First car 2.0?

Is a 2.0 too much for a first car? Also is insurance group 25 too expensive for new drivers?

Yes way too much.

It'll cost you loads and isn't worth it in the short term given you're likely to crash your car in the first year of driving. Group 25 would cost you multiple of thousands with a black box, which having a 2.0 would be useless for.

Reply 2

RogerOxon

Original post by catto

Is a 2.0 too much for a first car? Also is insurance group 25 too expensive for new drivers?

Get quotes, but it will be expensive.

For your first car, get something safe (concentrate on crash test results and safety features) and slower. More power just allows you to get in more trouble. A lower power car requires you to think ahead, and drive more smoothly - both useful skills to have.

I am a petrol head, and frequently 'exercise' my supercars. I completely understand the desire to have a faster car, or even just avoid an under-powered one. However, you really do need to gain experience before getting more power (and responsibility). You're more likely to have a nicer car for longer if you wait a little.

Reply 3

TheMcSame

Depends...

If you can find something reasonable to insure, why not?

I wouldn't go religious on the power argument here. Bigger engines don't necessarily mean more power or a quicker car when you're talking a matter of a few hundred ML of displacement at best. OP could quite easily look at an old 2.0L then find a slightly newer 1.6/1.4 that's just as quick, if not quicker because that's exactly how the industry has evolved. Ford's 2.3L Ecoboost engine isn't that far behind their 5L V8, only being about a second slower from 0-60 in the Mustang. Not bad considering the size and power differences. If they're pushing a smaller 2.3L turbo engine close to the capabilities of their V8 with a 2.7L displacement difference, a matter of 400-600ml of extra displacement doesn't mean much at all.

In fact, some seem to make it seem like a 2L engine will be a rocket, bar a few examples, you're probably looking at about 8-10 seconds from 0-60, that's hardly unmanageable for a new driver and likely the same sort of time their instructor's car would do 0-60 and is indeed the same sort of figures you'd get from many cars around the 1.4-1.6L range as well.

(edited 4 years ago)

Reply 4

julietmoger

Original post by catto

Is a 2.0 too much for a first car? Also is insurance group 25 too expensive for new drivers?

If you are a 17 year old boy then it will be very expensive yes. New drivers are still learning and should be driving in a smaller engine car until you know how to handle it. You can learn in a 2 litre car affordably but once you've passed your test insurance will be astronomical and if you crash you will find it very hard for anyone to insure you.

Reply 5

IWMTom

Original post by julietmoger

As stated in another thread, not necessarily. Engine size is not the be all and end all of a premium calculation.

Reply 6

lightningbox81

If you want something faster that's a lower insurance group you could go for a Ford Focus 2.0L (like this one) - It's insurance group 17 and 203BHP.

Also, a word to the wise, it’s not all about engine size because you can pick up cars that have 1L engines and are 120BHP+ (like this Eco boost for example - 123BHP and insurance group 15). So, it may be worth checking the insurance prices on something along those lines as well.

If you’re going down the used car road, id check for any outstanding safety recalls and MOT advisories and make sure the seller has had them fixed (you don’t want an engine fire half way home), I used rapidcarcheck because it shows both safety recalls and MOT history free. Plus, it’s a good starting point to haggle the seller down on the price if they haven’t had any issues fixed!

Reply 7

catto

Thanks for the help and advice everyone

Reply 8

Y333EEE

I suggest you get something smaller as a first car!

Get a 1.0 Corsa, learn the ropes of driving and whats good and what's bad and take it from there.

Reply 9

The Empire Odyssey

2.0 sounds a bit much. For my first car, it was a weak 1L engine. On my 2nd car, which is only 1.6L. But it was needed. I doubt anyone needs a 2.0L engine sized car for their first car.

It depends on your needs and stuff. But I'd say if you're doing motorway/high speed driving, then anything between 1.2-1.6L is more than enough.

Plus you'd waste so much money on insurance and gas!

Reply 10

NX172

Depends on numerous factors, it's incorrect to base everything off displacement alone. My first car was a 1.8L but as it was a heavy family car, it wasn't a fast car by any means. Plus, it being a family car, it was naturally in a lower insurance group, amongst other things that made it very cheap to insure.