Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm going to throw this out from left field and suggest a brand new Hyundai Getz.

It won't pass your "not girly" requirements, but it ticks all the other boxes. It's light on fuel (official 6.1L/100km rating). It'll be new so no idiot's driven it into the ground, which will help with reliability (as will the warranty).

The car has the full plethora of safety features (ABS, ESP) which is good in a daily, especially if you let people who can't drive that well borrow it. The head unit plays MP3s off CD or a USB drive, and has a Bluetooth handsfree kit. Importantly, it has air con.

My girlfriend's work has one as a runabout. The seats are pretty hard and the plastics are bin-like, but aside from that its not that bad as something to just drive for a while and sell in a few years.

The other issue is that the 5 door RRPs at $15K drive away ($13K if you go 3 door), but you might be able to talk them down. It's above your $10K limit, but all the mod-cons and the lack of headaches from not being pre-abused by some idiot might offset that extra cost in your mind.

P.S. I don't work for Hyundai. :P

Getz_Brochure.pdf

Edited by scathing

a friend just bought a subaru liberty (2001, 2.5L engine, manual, ~140,000kms) for $12k. Fuel efficiency is decent if talking it easy but the best bit about is it's handling and with AWD, it grips quite well but the suspension is still conformable for a daily. plus, its no snail like most small cars, so can be a bit of fun at least compared to new corollas ect.

haven't been in many other cars that i would recommend buying for a daily :thumbsup:

^a friend owns an old hyundai excel, after driving it, i was happy im stuck with a VN.

Edited by Peter89

why are so many people recommending cars like mazdas that are so expensive to service? if you want a cheap to run daily the guy with the getz idea is on the money - however there's like 800 bucks gross profit in those cars so good luck getting a serious discount. a 3 or 4 k corolla is a great idea as they won't cost you anything to look after - and a later model magna tj for example is great value for money.

why are so many people recommending cars like mazdas that are so expensive to service? if you want a cheap to run daily the guy with the getz idea is on the money - however there's like 800 bucks gross profit in those cars so good luck getting a serious discount. a 3 or 4 k corolla is a great idea as they won't cost you anything to look after - and a later model magna tj for example is great value for money.

same goes for hondas, that and they look shit.

I was looking at a daily also, mainly just for going to station, and places where I would otherwise not park etc. I dont care what it looks like etc ONLY that it is cheap and has working a/c.

The best option I came up with was a Toyota Startlet... based on what they are selling for I could easily get one for $3k and being a 1.3 they sip petrol. That is for a car that is about 10 years old and has a drivers airbag, a/c and power steer.

Only thing that annoys me is paying 2 sets of rego and 2 sets of insurance and 2 sets of maintenance which would be about $1k a year for a starlet I would say.

Not too bad a price though for the added convienience

Edited by r32line

I bought a Swift GTi as a daily runabout.

Like you say, the 1.3L sips petrol and being so small its easy to park. Mine doesn't have air con but they did sell some that do.

It's also a shitload of fun to drive.

The reason I didn't suggest it is because its old and, being a "desirable" hot hatch, will come pre-thrashed.

Edited by scathing

SR NA Silvia, great on fuel and to smash around.

They hold their value aswell as so many p platers want them, I had one bought it for $5000 added a 2nd hand nissan aero kit (painted and fitted myself) kept it for 5 months sold it for $8500 in 2 weeks, no shit.

It was manual tho

Edited by Silvia GTR
actually, a TJ series magna would be the pick.

smooth 3.5l v6, better build quality than local products.

BUT, my bluebird is for sale! lol

the magnas are a local product and build quality isn't that great. not bad, but not great. no worse than any other aussie made car, but not better either.

also they aren't the most economical car either. they are quick in manual form though. i have owned 2 TH magnas. both 3.5L manuals. they are the same as a TJ, just different vody shape but built off the same platform (basically just different nose and tail) and they are ok cars. my second one ran a 14.8 at willowbank with just a catback exhaust. on the highway the economy is good. you can get around 8-9L/100kms pretty easily. round town though they are heavy on fuel. even babying it i was getting around 13L/100km. if you drive a bit harder that will jump up to 16L/100kms very quickly.

I would have suggested a N15 Pulsar SSS but they are a bit long in the tooth, and Nissan build quality isn't fantastic. They did come standard with everything you'd need in a daily (air con, power windows/mirrors) and the SR20DE isn't a bad motor. Any Nissan hatch after the N15 isn't even worth considering.

i have one of these and love it. build quality is good, no different to any other nissan (for example a skyline). they run cheap (on the highway i've had a best of 6.5L/100kms) and some spirited driving round town will see me at 12L/100kms as worst figures. generally just over 10l/100kms, but if i lived in a different area and was driving further to work (and doing less short trips on cold start enrichment) i would easily get under 10L/100kms. in fact towing a 3.6m tinny on the highway i still get under 10l/100kms.

i would highly recommend the n15 SSS. they are comfy to drive, go well, and even better with some mods (full exhaust, not just cat back. extractors make a big difference to the top end) and are economical, and much nicer to drive than a corolla or lancer, etc. the old girl has a base model 2000 model corolla and it is terrible to drive compare to the pulsar. it goes ok but is too soft in the suspension. lancers are the same. and you can pick some up with low kms on them still (under 100,000kms) which isn't bad for a 10 year old car.

i don't know if i'd go with a subaru. i've driven a 2.0L imprezza and a 2.5L liberty and while they go ok, i would still take the pulsar over them.

i have one of these and love it.

I used to have one. I loved it and it always ran without missing a beat, but the interior trim was very rattly and it was squeaking in a fair few places.

build quality is(...)no different to any other nissan

Yep, that's what I said. Pretty average build quality.

Most Nissans I've been in have rattled and squeaked, most straight off the dealership floor. The bits that make it stop, turn and go are generally bulletproof but everything else feels like its not quite firmly attached.

Those characteristics are fine in a fun sporty car, but not as desirable in a daily runabout.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...