2016 Renault Captur 0.9 tce

Last year, my lady wife and I went to Sheffield and the Peak District, and hired a car from Enterprise, who I have always found to be universally excellent. Having been upgraded from a Clio sized car to a small crossover in the shape of a Renault Captur (pictured), we set off in search of adventure in the rolling hills of Derbyshire.

We had not gone very far, however, when I discovered a problem with the 900cc turbo petrol engine in this particular car. It seemed permanently underpowered. I have driven little three cylinder turbocharged petrols like this before, and was singularly unimpressed with the acceleration. I thought nothing of the little green light marked 'Eco' on the dashboard, and carried on with the reduced power, slightly irritated that at every hill (and there are plenty of them in the Peak District), then car would do a very good impression of a milk float. There were other problems too.

The credit card shaped key was deeply annoying for some reason, there were no parking sensors or reversing camera, despite satellite navigation, a touch screen, Bluetooth and a whole 'Eco' display to tell me how good (or bad) my driving was. This is fine in some cars, but the Captur does not have the best rear visibility, and is quite wide. The build quality was also not particularly good, which is perfectly fine on a £7,500 Dacia Logan MCV, but not so good on a Captur which costs double that amount.

Overnight, I looked up some reviews online, and found out that I could de-activate the 'Eco' mode. The performance then returned, and the little three-cylinder turbo was far more spritely. If I owned one, I would definitely not use the 'Eco' mode for anything other than town driving. With these new performance capabilities, I searched for the cruise control activation switch, only to find it was buried at the bottom of the centre console, whereas the other controls for it were on the steering wheel. Very strange... Looking more into the 'Eco' mode display on the touch screen also revealed that the car was getting just 38 mpg on average, despite Renault's claims of 55-60 mpg.

As this was a hire car, I realise that it may have been driven a little more swiftly than usual, but as most people probably had not worked out the niceties of the 'Eco' mode, thus it had been on all the time, I imagine it was not as economical as one may have thought. Mind you, I did get a £15 rebate from Enterprise from having overfilled it at the end to put towards my next hire, so that was good.

In summary, particularly as my uncle and aunt own a Captur, I would not say it was a bad car at all. However, having recently driven some of the competition such as the Suzuki Vitara and particularly the wonderful Ssangyong Tivoli, it does come across as a little average.

2001 Vauxhall Corsa 1.0 Expression

The final post on this series about driving school cars is about another Vauxhall Corsa. This 2001 Corsa 1.0 Expression is identical to the one I learned to drive in towards the end of my learning career, except it has a different numberplate...

The 1.0 litre three cylinder Family 0 engine produces just over 60 bhp, but as the Corsa 'C' weighs so little, the car never seemed underpowered. The other amazing thing at the time was the electric power assisted steering, a real novelty on cars at the time. It meant that it lacked a bit of road feel, but it was really easy to park, and could be twirled with one little finger from lock to lock (although one would never do such things on a test).

The other revelation was the difference in interior quality between this and the older Corsa. These days, a Corsa 'C' interior seems quite tacky, but in 2001, it seemed high quality and well assembled. The ride and handling were probably OK (it was a while ago now), but the gearbox was typically vague with quite a long throw in the finest Vauxhall tradition.

I passed my test in the Saxo in September 2001, and have driven a fair few cars since...

1994 Vauxhall Corsa 1.4 GLS

Continuing with the driving school cars theme, this is a 1994 Vauxhall Corsa 1.4 GLS (ignore the SI badge on the back, as this refers to the type of engine, not the trim level). A very similar burgundy-coloured one was the other car I learned to drive in back in 2000-2001. My sister's driving instructor had two cars during the time we learned to drive with him, this one and a brand new Corsa later on (more of that in a future instalment).

In contrast to the Saxo that I also drove, the Corsa very substantial, and of a much higher quality. The dashboard was split, with the display set high up far above a unique fit radio (something very new at the time), and then the chunky heating and ventilation controls underneath. The power steering made light work of parking, and all round visibility was excellent.

Despite no standard driver's airbag (this was not the case until a facelift in 1996), the car was definitely safer than the Saxo. It was also faster, thanks to an amazing 82 bhp (as opposed to the 60 bhp from a 1.1 Saxo) from the 1.4 SI engine. (There was also a 60 bhp so called 'Hi-Torq' variant, but this was the more powerful one.) Amazingly, for such a relatively high-powered car, I don't recall it being fitted with a rev counter. The gearing was such that it accelerated fast, but reached 60 mph a bit too quickly, as it seemed to be far too noisy when cruising on the motorway at 70 mph in fifth gear (a trait shared with my housemate's 1.2 SXI Corsa from 2006).

The gearbox was, in truth, not very good (like many Vauxhall gearboxes of the era), but it seemed much better than the Saxo, and it was at least difficult to put it in the wrong gear. The handling probably was not as sharp as the Citroen, but it was hard to tell when one car lacked power steering, and one was so equipped. After around six years of use to teach people to drive, it was sold and another Corsa took its place. This was somewhat differently powered...

1996 Citroen Saxo 1.1 SX

Today sees a new series, looking at driving school cars. We start with the one I (mostly) learned to drive in myself, a 1996 Citroen Saxo 1.1 SX. This largely forgotten French supermini was hugely popular in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Let us look at why this may have been.

Launched to replace the venerable Citroen AX, and indeed sharing many components with it and the Peugeot 106 (Peugeot and Citroen have been the same company since 1974), the Saxo came out in 1996, which means the one I learned to drive in was a very early car, like the one pictured. It was a slightly different colour from this (more like a sandy gold shade), but otherwise identical. The engines were largely carried over from the AX and 106 too, which in this case meant a 1.1 litre TU series motor developing around 60 bhp. This may not sound like much, and by modern standards it is not, but with a kerb weight of around 850 kg, the performance was perfectly acceptable.

Acceptable performance it may have had, but refined it was not. Before being implemented in the 106, the Saxo's twin (many parts are identical), the TU engine series was also used in the Peugeot 205 from 1988, and actually was derived from an even earlier type of unit, the X-series, originally introduced in 1972. Thus, the Saxo always seemed a bit unrefined, particularly at speed. I was thankful that the driving school actually had not chosen the 954cc unit from the basic Saxo. The loss of an extra 150cc may not sound like a big difference, but having spoken to people who drove the 1 litre cars, they were pretty much unbearable.

Another bad area was interior quality. The dashboard was ugly and crude, with a haphazard and dated arrangement of switchgear, some of which was lifted straight from the later years of the Citroen AX, and looks REALLY dated now. The driving position was also terrible, with no seat height or steering wheel adjustment. The ultimate evidence of cost cutting, however, was electric window switches by the handbrake so that they did not need to be moved for left or right hand drive cars. At least there was a standard driver's airbag on all models, but with such a low kerb weight, the car never felt that substantial in comparison with a Corsa or Polo.

Light weight, however, did have some advantages. The Saxo (which always sounds like an uncomfortable combination of Paxo stuffing and Saxa salt in this country) was generally a basic car, and lower specification models, such as the 1.1 SX, did not even have power steering. I thus passed my test in a car without this mostly essential feature, and to this day am pleased that this was the case. The lack of any sort of hydraulic or mechanical assistance meant very good steering feel, which also complemented the Saxo's nimble chassis, a trait shared with the Peugeot 106. The handling was very good indeed, although the car did lean a lot in the bends.

The sportier Saxo VTR and VTS models were massively popular 15-20 years ago, as they were relatively powerful (between 90 and 120 bhp from a 1.6 litre engine), but had a low kerb weight. Citroen also did free insurance deals for young drivers, and Saxos are generally unsophisticated vehicles (even by late 1990s standards), so modifications were easy. It is therefore very, very hard to find a good condition unmodified Saxo these days, particularly one of the performance variants. That is if you genuinely want one...

Another annoying trait in the early models was a keypad immobiliser. I well remember having to punch in the code every time before starting the engine, which got very, very irritating, very, very quickly. Once stalled, there was a bit of grace to get the engine restarted before having to put the code in, but not much. I don't know how reliable the system was either.

The car was not the last word in quality, as I once had a driving lesson cancelled because the gear selector arm had fallen off. I know it was a learner car, but at just four and a half years old, it wasn't exactly impressive. The funniest memory I had was once the car had been sold on, it ended up at the local Citroen dealer in Winchester, and my mother and I drove past. I recognised it immediately, and it was being sold at some super inflated price. Little did they know....

Saxos are not exactly expensive these days, but with mediocre quality, poor reliability and less than impressive ergonomics, money for a cheap runaround can be better spent elsewhere.

2017 Ssangyong Tivoli 1.6 ELX Diesel

Today's little delight is the Ssangyong Tivoli ELX. Most people have never even heard of Ssangyong, let alone the Tivoli, but it is an extremely competitive entry in the so-called 'small crossover' or 'small SUV' market segment.

The one I had the pleasure of driving for just over 24 hours last year (Ssangyong were doing a free no obligation 48 hour test drive at the time) almost caused me to put a deposit down immediately. The top of the range ELX model (this one was a two wheel drive diesel with a six speed manual gearbox) had just about any type of equipment you could care to mention:

-Lane Keep Assistance
-Heated Seats
-Automatic dipping rear view mirror
-Full leather interior
-Three different steering modes
-Front and rear parking sensors
-Automatic lights
-Automatic wipers
-Lane Departure Warning
-7 inch touch screen satellite navigation
-Reversing camera
-Adaptive cruise control
-Dual Zone climate control
-Automatic folding mirrors

Doing the sums, I found out that a fully equipped one like this was available for a pretty ridiculous sum of money on a monthly finance deal, is economical, well put together, powerful and comfortable. Even the handling was impressive.

The fact that this car is considerable cheaper than something like a Suzuki Vitara, Renault Captur or Nissan Juke for seemingly no loss in quality is a massive credit to this relatively unknown South Korean brand. It has to be the most competitive entry in the sector that I have seen, and is more affordable than virtually all of them.

2016 Vauxhall Viva 1.0 SE

In late 2016, when I was looking for a car to replace my beloved 1996 Rover 216 SLI that was more modern, more reliable, and more suitable for my now lady wife to learn to drive in, I looked at a couple of models, one of which was the new Vauxhall Viva. This is a completely different car to the identically named one built at Ellesmere Port from 1963 to 1979, in fact this one is assembled in South Korea by the former Daewoo Motor Company (remember them?) and is largely the same as the Chevrolet Spark.

My parents owned a Vauxhall Viva in the 1970s, and it was an absolutely terrible car. The design had been updated by the time of the HC series Viva of 1971-9, but the underpinnings were still fundamentally the same, which meant a front engined rear-drive layout with leaf springs at the rear. The original HA Viva of 1963 had a 1.1 litre engine, which was subsequently enlarged to 1256cc for most models until the end of production in 1979. This made for sluggish performance (apart from in the sporty Magnum and Firenza variants) and "interesting" handling, amongst other characteristics....

My mother often tells me of how the Viva used to break down on a frequent basis, had uncomfortable seats and was rusting, even at just a few years old. Many people complain about British Leyland being the poster child of British built automotive incompetence in the 1970s, but Ford and Vauxhall were not necessarily much better. The technically unsophisticated Viva was particularly bad, especially compared to the Cavalier and, its front wheel drive replacement, the Astra.

Back in March, I had to take my previous car, a 2014 Chevrolet Cruze, in for some warranty work at the nearest Vauxhall dealership before the warranty expired. (Vauxhall and Chevrolet were once part of the same company until earlier this year, and Chevrolets were sold in Britain until 2015.) I asked for a courtesy car, and was given a 2016 Viva SE.

This little chap had a 1.0 litre three cylinder engine with 75 bhp, as all Vivas do (as well as the identical Opel Karl, sold on the continent), and a five speed manual gearbox. It wasn't very clean when I received it, so I will not be revealing the name of the dealer where I had the Chevy serviced....

My first impression was of a small light car with a tall body and relatively pleasant styling, albeit nothing exceptional. I spent around 28 hours with it, and came away glad that I had forgone the Viva over my lady wife's MG3. It is by no means a bad car, but it did highlight to me that the MG3 is, surprisingly if you read most of the reviews, even better.

Like most small three cylinder units, the engine needs a fairly heavy right foot to make decent progress, but does have a relatively pleasant sound. Being a very light car, it was easy to drive and park, and the gearbox and clutch were pleasant to use. The steering, like many cars these days, was much too light and devoid of feel, and could be made even lighter with a little city button on the dashboard. For many, this would be a good thing, but for the enthusiastic driver, not being able to place the car accurately on the road makes for a less than enjoyable experience. The MG3, with more power and a better chassis, is much better in this respect.

The build quality of the car was overall perfectly acceptable, but with hard scratchy plastics (the bugbear of many motoring writers) on many surfaces, very light doors and some cheap feeling switches, it was far more Daewoo than Vauxhall. At least the standard equipment is reasonable, with air conditioning (an optional extra) fitted to this particular model, along with foglights, lane departure warning, Bluetooth and the aformentioned dual mode power steering. The top of the range (not that there is a very broad one) does have satellite navigation, alloy wheels and more luxurious interior trim.

For a city car, the interior space is OK, although the boot is quite small, and the rear seats are a bit cramped. Similarly priced rivals such as the Dacia Sandero and MG3, however, offer more space and equipment for less money.

Where both the Dacia and MG fall down, though, is running costs. The Viva's 1.0 litre engine is extremely economical and falls in a low tax bracket. It is also very cheap to insure (although the Sandero and MG3 are not exactly expensive), and servicing costs are likely to be low. For a single person or couple living in a city, the Viva does make sense. However, those who regularly carry luggage or more people, and those who frequently venture beyond city limits are likely to find it dynamically unsatisfying. A Skoda Citygo, Volkswagen Up or Seat Mii remains the best choice in the city car class, with the Dacia Sandero and MG3 offering more space and equipment, but with compromises.

2017 Ford Focus Estate 1.0 Ecoboost Titanium

Just after Christmas last year this 2017 Ford Focus 1.0 Titanium estate was waiting for us at Hannover Airport when we flew in from Heathrow.

Last year, when we arrived, the hire company gave us a car that was much too small for the task, and so we went up a size, ending up in the estate car category. Despite having driven many different cars, and the worldwide popularity of this particular model, I have only driven a Ford Focus once before (very briefly), and so this has been quite an experience.

This Focus estate has one of Ford's best engines, a three cylinder 1.0 litre turbocharged petrol unit producing 125 bhp, an incredible figure given its tiny size. As I found out on the 160 km journey from the airport (around 100 miles) when we picked it up, this is more than adequate for moving the Focus' considerable bulk at highly illegal speeds (or at least they would be illegal in Britain), and the car cruises nicely at 90 mph. Being a 2017 model, it is also equipped with a lot of very nice features.

The much derided original interior of the third generation Focus (launched in 2011), was replaced a couple of years ago with an updated version, which is much better quality and easier to use. The Titanium trim comes with such niceties as a rear parking camera, heated seats, a heated steering wheel, Android Auto, automatic folding mirrors, cruise control, Bluetooth, front and rear parking sensors, keyless entry, lane keep assistance, lane departure warning and numerous other niceties. There is even an automatic parking feature (which I have yet to try) along with a 'lady button' to put the steering into superlight mode for city parking.

The car feels composed and stable at high speed (where the law allows, as around half the German Autobahn is derestricted), the steering is not too heavy, and the pedals all have a good and positive feel to them. Compared with my Seat Toledo, there are a lot more soft touch materials in the cabin, and the fixtures and fittings, whilst not being quite like a Mercedes-Benz, do not really feel cheap at all.

The handling, long known as a Focus strong point, seems fine, although the roads I have driven it on have not been the best for exploiting this. The dichotomy between the obvious practicality of the car and it being pleasant to drive is perhaps not surprising given that 2018 is the Focus' 20th anniversary, so Ford's engineers have had a long time to perfect its overall dynamics. The high performance Focus ST estate is probably a tempting proposition for many, given that it has the same practicality as all the other estates, but has much, much more performance whether with a petrol or diesel engine.

My sister wanted some boxes and a desk shifting from one of her old flats to her new one, and so the Focus duly obliged. The boot is not the biggest for an estate at around 476 litres, given that the one on my Seat Toledo is 550 litres, but of course, it is a more practical shape than the Toledo. The rear space is also no more than average, compared with the almost limousine like rear legroom of the Toledo. I doubt that this is too much of a problem for most people, though, but it was quite annoying that it took two people and an Internet search to work out how to remove the rear load cover...

In summary, it is easy to see why the Focus enjoys huge sales and critical acclaim. It is probably a bit dated in terms of styling next to newer opposition such as the Vauxhall Astra estate, and certainly loses in terms of practicality compared with even the sub £10,000 Dacia Logan MCV, but it provides an excellent compromise for most. The range of engines, particularly the 1.0 and 1.5 litre Ecoboost petrols, seem excellent, and recent updates have meant that it can have all the latest technology. One area of concern, however, is the list price, which is comparable with a far more prestigious Volkswagen Golf, and seems too high, although substantial discounts are available. My personal recommendations in this category are probably the Skoda Octavia, the Seat Leon ST, both of which offer similar quality and bigger boots for less money. Or, if you don't need the estate shape, the Seat Toledo or Skoda Rapid twins, which are much cheaper, and have a bigger boot, are an excellent option too.

2014 MG3 Style 12,000 mile ownership report

One of the two permanent vehicles we have is a 2014 MG3 Style (yes, I know the trim names are a little stupid)... I have had the pleasure of owning her for a while now, and she has been an overall delight to drive.

I picked her up at the end of November 2016, and since then she has covered about 12,000 miles with a total mileage of around 45,000. She was originally a company or fleet car, from what we can work out from the log book, and she was bought to replace a far less sensible 1996 Rover 216. Needless to say, she has been much more reliable than the former pride of Longbridge, and shows just how much quality and reliability have improved in around 20 years.

As MG advertising continually seems to point out, the previous generation Ford Fiesta, which was replaced at the end last year, was, spec for spec, around £5,000 more expensive than an MG3. This would mean that the equivalent MG is around two thirds the price of a Fiesta, and has lower insurance costs to boot. Whilst this is broadly true, the picture is a little more complex than that.

The Fiesta does have the same boot size, has roughly the same exterior dimensions and actually has less interior space, but it can be sold and serviced at any Ford dealer nationwide, and has much more choice when it comes to specification. The MG3 has just one engine and gearbox choice, when a Fiesta has about seven engines and three gearboxes to consider. This MG engine in question (which, for Rover fans, unlike the older MG6 petrol is unrelated to any previous MG Rover product) is a four cylinder, 1.5 litre chain cam petrol unit with variable valve timing producing 105 bhp. This is actually quite a lot in a car with group four insurance (highly suitable for first time drivers), and means performance is surprisingly brisk.

I have heard lots of journalists criticise the power unit for being rough and needing to be worked hard to maintain decent progress, and although it does need more revs to get going than the 1.0 litre three cylinder turbo in my Seat Toledo, it really is not that bad. It is torquey enough, is quiet at most revs, seems to spin progressively and even has a pleasant exhaust note. Sadly, MG have since released a turbocharged version in the MG GS and also a brand new 1.0 litre three cylinder turbo in the new MG ZS, which makes this look rather old-fashioned indeed. True, when compared with the 1.25 litre in the previous generation Fiesta and current Ford Ka+ (which dates back at least 15 years) it does not look too bad. However, with embarrassingly high fuel consumption and emission figures for a modern supermini, I can understand why some writers are not impressed, and getting an average of just over 38 mpg on ours, when compared with 50+ for a new generation Fiesta, is not brilliant at all. However, with a relatively low annual mileage, and given the MG3's much cheaper price, it is not that bad in context.

The two cars to which the MG3 are often compared are the Ford Ka+ and the Dacia Sandero. Both are as practical and have similar issues with cheaper interior plastics than, say a Volkswagen Polo, and, when comparably equipped, they are about the same price. They also offer better fuel economy. However, this somewhat misses the point. The MG3 is actually more of a cut-price rival for a Mini, and offers similar customisation options (some of which are truly hideous).

There may be a bit of cheap plastic in the interior and "pull up" exterior door handles (as opposed to the more modern "pull out" on virtually every other modern car), as well as an inefficient engine, but the MG3 is a stylish little car. All models have LED running lights, colour co-ordinated air vents and racy instruments that do a little dial sweep when the engine is started. The car is also fitted with hydraulic power steering, when virtually every other small car has the vaguer, but lighter, electric power steering set up. This means that the car car be a little heavier to park than some, but it is never too heavy, and the car is an absolute joy to drive. The handling is an absolute revelation, with the feedback through the steering a delight like few others and plenty of grip. The trade off is quite a firm ride, and this can get tiresome at times, but I personally think it is a great compromise.

With interior space from the class above (easily fitting four six foot tall people), luxuries on our upper level Style model like cruise control, parking sensors, automatic lights, automatic wipers, Bluetooth, DAB radio, diamond cut alloy wheels and a USB port, the MG3 is very easy to live with day to day. What is less easy is the clutch which bites a little higher than expected, and a gearbox which can be a little vague (in comparison with a Ford or Volkswagen), but if you have driven older cars, such as a 15 year old Corsa or Peugeot 206, it is definitely not as bad at those.

To sum up then, the MG3 is actually something of a bargain and a very fun car to own. The only problems with have had are a washer jet which seems to get blocked up too easily, and parking sensors which sometimes do not operate in the rain. That is it for 14 months of ownership. Fiestas, Polos and Corsas may be more plentiful and offer more choice of trims, but I am still very pleased indeed that we will be keeping our MG3 for many years to come. It is a very suitable car for a younger driver (provided they have one with parking sensors, as the visibility and door mirrors are a bit compromised). I would certainly take one over our old friends the "recycled last generation Fiesta" Ford Ka+ or the infamous Dacia Sandero.

1996 Rover 416 SLI

On 1st March 2018, I ventured out with my extremely patient lady wife to the snowy wilds of Hinchley Wood, near Esher, where I picked up this 1996 Rover 416 SLI automatic. The owner and his wife had had it from new, and after 22 years of faithful service, he had given up driving.

With a full service history, garaged all its life and having had just one owner from new, it seemed to be a snip at just £255 having won the auction on Ebay. Having owned three other examples of Longbridge's finest products, it certainly felt comfortable slipping into the driver's seat (which will need a fabric repair) and cranking the 1.6 litre Honda D-series engine into life.

Once we had got the paperwork, taxed the car and said goodbye to the previous owner and his son, I ventured out onto the slightly treacherous Surrey roads, made even more amusing by the fact that the car had two bald front tyres and a brake pedal softer than an armchair. Gingerly making my way back to our flat behind my lady wife in the far more modern MG 3 (eighteen years more modern to be exact), I then set off to SE Tyres in Epsom to get some new rubber.

Having had the brakes at least marginally improved by having them bled and some of the fluid replaced, and having procured two new tyres (safety first), I then was able to more thoroughly examine the driving habits of my latest purchase.... With nice steering, a comfortable ride, a smooth automatic gearbox and a reasonably powerful engine, I can see why the previous owner had grown fond of her. Opening up the bonnet, I was amazed at the condition of the Honda D-series motor. It is by far the cleanest Rover engine I have ever seen (and that is saying something, considering I have owned three of them).

She needed a good valet, has a dent in the wing and several small rust patches, but she sailed through the MOT the next week. Of course, I have to try not to get too sentimental about old Rovers ( I have comprehensively failed at this on at least two previous occasions), but she was genuinely a lovely old car. The owner even left me the original roof rails (genuine Rover parts), a warning triangle and a set of jump leads (I didn't need to use them), a sign of duty, care and attention.

What do we do with low mileage cars with full service history and an amazingly low number of owners? We take them drag racing at Santa Pod, of course! More about this in a future instalment.

1997 Mazda 323F

Last year, I left a temporary phone which I was using whilst my main one was away for repair on a train, and I lost within it a memory card with all my pictures dating right back to 2005. One of these was a photograph of the 1997 Mazda 323F which I owned whilst at university.

Back in 2002, my friend very kindly allowed us to get a car for use up in Durham in connection with our student house. For some reason, I chose a sporty looking Mazda 323F 1.5 Innsbruck Edition. With only 90 bhp, it wasn't exactly fast, but it looked stunning, had a big boot, relatively good passenger space, frameless doors and a nice set of alloy wheels.

This was not the average car of most 19 year old students, and she drove like a dream. With a firm ride, but amazingly good grip and handling, this 323F was a pleasure to pilot, and was very reliable to boot. I drove all over the country in her, along with many trips to the Metrocentre in Gateshead, Newcastle Airport, Jesmond to see my twin sister, and much more besides. She wasn't the most economical car, but with petrol at around 80p a litre at the time, it wasn't a massive problem!

Slight quirks were an air conditioning button that lit up even if there was no air conditioning (there was an electric sunroof instead), a blue soft touch plastic dashboard and an indicator stalk on the 'wrong side' of the steering column. I had to sell her in the end to a car trader from Luton (there wasn't much point in keeping her post university as there were already two cars at my mother's house), but I had three amazing years with her. The fact that they are still less than £1000 for a decent example is rather too tempting...