Car insurance question

[Poverty]

Well I did some quotes for similiar performing mk5 golfs and they were more expensive than the audi. So far the only car with 2.0FSI performance but cheaper insurance is a focus, but my vans a ford which I drive everyday, and my friend has a focus so I dont want one.

When I originally got the corsa my mum would drive it to work everyday, so it was legit, or for the first 6 months atleast.

The M3 cost 30 grand which ofcourse his daddy paid for.

 

[Roo]

Well I did some quotes for similiar performing mk5 golfs and they were more expensive than the audi.

The Mk5 Golf, lest we forget, being the one full of expensive technology that'll need a loan from Fort Knox to cover if crashed (one of the things the insurance companies factor into the cost of the premium is how much replacement bits are), as opposed to the Mk3, which is the sensible option with a VR6 model if so desired (possibly cheaper to insure than a new Mk5).

So far the only car with 2.0FSI performance but cheaper insurance is a focus, but my vans a ford which I drive everyday, and my friend has a focus so I dont want one.

Are those the only reasons you have for not wanting one?

When I originally got the corsa my mum would drive it to work everyday, so it was legit, or for the first 6 months atleast.

Which still leaves 6 months when you are, as Famine mentioned, one of:

the idiots that are driving about with no insurance that are pushing up our premiums.

The M3 cost 30 grand which ofcourse his daddy paid for.

On a personal note, from someone who pays for everything himself and actually has to budget for these things (yes, I'm bitter and jealous), I can only say: silly daddy.

 

[Dave A]

And what exactely are your quotes so far? I'm not seeing the logic behind you not wanting a Focus because you drive a Ford van and your friend has one? That makes very little sense. And what spec Audi A3 are you after?

 

[Poverty]

A3 2.0FSI sport.

I drive a ford transit connect, and quite frankly I dont want a car that has anything in common with it. Its not a bad van at all, infact as a van I like it very much and its alot better than that french crap some of my collegues got stuck with.

I just dont want a ford really because of that, and I would be more inclined to just get another corsa than a focus.

 

[Dave A]

Again though, WHY? The Focus is a good car, a very good car when it come to insurance as well. A 1.8 Focus is a lot cheaper to insure than my 306 diesel and franly it's a much better car too. a Corsa is a relatively poor car, hell it's just a poor car. Your logic here is to be perfectly honest, non-existant.

 

[Roo]

Why not get one of these and stick a set of these on it?

 

[Poverty]

Why not get one of these and stick a set of these on it?

lol, I have another reason againt the mk2 focus which is depreceation. Im aiming to keep the audi only for two years, at which point I want to get something faster, unless I get a 200sx in that peroid.

Its kinda like everytime id get in a focus it would remind me of my van.

 

[Famine]

Well I did some quotes for similiar performing mk5 golfs and they were more expensive than the audi.

That's why I said MkIII.

my friend has a focus so I dont want one

Oh lordy... And they say women are bad with wearing the same dress...

Here's a thought - if two of you have a Focus, you can compare notes and have a greater knowledge about the car you drive.

The M3 cost 30 grand which ofcourse his daddy paid for.

15% of the value of the car for insurance.

Here's where you run into trouble when comparing insurance quotes. There's a whole field of variables for calculating these things. They can be summarised as:

• The driver.
• The car.
• The use.
• The location.

The driver, use and location, one would presume, are pretty similar to your situation. Now you might think "The car? It's an M3 - powaaaaah!" - but it's more finely-tuned than that. Here's an idea:

• How often is that model of car involved in a crash?
• How often is that model of car involved in a crash per unit sold?
• What is the average severity of a crash involving that car?
• What is the average cost of repairs from a crash involving that car?
• What is the average cost of compensation for bodily injuries from a crash involving that car?

Now... Saloons fair better than hatchbacks on the first one. Most saloons are repwagons and see lots of motorway mileage - motorways being the safest roads in the country. So most saloons aren't crashed as often as hatchbacks, which are mainly used by wives and teenagers for town/city driving - the riskiest roads to use. With BMWs this is even more apparent - the fleet market for the 3-series is colossal.

With the second one... I don't have an answer. I've no idea how many percent of M3s are pranged each year. You can bet an actuary will know though.

The last ones really see hatchbacks suffer. Saloon cars have big crumple zones and hatchbacks - prior to the safety drive in 2001/2 - don't. In a big car you're simply further away from the point of impact. So hatchback crashes usually involve insurance write-offs and bodily injuries from vehicle intrusion into the cabin. The fact that hatchbacks are big with teenagers kills them yet further - the typical teenage boy/hatchback crash involves the phrase "Watch this!" and ends with several someones being cut out of an upturned vehicle.


Looking at performance and insurance group is a ropey way of guessing premiums. It's a good rule of thumb, but not very accurate - for your reference, an Audi S8 would cost me less to insure than my current MX-3 V6, and a TVR Griffith would cost me less than a Focus RS. Your friend's M3 is simply another example of this. The only way to do it is to quote exactly the same details for several cars - and confused.com is quite good for this.

 

[Poverty]

Damn, I knew your were intelligent but its like you have knowledge on everything. I think im just gonna pay up for my insurance, I dont drink or smoke so paying extortionate prices can count as my expensive bad habit

On a sidenote I saw that 350z's were selling for as little as 12 grand, so ofcourse I did a quote with confused.com. No-one would offer to insure me on it.

 

[Scaff]

Another area that is taken into account when insurance groups and rates are calculated (in addition to those Famine detailed) are to do with theft.

• How often are cars of this model stolen
• What type of location are the stolen from (links to the location you live in)
• How often are models of this car broken into
• What is the average cost of repair following a break-in
• How often are vehicles of this type recovered after theft
• etc, etc.

Insurance calculation is, as Famine mentioned, a very complex subject. In addition I whole heartedly agree with Famine's earlier post regarding car choice. While it is of course a free choice I have to always question the logic of getting such a new car, given your limited driving experience and the resulting chance of an accident it brings with it.

The best advice you have been given in this thread was by Famine and I repeat it here

Yes, we get that you love Audis thiiiiiis much and really want an A3 as your first car - but is it worth it? Listen to the voices of experience - get something cheap to run and cheap to fix (by yourself, for preference), don't arse about modifying it and, above all, get something disposable because, at some point in the next year or three, you're going to stack it into a tree/wall/bus shelter/parked car. It's going to happen - sucks, but it's true.

Save your dreams - and your horrific amounts of vehicle insurance premiums - for the next car. You'll still end up paying about a grand a year for most things, but that saves you 6 grand on the spot to put towards the next car.

Now aside from the point that its not your first car, the rest still very much stands.


Regards

Scaff

 

[vectradriver]

There was me feeling quite smug that when Mummy and Daddy buy me a car next year, it was going to be an E36 BMW, but a 19-year old with an M3? I bet that will be crashed sooner or later. I'd be surprised if he knows the cars limits let alone how to correct it when those limits start to chip away either.

The Focus will be more fun to drive than the A3 full stop. If your going to be driving the A3 at all enthusiastically, be prepared to find it competent yet dull. As for its connections with a Transit Connect, how do you feel that your A3 shares plenty in common with the Skoda Octavia and Seat Leon? Crikey if you find the fact that Ford make vans a problem, you must find 'budget' cars being related to 'premium' Audi's pretty bad?

 

[Poverty]

Once again with the audi stereotype. Is the golf dull to drive enthusiastically? No its not and neither is the A3, or equivelant seat. I can post tons of reviews that says the A3 is a pleasure to drive, and seeing as the A3 im getting is lighter than the same engined golf according to whatcar.com, and faster, im sure I'll like it. Anyway I will test drive it before I buy, and if I dont like it I wont buy it.

 

[Scaff]

Once again with the audi stereotype. Is the golf dull to drive enthusiastically? No its not and neither is the A3, or equivelant seat. I can post tons of reviews that says the A3 is a pleasure to drive, and seeing as the A3 im getting is lighter than the same engined golf according to whatcar.com, and faster, im sure I'll like it. Anyway I will test drive it before I buy, and if I dont like it I wont buy it.

Uhh I don't see a stereotype here at all, the Focus has always been rated as one of the finest handling FWD cars made today.

In regard to your comments on the Golf, A3 and equivalent Seat, they may share chassis and components but they are dynamically tuned very differently, point of fact Autocar describe the new A3 as "Peerless Quality, but mute steering and poor refinement", the A3 has always been better in terms of refinement than the Golf, but not a dynamic match, as the suspension set-up is not the same.

Regards

Scaff

 

[Poverty]

Actually it depends on what model drivetrain it is. Get a A3 SE and a Golf SE and they will near enough be identicle, except the audi will ride slightly firmer.

Could it have been autocar tested a haldex audi?

The audi stereotype comment has nothing to do with the focus, it has got a class leading chassis in MK1 form, however in MK2 its debatable. However the mk1 focus chassis had its flaws also, most notably it being a extremly difficult task to make use of it with a 4wd drivetrain hence the FWD RS focus.

 

[Scaff]

Actually it depends on what model drivetrain it is. Get a A3 SE and a Golf SE and they will near enough be identicle, except the audi will ride slightly firmer.

Why exactly would sharing the drivetrain make the suspension set-up and tuning identical on two cars that would have been tuned and set-up by different engineering teams for different target customers.

By saying that the Audi will ride firmer you are acknowledging that its set-up different.

Could it have been autocar tested a haldex audi?

By Haldex Audi I take it you are refering to one fitted with the Haldex clutch system used on models with a transverse engine and quattro.

Audi uses a Haldex® clutch to transmit power on its cars with transverse engines and quattro® permanent all-wheel drive. It has been specially adapted to this configuration and distributes the drive force variably between the front and rear wheels, preventing the build-up of stresses in the power train when cornering (like the Torsen® differential). The Haldex® clutch has advantages for all-wheel drive in conjunction with a transverse-mounted engines. A lot of different information is needed to distribute power to the wheels – for example, the engine speed, torque, wheel speed and anti-lock braking system (ABS) function.
*) Trademark of Haldex AB, Landskrona, Sweden

What exactly is the point you are trying to make with this?

The audi stereotype comment has nothing to do with the focus, it has got a class leading chassis in MK1 form, however in MK2 its debatable. However the mk1 focus chassis had its flaws also, most notably it being a extremly difficult task to make use of it with a 4wd drivetrain hence the FWD RS focus.

Then what stereotype about Audi are you trying to say is being made?

I also did not say that the Focus had a class leading chassis, in fact I did not mention the chassis at all, the class leading handling qualities of the Focus are principally attributed to its control blade independent rear suspension set-up, which is practically unique among FWD cars.

Regards

Scaff

 

[vectradriver]

MK2 Focus handling debatable? Er, I think not. Also the S3 has been labled as a bit dull by Autocar, what hope does the boggo FWD TFSI have? It isn't a stereotype, Audi have only just released a good handling car, the RS4 and then undone that hard work with the S6 and S3 which have been marked down for their uninvolved handling characteristics.

I can personally vouch for the ability of the Focus, when in May I was doing work experience with Autocar and one of the Photographers, Mitch threw the Focus into a roundabout and the front just bit into the tarmac and it didn't fluster the car at all. I know for a fact the Vectra wouldn't cope with that and I doubt the A3 FWD would either. The Focus is on another level for fwd handling. The rest of the car is a bit dull, especially just driving it normally along the M25. Meh.

 

[Poverty]

MK2 Focus handling debatable? Er, I think not. Also the S3 has been labled as a bit dull by Autocar, what hope does the boggo FWD TFSI have? It isn't a stereotype, Audi have only just released a good handling car, the RS4 and then undone that hard work with the S6 and S3 which have been marked down for their uninvolved handling characteristics.

I can personally vouch for the ability of the Focus, when in May I was doing work experience with Autocar and one of the Photographers, Mitch threw the Focus into a roundabout and the front just bit into the tarmac and it didn't fluster the car at all. I know for a fact the Vectra wouldn't cope with that and I doubt the A3 FWD would either. The Focus is on another level for fwd handling. The rest of the car is a bit dull, especially just driving it normally along the M25. Meh.

The MK2 focus isnt as good as the MK1 driver wise, and whats impressive about flinging a car ina roundabout and it sticking to the road. Any decent car will do that in this day and age.

The Golf GTI is highly rated. The Audi A3 TFSI is even faster still yet isnt good handling and boring?

The 3.2 audi A3 sportline is also faster around the 'ring and hockenheim than the VW R32, is the A3 yet somehow crap handling like you claim?

Also your forgetting about the MK 2 TT which has been compared to the cayman, and is class leading in its sector as the overall ultimate package.

The Focus isnt on another level for FWD cars at all, there are several japanese FWD cars that will and would take it for a walk.

The S3 has been said to brilliant apart from the engine have too much lag and being too punchy and un audi like as its power delivery in comparable to that of imprezas.

The S8 is also a better drivers car than any 7er or S-class.

And audi have been releasing good handling cars for well over a decade. Fords first good handling car? (excluding supercars). The Escort Cosworth, and they didnt make another good handling car till the MK1 focus, the MK2 is still good, but not as good as the first.

All this comparing a audi a3 to a focus is stupid though, as the audi is safer, and has a better interior and ride, and hence is heavier. Not exactly a fair comparison, as whenever ford tried to make a luxury/premium vehicle they failed.


So yes your stereotypes are outdated, as the cars that did fit the stereo type like the MK1 TT, MK1 A6, MK1 A3 are no longer here, and the audi A4 will be getting replaced next year.

 

[Dave A]

The MK2 focus isnt as good as the MK1 driver wise, and whats impressive about flinging a car ina roundabout and it sticking to the road. Any decent car will do that in this day and age.

Nope, the Focus still has incredible bite, most fwd cars will still understeer into the outside of the lane if you try to throwm them into corners.

The Golf GTI is highly rated. The Audi A3 TFSI is even faster still yet isnt good handling and boring?

Why do you keep bringing this up, your missquoting people.

The 3.2 audi A3 sportline is also faster around the 'ring and hockenheim than the VW R32, is the A3 yet somehow crap handling like you claim?

Again your missquoting, vectradriver has not once said that the A3 has "crap handling". Uninvolved, uncommunicative, lack of feel are all terms I've heared associated with the A3 in reviews and road tests.

Autocar on the A3 3.2 quattro sport -
With all-wheel drive eliminating any suggestion of torquesteer, time for our preferred bit of demanding road north of Munich airport. Up the tempo, however, and nothing can hide the understeer or the early onset of tyre squeal from the Michelin Pilot Primacy rubber. Disposing of the standard ESP only exaggerates both conditions, leaving the keen driver
frustrated by the inability to exploit the power and struggling to restrain the A3's desire to push its nose wide.


The message is clear, for all its many virtues, don't buy this A3 if youre expecting an entertaining drive.

Evo-
In objective terms there are reasonable but certainly not exceptional levels of grip, and a safe, understeer-led balance, but you never get the feeling the A3 ever gets up on tiptoes and begins to flow. Like its neat and tidy exterior, the chassis is efficient and safe, but there's no life, no highlights or stand-out dynamic flourishes that make you warm to it. A BMW 325 Compact isn't enthralling, and may be lacking in power compared with the muscular Audi, but show it a decent thread of bends and it can entertain.

And this is the A3 2.0 FSI...
Autocar-
A decent chirp from the front wheels sets the mood. There’s no excess of ESP engagement, and torquesteer is never an issue on dry roads. Yet, for all its performance and the implications of Audi’s marketing hype, the A3 doesn’t cut it as a driver’s car. Maybe on Germany’s smooth roads the Sportback works, but in the mountains behind Nice it struggles to contain body roll, vague on-centre steering with a slow turn-in, and a restless low-speed ride. The A3 uses the same electro-hydraulic steering as the Golf, but on these challenging Monte Carlo rally stages it seems even more remote and uncommunicative, in part because the engineers wanted to banish torquesteer. Audi has softened the dampers and bushes since criticism that the early Mk2 A3s were too stiffly sprung. It’s an improvement, but at what cost? A BMW 1-series is in another league for steering and body control.

Evo-
There's none of the edgy keenness you'd find, say, in a Focus ST170. Sure, the A3 feels much more expensive and upmarket. But it doesn't have great verve. Some of the blame must be pinned on the electro steering, which seems dormant for the crucial first eighth to quarter of a turn. The A3's nose is reluctant to move smartly away from the straight-ahead and needs a good tweak to encourage it to turn-in. Equally, when steering along a series of bends the car doesn't snap satisfyingly out of corners.

And the S3...
Autocar-
What many prospective owners won’t be expecting is the mixture of coarse growls, rumbles and whooshes that are ever present even on light throttle openings. Grip and traction levels are high, but the S3 feels more passive than its Golf GTi cousin, without that car's sense of fun in changing direction.

Neither is the steering quite as rewarding, feeling light and just a little vague about the straight-ahead. Up the pace and the weighting increases, and it’s accurate enough once into a corner.

Also your forgetting about the MK 2 TT which has been compared to the cayman, and is class leading in its sector as the overall ultimate package.

No ones forgetting about the MK2 TT which is one example of an Audi being praised for it's handling. That's a single example from their whole model range, and since it's their most sports focused model in the range you'd hope they could make it handle nicely.

The Focus isnt on another level for FWD cars at all, there are several japanese FWD cars that will and would take it for a walk.

It's alright you saying that but cae to name a few and provide something to back up that staement. Because for all intenets and purposes I can find plenty of sources praising the Focus, both the MK1 and 2 for it's great handling.

The S3 has been said to brilliant apart from the engine have too much lag and being too punchy and un audi like as its power delivery in comparable to that of imprezas.

And it's not very involved handling.

The S8 is also a better drivers car than any 7er or S-class.

Source please.

And audi have been releasing good handling cars for well over a decade. Fords first good handling car? (excluding supercars). The Escort Cosworth, and they didnt make another good handling car till the MK1 focus, the MK2 is still good, but not as good as the first.

Ford have made and been making good handling cars for decades relative to the standards of their time. Sure not all Fords have been good handling, over the years probably most haven't but what does that have to do with this debate?

All this comparing a audi a3 to a focus is stupid though

They're in the same class.

as the audi is safer, and has a better interior and ride, and hence is heavier.

And more expensive, and I mean to own as well as to buy.

Not exactly a fair comparison, as whenever ford tried to make a luxury/premium vehicle they failed.

Which has nothing at all to do with the comparison.

So yes your stereotypes are outdated, as the cars that did fit the stereo type like the MK1 TT, MK1 A6, MK1 A3 are no longer here, and the audi A4 will be getting replaced next year.

No ones going on about stereotyping Audi's brand as a whole, I do beleive they are all talking about specific models and most of what has been said has been said in magazine reviews.

 

[Poverty]

For every review slating the A3's driver wise I can post another one praising it. Its like a yoyo this converation back and fourth, and I cant be bothered to play right now.

I dont see how a cheap, poorly built, noisy, and wallowy focus can compete with a A3 though, and I have driven the MK2 focus. Then theres the reliabilty issues of fords also to contend with and their rubbish ability at holding onto their value and not rusting away.

Also looking at audi sales figures they must be doing something right, a hell of alot of people seem to appreciate how they perform.

 

[Famine]

All this comparing a audi a3 to a focus is stupid though, as the audi is safer

O RLY?

and has a better interior

A3 - wood trims look cheap.

and ride

A3 - The suspension is new, so that means the ride is not a crashy as that in the old A3.
Focus - It is generally a refined environment in which to travel with limited engine and road noise.
One of the Focus's greatest strengths is its handling. Even models with modest powerplants offer an enjoyable driving experience thanks to responsive steering and nimble yet surefooted behaviour through bends. Rivals have sought to catch up in this area, but as yet neither the Golf nor Astra can match Focus. Ride quality also benefits from the sophisticated suspension and occupants will be quite happy as long as the driver isn't enjoying the handling benefits too much.

and hence is heavier.

Ford Focus 2004 2.0 - 1322 kg
Audi A3 2.0 FSI - 1275kg

 

[Dave A]

For every review slating the A3's driver wise I can post another one praising it. Its like a yoyo this converation back and fourth, and I cant be bothered to play right now.

Well go on then, you show me a source that says that the A3's handling is communicative and it's a great drivers car.

I dont see how a cheap, poorly built, noisy, and wallowy focus can compete with a A3 though, and I have driven the MK2 focus. Then theres the reliabilty issues of fords also to contend with and their rubbish ability at holding onto their value and not rusting away.

Well the Focus has been praised significantly more than the A3, it's also a lot cheaper to own than an A3 and it's safer than an A3 despite what you may think. And they aren't wallowy, having driven more than one Focus and both M1 and MK2 models I can say what I want about their handling and ride to support my view but all of that is meaningless words being typed onto an internet forum with no proof whatsoever. Now magazine reviews, road tests and car awards are proof enough that the Focus is a good car. It's also a very good insurance deal, it's cheaper to insure than my 306 for repective models and when it comes time to replace the 306 (which may be sooner rather than later the rate the 306 is gettin crashed into) the Focus is high on my list of what I'm going to be looking into. not because it's a cool car, it isn't. But in other ways it's a very good sensible choice.

Also looking at audi sales figures they must be doing something right, a hell of alot of people seem to appreciate how they perform.

And you can't say that for the Focus. No.

 

[Poverty]

Famine you make it seem as if your saying that the A3 has not got a better interior. I dont like the wood trim, I think the wood trim looks cheap in ever audi, bmw, mb etc. The focus interior cant hold a candle to that of the A3.

More than a posh Golf, at least in terms of image. Underneath, you'd be surprised how much is shared. The A3 is more plush inside, a tad quieter and every bit as enjoyable to drive.

So you guys still deny your not repeating old stereotypes?

Doesn't feel as robotic as the previous car. It's confident and inspiring - just like a sports hatch should be. But it's easy to drive, too, simple to park and happy in town. The ride is much improved over the old model. It's supple over all surfaces and cruises without complaint on the motorway. On fast A and B roads, it shows superb grip and has precise steering and a pleasing gearchange.

No way dude that cant be right its all understeer and no feel. Parkers are liers!!!!

I could now continue with a smear campaign copying and pasting everything bad I find about the focus, but I wont do that. I know its a good car, but its not class leading in everything does like some people seem to think.

On the safety note some national newspaper did a article about the safest cars in its class, and the A3 came first in its category. Admittedly I dont know if the focus was in the same category or not, but size wise one would presume so, even if the focus is a tad bigger.

As for the weight the 1.4 and 1.6 focus are both around the 1200kg mark, as is the A3 1.6, so either the 2.0FSI is really light or those ford engines are really heavy.

 

[Famine]

quote

It's a good quote - but do you see what the A3's handling is being compared to? Yep - a Golf, and it only matches it. Let's see what Parkers say about the Ford again...

One of the Focus's greatest strengths is its handling. Even models with modest powerplants offer an enjoyable driving experience thanks to responsive steering and nimble yet surefooted behaviour through bends. Rivals have sought to catch up in this area, but as yet neither the Golf nor Astra can match Focus.

Fun this game.


Personally I have no opinion either way. They're hatchbacks and so I don't actually care about either. I was just surprised by your earlier claims when I'd heard the exact opposite from, no offence to you intended, more reputable motoring sources than some bloke on the internet.

EuroNCAP puts the Focus and the A3 in the same class, and the links I gave you should demonstrate that the A3 is not safer than the Focus.

 

[Roo]

The thing about quoting from magazine and website tests - be it from Autocar, Evo, Parkers, wherever - is that everything stated is the personal opinion of the road tester(s) involved - you can't really judge between them until you've driven both.

Secondly, don't you live in London, Poverty? How often are you really going to use the extremes of handling? Sure, the A3 might pull 0.001 more of a G round a roundabout, or whatever, but you won't be driving as hard as you can all the time. I would think - bear in mind I've never driven in London - that interior comfort and reliability might well be high on the list of priorities, and, generally speaking, the Japanese do that best of all.

Why do you want an A3? The only reason I can really see for you wanting the Audi is the badge.

 

[Poverty]

I live in london, not near the city center though, and there are some fun b-roads round my way.

The main reason I want the audi is because I want a car that is reliable, will hold its value, is a pleasure to drive, comfortable and has a beautiful interior. I went to a car supermarket so I could look at other cars I hadnt considered at all and I dont think japanese cars would cut it interior wise. They are typical japanese really, and Im used to and like my euro interiors that one would find inside volvos, vw's etc.

Also the biggest reason why I am not going japanese is because I cant afford to insure any of the models that I find desirable. The sensible versions are just bland and boring in my eyes.

I think the A3 is just the perfect car for my sistuation at the moment because it does everything I want well.

 

[Dave A]

Well good luck on getting a good insurance quote, you'd probably cut it in half with a more sensible choice. Regarding depreciation, in 4 years an A3 and a Focus will lose pretty similar values, a 17k A3 2.0 FSI will go from roughly 17.8k to 7k in 4 years, a Focus 2.0 16v will go from roughly 16.3k to 5.5k. By contrast a SEAT Leon 2.0 FSI Sport will go from 14.5k to 5.6k in 4 years and a VW Golf 2.0 GTI will lose the most with a staggering 20.8k down to 8.2k in 4 years. In terms of value the Golf GTi is not the wise choice. a Golf 2.0 SDI however goes from 13.1k to 5.7k, losing the least in the cars I've mentioned. The A3 and Focus are both equal at 10.8k depreciation over 4 years and the SEAT loses a bit less. Then you have thoes dreaded insurance quotes to get, well it's your choice and imo everybody has tried to give you sensible advice.

 

[Famine]

Also the biggest reason why I am not going japanese is because I cant afford to insure any of the models that I find desirable. The sensible versions are just bland and boring in my eyes.

So... an interesting Japanese car would cost you more than £3,500 a year to insure?

You're not looking hard enough. What have you considered and discounted?

 

[Race Idiot]

So... an interesting Japanese car would cost you more than £3,500 a year to insure?

You're not looking hard enough. What have you considered and discounted?

My Car is group 16, if I recall correctly the S14 200SX with an SR20Det is group 17. If I recall Elephant quoted me about £100 more than what my Mr2 was quoted for. Which was about £1400 overall (well I think 600 because I changed cars mid policy) if I remember correctly.

But yeah just let him get what he wants and illegaly insure it the way he wants to. You aren't telling him what he wants to hear.

 

[daan]

You can always tell a fanboy. You just can't tell him anything.

.......

As an aside. Group 18, 3.0 litre V6, £311. Get in!

 

[Poverty]

Yes I sure said that im going to insure it illegally. I did a quote on a S14 touring and it would cost me £5000 to insure. I sure as hell am not going to spend that figure on insurance. It the quote was similar to that of the audi Id buy a 200sx tomorrow.

If anyone can show me a japanese car with similiar performance to the 2.0FSI A3, with cheaper insurance I will check it out. No toyotas though, the ones on sale today are all bland, and celicas I cant afford to insure.

Oh and remember, a 1.4 corsa costs me 2100 to insure. I dont think 3500, is bad at all for a much superior car. I work to live, not live to work and want a nice car.