oh, so now you're a qualified financial advisor, too?

Always have been & a qualified accountant - hence the usual swing to

I suppose you'd have to be able to use an abacus to keep counting the costs of owning a Fiat

Basically, no one cares what you say; about anything.

Car is a Fiat Coupe 20v Turbo - modified to circa 285bhp.

Std 0-60 6 seconds

0-100 14 seconds

VMax 155mph.

MPG I achieve 30-32mpg and best ever 37mpg worst 25mpg.

This should be well known as it has been raised before.

There is no doubting the fact that the 330d MSport is a great car - Im sure most on here would like one the newer the better (as they are step ups in power each time) but I'd be happy with the 204bhp

Definately an Accountant...

I suppose you'd have to be able to use an abacus to keep counting the costs of owning a Fiat

Not quite - I use the modern day equivalent Excel.

I have all costs incurred for the car since it was bought & have forecast in future costs of known replacement parts/soon to be worn out. I do this to know exactly what the cost per mile is.

Basically, no one cares what you say; about anything.

Im not concerned with posts like this - if your not interested then dont read the thread or block my user name simple.

No one's concerned with any of your posts though!

This is the point you seem to forget everytime you reach for the keyboard!

No one's concerned with any of your posts though!

If you're not concerned with them, stop responding.

This thread is intended for the discussion of the depreciation of the Fabia, if you want to b!tch at someone may I recommend you try elsewhere?

Rob.

No one's concerned with any of your posts though!

This is the point you seem to forget everytime you reach for the keyboard!

That is YOUR opinion which YOU are entitled to but please dont try to be a dictator here clearly everyone has their own mind and if they want to read the thread they will if not they ignore it.

This is totally a Fabia thread initially expanded by others & myself about general car ownership issues/costs and you seem to think that noone is concerned well clearly they are otherwise it wouldnt have 53 replies with many genuine posts amongst the pointless (yet fun) banter.

As someone else stated the 1.4 isnt that much different in reality to the 2.0 performance wise but is vastly more fuel efficient.

2.0 vs. 1.4: 0-60 16% better, top speed 5% better, torque 26% better, power 13% better

1.4 vs 2.0: urban economy 17% better, rural economy 8% better, mixed economy 13% better

If you compare, say, 0-60 with urban economy and top speed with rural economy, your idea of "isn't that much different" looks very similar to your idea of "vastly more".

Basically, I think performance and economy balance out and I still maintain that the difference in second hand values seems extreme.

That is YOUR opinion which YOU are entitled to but please dont try to be a dictator here clearly everyone has their own mind and if they want to read the thread they will if not they ignore it.

This is totally a Fabia thread initially expanded by others & myself about general car ownership issues/costs and you seem to think that noone is concerned well clearly they are otherwise it wouldnt have 53 replies with many genuine posts amongst the pointless (yet fun) banter.

Ok, let me level this out a bit.

I and many others do appreciate your input and what your trying to say. I peronally don't agree with the way you say it but that's my opinion.

However, this thread like the umpteen others you have started have ended up being little to do with the Fabia and they just get turned in a massive slanging session with no direction or bearing on anything fabia related. You started this thread as if you were rubbing the drop in used prices in to every fabia owner who reads it. That's what it looked like and thats how it came across (That's not just my opinion, thats plain fact and exactly the same as all the other threads started by yourself in the same vain) hence the reason why people will get aggro at your posts. This has been pointed out before and you continue to post. You MUST know it will wind people up, but it still continues.

PLEASE start these threads in another forum. Can I suggest Car releated Chat or the off topic forum. That way you will reach a larger audience and not upset the Rose Tinted Fabia driving masses that read the Fabia forum.

If you compare, say, 0-60 with urban economy and top speed with rural economy, your idea of "isn't that much different" looks very similar to your idea of "vastly more".

I'm not sure how good percentages are for comparing the difference...is being a second quicker to 60 more noticeable/important than the car returning an extra 6mpg or so?

Rob.

2.0 vs. 1.4: 0-60 16% better, top speed 5% better, torque 26% better, power 13% better

1.4 vs 2.0: urban economy 17% better, rural economy 8% better, mixed economy 13% better

If you compare, say, 0-60 with urban economy and top speed with rural economy, your idea of "isn't that much different" looks very similar to your idea of "vastly more".

Basically, I think performance and economy balance out and I still maintain that the difference in second hand values seems extreme.

Id not checked the stats I was picking up on someone elses but yes thats oranges & apples.

It might be the Climate Green brigade which is pushing down prices of bigger capacity engines

Money & debt are very important especially with a 25 base rate rise going to happen this Thursday and then probably going up as far as 6% nearer the end of 2007.

Right then, whatever you say

I'm not sure how good percentages are for comparing the difference...is being a second quicker to 60 more noticeable/important than the car returning an extra 6mpg or so?

Rob.

Rob makes a valid point & especially if you spend most of your time driving in rush hour in the S.E. or other UK congested parts - overtaking isnt possible you drive with the flow of the traffic.

I only wish I had stop start technolgy in my car - &/or roof solar powered climate control. It seems such a waste of fuel to sit in traffic engines running for 45 mins to drive a handfull of miles crazy. In many ways I want the road tolls to come in as

It's an interesting point Mike raises as there must be significant;y more 1.4-16v's around so you'd think they would be ten a penny to buy compared to the more elusive 2.0l Fabia? I guess it comes down to desirability though and most buyers would probably opt for a small-engined super-mini and only go for a bigger engine in something bigger like a Focus?

Interestingly also, Skoda's used car locator seems to agree with the pricing!

Chris

I get that you are a car fan Welshy, as you quote all the right models and figures, which is something most of us on Briskoda understand too as we probably all read the same magazines. But what I don’t understand is you start threads which seem specifically designed to wind up the Skoda nuts on here. Yes, a BMW 330D is a great car and is in most respects a better car than my Octy (obviously not as spacious) but you present facts to try to rub the Skoda fans noses in. I too can quote endless figures on cars depreciation (I actually was a car saleswoman) or for example the differences between Piezo electric and PD engines, but I wouldn’t do it to put down and then relish in the fact, that Skodas are not the greatest cars on the planet. WE KNOW! We are not stupid. There are plenty of people on here who don’t have Skodas, but they join in a friendly bit of rivalry with their own vehicle versus Skodas etc.

I’m not trying to have a pop at you, it’s just I think your posts seem a little hostile to the average Briskodian car nut. Perhaps you should fill us in on your own car history, then we can all see where you are coming from. Perhaps you have owned many Mercedes and now are bitter that you can’t afford one and resent cars like Skoda as they are all you can afford, perhaps you have won the lottery and laugh at us folk that can’t afford a Spyker. Go on talk to us about your cars and don’t just try to plant demeaning posts about Skodas. Why not try to stimulate a discussion, rather than aggravate one?

I'm not sure how good percentages are for comparing the difference...is being a second quicker to 60 more noticeable/important than the car returning an extra 6mpg or so?

I am not comparing performance to economy. I am comparing performance to performance and economy to economy. I was attempting to show that the expressions "isn't that much different" applied to performance and "vastly more" applied to economy are quite unfounded when measured objectively. One can only use such expressions if one puts one's own value judgement on each.

Getting back to my original point (the relative second hand values of Fabias of different engine size), it would appear that the value judgement for economy is higher among secondhand buyers than new buyers - if the figures quoted in What Car are to be believed.

Right then, whatever you say

Well this thursday there will be a 25base point rise thats 100%.

The markets also do expect it going up to 5.75% maybe in the summer. Remember the BoE are charged with holding inflation at 2% this is 50% over target and big % moves are required.

There is going to be a lot of people with debt struggling - so dont spend that

Getting back to my original point (the relative second hand values of Fabias of different engine size), it would appear that the value judgement for economy is higher among secondhand buyers than new buyers - if the figures quoted in What Car are to be believed.

Could insurance group be a factor? I'm guessing quite a few Mum's will be thinking to add their kids to the cars and small engine = safe may be in their minds?

Chris

Chris - good suggestion.

Do you all remember back in the day when Vauxhall sold the Vectra 1.8 & 2.0ltr for exactly the same price. What sold the most? 1.8ltr... economy/adequate performance.

Alternatively you could just buy the car you want and not give a feck about how much it costs to fill it up. :P

Could insurance group be a factor? I'm guessing quite a few Mum's will be thinking to add their kids to the cars and small engine = safe may be in their minds?

Insurance may be a factor - but this would be no different whether new or secondhand. Your point supports my hypothesis that second-hand buyers are looking for ongoing economy rather than performance.

They seem to be prepared to pay over the odds initially. I would like to see how soon they could make up the

Small city cars hold their value better than larger-engined variants as a rule. Some of the factors might be:

They're generally used by women or other low mileage drivers so are seen to be "carefully driven" (just a perception, I know).

They're cheaper to insure

They're cheaper to tax (providing they fall in the lower emissions band)

They're more economical (even a little can be a factor)

They have lower servicing and consumables costs (e.g. typically they use smaller tyres)

All adds up.

In terms of desirability that's a case of each to their own, but I'd say that trends dictate more would go for the 1.4 over the 2.0 as there's only 15bhp difference between the two (torque aside - I'll get to that) and yet the tax is lower, the mpg is better, the insurance is cheaper and the engine is a newer design.

But, if

I bought the VRS because i liked it, nothing else. Not concerned about residuals.

I read somewhere yesterday about a 760 BMW, 3 years old

It's all well and good talking about 1 type of car and saying the model is losing it's value quicker, how about a general look at the entire market, I can imagine 2nd hand car prices are dropping across the board!

I can imagine now that I could get more