What is the biggest cost associated with owning and running a new car? Fuel isn’t cheap, road tax can mount up and insurance premiums keep on rising, but depreciation will account for the biggest hit on your wallet. So if you want a cheap car, you need one that will keep hold of its value. After all, there’s no point in having the cleanest engine or lowest tax bill if your new pride and joy will be worthless after three years.
Future resale values - or residual values as they’re often known - are affected by a huge variety of factors and it’s vital to know what they are when choosing your next car. For instance, two seemingly identical cars can be worth vastly different sums of money just because they’re a different colour or because of the engines under their bonnets. Bright colours are good for smaller models as second-hand buyers of city cars tend to be younger and prefer lighter shades. But on bigger models conservative colour choices are likely to guarantee better resale values – ask yourself, when was the last time you saw a fire-engine-red BMW 5 Series?
Go for the most economical engine you can get away with because taxation on the most polluting models is sure to get heavier – and few things deter used buyers like an annual tax disc of £400. The only way to get around this is to reduce the price of your car and that’s not a good recipe for cheap motoring, so efficiency is important for a good resale value.
Keeping your car in good condition is also critical but getting the right model in the first place is even more important, and when it comes to holding onto their new value, here are the best – in percentage terms - in 10 key sectors of the market.
Data: The figures are supplied by VIP Data (February 2013) and are based on three years and 36,000 miles.
Disqus - noscript
Peugeots 1.4 hdi unit offers great economy..
No fiat panda?!
It's resale value based - Fiats depreciate ;ike stones, hence no mention. plus their reliability (or lack of it) is still a serious issue looking at their facebook page today. Nothing but complaint after complaint.
I must say I'm stumped. Autoexpress really made a list of cars without crowbarring a Skoda in.
Still going on about that? Don't buy a FIAT, get a VW and bore off!
My Skoda Yeti lost £2600 over two years from new in depreciation making it cheaper to run than any small hatch that I have owned.
But a pre march 2001 car, that way you can pollute as much as you want, and into the bargin the car will not owe you anything when it comes to sell it on as it will now be over 10 years old...that's my best advice, don't bother with silly modern cars with their high taxes and crappy diesel engines, get an old 3.0-5.0 litre and smile.
Hmm - pretty much like VW's Facebook wall last time I looked. Also check out Warranty Direct's reliability index. Fiat is 17th and VW is 23rd.
I recommend this approach too. Bear in mind any experienced mechanic will have fixed most problems you have encountered in the past, especially if you pick a popular car like a Mondeo.
My 2006 Kia sedona SE+ with only 56000 miles lost £17000 when I traded it in last month
Lucky you, my new skoda fabia lost about £3000 in 6-8 weeks!
My 1997 Range Rover P38 cost £5400 (inlcuding a 2 year RAC warranty) in October 2010. I ran it until March 2012 and it was then sold for £5000 (the difference being the cost of the warranty). Who says Range Rovers are expensive to run - use the right supplier/reseller.
what a load of propaganda!! The FIAT 500 and Panda are the best small cars on the market and amongst the best for keeping their value yet no mention of them. Another auto express biased report!!!
until it breaksdown...
Why is this article called cheapest cars to run? It should say 'lowest depreciating cars'.... Ask anyone who has ever owned a range rover for any period of time on a daily basis if it is cheap to run.
I can beat that, my MINI lost in £4800 in 12 weeks. That just happens to be £800 more than my Mitsubishi Colt did in 4.5 years!
Resale values and the residual values the motoring press report are a complete con. All cars loose shed loads of money, bigger brands the most, because they cost more in the first place.
Go Classic...!!
My 1998 Classic mini has fuel injection, airbags, does 40mpg, just cost £29 for new discs and pads and has risen in value in the last 2 years by over £3000
I have to agree, the cost of producing the car and the environmental impact have long since been balanced out.
Must be some Mini another two years and the average mini is in the scrap yard
I have two fiats a camper van and look about 30%of camper vans on road are Fiat and i have never seen one broken down, I also run a 52 plate Doblo di and is no bother at all , 50mpg
Well said!
Old is gold
VW and Fiat are both rubbish
I bought a new Kia Picanto 1.0 Air 12 months ago. In many ways it is fine however FUEL economy is very poor, it averages mid 40s . While I knew the "official" figures were a fairy tale the fact that it gets less than 50mpg is dire for a so called "economical" car. I would not have bought it had I known this . The fact that WHICH and so many other people have the same type of experience suggests it is the norm
The electric car could be a good solution! It's cheap to run and there is no emissions.