what do you guys think of this one??

[siklid]

thanks HMG1k. yer I have done an insurance check on both the 2.0 and the 2.5 and its not much different you guys are riht. BUT the price is alot different to fill up the tank. and iv worked out (dont ask me how) how mch it is apporxametly for the 2.0 one and the 2.5 one.

2.0 to fill up the tank = £70 max
2.5 to fill up the tank = £95 max

and I cant aford £95 a week for petrol. because I drive my car everyday and my 1.6 last me about week and that costs £45 to fill up. but i cant afford to put more hen £70 in my tank a week. If you guys dissagree with my calculations please let me know because my freinds have all told me not to go for the 2.5 because of fule costs.

[HMG1K]

thanks HMG1k. yer I have done an insurance check on both the 2.0 and the 2.5 and its not much different you guys are riht. BUT the price is alot different to fill up the tank. and iv worked out (dont ask me how) how mch it is apporxametly for the 2.0 one and the 2.5 one.

2.0 to fill up the tank = £70 max
2.5 to fill up the tank = £95 max

and I cant aford £95 a week for petrol. because I drive my car everyday and my 1.6 last me about week and that costs £45 to fill up. but i cant afford to put more hen £70 in my tank a week. If you guys dissagree with my calculations please let me know because my freinds have all told me not to go for the 2.5 because of fule costs.

No problem!

Fuel costs - a few weeks ago I filled up my 2.5 and it was around £60 to the brim (I was running really low ahead of that fill up)...!

Folks - is that what you all find...?

One word on servicing costs - I know it was briefly touched on here with service schedules - but there's not much difference in servicing costs between a 2.0 and a 2.5...

philip

[Nick Mann]

It's not the cost of filling the tank - it's how many miles you get for that tankful?

They both cost the same to fill, 'cause the tanks are the same size.

The 2.0 should get nearly 350 miles to a tank. (Manual version)
The 2.5 should get over 300 miles to a tank. (Manual version)

Both with a tank cost of £55-60.

Bear in mind that an auto 2.0 can have worse MPG than a manual 2.5!

Official figures are 34 MPG for a manual 2.0 and 31 MPG for a manual 2.5. Not much difference - maybe 10% and certainly not the 20-25% you have mentioned above!

[siklid]

are you sure theres no difference between tank costs. see now im tempted to go for the 2.5 one

[HMG1K]

Nick's right!

They are both 60 litre tanks in the cars, so the cost of filling is the same litre for litre - it's the fuel price that matters, and more importantly the MPG!

[Kieran]

I went from an Automatic 2.0GLS to a 2.5V6 Sport with a manual gearbox.

Having owned both I would go back to a 2.0 GLS over the V6. For a few reasons:

MPG. The GLS managed about 29mpg with mixed driving and an hours commute to work each day. I could have got more than that had I have driven more economically. The V6 averaged about 26~28 mpg when I worked it out. Not a huge difference but noticeable. Unless I drove with feather feet it was usually nearer 26mpg. It was better on a run.

Servicing - Had them both main dealer serviced, didn't seem much in it. From a DIY perspective I'd say the GLS was the easier car - even on basics like oil changes, the filter is more accessable on the GLS.

Ride & Road manners.... When Mitsubishi facelifed the cars and introduced 'Sport' models, they faffed about with the dampers and fitted 17" alloys. Unfortunately whilst my V6 had better grip, the ride and comfort were less good. Having said that, the GLS was a 'wallowy' car.

[siklid]

ok. thanx a lot. what do you guys think of this one then.

http://search.autotrader.co.uk/es-uk...=&max_mileage=

and why is it so much cheeper then the 2.0 one and its got more and its lower millage I dont understand how why its cheeper.

[siklid]

interesting. so your saying the 2.0 is better then the v6... so all they done different to the sports version is bigger alloys and dammpers. otherwise is it the same as the GLS 2.0?

[Paul Beazer]

Both fuel tanks are the same.
You need to be looking at the mpg figures to get an idea of fuel costs, not the engine size and fuel tank capacity.

[Paul Beazer]

ok. thanx a lot. what do you guys think of this one then.

http://search.autotrader.co.uk/es-uk...=&max_mileage=

and why is it so much cheeper then the 2.0 one and its got more and its lower millage I dont understand how why its cheeper.

The V6 isnt a facelift, so it could be older dealer stock.
Also i think that the 2.0 is way overpriced. You could have a VR4 for that!
I bought my V6 sport when it was 5 years old for approx £4k, but it had higher mileage.
Given a choice id have the V6 anytime for the loverly noise it makes. Nothing wrong with the 2.0l per se, just i'd rather have a V6 for the power and noise. Good luck in finding a good one.

[HMG1K]

Yep - Paul's right on the non-facelift... Just to add that same car was advertised bythe same person around September last year, with the same pix!

Ask yourself if you would like the run out shark-nosed (VR4 looking) Galants (2001 - 2003) or the previous standard one without the aggressive front.

Just to add you get one or two more toys on non-facelift V6-24V Galants, including electric and heated seats...

By the way, Kieran's correct on the road manners - I swear i sit lower on my V6 Elegance on the 17" alloys than my old 6G Galant, even with all the seat adjustments on UP HIGH!

[siklid]

hmmm... i dont know what to do now.. can you guys just find me a galant that you think is worth the money and ill buy it. iv got £5000 to spend

[Kieran]

hmmm... i dont know what to do now.. can you guys just find me a galant that you think is worth the money and ill buy it.

Heh! £5k will get you a good one.

You'll find one for sure, and sometimes if you spot a car that's near a member, you might be able to get one of them to come with you for an experienced view.

But finding and making the descision rests with you! "The wizard doesn't choose the wand, the wand chooses the wizard, Mr. Potter!"

[Paul Beazer]

Hell yeah £5k should get you a good facelift one easy.
I'd guess you could get one with FDSH from say 2002 in good nick fairly easily.

[siklid]

what do you mean by good facelift and FDSH?

[HMG1K]

Yep and yep Paul and Kieran!

£5k gets you into facelift late (52 or 03 plate) Galant 2.0 Classic or 2.4 Equippe cars... 01 > 02 plate 2.0 and 2.5 V6 Sports - and some 02 2.5 Elegances...

£5,800 is current book price for a late 52 or 03 2.5 Elegance with the leather.

Facelift if the shark-nosed aggressive front, found on the VR4s... FSDH is Full Dealer Service History... Accept nothing less at this price and with these cars!

[siklid]

im not sure of what to get now.. hav anyone got a v6 that lives in london.. i just want to see the car before I buy a v6. I dont mind paying someone to test drive there car or somthing. I just want to make sure i get the correct one and that I will be able to maintain it. HMG1K dd you get my PM that i sent you?

[HMG1K]

Yep - sorry, haven't got round to reading it yet... At work and dashing in and out of meetings... Will read in a tick... Where abouts in west London are you..?

[siklid]

oh ok thats cool. i live in notting hill.

[HMG1K]

PM'd you!