Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 15:13:51 +0000 From: danny <dannynopsamia-esprezzo.com> Subject: Re: buying a 900/9000 - what mileage/year?
Finbar wrote: > Hi - I've got my mind/heart set on a 900 or 9000 (I owned a 99GL about 10 > years ago), but as ever not much money. I have £2000 to spend, which means > quite high mileage. I've found, by looking in LOOT/London, that I basically > have a choice - an average mileage1988/9 (90-100000), or high mileage > (150000+) 92/93/94. Amazingly, a lot of the ads have 'fsh'. I'll probably > steer clear of a turbo, and I've read the faqs on what to look for (seems to > be gearbox mainly- I'll get a manual and check on the test drive). > > What would you go for - or should I check out a few of each? > > There are a lot of differences between 900/9000 - I much prefer the 9000, so you really need to decide which model before going in any further. Once you have decided on body shape, then if it's the 9k I would not worry about buying a turbo - they are reliable, more economical, and I wish mine was a turbo (1990 9000CDS auto). Only downside is slightly higher insurance with the turbo, and most companies require a thatcham approved alarm be fitted. £2k will get you upto a '94 9k turbo. My 9k was £1500 2 years ago (leather, aircon, heated seats...everything but electric seats and cruise and climate control, I think) Some prefer the hatchback to the booted version (If I was doing it again I'd go for the hatch), and I've not had problems with the auto box yet (touch wood) at 130k miles. I really like the 2.3 engine, so a 2.3 LPT would be a good buy, if not the full turbo. These engines are basically bulletproof and don't suffer stress in turbo form, so apart from timing chain maintenance and making sure they don't overheat and do the head gasket in I think they are a strong engine. -- Regards, Danny http://www.gaggia-espresso.com (a purely hobby site) http://www.dannyscoffee.com (UK advert for my mobile espresso service) swap Z for above characters in email address to reply
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
