I'm not really keen on a turbo, I don't need that much power. I just need the RWD and heaps of room
vtecintegra,
Jan 10, 6:30am
Those are useless numbers, they've given the 2 and 4wd Stageas the same numbers and I know for a fact there is a very significant difference there.
thejazzpianoma,
Jan 10, 6:31am
By all means provide some better ones. The Stagea is a bit of a global orphan so its quite hard to find figures.
thejazzpianoma,
Jan 10, 6:35am
You are most welcome, I edited my post above to include the official combined figure of an 05 base model BF Falcon which is 10.7l/100km, the 6 speed auto one is a bit better at 10.4l/100km. Gives you a bit of a yard stick.
If you are considering the Falcon though, you really need to drive it as they are are less than half the price of an A6 Quattro new so while competent and functional they are not really in the same league.
vtecintegra,
Jan 10, 6:36am
You aren't going to find anything very reliable for Japanese market cars.
As for real world I'm seeing between 8 and 12l/100km in my 3l Skyline (which will be more fuel efficient as its lighter wieght)
austingtir,
Jan 10, 6:38am
Get the 350 in RWD then they are a fantastic car.And imo the best value by far for the type of car your looking at i mean compare what jazz is talking about a 1.8t wagon to the 350rx imo its no contest when you look at the prices.
thejazzpianoma,
Jan 10, 6:38am
That lines up fairly well with my real world estimate of getting about 12l/100km out of one for a normal mixed tank with no towing.
thejazzpianoma,
Jan 10, 6:46am
How is it the best value! For the price of a 350 you could even buy the newer model Skoda or Passat wagon in 4WD and Diesel, giving you plenty of towing power combined with the direct running costs of a little 1.3 liter shopping basket.
Or if by power you mean the last word in performance you could get one of really high performance Audi/VW wagons.
They Stagea is a significantly cheaper car new than the Audi's and while competent simply does not compare. You only have to sit in the two cars to see that, let alone compare spec and driving experience.
austingtir,
Jan 10, 6:50am
^^Exactly for the price of a 350rxan Audi or skoda does not compare.Show me some examples on here!Theres none even within 7k of the cheapest 350rx even if they are high mileage.O.k theres some 3.0 audi wagons nothing special.
Show me a 2002-2005 audi or skoda wagon that compares to any stagea 350rx on trademe!
vtecintegra,
Jan 10, 6:51am
I wouldn't get into an argument on here, not worth it
OP should drive a few options and decide for themselves what
austingtir,
Jan 10, 6:54am
^^Its a discussion not an arguement.And i agree OP should drive them.But as i said the 2.5di is a waste of time.
thejazzpianoma,
Jan 10, 6:59am
I would rather not side track the OP's post, But for the same money as you pay for a Stagea 350rx (11K - 18K) you can have your pick of some amazing VW/Audi/Skoda options, from the new model Diesel wagon to the amazing W8 Passat. But as the OP's budget is 11K tops and they are not looking for super high performance its a bit pointless.
Best bet for them IMO is still a sub 11K Quattro with their pick of engines from 1.8T to 3.0 V6 (you could get an8 Cylinder in in that price range too, but again its unsuitable as it will drink gas like the Stagea).
If they drive the different options they will quickly see what I am getting at. At the end of the day its about towing some jetski's, economy and value for money, not a pissing match.
austingtir,
Jan 10, 7:06am
You can get a 350rx for a lot less that 11k if you look around.I paid 8k for my 2005 350RX FOUR two years ago!Now im not saying thats the norm but they can be had for alot less than the figures your talking about.
Even with 130,000kms + they are fine very little goes wrong with them.The 2005 models can have dodgy fan sets (recall) which are like 230NZD if you buy them from rockauto.com in the states.
This is another huge advantage to the stagea alot of the mechanical parts are identical to g35 sedans in america so you have access to incredibly cheap and large assortment of parts.
00quattro00,
Jan 10, 7:23am
Careful there, the only thing amazing is the failure rate, the w8 is a pos
craig04,
Jan 10, 7:36am
However you stated in another Passat thread"The 2.0 FSI petrol is a great engine but is pushing it a little bit in the bigger Passat body". So, which is it!
charles.j,
Jan 10, 7:41am
Thanks for the input guys, I'm off to test drive a couple this weekend. Will certainly keep the 350 in mind!
Thanks again
craig04,
Jan 10, 7:53am
I'm not trying to pick on you, but you are very inconsistent. The links you posted showed the 3.0 Audi being at 16l/100 urban and 8.6l/100 extra urban vs Stagea at 15l/100 urban and 9l/100 extra urban. So the Audi is worse around town by the tune of 1l/100 and better on the open road by .4l/100. Hardly amazing. My pick would be a Stagea 300. Well spec'd and great load space too.
richardmayes,
Jan 10, 8:06am
The older shape Stageas with straight-six "RB" engines were notoriously thirsty. The V6 cars you are looking at are completely different, and anyone generalising that "Stageas drink the gas" is really in the same league as those who generalise about "European cars".
Did anyone see that thread recently about a 2003 Holden Common Rail Diesel ute that was going to cost $6,000 for a new injection pump! Common Rail Diesels are for new car buyers only, IMHO.
The 2.5 and 3 litre Stageas are direct fuel injection which is also new-ish technology (compared to a lot of other cars of this era.) . As someone above said, the 3.5 litre Stageas are good old-fashioned throttle body EFI just like every sensible jap car since the 1990s has had, this has got to be a safer bet - while still making as much power as a 5.7 litre V8 of the same era (Scotty! Are you there Scotty!)
jas_nz,
Jan 10, 9:32am
Have a look at my auction if ur interested in a new STAGEA
thejazzpianoma,
Jan 10, 9:32am
I was not suggesting they buy a 2.0 FSI Passat, just as I was in the same breath not suggesting they buy a 1.3 Jap commuter. I was simply pointing out that CC rating in modern engines does not really have much correlation to power/economy. Read it again.
thejazzpianoma,
Jan 10, 9:36am
My first figures were my best real world estimate. The second lot are what I found later. I still think in the real world the Audi will be a little cheaper to run, not only does my personal experience (and that of a poster above with a Skyline) agree. But also Japanese economy figures are worked out quite differently to European ones, in Japan they don't even get the car up to open road speeds for example.
You have also picked the most expensive to run Audi with the biggest, heaviest body of those I suggested.
thejazzpianoma,
Jan 10, 9:41am
1. This is just silly, I have been very clear about what to expect fuel economy wise with the stagea and even produced figures to back what I said.
2. Judging all common rail diesels based on the price of a part for one particular manufacturers engine is completely absurd. Its like saying all modern petrol engines are no good because the Toyota D4 is unreliable.
If common rail diesels were not economical and reliable to run overall, do you think long haul couriers, posties and all our Ambulances might not run them!
What about Europe where over 60% of the cars are diesel and the majority of those are common rail. For goodness sake these engines have been out for 15 years now and those very first off the blocks Fiat and Mercedes engines have proved exceptionally reliable and cheap to maintain even with enormous km's on them.
Clearly you are just here to bad mouth me at any opportunity.
electromic,
Jan 10, 8:23pm
The wife has a 250 rs Stagea @ 145000km , the only thing I don't like is the lack of an LSD.If they are gutless and thirsty then there is a fault. You have to use 98 fuel they pre ignite on 91, the shocks are expensive to replace, the rear springs are a little soft. They are easy to service, pleanty of room in engine bay, cheap on parts (EXCEPT SHOCKS!) Over the 70 000km that she has done the real world figures are 8.4l/100km trip (4 people/dog/boot full of luggage)12l/100km town. Remember they weigh 1600 + kg. We tow with it and have fitted a large external trans cooler, the car tows very well.I have driven most wagons before and after the stagea and still prefer the Stagea. I am looking at replacing my stolen skyline with a Stagea 350 over another 250 only because i want the five speed trans and hopefully an LSD. The fuel economy of the 350 in the real world is the same after driving both side by side.
chebry,
Jan 10, 8:26pm
Most people havent driven European cars and simply dont realise the huge gulf in driving dynamics compared to Jappas.
austingtir,
Jan 11, 4:28am
I have driven plenty what you guys are mistaking for ignorance is actually common sense in that to get a similar spec euro to the stagea you are paying a significant amount more.Im not going to argue which is better i paid my money and am perfectly happy with what i have.
Prove me wrong and show me a comparable euro to a 2005 stagea 350rx price wise.Remember a m35 Stagea is a RWD/4WD front midship v6 with a decent suspension design and a reliable engine and transmission.
The transmission is basically the same as the older skyline GTR's but with an 5 speed auto and a redesign to suit the v6 in 4wd form to help with weight distribution.The engine and transmission are very robust indeed.
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.