Ricey Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 If i were to buy again i would buy from this forum, then you know it will be up together , and known to people on here who can vouch for it ........unless of course your Calzed .........one off though I guess! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATTAK Z Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 If i were to buy again i would buy from this forum, then you know it will be up together , and known to people on here who can vouch for it ........unless of course your Calzed .........one off though I guess! I don't think the seller knew about any defects on that car TBH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
threefiftyz Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Had a negative experience with a Zed in Burton-on-Trent, still bitter I guess. i saw a bad condition one in burton on trent a couple of months ago before i got mine, wonder if it was the same one - gm gt really bad bodywork, alloys fooked and clicking rear axel by any chance? the seller reckoned it was mint.... Didn't see it myself, got an AA inspection, he said it had been in a crash, all the off side had been repaired. Was it at Riverside car sales? friggin ell! - cant remember the name of the garage, what colour/year was it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricey Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 If i were to buy again i would buy from this forum, then you know it will be up together , and known to people on here who can vouch for it ........unless of course your Calzed .........one off though I guess! I don't think the seller knew about any defects on that car TBH Sorry that didn't actually read very well did it! What I meant was people vouched for it and Dene was obviously a good guy and big enthusiast but sometimes you just never know when somethings going to pop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevo1179 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Had a negative experience with a Zed in Burton-on-Trent, still bitter I guess. i saw a bad condition one in burton on trent a couple of months ago before i got mine, wonder if it was the same one - gm gt really bad bodywork, alloys fooked and clicking rear axel by any chance? the seller reckoned it was mint.... Didn't see it myself, got an AA inspection, he said it had been in a crash, all the off side had been repaired. Was it at Riverside car sales? friggin ell! - cant remember the name of the garage, what colour/year was it? 2004 53 http://pistonheads.com/sales/2316535.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetSet Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 It's definitely a buyers market right now and will be for quite some time. I'll keep hold of the Zed for the foreseeable future as owning a car for many years holds no fears for me, I owned an RS Turbo for 12 years and got a very good price for it when I reluctantly sold it in 2001. In fact I lost more in depreciation in the first year of Zed ownership than I did in 12 years of owning an RS. I expect fuel prices will stabilize in the next few months, the government should be aware that if they force people and business off the road then we could enter another recession....less vehicles doing less miles on the road means less tax revenue. Have to laugh though, this government claimed it was ending the war against motorists...in fact they were just ending the war against offenders, and declaring war on the rest of us Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigelp Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 within 2 years a 05/55 will be worth more than a 06/56 due to the tax bracket. As someone already said, do you REALLY think so ? Its only £220 extra a year for a newer model, taking everything else into account, ie insurance, fuel and servicing, will £220 make THAT much difference ? I`d rather have a newer model to be honest. When I bought my Zed, I knew what the running costs were going to be, anyone who does even a little research should be aware of the costs before buying. Fortunately, they are very reliable and apart from fuel, other running costs are very low. I`ve been keeping an eye on prices for a while now as I`m putting my Zed up for sale in a few weeks and I must admit, I am surprised at the prices some cars have been reduced to and still haven`t sold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elfman Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 As for the 05-55 being worth more that 06-56 in 2 years , really cant see that as its only £200 you are talking about and people will always want a newer car rather than an older one. i cant speak for other buyers, but i like big engines and perofrmance, so in order to still have that i now only look at cars pre 2006 for the lower tax. or the new car has to have emissions that put it in the 245 a year bracket. i like my cars but i'll only line the government coffers so much. its part of what put me off the zed ownership. and with all the other costs and people haveing generally less in their pockets than normal it will have an effect. on the zed the power difference between a HR and a pre 06 is almost impossible to notice in general performance. put them both on a track and they'll cross the line at almost the same time, think there would be no more that about 1/2 a car length in it if that. if there were 2 identical zeds but one was prefacelift, i'd get that one. and if you take into account the drivers are getting younger on here all the time, there insurance isn't cheap and some do it on a very fine budget. the extra 500 can mean alot. i looed at the mk5 golf r32 and the 55 plate and pre o6 ones are like hens teeth, very few come up that have the DSG box. Rich, out of curiosity is the sk2 much cheaper to run than the zed? I was looking at them the other week and still have a big soft spot for them, plus the miles i do they could be nicer on the wallet fuel wise? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodyboarder Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I run a s2k for a year and i have owed my zed for about 9 months now and i think the s2k was cheaper to run but not as much as you may think . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 my average mpg is 29.12 in the s2k compared to the 24.40 average of the zed. average cost per mile in the s2k is 19p per mile average cost per mile in the zed is 34p per mile that doesnt take into account that fuel was cheaper when i had the zed all the data is off my software that i log every fill up in the petrol station on. i kept all the data from the zed and i can compare the 2 very accuratlely this takes into account the same driver over a long period of time same type of drives roads etc; as its my daily driver. can give you more stats if you like but thought they were the most important to give you the best idea. my opinion the performance is almost identical (different drives of course) but you get alot more bang for you buck with the S2k (financially speaking of course) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Bloody hell Rich You need a hobby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waitey Posted January 11, 2011 Author Share Posted January 11, 2011 my average mpg is 29.12 in the s2k compared to the 24.40 average of the zed. average cost per mile in the s2k is 19p per mile average cost per mile in the zed is 34p per mile that doesnt take into account that fuel was cheaper when i had the zed all the data is off my software that i log every fill up in the petrol station on. i kept all the data from the zed and i can compare the 2 very accuratlely this takes into account the same driver over a long period of time same type of drives roads etc; as its my daily driver. can give you more stats if you like but thought they were the most important to give you the best idea. my opinion the performance is almost identical (different drives of course) but you get alot more bang for you buck with the S2k (financially speaking of course) Out of interest can you give all the data leading to those figures? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATTAK Z Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Bloody hell Rich You need a hobby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 hi Waitey i could but it would take along time; for the s2000 alone there are 32 fill ups each one giving the price per litre, litres of fuel, odometer reading and the date.for the 350z there are about 20 fill ups with the same data. the software then does all the calculations and gives out the figues. if you look at the recent mpg thread viewtopic.php?f=9&t=44698&start=15 gives my complete break down of the zed fuel usage/cost etc is in there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elfman Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Cheers rich, interest figures there. Do you fill the sk2 with V-power etc? or just the bog standard stuff? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Cheers rich, interest figures there. Do you fill the sk2 with V-power etc? or just the bog standard stuff? both filled up on the same fuel which is tesco 99 ron same petrol station etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waitey Posted January 12, 2011 Author Share Posted January 12, 2011 I just wanted to know what other figures apart from MPG went into the cost per mile? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 I just wanted to know what other figures apart from MPG went into the cost per mile? that is just fuel alone, i had other software before that allowed you to include other costs, but this software is so much better Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarnie Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 GEEK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 GEEK yep i am that sad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waitey Posted January 12, 2011 Author Share Posted January 12, 2011 Oh I just thought it was odd that a circa 20% difference in MPG caused a circa 50% difference in running cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spursmaddave Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Yeah how soes 5 mpg better in the S2K mean it is almost half the cost to run than the Zed Doesn't make sense, but if I misses something then im sorry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodyboarder Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 My s2k was better on fuel, but it does have alot smaller engine but everything else was about the same cost . I do however think that the zed i have ( 313 ) is a bit qucker than my s2k over say 60 mph. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 i'm wondering if its spreading the cost of the fill up over different time period. being that the s2k only has a 50L tank compared to the Zeds 80L also the difference in fuel costs. possibly when i copied the data across from the old software i might have miss put in some data (but i don't think i did) also i did some track days in the Zed when the MPG was as low as 9mpg on the day and i haven't done any yet in the s2k. i'll go back and check it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 sorry i think the zed is meant to be 33p per mile not 34p so a difference of 14p per mile also did about 1000 miles in france cruising at 32mpg and petrol costing on average about 10p a litre less might have made a difference as well. average fuel price zed = 1.18 s2k = 1.22 distance between fillups zed = 264 s2k = 256 best fuel economy zed = 31.08 s2k = 35.21 worst fuel economy zed = 20.29 s2k = 23.30 i think the info is accurate. i know i gave yo uthe averages earlier, but the s2k on a long drive would get more than the zed if you look at the distance between fillups there is only about 10 miles difference, but when i filled the zed up it was nearly 80 quid but filling the s2k is about 60 so 20 quid difference per fill up but on average only an extra 10 miles out of the tank. thats like 2 quid a mile for those extra 10 miles in the zed. maybe if i had more data on the zed over a longer period it might balance out a bit more. even if the software is calculating wrong it will be the same difference on both cars at it will use the same formula. at the end of the day i can see how much i've saved with the S2k and i;ve certainly noticed it in my pocket. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.