Older vs Newer

[obi_waynne]

I'm actually coming round to the idea that older cars 2000-2005 are better propositions than newer cars 2008-2011.

It just seems that cars are made to a budget now and a lot of corners are being cut.

Compare the build quality of an 1996 Audi S6 with a 2008 S6 and you'll see what I mean. The older cars also seemed more reliable than the newer ones with a lot of electrical components suffering from poor contacts and plastics breaking off.

What are your thoughts on this debate then? Are slightly older cars really better? What about pre 1990 cars? Do they figure in this as well or are they too old and worn out to count?

 

[stamford]

Not owned a recent car so can't really comment but my 02 MG has passed every MOT since new and compared to the facelifted version it is much better built, no cost cutting exercises here. Pre 1990 cars will suffer from corrosion issues and running issues as ecu controlled soleniod fuel injection was just starting to be considered production. Most were still on poorly built carbs on poverty models with K-Jetronic on the classier injected ones which was limited in design. Interior trims on pre 1990 cars don't weather too well either as the UV destroys them. As the materials improved so did the longetivity.

 

[Yugguy]

The best buys now IMO are large-engined premium barges registered before March 2006. Like a Lexus LS430, get one of those registered before March 2006, it'll have every conceivable extra, it'll never break down and it'll cost you 240 quid a year road tax.

 

[bigbadjoe]

I come to this debate with a biast opionion anyway. The genral car, for the everyday family now days is a pile of carp. They look terrible. Big and rounded. And like Waynne said, all made on a tight budget.

 

[T9 man]

The best buys now IMO are large-engined premium barges registered before March 2006. Like a Lexus LS430, get one of those registered before March 2006, it'll have every conceivable extra, it'll never break down and it'll cost you 240 quid a year road tax.

Really? :amazed: Might have a look in the Autotrader later

 

[herb]

The best buys now IMO are large-engined premium barges registered before March 2006. Like a Lexus LS430, get one of those registered before March 2006, it'll have every conceivable extra, it'll never break down and it'll cost you 240 quid a year road tax.

Isn't it before march 2001 like mine to get the £240 a year tax no matter what engine size

 

[thexav]

IN 2007 the bands J & K were added with higher tax rates. So the same band K car in 2007 would cost a LOT more to tax than a 2006 model. My dad wishes his 2007 car was just a few months older but at least it's sitting in band J so it's not too bad! I shudder to think what the future holds tax wise for it though.

 

[HDi fun]

Hard to generalise but I bought a 5 series E39 as an emergency purchase simply because of;

1.the general reputation for bullet proof reliability that model has, and,

2; the immaculate condition and history of the one I viewed.

I'm not sure we can condemn makers for building down to a budget - to a degree this has always been the case. I borrowed a new Focus 1.8 something or other last month and it was great - bit noisier than I'd like but not loud, bit slower than I'd like but still quick enough. Perhaps drive that exact same car in ten years time and see how it's stood up over time.

This would be the only fair way to determine the answer to this question.

But my mate up the road has a 2000 registered Focus 1.8, she's happy with it and I've driven it too-it feels fine, even to my ultra fussy persona.

 

[MasterAuron]

They don't make em like they used to! I still do and always will prefer the cars I grew up with and modern cars just don't drive like old ones any more with all the weight and safety features.

 

[HDi fun]

They don't make em like they used to! I still do and always will prefer the cars I grew up with and modern cars just don't drive like old ones any more with all the weight and safety features.

I don't mind the safety features and weight if they can sort out the performance and handling. Hence my general dislike of Vauxhalls. It's a bit of a generalisation by me because I have not driven every single new Vauxhall model so cannot comment comprehensively.

The "don't build 'em like they used to [do so]" thing can go too far. In many way ways I'm glad that they don't! A 1964 Morris Oxford which requires a decoke every 5000 miles and engine rebuild every 10,000 (if it lasts that long) isn't my idea of fun. That's if the tin worm didn't bite, as well.

We all have a golden era in our minds though. I have a soft spot for the MkII Granada Saloon in 2.8i Ghia X trim. At least as a memory. If I were to drive one again tomorrow I'd possibly be horrified by the lack of refinement, poor performance and general feeling of vulnerability.

Nostalgia is a wonderful thing and is sometimes best enjoyed in the mind rather than on a practical level.

 

[Prince]

Older cars offer more value for money, and for someone that wants a lot of off-the-shelft tuning options then you have loads of choices and lots of knowledge to choose from. My favourite era is the 90s. I think cars of this era have more personality than newer cars that all seem to look the same.

Also, just because it's older does mean luxury is sacrificed. Older Mercedes and BMWs were lavished with leather, on board computer and all sorts of little touches that newer cars don't have.

 

[HDi fun]

Not sure about BMW. They used to be the stingiest of any maker. You were lucky to even get PAS in a 3 series twenty years or so ago.

I think modern cars are quite well tooled tbh. My mate has a 207 teaching car and it has plenty of kit for what is a basic model, including a trip computer.