Home > General > What would you get? |
|
|
XXXAngelXXX Member Since: 25 Mar 2007 Location: Stuttgart Posts: 4994 |
45k m. All my spelling errorz are belong to me!
|
||
11th Jul 2016 11:13am |
|
dingg1 Member Since: 29 Jun 2013 Location: PORTUGAL Posts: 1340 |
try them both and see what suits you |
||
11th Jul 2016 11:16am |
|
johnboyairey Member Since: 11 Jan 2013 Location: surrey Posts: 2032 |
The lower mileage one, is somewhere near to half as much to run, fuel wise. On LPG, against an SC
|
||
11th Jul 2016 2:10pm |
|
northernmonkeyjones Member Since: 24 Mar 2012 Location: derby Posts: 8499 |
hunt out a Jag 4.4 if you can.
|
||
11th Jul 2016 3:31pm |
|
zarnd Member Since: 22 May 2014 Location: Kent Posts: 459 |
Would buy oin condition over age and mileage. Having a SC myself, would recommend one. Mine has done 92k and in daily use so wouldn;t be put off by one with higher mileage.
|
||
12th Jul 2016 9:37am |
|
RR2008HSE Member Since: 06 Jan 2013 Location: British Columbia Posts: 2932 |
Buying on condition is VERY good advice.
|
||
12th Jul 2016 10:33pm |
|
steeplejack Member Since: 11 Apr 2016 Location: Gloucestershire Posts: 19 |
Personally I wouldn't buy either, the 2004 is a bit old for the low miles and I won't buy anything that's been converted to LPG.
|
||
17th Jul 2016 8:23pm |
|
johnboyairey Member Since: 11 Jan 2013 Location: surrey Posts: 2032 |
quote,
|
||
17th Jul 2016 10:06pm |
|
Alistair Member Since: 11 Feb 2011 Location: Peterborough / Bordeaux / Andorra Posts: 7921 |
Seems slightly odd that a car that's done 45k in 12 years has LPG fitted at all - hardly seems worth the return on investment.....
|
||
18th Jul 2016 6:09am |
|
RRR207 Member Since: 27 May 2016 Location: Basel Posts: 49 |
Thanks for all the info, in the end I didn't buy either car!
|
||
20th Jul 2016 9:13pm |
|
|
All times are GMT |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis