MBrown
|
| posted on 19/9/14 at 09:16 AM |
|
|
I'd recommend the Saab route, don't rule it put because of the name! I have a 2.0 aero Saab 9-3, it has a turbo, is great fun, loads of
power, reasonably good mpg, unbelievable quality for such an amazing price, I got a 2007 with full cream leather etc etc and 65k for only £4000, has
been very reliable and it still puts a smile on my face whenever I drive it. I'd seriously recommend test driving one as it has to be seen to
believe it! It is up to the same standard as any other brand but so much cheaper! There is also a more powerful v6 model but mine does 0-60 in 7
seconds (although not when pulling a trailer) 
|
|
|
|
|
Charlie_Zetec
|
| posted on 19/9/14 at 11:04 AM |
|
|
Another vote for Land Rovers. I used to tow plenty with my 2.5DSE (2.5l BMW diesel-engine) P38 Range Rover, although have towed using the V8 model as
well. Obviously the derv was better on fuel, but felt it didn't quote have the same grunt as the petrol. I now use a Defender, but have you
considered a Discovery? Cheap as chips, and the usual thing that gets them is rot! And I'm pretty sure most people on here have access to or
can weld to sort it out....
Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity!
|
|
|
daniel mason
|
| posted on 19/9/14 at 11:52 AM |
|
|
Strangely enough I've been looking at a saab 9-3 estate with the 2.0t engine.
The only thing that put me of was that it shared many vectra parts including engine which I was a bit wary of. But from reading forums it seems they
are pretty reliable
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 19/9/14 at 01:57 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by raplma
snip
I have towed with two P38 Range Rovers, one had the gas conversion, I am not a fan of towing weight on gas, even with the multipoint sequential system
we blew an engine with the gas jets pretty much punching holes into the block, this could well have been an installation error, who knows, those
engines were renown for being poor anyway, there is also less power on gas.
snip
? ??
[I] “ What use our work, Bennet, if we cannot care for those we love? .”
― From BBC TV/Amazon's Ripper Street.
[/I]
|
|
|
simonrh
|
| posted on 19/9/14 at 03:04 PM |
|
|
At the opposites of extreme, I often tow industrial trailers with a Mondeo 1.6 diesel and it is fine. Empty trailer is 1.1 tonne.
I recently collected a 2.75t boat from Suffolk to take to Rutland and decided to use something bigger. Borrowed an Overfinch range rover supercharged
with 500 and something horsepower. Didin't even notice the trailer's brakes were jammed on for the first few miles!
[Edited on 19/9/14 by simonrh]
|
|
|
slingshot2000
|
| posted on 19/9/14 at 06:52 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by simonrh
At the opposites of extreme, I often tow industrial trailers with a Mondeo 1.6 diesel and it is fine. Empty trailer is 1.1 tonne.
I recently collected a 2.75t boat from Suffolk to take to Rutland and decided to use something bigger. Borrowed an Overfinch range rover supercharged
with 500 and something horsepower. Didin't even notice the trailer's brakes were jammed on for the first few miles!
[Edited on 19/9/14 by simonrh]
You mean to say that you didn't notice the cloud of tyre smoke behind you, or the smell of burnt rubber? Must have put an almighty flat-spot on
the tyres. Mind you, not many drivers of Overfinches do use the mirrors !
|
|
|
simonrh
|
| posted on 19/9/14 at 07:20 PM |
|
|
Ok, I will rephrase, the brakes were dragging so heavily so that once we reached the first road wider than the boat we stopped and found smoke pouring
from the drums.
The beauty with that much power is that getting going again is a breeze
|
|
|
twybrow
|
| posted on 19/9/14 at 09:44 PM |
|
|
I used to tow with a Seat Leon Cupra 1.8t that was converted to run on lpg. Plenty of grunt and cheaper than running a diesel!
|
|
|
mookaloid
|
| posted on 20/9/14 at 07:40 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by daniel mason
Strangely enough I've been looking at a saab 9-3 estate with the 2.0t engine.
The only thing that put me of was that it shared many vectra parts including engine which I was a bit wary of. But from reading forums it seems they
are pretty reliable
The 9-5 is a much better car than the 9-3. I got my 2.3T Aero estate (250BHP and 350NM) 2003 with 70K miles for £1500. You are quite correct about the
Vectra link.
Drive them both and then you will understand. I have both and the only reason I have the 9-3 is that Mrs Mooky likes it because it is a convertible.
It's crap to drive.
You can get cars of this age remapped to 275BHP and 400NM - good for towing very easily. Also automatic is the way forward for towing - no clutch to
burn out.
"That thing you're thinking - it wont be that."
|
|
|
Sam_68
|
| posted on 20/9/14 at 07:52 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by daniel mason
Strangely enough I've been looking at a saab 9-3 estate with the 2.0t engine.
The only thing that put me of was that it shared many vectra parts including engine which I was a bit wary of. But from reading forums it seems they
are pretty reliable
If you're looking at Saabs, why not go for the 9-5 estate with the 2.2 litre diesel?
I know your original post said that you were wary of modern diesels but the 2.2 isn't modern (no DPF or fancy gubbins like that) and has
a reputation for being bullet-proof.
I have a 9-5 2.2 diesel estate as my fishing car and back-up commuter, whilst my boss, coincidentally, runs a petrol Aero estate. The diesel is
undeniably very agricultural (and obviously nowhere near as quick) in comparison to the nice, smooth petrol engine, but I consistently average 52mpg
whereas he gets exactly the 31mpg quoted by rdodger. Both are automatics, incidentally, so you should be able to get a little better in both cases
with a manual, though both of us drive relatively gently these days.
Mine cost £2K, in mint condition at 72K miles.
|
|
|
