On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:44:36 GMT, (Kat) strung
together this:

As it happens, I have a canoe too... I'm thinking of buying a cheap
tranny for the purposes I mentioned, then converting it into a camper
van after the DIY and moving is complete. I did that once before with
a similar van. The lack of windows made it great for sleeping
overnight just about anywhere, rather than paying out for a hotel.
having said that, all-round windows are such a boon when it comes to
driving and parking.

I've driven quite a few vans over the years and have never missed
having any rearward visibility apart from side mirrors. If you have
decent spacial awareness then lack of windows isn't a problem.

Slightly oversized for you I know but I drive a Transit Luton quite
often and find that a doddle to reverse and generally manouvre.
--

SJW
Please reply to group or use 'usenet' in email subject

It was somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Air Rider"
saying something like:

I'm pretty sure (as my mate has one) that the swb trannie is the same length
as a normal car. My mate couldn't have anything bigger, otherwise there
wouldn't be any parking spaces big enough outside his terraced house.

If there's a bulkhead fitted, the SWB Tranny is annoyingly just too
short to get the doors shut on a sheet of 8'x4'. If no bulkhead it can
stand up and poke between the seats.

Apart from that, I found the SWB shr Tranny a gem to own, being bloody
useful for most things and an excellent tug.
--

Dave

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:17:00 -0000, "Owain"
wrote:

"Kat" wrote
| ... the lack of substance between me and the hypothetical
| concrete lamp post I drive into is a bit unsettling... ;-)

Reassure yourself with the thought that hypothetical lamp posts only cause
hypothetical injuries :-)

Yes; it was the drunken 90-yr old pensioner in the Range Rover coming
the other way, overtaking on a blind corner at 120 mph with his foot
on the accellerator, instead of the brake that causes the *real*
injuries, wan't it? ;-)

K

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 21:54:15 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

Kat wrote:

On all the cars I've had, (British and Japanese) , it's been body rust
- especially the sills - (even though the engines still had about 200K
miles of life left in them)! How are the 10-15 year old Volvos with
regards rust problems? I once drove a 740 when they first came out in
the 80s, and was quite impressed.

Something like a 10 year old Subaru Legacy estate is a similar size and
will go forever. Not as easy to find, spares cost a bit more but you
won't need em often! (They had corrosion licked by the time they
produced the Legacy - especially '92 onward). If you get and estate with
the built in roof rails and stick a decent set of roof bars on them it
would carry 100kg+ on the roof.

Thanks for the tip. Was that one of Subaru's 4-wheel drive cars? If so
I'd be especially interested.

K

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 22:05:10 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

Kat wrote:

That may be the answer. Thanks. Anyone recommend an estate car that
accelerates fast, is reliable, cheap to run, comfortable, handles well
on corners and in crosswinds, has a good bit of carrying space, and
doesn't go rusty around the sills? I don't want much eh? ;-)

If you can find one, the estate version of what I have ;-)

Subaru Legacy 2.0 4 CAM Turbo. There were only a few hundred official UK
spec models ever built (they had to sell 5000 world wide, to qualify it
for entry into the rallies), but a good proportion of them are atill about.

Does all you require, alothough a little fond of the jungle juice if you
get too keen with the right foot! Unassuming shape, permenant four wheel
drive with viscous coupling diffs, and Sierra Cosworth style
performance.

Ah, so yes, it *was* a 4-wheel drive car! I must investigate further.
It sounds interesting.

Basically it has a break, clutch, and a smile pedal!

(Grey imports of newer versions are more easily available including the
twin turbo version, but that will cost you more in insurance).

Thanks again for the suggestion.

K

In article ,
"Sam" says...

most exciting to drive. So older ones can still be found in serviceable
condition. Other similar large estates - like say Ford used to make - are
getting rare.

Scary prices for Volvo spare parts though, from what I remember.

No get them from people like http://www.eurocarparts.com/ or my current
favourite http://www.gsfcarparts.com/ coz they have just opened a local
branch. Any other difficult bits get them from the local scrappy. Course if
you have to go to a main street dealer they will rip you for parts - course
you will know they're not really cheap will you :-)

The Rover/Jaguar dealer that I used to buy parts from years ago was
very reasonably priced, and right in the middle of town. The last
Rover dealer I used (obscure parts needed) wasn't bad either, but a
bit slow. I usually buy parts from a grubby little backstreet
establishment, but I doubt they know a lot about Volvos. That's okay,
as I don't think I'll ever buy one, but a couple of guys I know have
had them and had problems sourcing obscure parts at a sensible price.
That was before everyone and his dog was on the internet though -
it's a lot easier to find specialists and shop around these days.

Kat wrote:

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 08:15:18 -0000, "nightjar"
wrote:


"Kat" wrote in message
...

I'm looking for a van for use when I renovate my house, then move out.
I want something small as possible (because it will be my only vehicle
for a while) However, it must be big enough to carry 4' x 8' sheets of
plasterboard, MDF etc inside. Anyone suggest some models?
Toyota Hi-ace? Nissan Vanette? Others?

It's got to be smaller than a Ford Transit; that's for sure. Toyota
Lite-Ace would be nice but I guess they are too short to fit 8' x 4'
sheets in...

Personally, I would choose the car I need, have a tow hook fitted on it, and
either hire a trailer when I needed one or, if the use justified it, buy
one.

For example, the Ifor Williams BV5 will take 2400 x 1200 mm sheets flat
inside

http://www.iwt.co.uk/products/boxvan/bv5.htm

or the BV4 will take them standing on edge

http://www.iwt.co.uk/products/boxvan/bv4.htm

I used one of the latter to take furniture the length of France a couple of
years ago.

My local Ifor Williams dealer hires out trailers and I would be surprised if
others did not do so as well.


Hi Colin, Thanks for this excellent suggestion. I've never seen
trailers for hire in my area but I'd venture to guess that If I look
hard enough, I'll find some. It might even make sense for me to buy
one, since those horse-box type trailers seem like quite a secure form
of lockable storage which might be very useful when I come to move
house.


They are not bad at all, but the trailers do NOT come cheap, and
reversing a trailer is a bit of an art - and one I don't have.

But a good estate car like a merc or volvo (shudder!) with a tow bar,
and a trailer is a darned useful combo.

However if you are doing long term hose renovation and want a lockable
storage, hire a container: Its MUCH easier than using a trailer.

Friend I knew once bougfht a clapped out van to do his removals for less
than the cost of hiring one, and sold it for marginally more than he
bought it for afterwards. That was some time ago. Going rate for a
runner in basically working oder with 6-9months MOT should be under 500
squids.

Thanks again

K

Kat wrote:

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 10:38:58 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:


In article ,
Kat wrote:

I'm looking for a van for use when I renovate my house, then move out.
I want something small as possible (because it will be my only vehicle
for a while) However, it must be big enough to carry 4' x 8' sheets of
plasterboard, MDF etc inside. Anyone suggest some models?
Toyota Hi-ace? Nissan Vanette? Others?

Before you go ahead, check up on the insurance situation.

It might be cheaper to get a big old Volvo estate.


It might, indeed. Thanks. Especially one with a tow bar... But why a
Volvo, in particular?


Tough and reliable, and have large load spaces, and the older ones have
reaer wheel drve which is quite good for trailer work.

Hate the bloody things meself, because nearly all the worst drivers buy
volvos, and you get tainted, but they are actually not bad cars really.

K

Kat wrote:

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 14:57:28 GMT, Mike Harrison
wrote:


On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 14:23:06 +0000, Broadback wrote:


The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Kat wrote:


I'm looking for a van for use when I renovate my house, then move out.
I want something small as possible (because it will be my only vehicle
for a while) However, it must be big enough to carry 4' x 8' sheets of
plasterboard, MDF etc inside. Anyone suggest some models?
Toyota Hi-ace? Nissan Vanette? Others?
It's got to be smaller than a Ford Transit; that's for sure. Toyota
Lite-Ace would be nice but I guess they are too short to fit 8' x 4'
sheets in...

Many thanks and happy boxing day..

K


I went for a trailer, and never regretted it, easy to load and unload,
ideal for those numerous trips to the local tip, where in most cases
high vehicles are prohibited. I bought mine from a local one man
manufacturer, he will make them to your specification, though that is
Stoke on Trent I would imagine there is one in most areas. A little
thought and some strong polythene will cover you good in transit.

That's an important consideration - many tips nowadays have height limits, but I vaguelly recollect
seeing one that also banned trailers....

As you will presumably only occasionally need the full 8x4' capacity, how about an estate car with a
roofrack ?


That may be the answer. Thanks. Anyone recommend an estate car that
accelerates fast, is reliable, cheap to run, comfortable, handles well
on corners and in crosswinds, has a good bit of carrying space, and
doesn't go rusty around the sills? I don't want much eh? ;-)


Merc is good for general build quality,

BMW the best drive.

Jaguar X-type the best comfort level.

Volvo the biggest load space.

But all are reasonably good really.

Subaru can be stunningly good on corners..:-)




K

Kat wrote:

Thanks for the tip. Was that one of Subaru's 4-wheel drive cars? If so
I'd be especially interested.

Yup, IIRC all/most models are 4WD. Some of the autos have the option of
switching to FWD only. Some of the estates have a low range transfer box
option (doubling the gear count).

My first one (2L saloon) I sold to my FIL 5 years back, that is still
going strong. Replaced with the turbo nutter model I descibed elsewhere
in the thread (ideal Q car - does not look particularly souped up or
sporty until you engage the afterburner). Recently bought SWMBO a 2.2L
estate version. That has the built in roof rails and will carry a
serious load on the roof, plus having volvo style real estate in the
back with the seats folded down.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Kat wrote:

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 14:29:41 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:


In article ,
Kat wrote:

Before you go ahead, check up on the insurance situation.

It might be cheaper to get a big old Volvo estate.

It might, indeed. Thanks. Especially one with a tow bar... But why a
Volvo, in particular?

They tend to be pretty well engineered vehicles - although maybe not the
most exciting to drive. So older ones can still be found in serviceable
condition.


What is the usual thing that eventually consigns them to the scrap
yard?

On all the cars I've had, (British and Japanese) , it's been body rust
- especially the sills - (even though the engines still had about 200K
miles of life left in them)! How are the 10-15 year old Volvos with
regards rust problems? I once drove a 740 when they first came out in
the 80s, and was quite impressed.

Most cars these days will not rot much before the engines are knackered.

15 years or 150k miles is what most '2 liter' cars of decent manufactire
(no Fiat) should do, with the clas cars like beemers, mercs, veedubs,
volvos and even jags *(these days) being capable of.

I happen to have a landrover defender, and that - 110 size and tdi or if
possible td5, is a good workhorse IF you can accept the high fuel
consumption and the offroad capability is worth trading it for.

Its a second best at everything for us - except when the weather turns
sour, and then there is nothing I would rather be in, frankly. I've
towed with it,. gone across fields looking for the dog in it, filled it
with a ton of bricks, taken it to denmark and germany and back, driven
through 2 foot of floodwater, through 8" of snow, cleared houses with it.

Lots of crappy qulaity problems, but the big bits - Engine, tramsission
and brakes and tyres - have never let me down, and its just coming to
the end of its first set of tyres after 450000 miles from new.


Low service costs too.

Only expense is the 26mpg dropping to about 20mpg at 85mph :-)

And the weird handling. Each end of teh vehicle has a mind of its own,
and making sure they agree is a little tricky if youi are 'pressing on'
hard..



K

John Rumm wrote:

Kat wrote:

That may be the answer. Thanks. Anyone recommend an estate car that
accelerates fast, is reliable, cheap to run, comfortable, handles well
on corners and in crosswinds, has a good bit of carrying space, and
doesn't go rusty around the sills? I don't want much eh? ;-)


If you can find one, the estate version of what I have ;-)

Subaru Legacy 2.0 4 CAM Turbo. There were only a few hundred official UK
spec models ever built (they had to sell 5000 world wide, to qualify it
for entry into the rallies), but a good proportion of them are atill about.

Does all you require, alothough a little fond of the jungle juice if you
get too keen with the right foot! Unassuming shape, permenant four wheel
drive with viscous coupling diffs, and Sierra Cosworth style
performance. Basically it has a break, clutch, and a smile pedal!

(Grey imports of newer versions are more easily available including the
twin turbo version, but that will cost you more in insurance).

I can second this. Bro in law has one and its a hell of a car. Can be
found awful cheep.

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 03:01:01 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

John Rumm wrote:

Kat wrote:

That may be the answer. Thanks. Anyone recommend an estate car that
accelerates fast, is reliable, cheap to run, comfortable, handles well
on corners and in crosswinds, has a good bit of carrying space, and
doesn't go rusty around the sills? I don't want much eh? ;-)


If you can find one, the estate version of what I have ;-)

Subaru Legacy 2.0 4 CAM Turbo. There were only a few hundred official UK
spec models ever built (they had to sell 5000 world wide, to qualify it
for entry into the rallies), but a good proportion of them are atill about.

Does all you require, alothough a little fond of the jungle juice if you
get too keen with the right foot! Unassuming shape, permenant four wheel
drive with viscous coupling diffs, and Sierra Cosworth style
performance. Basically it has a break, clutch, and a smile pedal!

(Grey imports of newer versions are more easily available including the
twin turbo version, but that will cost you more in insurance).

I can second this. Bro in law has one and its a hell of a car. Can be
found awful cheep.

Spares might be a problem though, if only a few hundred entered the
UK, yes?

K

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 02:44:52 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Kat wrote:

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 08:15:18 -0000, "nightjar"
wrote:


"Kat" wrote in message
.. .

I'm looking for a van for use when I renovate my house, then move out.
I want something small as possible (because it will be my only vehicle
for a while) However, it must be big enough to carry 4' x 8' sheets of
plasterboard, MDF etc inside. Anyone suggest some models?
Toyota Hi-ace? Nissan Vanette? Others?

It's got to be smaller than a Ford Transit; that's for sure. Toyota
Lite-Ace would be nice but I guess they are too short to fit 8' x 4'
sheets in...

Personally, I would choose the car I need, have a tow hook fitted on it, and
either hire a trailer when I needed one or, if the use justified it, buy
one.

For example, the Ifor Williams BV5 will take 2400 x 1200 mm sheets flat
inside

http://www.iwt.co.uk/products/boxvan/bv5.htm

or the BV4 will take them standing on edge

http://www.iwt.co.uk/products/boxvan/bv4.htm

I used one of the latter to take furniture the length of France a couple of
years ago.

My local Ifor Williams dealer hires out trailers and I would be surprised if
others did not do so as well.


Hi Colin, Thanks for this excellent suggestion. I've never seen
trailers for hire in my area but I'd venture to guess that If I look
hard enough, I'll find some. It might even make sense for me to buy
one, since those horse-box type trailers seem like quite a secure form
of lockable storage which might be very useful when I come to move
house.


They are not bad at all, but the trailers do NOT come cheap, and
reversing a trailer is a bit of an art - and one I don't have.

But a good estate car like a merc or volvo (shudder!) with a tow bar,
and a trailer is a darned useful combo.

However if you are doing long term hose renovation and want a lockable
storage, hire a container: Its MUCH easier than using a trailer.

Friend I knew once bougfht a clapped out van to do his removals for less
than the cost of hiring one, and sold it for marginally more than he
bought it for afterwards. That was some time ago. Going rate for a
runner in basically working oder with 6-9months MOT should be under 500
squids.

Yes, that may be what I end up doing. My car just failed the MOT and
seems prohibitively costly to do the work (welding).

But I shuddr at the thought of using a van for the regular 60-mile
weekend trips I have to do, and nipping to town just for grocieries.
So I'm allso thinking of an estate or possiblt a longish hatch-back. I
had a hatchback once, and I couild get very big items in it by driving
with the hatch open and the cargo sticking out of the back (well tied
down of course). For the long, fast trips, the hatchbacks tend to burn
less fuel due to the better aerodynamics, methinks. But they don't
have that large roof area for a large roof-rack suitable for
plasterboard sheets etc.

K

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 02:49:15 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:


Merc is good for general build quality,

BMW the best drive.

Best drive in what way? Pray expand...

Jaguar X-type the best comfort level.

Volvo the biggest load space.

But all are reasonably good really.

Subaru can be stunningly good on corners..:-)

I'm attracted to the Subaru - partly because I've never had one, and
they aren't common, but chiefly because of the reported performance
and handling and 4WD. Concerened about the spares situation though...
Probably hard to find them in scrap yards, yes?

K

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 01:05:13 +0000, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:

It was somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Air Rider"
saying something like:

I'm pretty sure (as my mate has one) that the swb trannie is the same length
as a normal car. My mate couldn't have anything bigger, otherwise there
wouldn't be any parking spaces big enough outside his terraced house.

If there's a bulkhead fitted, the SWB Tranny is annoyingly just too
short to get the doors shut on a sheet of 8'x4'. If no bulkhead it can
stand up and poke between the seats.

Alternatively, you can prolly drive with the back doors open, suitably
adorned wioth red rags, yes?

Apart from that, I found the SWB shr Tranny a gem to own, being bloody
useful for most things

If 'most thinks' includes nipping down to my crowded narrow shopping
street for a packet of tea bags, I'd have to beg to differ.. ;-)

K

Kat wrote:

Spares might be a problem though, if only a few hundred entered the
UK, yes?

Not really. The "few hundred" applied only to the 4 cam turbo model. The
conventional fuel injected ones were always available in quantity and
still are. Most of the parts are common to both. Some of the turbo
specific parts are common to the Imprezza as well where most models sold
are turbos. Generally getting parts is no problem.

The conventional fuel injected car is more than capable and very nice to
drive, and would probably suit your needs very well. It depends a bit on
what you mean by "accelerates well". The 2L 120ish bhp conventional car
is not slow at all. However, the ability of the turbo to go from 30 to
60 in the space of 100 yards is quite astonishing though.

(They introduced the Turbo into the UK in late 91 IIRC, when Subaru
decided they wanted to make a serious entry into the WRC circuit (having
previously been successful in their class, but never having had a
vehicle that could compete at the top level). A certain Mr. McCray then
set about changing the brand visibility in the UK just a tad! They
stopped importing the turbo legacy model in about 94 when the imprezza
because available and took over the rallying, but they still produce
them for the Japanese market, including some very exotic twin turbo
versions that they have developed with the their partnership with Porsche).

If you go for one of they grey imports then you may have more difficulty
with getting parts through the official channels (not because they are
different, but because they sometimes try to restrict support for grey
vehicles), but again there is a whole grey parts industry in place to
support them.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

In article , "Kat" Katch661
@ydbttvou.com says...
snip
If 'most things' includes nipping down to my crowded narrow shopping
street for a packet of tea bags, I'd have to beg to differ.. ;-)

That's what a bicycle is for :-)

Kat wrote:

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 02:49:15 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:



Merc is good for general build quality,

BMW the best drive.


Best drive in what way? Pray expand...


Handling and feedback frm teh wheels. The merc is tanklike and the jag
is a bit spongy.

Volvos are pretty tanklike too.


Jaguar X-type the best comfort level.

Volvo the biggest load space.

But all are reasonably good really.

Subaru can be stunningly good on corners..:-)


I'm attracted to the Subaru - partly because I've never had one, and
they aren't common, but chiefly because of the reported performance
and handling and 4WD. Concerened about the spares situation though...
Probably hard to find them in scrap yards, yes?

Dunno. He has friends in Prodrive who rally prepare em ;-)


K

"Kat" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 07:32:17 GMT, (Anna Kettle)
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 17:19:38 -0000, ":::Jerry::::"
wrote:

Remember the smaller the vehicle the less weight you will be able to
carry
(legally).

My van is a Vauxhall Combo which is a boxy car derived van and it can
carry a ton(ne?) and a half cos it is the version with improved
suspension, so size isn't everything. At least that is what my ex said


Its too small for 8*4 sheets and three seater sofas but its fine for
dribs and drabs house move and for cement mixers. Ford stopped making
the Escort van a while ago and I guess that is cos builders have
discovered that the boxy shape vans are much easier to get stuff in
and out of than are estate car derived ones

Being car derived (the Corsa) its easy to drive and its cheap to run
too. I suggest you look at Combo or other manufacturers equivalent
Renault Trafic etc

Yes; it's certainly an option. I have owned an Escort Van and hired an
Astra van on occasion. Nice and small for parking but not as much room
as say a Hi-Ace or Vanette with about the same overall length.
Cheers,

K

Stay well away from Renaults, bloody expensive to keep on the road!!

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 22:48:55 GMT, "Stephen Dawson"
wrote:


"Kat" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 07:32:17 GMT, (Anna Kettle)
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 17:19:38 -0000, ":::Jerry::::"
wrote:

Remember the smaller the vehicle the less weight you will be able to
carry
(legally).

My van is a Vauxhall Combo which is a boxy car derived van and it can
carry a ton(ne?) and a half cos it is the version with improved
suspension, so size isn't everything. At least that is what my ex said


Its too small for 8*4 sheets and three seater sofas but its fine for
dribs and drabs house move and for cement mixers. Ford stopped making
the Escort van a while ago and I guess that is cos builders have
discovered that the boxy shape vans are much easier to get stuff in
and out of than are estate car derived ones

Being car derived (the Corsa) its easy to drive and its cheap to run
too. I suggest you look at Combo or other manufacturers equivalent
Renault Trafic etc

Yes; it's certainly an option. I have owned an Escort Van and hired an
Astra van on occasion. Nice and small for parking but not as much room
as say a Hi-Ace or Vanette with about the same overall length.
Cheers,

K

Stay well away from Renaults, bloody expensive to keep on the road!!

I will, thanks. Never owned a French vehicle yet... I've never found
one that I liked. I've only owned Britsh, Japanes, and American
vehicles so far...

K

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 15:04:30 -0000, Rob Morley
wrote:

In article , "Kat" Katch661
says...
snip
If 'most things' includes nipping down to my crowded narrow shopping
street for a packet of tea bags, I'd have to beg to differ.. ;-)

That's what a bicycle is for :-)

Good point! :-)

K

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 21:49:56 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Kat wrote:

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 02:49:15 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:



Merc is good for general build quality,

BMW the best drive.


Best drive in what way? Pray expand...


Handling and feedback frm teh wheels.

Interesting - cos I've never driven a beemer in my life.

The merc is tanklike and the jag
is a bit spongy.

Volvos are pretty tanklike too.

That was my exact description, upon driving the only Volvo I ever
drove: a brand new 740 or 760 estate, I think, back in 1985... Like
driving a tank.... a very comfy tank, though... ;-)

K

It's got to be smaller than a Ford Transit; that's for sure. Toyota
Lite-Ace would be nice but I guess they are too short to fit 8' x 4'
sheets in...

I've got a Fiat Ducato, which you'd probably find too big. The sheets just
fit. I'm not sure you'll find a smaller van that will take them. However,
when shifting 8x4 sheets, I almost always put them on the roof with roof
bars, or occassionally put them in the trailer. These methods would work on
almost any van.

BTW, I love driving the van. Much more satisfying than the car. You get
better visibility over hedges and oncoming cars turning right at the lights
and it has no larger footprint than a Lexus.

Christian.

I have a swb trannie, 1270kg payload, 8 by 4 sheets with ease, changing
room
for canoeing. It has an incredible turning circle, shorter than my other
halfs rover 25. Its economical, comfortable, parts are cheap and readily
available. I have driven many large vans at work and nothing even comes
close to the transit IMHO.

Strange. I prefer the Ducato/Boxer/Relay. Both the Trannie and Ducato are
nice to drive, but the Ducato has the dash mounted gear stick and right hand
mounted handbrake. The former is great for being lazy, the gear knob being
no more than 10cm from the steering wheel. The latter is great when carrying
passengers and they don't mangle themselves into the centrally mounted
controls.

Christian.

I will, thanks. Never owned a French vehicle yet... I've never found
one that I liked. I've only owned Britsh, Japanes, and American
vehicles so far...

Peugeots are fine. But then, they're mostly British, rather than French...

Christian.

Lots of crappy qulaity problems, but the big bits - Engine, tramsission
and brakes and tyres - have never let me down, and its just coming to
the end of its first set of tyres after 450000 miles from new.

Wow, half a million miles on one set of tyres!

Christian.

I'm attracted to the Subaru - partly because I've never had one, and
they aren't common, but chiefly because of the reported performance
and handling and 4WD.

The X-Type is 4WD as standard on the 2.5 and 3.0.

Christian.

Christian McArdle wrote:

I'm attracted to the Subaru - partly because I've never had one, and
they aren't common, but chiefly because of the reported performance
and handling and 4WD.


The X-Type is 4WD as standard on the 2.5 and 3.0.

as are some of the Volvos.... an old 850 T5 R (as favoured by plod) also
goes like stink (250bhp, 4WD) - easy to recognise by the implausibly low
profile tyres!

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 11:08:00 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

Christian McArdle wrote:

I'm attracted to the Subaru - partly because I've never had one, and
they aren't common, but chiefly because of the reported performance
and handling and 4WD.


The X-Type is 4WD as standard on the 2.5 and 3.0.

as are some of the Volvos.... an old 850 T5 R (as favoured by plod) also
goes like stink (250bhp, 4WD) - easy to recognise by the implausibly low
profile tyres!

Do any of the aforementioned vee-hicles have traction control?

K

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 10:18:05 -0000, "Christian McArdle"
wrote:

I will, thanks. Never owned a French vehicle yet... I've never found
one that I liked. I've only owned Britsh, Japanes, and American
vehicles so far...

Peugeots are fine. But then, they're mostly British, rather than French...

A bit like my old Vauxhaull Astra then, described as British, but
designed and built in Germany. Go figger... . ;-)

K

Do any of the aforementioned vee-hicles have traction control?

If you need traction control on a 4WD, then you need to lose your baseball
cap, and learn to control your feet!

Christian.

I have a Transit 80 circa 1994 and a Fiat Ducato same era. The Transit is the Morris thousand of vans, many faults but you can't beat it for reliability and cheapness of both parts and labour. The Fiat is bigger more thirsty, quicker off the mark, but isn't a personality.

I frequently carry 20 or more plasboard on the full frame roof rack of the tranny, which vertually turns it into a double decker. Aged 47, shinning up to the roof one foot on the back wheel, a good grip on the roof rack and I'm up there walking on the bridge round the back of the merchant's pulling sheet by sheet off the forklift. That's the beauty of a transit, it's at home with all things building trade.

My trade is gas fitter, but I renovate houses and coordinate all trades, so I get my hands dirty in all aspects of building, and I love it, get payed for playing at being a builder.

Just go and get a Transit with a big f**k off roof rack, you'll always get back what it cost. Last one I sold only stayed on the end of the road for an hour before it sold and then I could have sold it twice more the same evening. I got all my money back.

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 10:16:55 -0000, "Christian McArdle"
strung together this:

Strange. I prefer the Ducato/Boxer/Relay. Both the Trannie and Ducato are
nice to drive, but the Ducato has the dash mounted gear stick and right hand
mounted handbrake. The former is great for being lazy, the gear knob being
no more than 10cm from the steering wheel. The latter is great when carrying
passengers and they don't mangle themselves into the centrally mounted
controls.

I used to have a 2000 W SWB Boxer 1.9D and I thought it was in
general, crap. It spent more time in the garage under warranty than it
did on my drive and everything is backwards, and cheap plasticy type
crappy flimsy. I sold it at 43,000 miles. Don't know what the new ones
are like but I had an 02 reg Partner 2.0 HDi after that and that
started to fall to pieces pretty quickly. To be fair I had it for 15
months ish and did 52,000 miles in it, after buying it with 9,000 on
the clock. I don't think it should have had to have two new
alternators, new crankshaft pulleys, bearings etc. eveery 20,000 miles
as it seemed to, but it does though.

In summary, Peugot are crap, I wouldn't be overly keen on getting
another.
--

SJW
Please reply to group or use 'usenet' in email subject

I don't think it should have had to have two new alternators, new
crankshaft pulleys, bearings etc. eveery 20,000 miles as it
seemed to, but it does though.

A very different experience to mine, then! My first was a 1995/M (Boxer). It
did just short of 200,000 miles before some joyriders rammed it at 30mph in
reverse. I sold it to a friend of a friend (a mobile mechanic who had just
had his van and tools nicked) who has pulled out the damage and it is still
on the road, presumably at well over 200,000 miles now. Very few signs of
rust, given the age and mileage, too. My second is a 2000/X (Ducato) on
around 50,000.

I haven't had any serious mechanical trouble from either. The older one did
require a new heater matrix, but apart from that, it is just brake pads,
tyres and batteries I've changed on either of them.

Of course, they aren't really Peugeots, they're Fiats with a Peugeot
drivetrain. The engine chosen (the 1.9 XUD) is the one that seems to be in
about 50% of diesel engine cars of the period.

Christian.





"Lurch" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 10:16:55 -0000, "Christian McArdle"
strung together this:

Strange. I prefer the Ducato/Boxer/Relay. Both the Trannie and Ducato are
nice to drive, but the Ducato has the dash mounted gear stick and right
hand
mounted handbrake. The former is great for being lazy, the gear knob
being
no more than 10cm from the steering wheel. The latter is great when
carrying
passengers and they don't mangle themselves into the centrally mounted
controls.

I used to have a 2000 W SWB Boxer 1.9D and I thought it was in
general, crap. It spent more time in the garage under warranty than it
did on my drive and everything is backwards, and cheap plasticy type
crappy flimsy. I sold it at 43,000 miles. Don't know what the new ones
are like but I had an 02 reg Partner 2.0 HDi after that and that
started to fall to pieces pretty quickly. To be fair I had it for 15
months ish and did 52,000 miles in it, after buying it with 9,000 on
the clock. I don't think it should have had to have two new
alternators, new crankshaft pulleys, bearings etc. eveery 20,000 miles
as it seemed to, but it does though.

In summary, Peugot are crap, I wouldn't be overly keen on getting
another.
--

SJW
Please reply to group or use 'usenet' in email subject

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 09:14:22 -0000, "Christian McArdle"
strung together this:

Of course, they aren't really Peugeots, they're Fiats with a Peugeot
drivetrain. The engine chosen (the 1.9 XUD) is the one that seems to be in
about 50% of diesel engine cars of the period.

I think that's the problem, the XUD was\is a good engine and they seem
to be riding on the back of its success currently. It's just a shame
that anything they attach to the engine falls off.
--

SJW
Please reply to group or use 'usenet' in email subject

I think that's the problem, the XUD was\is a good engine and they seem
to be riding on the back of its success currently. It's just a shame
that anything they attach to the engine falls off.

Out of interest, which parts did you find unreliable? I know the fancy (but
complicated) gearshift system gets a bad press, but I've found my two really
good. Maybe a tiny bit notchy, but so much more convenient than finding a
huge industrial wiggle stick on your left, pressed into your passenger's
thighs.

Christian.

In article ,
Christian McArdle wrote:
but so much more convenient than finding a huge industrial wiggle stick
on your left, pressed into your passenger's thighs.

Some would pay good money for that.

--
*I'm not your type. I'm not inflatable.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 14:59:10 -0000, "Christian McArdle"
strung together this:

Out of interest, which parts did you find unreliable? I know the fancy (but
complicated) gearshift system gets a bad press,

Complicated? 5 gears + reverse.....

but I've found my two really
good. Maybe a tiny bit notchy, but so much more convenient than finding a
huge industrial wiggle stick on your left, pressed into your passenger's
thighs.

Well, I think was about the only thing that didn't break on the Boxer.

What In didn't like about the Boxer was the cheapness of it all.
Everything was just, well, crap. Nice driving position though, and the
low rear access was useful, as was the 'squareness' of the sides as I
always rack my vans out which is PITA with curved sides.

While Budgens had it, on quite a few occasions during the 2 years I
had it it had;

* 3 new driveshafts.
* 1 new ECU.
* 1 new other ECU type thing, just as expensive as the main one.
* Various other 'minor parts' replaced.
* The back doors would never shut without a good slam, the same with
the side door.
* The door holder openers never held the front doors open.
* There was a fairly major wiring fault with the vehicle that fried
the 2 ECU's and meant the van was always a bad starter and that the
cooling system never worked properly so the van was prone to
overheating. This was missed at every service and the cause was fairly
obvious apparently once you dug around in the engine bay, which the
'mechanics' had done on quite a few occasions. It was an auto
electrician, appointed by me at a later date, that eventually fixed it
shortly before I sold it, but my Dad had it by this time so I never
got to drive it while it worked properly.

Moving on to the Partner;

* 1 new alternator, current one on its way out. This is a fairly
common fault as the two 206s owned by my cousins have had altrernators
fail within 20k.
* Crankshaft pulley bearings shattering and destroying half the bottom
of the engine. A common fault apparantly, one which Peugeot have done
nothing about and still fit the same crappy parts as a replacement.
* Gear linkage\box prone to looseneing failing. Always needed
adjusting\checking as there was always loads of play when in gear,
(wore than my old 200k Maestro in fact).
Again, garages saw it more than me.

So, in general, I can't say I'm impressed with Peugeots of late.
--

SJW
Please reply to group or use 'usenet' in email subject

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 16:52:05 -0000, "Christian McArdle"
wrote:

Do any of the aforementioned vee-hicles have traction control?

If you need traction control on a 4WD, then you need to lose your baseball
cap, and learn to control your feet!


Depends on the type of surfaces/terrain you're driving on, doesn't it?
If you have to negotiate slippery steep inclines, traction control
would be an advantage, wouldn't it?

PG