... and told me my car will be three years old in March (I already knew this!!).  He thinks he can get me into a new car (same spec) for the same money as I'm currently paying.  This would be nice.  My first thought is that they are starting to heavily discount "old stock" ready for the facelift, I actually prefer the look of the current model over the facelift, even though the facelift is better specced, or are they trying to get me into a facelift?

 

I'm confused now as I wasn't really looking to change just yet!!

 

Are there any 230s left?

I'd imagine that they have a push to meet their sales targets for the end of the year.

Around this time there aren't too many people concidering a new car given that Xmas is just around the corner so they possibly fling a few good offers to people that they think might take it.

 

You would have to ask him if they can get you a facelifted car but I would guess that they are offering from stock so they can sell & register it before the end of the year to hit their targets & get a nice bonus.

 

It is always a good time to negotiate if there are some options etc that you might want but didnt have before or you might be able to push the price down even further.

If you find the right dealer you can squeeze almost all of their profit out of the sale just because they want to reach their target.

... and told me my car will be three years old in March (I already knew this!!).  He thinks he can get me into a new car (same spec) for the same money as I'm currently paying.  This would be nice.  My first thought is that they are starting to heavily discount "old stock" ready for the facelift, I actually prefer the look of the current model over the facelift, even though the facelift is better specced, or are they trying to get me into a facelift?

 

I'm confused now as I wasn't really looking to change just yet!!

 

Are there any 230s left?

 

You'll be  very lucky to find a new 230 sat in a showroom.  All dealer stock 230's were cancelled in August and only customer ordered cars were/have  been built.  The 230 is no longer been made. 

I won't even consider a change unless it has the same spec as I have now.  I would probably go for a petrol as I don't do the big miles now, so it could work out nicely.  The 230 spec is basically what I want but I could spec up a 220!!  What are the differences between the 230 and the 220 other than the addition of a diff (can this be retro fitted?)  How do they differ when mapped?

Since the 230 isn't still available this is mute, but it was cheaper than a 220 specced to the same level, without the diff.  If you want the LSD and extra power £600 gets a good stage 1 map and fitting a quiafe or peloquin geared LSD would be far easier than retro fitting a haldex I would think, they cost about £750 plus fitting I think. I'm no expert driver so don't ask me the details, but I believe a geared LSD can be better in some circumstances, haldex better in others.

I'll keep my towbar then !!!

Seriously Matt, you think they are offering you a good deal now, drop into the conversation "well I was just gonna VT it and walk away" it's generally good for another 20 quid off per month

First world problems.

You'll be  very lucky to find a new 230 sat in a showroom.  All dealer stock 230's were cancelled in August and only customer ordered cars were/have  been built.  The 230 is no longer been made. 

 

If you can navigate THIS SITE you might find you're sitting on a potentially limited edition motor.

So guess what, shock horror, they couldn't match my deal.  They want £4k down and an additional £50 a month.  It's OK I'll keep what I've got thanks!!

 

I'm expecting a call from them with a better deal later in the week!

Typical dealer tactics lure you in and see if you take the bait. If I spec up another VRS as my current one then in total the car costs £1750 more to buy so I doubt if any dealer can get you into a same deal. I have another 5 months left to go until my PCP ends and will probably hand the car back so some lucky person will get aVrs with around 6500 miles on the clock and in near mint condition for 3 years old.

I was only thinking the other day that life must be so easy for car dealers since PCP became popular, as the buying dynamic has changed so much. People used to save up for a new car (before instant gratification became a must have) and/or use HP or a bank loan, with the prospect of owning their car at some point. They would change their cars when they felt the time was appropriate according to circumstances etc. PCP is clearly designed to lure people in for a new car when their deal expires, every 3 years or so, because most people, especially after forking out every month for three years, are unlikely to have enough cash lying around to pay it off. It is one of the reasons why the level of personal debt has exploded, why car sales are at a record high (notwithstanding increasing exports), despite the fact that many people haven't had a pay rise in years. Despite all that, people MUST be seen in a new car, the latest, new improved version, although many cars seven or eight years old and older still look like new and function perfectly well. I am a petrol head but would never buy a new car again. The best car I have ever had is my current Lexus LS 400. It's worth only a few thousand, but has a 4 litre V8 engine. It struggles to do 30 mpg but depreciation is nil. I hate the car buying experience with a passion. I hate the bull**** espoused by car dealers and the occasionally thoroughly unpleasant experience at some car dealers (Mercedes of Doncaster springs to mind). I prefer to buy privately,  but car dealers have made that all but impossible now with all the car buying sites they also own

That is exactly why/how PCP was designed.  It also means a great supply of 2-3 year old cars, normally in good condition, to sell on the used market giving dealers another chance to make money.  Pch must be working similar I guess, some of the deals from new don't seem to even cover the expected depreciation so they must be factoring in that dealers will get another chance to make money when it's sold as a used car in 3 years.

Despite all that, people MUST be seen in a new car, the latest, new improved version, although many cars seven or eight years old and older still look like new and function perfectly well. I am a petrol head but would never buy a new car again. The best car I have ever had is my current Lexus LS 400. It's worth only a few thousand, but has a 4 litre V8 engine. It struggles to do 30 mpg but depreciation is nil. I hate the car buying experience with a passion. I hate the bull**** espoused by car dealers and the occasionally thoroughly unpleasant experience at some car dealers (Mercedes of Doncaster springs to mind). I prefer to buy privately,  but car dealers have made that all but impossible now with all the car buying sites they also own

 

I am yet to see a 7/8 year old car that looks "like new" that hasn't been stored in a barn and not driven. With the exception of possibly the Land Rover Defender, almost every car model is replaced by a newer model every 6/7 years or so. At 7/8 years, it's already a model behind, so hardly "like new" when it's starting to look dated. Most cars at 7/8 years old can have anywhere between 50k and 150k miles on by this point; again, nothing like new. Things become evident cosmetically such as stone chips on the outside, scuffs on the inside, creases in seats, loss of "new car smell" etc. Components such as suspension, brakes etc. may be approaching replacement due to wear and tear. The only cars that are like new, are those low mileage < 3 year old examples you often see for sale at manufacturer approved dealerships.

 

Some people like owning a new, or nearly new car, for ease of ownership. These cars are fully warranted, often reliable, and provide hassle free ownership for a few years. A lot of people can afford x amount per month and for this hassle free ownership and peace of mind they are happy to pay it. Older cars depreciate less, but as they become older and have more mileage, they tend to cost considerably more in maintenance. Cars cost money to own/run and to a simplified extent, it's swapping one cost (depreciation) for another (maintenance and repairs).

 

Personally, I've always owned my cars and couldn't stand being on a PCP or lease, but I get that they work for some people and if that's how some people choose to spend their hard earned, then who am I to judge.

That is exactly why/how PCP was designed.  It also means a great supply of 2-3 year old cars, normally in good condition, to sell on the used market giving dealers another chance to make money.  Pch must be working similar I guess, some of the deals from new don't seem to even cover the expected depreciation so they must be factoring in that dealers will get another chance to make money when it's sold as a used car in 3 years.

And the cars start their life at fleet sales prices on PCH, so about 25% discount from retail, so the depreciation does stack up

Ahhh so the pch does cover the smaller depreciation from a much lower fleet new price, gotcha.  They put right controls on condition and mileage for those exceptional deals, ensuring they get a great supply of excellent condition used cars to sell on.

Non Euro/UK question:  What is PCP & PCH ?

Non Euro/UK question:  What is PCP & PCH ?

 

PCP - Personal contract purchase - monthly finance with a 'balloon' payment at the end to purchase vehicle outright.

 

PCH - Personal contract hire - private lease of a vehicle usually with no option to purchase vehicle at the end.

The reason I bought mine new was that I was in a company car scheme (car allowance) with strict rules on what we could have.  My rules were that it had to be less than 6 years old and less than 100k miles, otherwise penalties were introduced.  I now work for a different company, still on a car allowance but a lot less strict rules.  My dilemma now is do I pay off mine and keep, chop in for new or get something different altogether!

I am yet to see a 7/8 year old car that looks "like new" that hasn't been stored in a barn and not driven. With the exception of possibly the Land Rover Defender, almost every car model is replaced by a newer model every 6/7 years or so. At 7/8 years, it's already a model behind, so hardly "like new" when it's starting to look dated. Most cars at 7/8 years old can have anywhere between 50k and 150k miles on by this point; again, nothing like new. Things become evident cosmetically such as stone chips on the outside, scuffs on the inside, creases in seats, loss of "new car smell" etc. Components such as suspension, brakes etc. may be approaching replacement due to wear and tear. The only cars that are like new, are those low mileage < 3 year old examples you often see for sale at manufacturer approved dealerships.

 

Some people like owning a new, or nearly new car, for ease of ownership. These cars are fully warranted, often reliable, and provide hassle free ownership for a few years. A lot of people can afford x amount per month and for this hassle free ownership and peace of mind they are happy to pay it. Older cars depreciate less, but as they become older and have more mileage, they tend to cost considerably more in maintenance. Cars cost money to own/run and to a simplified extent, it's swapping one cost (depreciation) for another (maintenance and repairs).

 

Personally, I've always owned my cars and couldn't stand being on a PCP or lease, but I get that they work for some people and if that's how some people choose to spend their hard earned, then who am I to judge.

Firstly, I would disagree that many 7 year old cars look dated, as manufacturers are so conservative that models evolve subtly nowadays. Most people cannot tell the difference between the last three versions of the VW Golf, for example. When I say that 7 year old cars can look like new, i mean that they are generally totally rust free on the bodywork, unlike years ago, when the wheel arches etc. would start to crumble, and can be pretty much kept in excellent condition.

Secondly, I'm not criticising anyone for buying new cars every three years or so. I'm pleased they do so, because it creates more low mileage  used cars for people like me. If people want to spend their hard earned satisfying their need for the latest and greatest, it's absolutely fine with me. The immense level of personal debt strongly suggests that they are spending it before they have even earned it, and do not realise how quickly things can go pear shaped, despite what happened in 2008, but that's up to them. People have a different attitude to debt now, and that's just  the way it is.

Things have moved quite quickly in the last 7 years....My 2010 VRS couldn't even be specced with Bluetooth never mind Mirror link etc. Built in Sat Nav which was a very expensive option back then has now arguably been made obsolete by Google Maps etc. CD players in cars are now obsolete to all intents and purposes. New cars are much more economical and cost less in road tax.

Things have moved quite quickly in the last 7 years....My 2010 VRS couldn't even be specced with Bluetooth never mind Mirror link etc. Built in Sat Nav which was a very expensive option back then has now arguably been made obsolete by Google Maps etc. CD players in cars are now obsolete to all intents and purposes. New cars are much more economical and cost less in road tax.

I agree with all that, but having a cd player in my car does not make the car obsolete and  I've always managed fine without bluetooth, which is often unreliable anyway. My XF Jag had it, but I never used it. Who the hell needs mirror link anyway ? research proves that using a phone, even hands free, reduces concentration when driving and the way traffic is now, that cannot be a good idea. Any savings in fuel economy are gained by adding technology that will at some point cost a fortune to fix, such as ever higher pressure fuel injection systems,  etc. I don't believe that fuel savings are that significant anyway and often are almost nil. They pale into insignificance against depreciation.  My 2004 3 litre diesel BMW did over 40 mpg regardless of how I drove it. A 3 litre engine ! My 1.9 pd Octavia will do 50 mpg all day long, and has no adblue or dpf to worry about. It is slightly agricultural, but quiet on the move and is a brilliant workhorse. With the money I save not buying new, I also run a 1999 4 litre V*8 Lexus for long trips and holidays. Possibly the quietest, most refined car on the planet. As for road tax, I would predict a huge increase for diesel cars, because all these expensive add -ons aimed at reducing pollution are now recognised as failing badly. I give it a year before diesel car owners are hammered. The lack of foresight and awareness of many motoring journalists is staggering because they continue to insist on reviewing almost solely new diesel cars, usually the ubiquitous bog standard 140 or 150 bhp version.

I'm not against people buying new cars, why would I be?. I do object to the view that seems to prevail that newer is better. Journalists often perpetuate this myth with their reviews, which almost never reflect any period of ownership. It smacks of the old soap powder ads with "new and improved" formulation". It is largely a con, although I will concede that car interiors have improved in terms of quality.  Even on this point, however, I read about many, many owners experiencing squeaks and rattles that they never experienced in older models of the same car. . I cannot abide squeaks and rattles, there are none in my Skoda and the Lexus is cathedral quiet. Perceived quality is not the same as quality.

I have bought new cars from time to time ( and have owned around 70 cars in total) and am periodically tempted to do so again. I can afford to spend more on a car than ever before and could pick and choose. Having taken some new cars on road tests, however, nothing jumps out as being substantially superior to what I already have, and many have unforgivable flaws. The BMW 3 series I drove was very average compared to one I driove around five years ago.  Nothing comes close to the Lexus, including newer models of Lexus, for various reasons. I will change the Skoda at some point at as I do not want to be driving two "old" cars, but am struggling a bit. The 1.4 TSI looks like a decent bet, but road noise in Skodas is a real turn off, hinting at cheapskate levels of sound insulation. VW Golf quality seems to be deteriorating, if owners'forums are to be believed. I considered a Toyota or Honda, but they are so dull. As someone said before, first world problems.

I also run a 1999 4 litre V*8 Lexus for long trips and holidays. Possibly the quietest, most refined car on the planet.

 

the Lexus is cathedral quiet.

 

Nothing comes close to the Lexus, including newer models of Lexus, for various reasons.

+1

 

I first drove an LS400 when Toyota/Lexus loaned one to the automotive consultancy I was working for in the 1990's - it was an eerie experience because it was SO quiet! I particularly remember driving on a then newly opened concrete dual carriageway where road noise in all the other cars I had driven there was approaching deafeningly loud, but in the LS400 the ONLY noise at 70mph was the splat of flies hitting the windscreen.

 

My NVH (Noise, Vibration & Harshness) colleagues had no idea how that level of isolation from engine and road noise had been achieved while still maintaining a car that was good to drive and didn't have secondary ride issues.

+1

 

I first drove an LS400 when Toyota/Lexus loaned one to the automotive consultancy I was working for in the 1990's - it was an eerie experience because it was SO quiet! I particularly remember driving on a then newly opened concrete dual carriageway where road noise in all the other cars I had driven there was approaching deafeningly loud, but in the LS400 the ONLY noise at 70mph was the splat of flies hitting the windscreen.

 

My NVH (Noise, Vibration & Harshness) colleagues had no idea how that level of isolation from engine and road noise had been achieved while still maintaining a car that was good to drive and didn't have secondary ride issues.

The only problem with the LS is that when you've driven one for a while you are spoiled for anything else. It's interesting you should mention NVH because Toyota were determined to make the best car in the world and had 60 engineers working solely on noise, vibration and harshness. Quentin Wilson, on a very old Top Gear once compared the lexus V8 engine with large  Mercedes and jaguar by placing a glass of water on the engines, whilst running. The Lexus was the only one without a ripple. When I read about the attention to detail on these cars, I had to have one and wish I had bought one years ago