Afraid I'm running my BX into the ground

[Philip Chidlow]

Nicely cared for car it would seem. Wouldn't worry too much about high miles if the price is right...

Got to be worth considering? (It won't go for too much either I would've thought).

[jonathan_dyane]

Looks good. The engine was used in many 90's Leyland Daf/LDV vans too, so spares are easy to come by.

Suspect the NA engine will be pretty flat tho...

[DLM]

Parts supply might be problematic, as many have ended up being containered to Africa for parts/repair, like the 504 before them.

However it seems the same seller is offering a petrol spares car too, though that's some trailering job....

[SamWise]

Hmmmmm, 505. I wouldn't even have thought of looking for one of those, as they're like hen's teeth, even rarer than CXs. On the downside, they have neither the all round solidity of the Merc, nor the glamour of the CX, but that one does appear well cared for. I don't know a lot about the interior spec of those, but I know all the seats face forward, and if both rear rows also fold to give access to the whole boot, then that's a big point over the CX, where you have to choose 8 seats OR full rear space (centre seat row doesn't fold, though it can unbolt, which allows either full boot access, or alternatively limousine levels of legroom for passengers in the rearmost row! Will have to investigate.

As far as the 205d goes, what I need most of all is the stupid fuel consumption of the 106/AX. On 3000 miles a month, it makes a big difference. Seems like the XUD powered 205 would not save me any money at all over the BX, I'd just lose a lot of space (though the option of the ragtop appeals). For the whole equation to make sense financially, my long distance daily driver has to cost less overall than my BX.

I've never sat in a 106; I must. Are there any other similarly tiny diesels? Would a Saxo (vom!) be another consideration? If I can just get about an inch and a half more headroom than an AX (and inch, even), I'd be home and dry.

[DavidRutherford]

In terms of looking for absolute economy, you might start looking for an LPG converted vehicle. Granted you can achieve 60-65mpg in a 1.5D AX/106/Saxo, but you have to try quite hard to do so (I never really achieved more than 50 in my mother's old 106 1.4D) and your journey times will be irritatingly long. Also, although the Saxo/106 is definitely a bit larger than the old AX, it's only barely so, and they are still nasty cars to want to spend a fair proportion of your life sat in.

Compare that to a BX 14 with an LPG conversion. You appear to be a fairly economic driver, and do 90% of your miles on motorways, so 45mpg is easily there for the taking. Running on 50p/litre LPG, that's a cost equivalent of some 85-90mpg. The only diesel car I can think of that could even come close to that is a 90's Diahatsu Charade 1.0 3-cyl diesel, and they are absurdley tiny, very crap, and non-exisitent these days.

The economics do make sense.
3000 miles per month at 60mpg of Diesel, wedged into a Saxo would cost about £240.
3000 miles a month at 45mpg of LPG in comparative comfort of a BX14 on LPG would cost about £155

For that matter, you could run about in a BX 19 estate with an LPG conversion at 35mpg on LPG, and cost £200 per month. Given the option of that or the Saxo-and-a-shoehorn, I know which I'd choose! Plus, a BX with an LPG tank in the boot is still a better load-lugger than a Saxo..

[citroen7]

why not buy another bx and run them six months about? yes it will cost a bit more in tax but if you arrange it with your insuranse people it will cost no more (providing they are the same group) this was always my intention but has not quite worked out yet but it will one day!

[Philip Chidlow]

Well the 505 is already as expensive as a decent diesel (n/a or TD) BX (is it really worth it?), (and I note the other 505 - a GTi 2.2 - is listed at well over £2k so maybe old Pugs are stupid prices compared to equivalent Citroens)...

So why give up on the BX? Many of us have tried to find a car that does the job, in terms of initial outlay, practicality and running costs, and generally failed to do so...

A TZD turbo estate will, if reasonably carefully driven get 58-60 mpg. What's wrong with that? Buy two, and as mentioned, rotate them...

[DavidRutherford]

Buy two, and as mentioned, rotate them...

And have one deteriorate on the driveway while the other sees all the use.

Having two identical cars and rotating their use seems pointless. If you're going to have two vehicles, then they might as well serve different purposes. As Sam has mentioned, he needs an uber-cheap-to-run car to rack up the miles in, and a people carrier.

As far as the uber-cheap-to-run car goes, I still think you won't better a smaller-engined car running on LPG.

As far as a people carrier goes, I really rate the Ford Galaxy / VW Sharan / Seat Alhambra people carrier. The TD models will achieve an easy 45mpg, and probably more in the hands of an economic driver, they are well built and very spacious. If you go for the less attractive Seat model (identical otherwise) then they are now very cheap indeed.

[Philip Chidlow]

The fact is, that if I'm doing the mileage I'm doing, any car, never mind an old one, is going to crap out sometimes. If that means I have to leave my missus without a car, that's no good. Sensibly, if I can afford it, I'd have another one.

This is what I meant about having two. And you won't get better value for money than a BX. I didn't mean to be taken literally about rotation, for instance, 6 months on 6 months off would be stoopid, David. I was thinking more 1 week on 1 week off. Assuming you decided on 3 cars, I must reiterate.

I don't know what the insurance ramifications would be though!

[DavidRutherford]

I was thinking more 1 week on 1 week off. Assuming you decided on 3 cars, I must add.

... which then means you have to have tax, MOT and insurance on both cars you're rotating, which means they are both "on the road" at the same time, but you're only ever using one. That sounds like double the fixed costs for barely any benefit.

Surely it has to be better to have one car that is specifically a very cheap mileage car, and another that serves a different purpose. That way you have the differing uses of each vehicle, but still have the ability to use one should the other break down. Sam can then rack up the mileage in the cheap-mileage car (be it his BX, an LPG converted petrol car or whatever) safe in the knowledge that he has another vehicle available if it should break down. (or indeed he could nab the XM, and his wife could then use the "other" vehicle.)

That way, they get the cheap mileage vehicle, the XM big comfy car AND the 7-seat people carrier that would all be useful in differing ways.

[SamWise]

David has understood the concept. Its definitely not going to be 2 BXs. I doubt it's going to be an LG BX either, but it might be an LPG something. Possibly something with a cotton top. Still thinking

Incidentally, the Pug was £100 when it was originally spotted. At £500 with several days to go, it's definitely off the table. Back to Merc/CX thoughts. Possibly something like an Alhambra, though there are pluses and minuses to going back to a van style. 45 mpg though, is a lot better than I ever got from my Toyota!

[Philip Chidlow]

Are LPG cars more reliable?

[mat_fenwick]

Are LPG cars more reliable?

Not necessarily, the system itself doesn't make a vehicle any more or less reliable in my experience. I suppopse it gives you slightly more reliability in one way though - if you have a fault with one fuelling system, you still have another (unless LPG only - rare though!) to get you home...

[DavidRutherford]

Are LPG cars more reliable?

Than what? A diesel car or a petrol one?

LPG systems themselves are very reliable indeed.. remarkably more so than carburettors and/or fuel injection. The only vulnerability is the ignition system, although the plugs on an LPG car don't soot up at all compared with a petrol engine.

Sam... Toyota people carriers are indeed vans, with similar levels of comfort and economy! The Galaxy/Sharan/Alhambra drives much more like a car, and is actually a pleasant place to be. It's a world away from the earlier people carriers like MK1 Espace or similar.

If you get half-a-second at some point, have a test drive of one. About 8 years ago I drove a TDi Sharan about 1500 miles in a weekend and was very pleasantly surprised. Comfy, easy to drive, and I averaged 47mpg despite driving it fairly hard.

[Barrie James]

I'd go for the Merc W124, I had a 230 Estate for a good few years, and it was a superb car. On the button every morning and a good mile eater on the Motorway. Economy wasn't too good at 34 - 36 average mpg. The 300D Estate is a little better, getting 38 - 40. The real advantage of the 300D is it's longevity. I knew one chap in the MBOC who had done over 500,000mls in his, and it was still going strong. And no cambelt to worry about, their camshafts are chain driven. They can also be quite fun to drive as they hold the road really well, which can surprise people with sporty hatches usually considered more nimble. But perhaps that's just my driving style. Spares are still readily available, and the only problem I had was removing the bearings from the rear hubs, a so-and-so of a job. Had to resort to a local garage with the necessary press, other than that no real difficulties. Might be worth finding your local MBOC group and popping along to a pub evening, you will probably get the chance of a test drive, as they're usually a very friendly bunch.