HFS's Cars
- Thread starter homeforsummer
- 639 comments
- 53,695 views
- Status
- 27,218
- United Kingdom
Tis nice, always liked 406s in both coupe and saloon forms, but if I wanted something along those lines I'd get an Alfa GTV. I'd forgotten how pretty the Coupe was. Makes you wonder what Peugeot are thinking these days...
- 8,642
- London
- GTP_Stotty
I can vouch for the safety of the 406 as I had a head on in one (my wifes company car) 7 years ago... no seatbelt, car completely totalled, got away with 2 days in hospital and a small scar on my hairline. Very comfy, but rubbish to drive.
Last edited:
- 8,642
- London
- GTP_Stotty
Sorry if I hurt her feelings 
Let me re-phrase and qualify my comments... 'rubbish to drive quickly'... whilst I found the 406 to be a superbly comfy long distance car, I also felt it lacked a certain something when it came to 'sportiness'. Specifically, light steering with very little feel for the level of front end grip, overly soft suspension and flat seats that saw me sliding all over the place during 'enthusiastic' cornering.
Nice styling (heard it refered to as the 'poor man's 456'), good quality interior, plenty of equipment... but only lasted 4 months due to aformentioned crash. Replaced by an Audi TT (225) Roadster.
Let me re-phrase and qualify my comments... 'rubbish to drive quickly'... whilst I found the 406 to be a superbly comfy long distance car, I also felt it lacked a certain something when it came to 'sportiness'. Specifically, light steering with very little feel for the level of front end grip, overly soft suspension and flat seats that saw me sliding all over the place during 'enthusiastic' cornering.
Nice styling (heard it refered to as the 'poor man's 456'), good quality interior, plenty of equipment... but only lasted 4 months due to aformentioned crash. Replaced by an Audi TT (225) Roadster.
- 36,679
- Scotland
- GTP_daan
You've hit the nail on the head there. It does eat up long distances with ease, but is too heavy and soft for the twisty bits.Sorry if I hurt her feelings
Let me re-phrase and qualify my comments... 'rubbish to drive quickly'... whilst I found the 406 to be a superbly comfy long distance car, I also felt it lacked a certain something when it came to 'sportiness'. Specifically, light steering with very little feel for the level of front end grip, overly soft suspension and flat seats that saw me sliding all over the place during 'enthusiastic' cornering.
Nice styling (heard it refered to as the 'poor man's 456'), good quality interior, plenty of equipment... but only lasted 4 months due to aformentioned crash. Replaced by an Audi TT (225) Roadster.
- 27,218
- United Kingdom
Small update.
Haven't driven anything recently, but had a closer look at a few cars, both of which are new-ish to the shortlist.
The first car, everyone should recognise. The second, probably only our UK members will - it's a Rover 45 saloon, a turbodiesel to be exact. Neither of the above cars I've driven yet (intending to after the Elf). The MR2 because I've always liked them and now they're within my financial means, and the Rover because the later Rovers were all a) fairly reliable, if customer reports are anything to go by, b) I like the look of them, elegant and well-proportioned - ideally, I'd have one in metallic British Racing Green (I know, I know, I need help) and c) because this particular model was a diesel and a turbodiesel still appeals because the characteristics of them are ones that I find favourable in a road car, namely wodges of useful torque, and the unit was co-developed with BMW so it's a good engine. I've not driven a diesel yet in my search but I feel I should.
I spent a couple of hours driving around today and admittedly, I was in a bad mood anyway for reasons I'm not going into here, but so many aspects of the journey were stressing me out and I do feel that a car that reduces that stress as much as possible day-to-day has a lot of appeal.
As for the MR2, the one I looked at in the pic above was a proper chav special - the dodgiest respray ever, an awful aftermarket steering wheel and spray-painted dash bits, and some pitted and scraped alloys, but having a look around the car and a sit inside definitely showed me that it's something I can consider - the boot space is more than reasonable, the seats seem comfortable yet supportive, all the controls are well-placed, and above all they're still very good-looking cars.
As mentioned, I intend to get a drive in both after UKGTP11 but these are the two main things I've looked at since I drove the FTO a while back. I'll soon be booking in the Fiesta to have the sump done and then it's going up for sale.
Haven't driven anything recently, but had a closer look at a few cars, both of which are new-ish to the shortlist.
The first car, everyone should recognise. The second, probably only our UK members will - it's a Rover 45 saloon, a turbodiesel to be exact. Neither of the above cars I've driven yet (intending to after the Elf). The MR2 because I've always liked them and now they're within my financial means, and the Rover because the later Rovers were all a) fairly reliable, if customer reports are anything to go by, b) I like the look of them, elegant and well-proportioned - ideally, I'd have one in metallic British Racing Green (I know, I know, I need help) and c) because this particular model was a diesel and a turbodiesel still appeals because the characteristics of them are ones that I find favourable in a road car, namely wodges of useful torque, and the unit was co-developed with BMW so it's a good engine. I've not driven a diesel yet in my search but I feel I should.
I spent a couple of hours driving around today and admittedly, I was in a bad mood anyway for reasons I'm not going into here, but so many aspects of the journey were stressing me out and I do feel that a car that reduces that stress as much as possible day-to-day has a lot of appeal.
As for the MR2, the one I looked at in the pic above was a proper chav special - the dodgiest respray ever, an awful aftermarket steering wheel and spray-painted dash bits, and some pitted and scraped alloys, but having a look around the car and a sit inside definitely showed me that it's something I can consider - the boot space is more than reasonable, the seats seem comfortable yet supportive, all the controls are well-placed, and above all they're still very good-looking cars.
As mentioned, I intend to get a drive in both after UKGTP11 but these are the two main things I've looked at since I drove the FTO a while back. I'll soon be booking in the Fiesta to have the sump done and then it's going up for sale.
- 21,286
- GR-MI-USA
- YSSMAN
- YSSMAN
I have to admit that I don't know much about the MR2, at least in that generation. I know that they hold their value pretty well here in the US, particularly the turbo models, so I'd assume that shopping around would be a reasonable idea.
As for the MG/Rover, it sounds good to me. I love big, comfortable cars, and while that doesn't fit that description to a T, I can always appreciate a luxury (?) compact (???).
As for the MG/Rover, it sounds good to me. I love big, comfortable cars, and while that doesn't fit that description to a T, I can always appreciate a luxury (?) compact (???).
- 27,218
- United Kingdom
The MR2 isn't the best example of the breed I've seen so it's why I didn't rush to test-drive it. The paint is like orange peel and the interior... well, the interior speaks for itself...
But I might have a drive anyway as I've not driven one yet and it did seem like a nice car. Well, there was a nice car underneath leading me to believe that a non-chavved version is a possibility. As for the Rover, it's sort of a typical Rover really. Nothing special on the inside but fairly inoffensive and reasonably screwed together, comfy seats, loads of space, and I personally quite like the looks. It'd have to be a saloon though and ideally dark metallic green, like this one (though this pic is of a hatchback):
As for size, the R45 is actually quite big for it's class. It was in roughly the same class as the Ford Focus/VW Bora, but size-wise it's bigger than either, and also bigger than the Audi A4 and Alfa 156 of the time. Well, in terms of length anyway. All Rovers had that issue at the time - they didn't seem to fit easily into any particular segment. Oh, and interior on the one I saw looks like this:
But I might have a drive anyway as I've not driven one yet and it did seem like a nice car. Well, there was a nice car underneath leading me to believe that a non-chavved version is a possibility. As for the Rover, it's sort of a typical Rover really. Nothing special on the inside but fairly inoffensive and reasonably screwed together, comfy seats, loads of space, and I personally quite like the looks. It'd have to be a saloon though and ideally dark metallic green, like this one (though this pic is of a hatchback):
As for size, the R45 is actually quite big for it's class. It was in roughly the same class as the Ford Focus/VW Bora, but size-wise it's bigger than either, and also bigger than the Audi A4 and Alfa 156 of the time. Well, in terms of length anyway. All Rovers had that issue at the time - they didn't seem to fit easily into any particular segment. Oh, and interior on the one I saw looks like this:
- 10,620
- gtp_jimprower
So they were US Lower-Midsize class, then.
Looks alright inside, too. For all the lauding they got, it seems no worse than what GM was putting out at the time.
Looks alright inside, too. For all the lauding they got, it seems no worse than what GM was putting out at the time.
- 10,620
- gtp_jimprower
Well, how hard would it be to swap in the ford 4.6? I mean, the factory did it...but I don't know how involved the conversion was.
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
- 6,584
- Kent, UK
- GTP_Jondot
The first car, everyone should recognise. The second, probably only our UK members will - it's a Rover 45 saloon, a turbodiesel to be exact. Neither of the above cars I've driven yet (intending to after the Elf). The MR2 because I've always liked them and now they're within my financial means, and the Rover because the later Rovers were all a) fairly reliable, if customer reports are anything to go by, b) I like the look of them, elegant and well-proportioned - ideally, I'd have one in metallic British Racing Green (I know, I know, I need help) and c) because this particular model was a diesel and a turbodiesel still appeals because the characteristics of them are ones that I find favourable in a road car, namely wodges of useful torque, and the unit was co-developed with BMW so it's a good engine. I've not driven a diesel yet in my search but I feel I should.
We had the same engine in our Freelander, and it wasn't half bad. I mean it drank a fair bit, but that's because it was in a car shaped like a 2 ton brick. Far more reliable than the K-series petrol; and preferable to it in my opinion.
(Also, good on you - I'd love a Rover
)
- 2,235
- Norway
Best thing about cars with interiors like that MR2 is that they're often way cheaper than other similar cars and an evening with a spray can or a painter buddy can sort it out. I'm sceptical of buying modded cars though, always prefer fresh OG cars myself. Call it prejudice..
I kinda like fur..
Fur or slammed? Or both. Dope
Camryfan, It could be a lot worse, believe me. It could have pink and green fur all over the place. It would probably make Eiriksmil drool then..j/k..
I kinda like fur..
It'd need to be slammed though.
Actually that would be baller as hell.
Fur or slammed? Or both. Dope
- 10,620
- gtp_jimprower
- 27,218
- United Kingdom
Apologies for not replying to anyone, I had a rough couple of days before the weekend and I've been Elfing all weekend so not had time.
They put the Ford engine in the 75/MG ZT, not the 45/MG ZS. I doubt it'd fit. The 45 is based on the Honda Domani platform. Which actually means the 1.8 170bhp VTEC would fit in there, but then that'd defeat the purpose of getting a lazy car.
Anyway, the Rover isn't a particularly likely purchase. I just fancy driving one. Most likely shortlist is still either a 3-series compact, an MX-5 or a Civic, but an MX-3 V6 is still very tempting if I can find one of the bloody things nearby, and an MR2 is still an outside chance.
They put the Ford engine in the 75/MG ZT, not the 45/MG ZS. I doubt it'd fit. The 45 is based on the Honda Domani platform. Which actually means the 1.8 170bhp VTEC would fit in there, but then that'd defeat the purpose of getting a lazy car.
Anyway, the Rover isn't a particularly likely purchase. I just fancy driving one. Most likely shortlist is still either a 3-series compact, an MX-5 or a Civic, but an MX-3 V6 is still very tempting if I can find one of the bloody things nearby, and an MR2 is still an outside chance.
- 2,235
- Norway
I don't dig them all shaved, I don't dig fur. Just some attention to detail and some TLC..
We're talking dashboards, by the way
- 27,218
- United Kingdom
Okay, something some of you may be able to help me with. I've still been looking for cars (in half an hour or so I'm popping out to have a look at a couple more FTOs) and yesterday I came across this Toyota Celica:
Yes, I know it's an auto. This doesn't concern me. What I'd like to know from people who might know a bit more about Toyotas or Celicas than I do, is what model it is. I can give you a bit of information: It has a 3S-GE engine, had what looked like factory chassis bracing (two braces connecting each strut to the scuttle), a barely-readable decal on the rear screen reading "Super Strut Suspension", a full factory aero kit and some nasty aftermarket alloys.
Now apart from the alloys, putting two and two together with everything else the car looks suspiciously like the JDM SS-III, i.e. the one with around 200bhp. What do you reckon? If it isn't, it's still a GT model with just under 180bhp with that engine.
It's up for sale at £1699, which is a little too far off the maximum end of my budget unfortunately, but still pretty good value. Was in great condition. Haven't driven it yet but might do if I get a bit of free time in the next few days.
Amusingly, the dealer's advert lists it as an "ST" model, which in the UK is the base model, 1.8 with about 115bhp, no bodykit, no alloys, no rear wing etc etc. Interestingly, it also comes up on the insurance database as that model too, so someone has been telling porkies when they imported it...
Just to check, I tried insurance prices based on the model. If it's an SS-III it would set me back £603 for a year's insurance. If it's the basic ST, it'd be just £381. And that's with it still being declared as an import. If they were even naughtier and said it was UK-spec it'd be £369.
Yes, I know it's an auto. This doesn't concern me. What I'd like to know from people who might know a bit more about Toyotas or Celicas than I do, is what model it is. I can give you a bit of information: It has a 3S-GE engine, had what looked like factory chassis bracing (two braces connecting each strut to the scuttle), a barely-readable decal on the rear screen reading "Super Strut Suspension", a full factory aero kit and some nasty aftermarket alloys.
Now apart from the alloys, putting two and two together with everything else the car looks suspiciously like the JDM SS-III, i.e. the one with around 200bhp. What do you reckon? If it isn't, it's still a GT model with just under 180bhp with that engine.
It's up for sale at £1699, which is a little too far off the maximum end of my budget unfortunately, but still pretty good value. Was in great condition. Haven't driven it yet but might do if I get a bit of free time in the next few days.
Amusingly, the dealer's advert lists it as an "ST" model, which in the UK is the base model, 1.8 with about 115bhp, no bodykit, no alloys, no rear wing etc etc. Interestingly, it also comes up on the insurance database as that model too, so someone has been telling porkies when they imported it...
Just to check, I tried insurance prices based on the model. If it's an SS-III it would set me back £603 for a year's insurance. If it's the basic ST, it'd be just £381. And that's with it still being declared as an import. If they were even naughtier and said it was UK-spec it'd be £369.
Last edited:
- 23,979
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
The DVLA thinks it's a 1998cc which would make it a GT rather than the 1.8 ST?
- 21,286
- GR-MI-USA
- YSSMAN
- YSSMAN
Frankly, I have no idea. That generation of Celica had a far greater number of variants outside of the United States in that generation, all of ours were powered by the 2.2L 5S-FE (read: Camry powah!) instead of the 1.8L and 2.0L options. What you have there is a car with the GT body kit, like mine, and it appears as though the interior is pretty much the same as well. Although, there are some different buttons, knobs and switches compared to what we have. That, and your steering wheel looks smaller too.
My GT lacks the strut tower brace that you mention, but I believe the sticker that says "Super Strut Suspension" would imply that it was an SS-III model. But, I guess you'd have to look under the hood to know for sure what was going on, because I really don't. Blame Toyota North America, we didn't get any of the good stuff.
Either way, the car is a lot of fun to drive, and thus far I've really enjoyed my purchase despite a few hiccups I've had along the way. Really, my only continued complaint has been the headroom, which despite my constant seat adjustment(s), is never quite right. The ride is stiff, but forgiving - but it is an otherwise near-perfect GT car travelling around. Having the short gearing and the big, torquey 5S-FE is good for no-shift passing, but it would be great to have some extra power. We soldiered on with only 130 BHP here in the States, my guess is that anything extra would have otherwise been thrilling.
My GT lacks the strut tower brace that you mention, but I believe the sticker that says "Super Strut Suspension" would imply that it was an SS-III model. But, I guess you'd have to look under the hood to know for sure what was going on, because I really don't. Blame Toyota North America, we didn't get any of the good stuff.
Either way, the car is a lot of fun to drive, and thus far I've really enjoyed my purchase despite a few hiccups I've had along the way. Really, my only continued complaint has been the headroom, which despite my constant seat adjustment(s), is never quite right. The ride is stiff, but forgiving - but it is an otherwise near-perfect GT car travelling around. Having the short gearing and the big, torquey 5S-FE is good for no-shift passing, but it would be great to have some extra power. We soldiered on with only 130 BHP here in the States, my guess is that anything extra would have otherwise been thrilling.
- 23,800
- Philippines
Not overly enamored of the automatic, but the engine is a decent one, 3SGE is about 140-160 hp, if I remember.
Personally... I didn't really love the last Celica of that generation I drove, but it was a standard one, without the suspension upgrades, and probably on tires that were ten years past their expiration date... and I am notoriously picky about cars I do like...
Still... looks good... should drive well... but it's a shame to get a junior sportscar with nothing but a 4-speed slushbox. I'd vote for one with a 5-speed, though.
Personally... I didn't really love the last Celica of that generation I drove, but it was a standard one, without the suspension upgrades, and probably on tires that were ten years past their expiration date... and I am notoriously picky about cars I do like...
Still... looks good... should drive well... but it's a shame to get a junior sportscar with nothing but a 4-speed slushbox. I'd vote for one with a 5-speed, though.
- Status
Similar threads
