain't fast :L

Re-look at insurance quotes though, sounds like you're in the same boat as me, (19 & 1 yr named driver on mums car) my insurance was just under a grand with admiral on a 1.4. Give them a call

I don't live in one of the best areas, so the risk is higher, even though I've never heard of a car been stolen in my street in the late 19 years.

I think it's going to have to be the 1.2 16v.

 

[SimonR.]

Haggle on price with your mum for doing dishes or summin :L

 

[JCC]

Can't see if you've mentioned it or not, but if the belts on the 1.2 haven't been done yet they'll need changed too.

 

[JamesWilson]

Haggle on price with your mum for doing dishes or summin :L

haha, I hardly do them anyway. She wants the cash for another car.

Not sure if the belts have been done on the 1.2. I'll find out in the morning.

 

[Alastair.]

obvious choice is the 1.2, proper dog s**t engine are the early ones though, 04 onwards with the better located throttle body and injection computer and new injection loom are 1000000000 times better

 

[SimonR.]

haha, I hardly do them anyway. She wants the cash for another car.

Not sure if the belts have been done on the 1.2. I'll find out in the morning.

Should have been done 2 years ago

 

[JamesWilson]

obvious choice is the 1.2, proper dog s**t engine are the early ones though, 04 onwards with the better located throttle body and injection computer and new injection loom are 1000000000 times better

How do these changes make the engine better? Can I not just bolt on a manifold/tb/cable/injectors from a new model.

 

[Martin_172]

How do these changes make the engine better? Can I not just bolt on a manifold/tb/cable/injectors from a new model.

not really iirc ECU was changed too, of course its possible but in reality not really. as ali said, pre 04 engines are plagued with issues. i blew one up lol

 

[Martin_172]

RUBBISH ON FUEL I THINK NOT ...... Compared to a DCi maybe but i can easily see 47-57 mpg

47 to 57mpg, ill have some of what your smoking, and ill do you a part exchange for my dci?

 

[JoeyD]

47 to 57mpg, ill have some of what your smoking, and ill do you a part exchange for my dci?

+1!!

I think I worked out my 1.2 16v is doing about 35mpg, and that's just normal driving. Utter tripe.

 

[fearless]

I used to absolutely abuse my 1.2, and it never dropped below 32mpg.

Frugal little buggers.

 

[JamesWilson]

The computer on the 1.2 reads 35mpg, on average over about 700 miles

 

[Martin_172]

The computer on the 1.2 reads 35mpg, on average over about 700 miles

lol screw that, my '72 does more than that!

 

[Cerrone]

Defo 1.2 mate! U know there car low miles andvthere is no difference in the 1.2 to the 1.4 well hardly any! I had a 1.2 Clio for my first car. No problems and it seemed fairly nippy for a 1.2!!

 

[p@blo]

1.2. No question.
- you know the car
- it's cheaper
- better resale value
- don't need to do any work to it.

Couldn't agree more. Surely its a no-brainer.

Why would you want a dvd player in your car anyway-are you homeless?

 

[nik0590]

1.2 bit slower but better mpg?

nik

 

[Jimbo-Clio]

This is the most retarded question i have ever seen asked.

The Car with less owners (known owners), Less Miles, No work required, No hassle just swap the keys on the drive, If its your mums its pretty much an unlimited warrenty, Better mpg, Better insurance list goes on and on


Or a high millage 1.4 with the ultimate ripspeed chav toy

WTF is wrong with you

 

[Jimbo-Clio]

+1!!

I think I worked out my 1.2 16v is doing about 35mpg, and that's just normal driving. Utter tripe.

No idea why!!

My 1.2 16v never dropped below 42mpg ever if driven normally i would see 45/46 over a full tank

Have you got a dirty great open cone on it joey? Rarely serviced? shouldent be that low mate

 

[-J-]

No brainer...

1.2 with known history and low miles
1.4 with DVD player (Reeks of Need Ooo Look at me with in in car DVD, Its just like im rollin in a Range Rover) High miles, in need of work Cam belt etc