ukjesters

iTrader: (3)

hi all.
little bit of history first, owned a box standard uk classic few years back and im gonna get back with the scoobs but im tooing and froing between models which is where your help shall come in.

the contenders...(gotta be a uk car from a trader as i have a p/x and have never bought privately so im sticking with what i know...or can i be tempted to buy privately?)

1 a uk classic with low miles and preferably ppp
2 a bug eye with headlamp conversion and again ppp preferably
3 an sti or uk 300 will probably have higher miles than the above to fit in budget
4 an rb5

budget between 6 - 9.5k

so if anyone can give some assistance it would be greatly appreciated. ideally a low miler rb5 or a ppp classic/bug eye would be ideal and it was only then that i thought well why not go for the sti in the first place as it has the brembo brakes etc and was designed for the 260bhp as opposed to the others that need ppp to get you the 240-260bhp.
but what is an sti like to live with regarding servicing and general running costs

any pointers for me please

regards
rick

Marx Mcrae

iTrader: (4)

Go for the STi instead of the bugeye WRX.
In the long run you'll probably spend more money on upgrades to get a WRX to the same spec as the STi, than what the STi would cost to start off with.
You should easily be able to get a UK bugeye STi for under 10k

ilogikal1

https://www.scoobynet.com/private-sa...sport-rb5.html

bluenosewrx

iTrader: (2)

As above comment, i had a bugeye and aftera bit i hunkered after a STi, i have finally got one(Spec C though) and the difference is pheonominal,i imagine a normal STi would be better fro your needs.

Best of luck.

Mac

ukjesters

iTrader: (3)

ok, after much deliberation and soul searching (i should be on the stage!) and loan searching (jeez!) i have decided to go for a 2003 model wrx. yeah i would love a classic again but mileage concerns and possible reliability probs have ruled those out. love an sti or uk300 both look great but gotta look at practibility - parked on road in canny decent area but car often left in precarious locations (bird watching you see) so i arrived at the decision of the 2003, a review reckoned that they were quicker 30-70 than old model and better mpg (albeit slightly).

Just thought id let you know and pics will follow when i get one (test driving one tomorrow - so fingers crossed)

cheers
rick