Michael McAleer answers your questions
From Cathal Cooney:
I am considering purchasing one of the following but can't decide which is the best. Can you help? Jaguar X-Type 2.0 Diesel; Lexus IS 250; Lexus IS 220d; Mercedes C 180 Kompressor Classic
I am currently driving a C180?
It would seem that your price range is about €42,000 to €48,000 and you are not too concerned about whether it be petrol or diesel.
I should remind you that a good rule of thumb for diesel is that if you are doing less than 12,000 miles per year then diesel is not really of benefit to you. Of the four you list, I think the Lexus IS range is perhaps the best looking and most eyecatching at the moment. However, rear legroom remains an issue for the IS and we are not impressed by its transmission.
The Jaguar is economical, if a little noisy and the X-Type is looking increasingly dated. Jaguar will be introducing a replacement for the S-Type in the near future but it really needs to work on an overhaul of its entry-level X-type model.
The Mercedes is a steady purchase in this category, though it is by no means the best drive. Prices are competitive but once you add on some options they quickly shoot up.
Of the cars you have left out, perhaps the most surprising for me was the BMW 320d at €46,000.
It's a nice engine and fitted to a very sharp performer. The design and look may be the reason you have opted to leave it out. It's a pity, because the 3-Series remains the best of the bunch.
There's also a couple of other contenders such as the Audi A4 2-litre TDI at €44,770 and the Volvo S60 2.5 T at €44,400.
In summary, the Lexus is the best looking, will probably have the best reliability, but is disappointing in terms of performance and driving.
The BMW has it in terms of driver fun but its look may not be to everyone's taste.
The Volvo may be the outside bet; but when judged on price, it offers plenty of "bang for your buck".
From L Crowley, Co Galway:
Work began recently on a new housing estate just down the road from my house.
What it means to me is constant works traffic going in and out. If that were not enough, they seem to operate in morning rush hour, thereby leaving our road a mess and slowing traffic to a crawl. Is it legal for these vehicles to trundle along at 15mph on residential roads with cars on either side and traffic tailing back behind them?
The simple answer is that if the vehicle has a registration plate, is taxed and insured, then it is legally entitled to operate on the road. Unlike some other European countries, there's no obligation upon the driver of such vehicles to pull in and let traffic past. In some countries, if there is more than three vehicles behind a slow moving tractor or truck, the driver is expected to pull in when safe to do so and let the traffic clear.
Of course, the driver can be prosecuted for driving too slow, but given that the traffic flow is already at a snail's pace at that time of the morning, it's hard to see if you would have a case.
What's needed here is a better regulation of the rules regarding such vehicles.
From Owen Murphy:
Is random breath testing really going to be the answer to all our problems on the roads?
Road safety policy really comes down to three areas, all of which need to be addressed if we are to reduce road deaths: enforcement, education and engineering.
Enforcement is the great short-term solution. As part of this, random breath testing is a vital enforcement tool. However it is far from the panacea to our problems. Australia is often heralded as the great example of the ability of random testing to reduce drink-driving. Yet, according to road safety reports, when it was first introduced in 1976 "it enjoyed only limited success due to the style in which it was implemented. This was a rather low level of enforcement interspersed with periods of high intensity blitzes."
Research concluded that the long-term deterrent effect of random breath testing depends on maintaining a high level of continual, visible enforcement.
Indeed, it's been accepted that target rates for testing are the best way to improve results. In 1989, the Australian prime minister announced plans to ensure that at least one in four drivers was tested every year.
If the evidence from Australia is anything to go by, random testing may go the way of the early days of penalty points here, whereby respect subsides as motorists realise that their chances of being caught remain low. Enforcement is as much about continuous policing as it is about new laws and penalties.
Send your queries to Motors Helpdesk, The Irish Times, D'olier St, Dublin 2 or email motorshelp@irish-times.ie