What car to get?

[Rouxenator]

Essentia = Entry level
Enjoy = Mid range
Cosmo = Top spec

Sadly the only Cosmo level is a manual, so Enjoy is as good as it gets.The 1.6T Como offers these standard features over Enjoy Automatic:

132kW
Climate Control
Lowered Sport Chassis
3-Spoke Sport Steering Wheel
Ergonomic Drivers sport Seat
Power Lumbar Driver
Heated Front Seat
Mondialleather trim
Rear Park Assist
Electronic Parking Brake
7" Colour IntelliLinkCD/Radio System
Colour Information Display
18" alloy wheels, multi-spoke design

That is for R309k. I would take the 1.4T Enjoy and add all the extras you want while staying in budget.

 

[satanboy]

FINALLY they have an automatic!

Is it any good though?

Opel!? Of course not.

 

[airborne]

Saw the new Astra in the flesh yesterday, very nice lines and great build quality, I would.

 

[FiestaST]

Saw the new Astra in the flesh yesterday, very nice lines and great build quality, I would.

Astra K?

Are you in Europe or something?

New model hits SA in March.

 

[Rouxenator]

No, we are talking about the Astra J sedan.

 

[FiestaST]

But that's hardly "new". It's "current"

 

[SauRoNZA]

Yes, pretty good. Opel tends to use Aisin autoboxes like some other manufacturers do.

So old piece of crap torque converter box then.

 

[SauRoNZA]

Opel!? Of course not.

To be honest they haven't had one to test in many many years so that's a terrible assumption to make.

 

[Splinter]

So old piece of crap torque converter box then.

Oi - I will open a new thread to discuss your beloved DSG/S-tronic box vs you know what. Try to keep the trash talk down to a minimum till then...

 

[SauRoNZA]

Oi - I will open a new thread to discuss your beloved DSG/S-tronic box vs you know what. Try to keep the trash talk down to a minimum till then...

There was the trash talk.

And it's not about my beloved anything. Opel hasn't had an automatic for years, so have no point of reference at all.

And I drove a perfectly "normal" automatic BMW and quite enjoyed it.

Could hardly tell the difference between it and my car except when in the eco mode, which frustrated me.

Fact Is I expect an Opel automatic to be about as good as a Kia's. Do you blame me?

 

[Brenden_E]

A turbo is not better with fuel consumption. Turbos use more petrol and oil.

"It's safe to say, however, that a small, modern, gasoline-turbo engine will save about 8 to 10 percent over a larger engine that makes similar power and torque."

Quote from popular mechanics. What you say was true in 1970 -_-

 

[Rouxenator]

Food for though http://paultan.org/2015/08/06/volkswagen-jetta-tsi-drops-dsg-for-6-spd-auto-in-us/ so if the "amazing VW" consider using the same 6 speed Aisin autobox the Astra has over their problematic DSG it does say something.

I have a 4 speed Astra auto and it's nice.

 

[PostmanPot]

"It's safe to say, however, that a small, modern, gasoline-turbo engine will save about 8 to 10 percent over a larger engine that makes similar power and torque."

Quote from popular mechanics. What you say was true in 1970 -_-

Seriously?

 

[Brenden_E]

Seriously?

Creates equal power and torque to a bigger engine, you tool. That's why it's saves you fuel. It's lighter.
And not only that, because it's lighter, you will get a greater power to weight ratio so it will be faster too. Win win win!

 

[Ocali]

Neat 2nd hand F30 320i Auto M Sports pack...sorted

agreed with this.

 

[Ocali]

why so much hate for the opels.... *sigh...

 

[PostmanPot]

Creates equal power and torque to a bigger engine, you tool. That's why it's saves you fuel. It's lighter.
And not only that, because it's lighter, you will get a greater power to weight ratio so it will be faster too. Win win win!

When someone asks if a turbo is more efficient, like-for-like engine capacity is assumed. Read the thread on a bit more and you will see that other forumites, who do not lack interpretation skills, agree.

 

[Brenden_E]

When someone asks if a turbo is more efficient, like-for-like engine capacity is assumed. Read the thread on a bit more and you will see that other forumites, who do not lack interpretation skills, agree.

And this is why you can't argue with old and whack forumites. Straight up in your face quote that turbos are more efficient and he'll find a way to continue arguing about it.

OK grandpa, I'm sure most of us think about engine size(because size matters) and not power/torque.

 

[SauRoNZA]

Food for though http://paultan.org/2015/08/06/volkswagen-jetta-tsi-drops-dsg-for-6-spd-auto-in-us/ so if the "amazing VW" consider using the same 6 speed Aisin autobox the Astra has over their problematic DSG it does say something.

I have a 4 speed Astra auto and it's nice.

Or it's simply cheaper...and the DSG is overkill for the smaller lower powered engine.

How you compare an ancient 4-speed to anything in the modern world is beyond me.

 

[SauRoNZA]

When someone asks if a turbo is more efficient, like-for-like engine capacity is assumed. Read the thread on a bit more and you will see that other forumites, who do not lack interpretation skills, agree.

I don't agree.

Why would like for like engine capacity be assumed? Why is capacity EVER even relevant to the equation?

It's all about power/torque and everything should be relevant to that.

So it should rather be how many litres /100 km / kw for this argument.


OF COURSE a car with the same capacity fitted with a turbo will burn more fuel...it's making more power. Nobody would put a turbo in a car to make the same power with the same capacity...because that' would be retarded.