It is a Rover 25 with a bodykit and a big heavy diesel engine. If you really want one get a petrol Rover 25 and then upgrade to the ZR the suspension yourself. What do you want from this car? Do you just want it too be fast or have you completely missed the point that being fast and fun and involving to drive are completely different things, and in front wheel drive cars the trend tends to be that more power produces a worse drivers car in chassis that aren't properly sorted (ie. Rovers and VWs).
I think we may be wasting our time here. It's turning into a harjun-esque thread of "try this, don't try that" "lalalala"
You can't get sporty and super economical, it just doesn't happen. And the more sporty a car you look at, the more horses the engine puts out, the higher your insurance quote is going to be. I went older to find a car that was economical enough for my needs while still looking pretty good and being fairly cheap to tax and insure. It's plenty fast enough. Right now I just like being able to go places at my own pace, in my own time. I don't feel the need to tell everyone how (un)powerful it is, so who knows and cares as long as it goes from A to B?
But I fear that anyone who isn't saying "yes get the most powerfulest car you can find in the world" is going to be ignored.
I like those. My dad had one years ago, but now we have grown out of them BY FAR. It is a really neat car, though and recently we bought one for autograss racing, it was 50quid with a damaged rear, but on it's journey home we topped 100mph downhill, so it's very fast, jakg
Seriously though, if i were Jakg, i would buy the cheapest car, cheapest to insure and a fairly good MPG. I wouldn't care about looks, speed, or anything of the like. If it's money you're worried about go for something like what i described.
I say safety ratings are BS, BS peddled by eurobox manufacturers that appeal to joan and john 2.4 kids, who drive around completely oblivous to anyone else around them because they are safe in their 5 * NCAP piece of shit.
I say every car should have a sharp 8 inch spike protruding from the centre of the steering colomn, and no seatbelts, bet ya people would drive bloody safe and aware then.
The problem with any cars that are vaguely 'sporty' is that the insurance on them is astronomical, never mind the crappy mileage they get.
I finally saw the light and got the most unsporty car I've ever had, a Fiat Panda Multijet (Diesel). Probably the cheapest car I've ever owned, £4k for the car, £35 a year on tax, and Group 2 on insurance (which for me means £140), plus 60+ MPG - currently 62.3 on the trip computer.
Sod performance, save yourself a packet and get a Fiesta TDCi or something. Must be loads around for ~£2k.
Oh and my Panda still does 60 in 13.00 seconds. (70 BHP/935KG)
Except Fiesta's are the most boring to drive car in the world - I had to learn in one and it just felt like i was pulling levers and the car was doing it's own thing - I felt no "connection" to the road at all (and not in a sporty way).
enough of the generalising, 106's are amazing handling and the 1.6 16v is fairly rapid, 8.5 ish to 60, makes it a warm hatch, at the very least. pity i cant actually drive them.
and why are people recommending diesels? fair enough they do more MPG, but its at least 12p a litre more expensive than petrol, so you have do to well over 10k PA to get a saving, and i doubt jakg does. and anyway, driving about in a tractor which hits the limiter at 4k, id rather have a less economical petrol.
jakg, dont bother running any kinda super unleaded, totally pointless unless the manafacturer specifically states that you should run it, otherwise your paying more for absolutely nothing.