Just bought a copy of the magazine today and it has some interesting results.
The worst car was the Corsa C, drivers hated just about everything about it. Quick summary of the results
Five worst cars:-
1. Corsa C - Poor brakes, reliability, comfort, building quality with only the running costs scoring higly
2. Astra G - Poor everything with only practicality scoring highly
3. 307 - Pretty much the same as the Astra
4. Fiata Punto (MK2) - Poor everything apart from practicality and running costs
5. Ford Fiesta (MK6) - Only handling and running costs scored highly
6. Polo MKIV - Same as all the above with poor reliability but ok running costs
- Spotted a pattern yet?
Top five cars
1 - Hyundai I30 - Owners seem to love the car to bits but I question thats its too new to know yet.
2. Jaguar XF - Loved again by its owners
3. Skoda Octavia - Whats new, owners really like it.
4. Golf MKVI - It seems a big big improvement over older models.
5. Renault Magqne MKIII - Seems to score very highly on reliability - maybe Renault have turned a corner.
The car I have ordered the Panda is placed at a low 60 out of 100 with drivers complaining about poor brakes, performance and comfort but I think they miss the point slightly that is one of the cheapests cars on the road. It is rated number 1 out of 100 for running costs and 14 out of 100 for reliability.
My critism is that it seems to go back too far. The Focus MK1 scores badly for example but it seems unfair to include what could be a 12 year old car with a brand new I30 for example.
Also not that for the top 5 cars drivers are happiest with all round are all European apart from the Hyundai.
|
>> Spotted a pattern yet?
You have personal experience of 3 out of the 6 worst ones? :-)
These surveys are always to be taken with a pinch of salt, because the data can never be 100% impartial. For instance, the Vectra always used to rate very low in satisfaction surveys, but a large proportion of Vectras were issued as company cars to drivers who had no say in the matter. Some Vectra drivers may be completely satisfied by their cars, while others may complain at being given anything without a BMW or Audi badge.
A fair number of buyers of popular, mainstream cars (307, Astra, Fiesta in the AE list) are disengaged from cars and driving in general and just buy whatever the adverts/ the car supermarkets/ their dad tells them to - and are generally dissatisfied with their purchases because a practical family hatchback is never going to have the looks of a sports car, the performance of a racing car and the reliability of a cuckoo clock.
The savvy car buyers (owners of the i30, Octavia and XF in the list) are more likely to have done their research and convinced themselves that their purchase would be satisfying, therefore their opinion of the car would be higher to begin with. I'm guilty of falling for that one myself - I rate my old Octavia as a far more satisfying car than anything I've had before or since, even though on paper it was probably not the cheapest or least troublesome vehicle I've ever run.
Last edited by: Dave_TD {P} on Mon 19 Apr 10 at 02:20
|
I'm bit surprised to find Corsa and Astra in bottom two! Those two are most common cars sold in UK.
If they are that bad, why do people buy them?
Edit: above post provides some explanation though.
Last edited by: movilogo on Mon 19 Apr 10 at 09:03
|
I wonder when BMW are going to finally start taking a hit for their interiors. It's pretty hard to tell the difference between the interiors of cars 5 or in some cases more years apart. At 10 years apart there's still only minor differences.
|
>>It's pretty hard to tell the difference between the interiors of cars 5 or in some cases more years apart.
Is that a bad thing? You might see evolution, but not revolution. Any dramatic change will alienate too many loyal buyers who like them for what they are.
|
>> Is that a bad thing? You might see evolution but not revolution. Any dramatic change
>> will alienate too many loyal buyers who like them for what they are.
>>
>>>>>>> i agree i still think the old twin tub and dolly peg is superior to a modern washing machine but the wife says its a new front loader or dirty pants for me
|
>> I wonder when BMW are going to finally start taking a hit for their interiors.
>> It's pretty hard to tell the difference between the interiors of cars 5 or in
>> some cases more years apart. At 10 years apart there's still only minor differences.
>>
You may be missing the point, my recent experience of BMW is that the money goes into the 'oily bits', I'd agree this is probably lost on most BMW drivers, I'd absolutely accept that the interior is no better than a Mondeo and not as good as a last generation Audi but as I said that's not the point.
Let me give you an example, the washer filler on my 12 month old 330d looks like it's made out of the same plastic as tumble drier vent hoses (so cheapskate), however the standard car is fitted with a strut brace, beautifully formed suspension components, performance brakes and the engine is a work of art (and engineering excellence) - the money went into the bits that petrol(diesel) heads appreciate and you can experience this every time you drive it.
Last edited by: idle_chatterer on Tue 20 Apr 10 at 09:45
|
my recent experience of BMW is that the money
>> goes into the 'oily bits'
I'm not a fan of many modern car interiors, save few exceptions they are dull dark unpleasant places with acres of horrible black plastic, BMW as bad as any others in this respect.
However gloomy they may be BM interiors will take years of hard use without falling apart or the seats sagging or the carpets going threadbare.
Similarly their mechanicals with few notable exceptions.
You can specify lighter colours but new and used buyers seem to want everything black to match the exterior and on it goes.
|
>>>reliability of a cuckoo clock
If you'd been a clockmender you'd not have picked that comparison! Devilish things.
|
that surveys just reinstalls into me not to buy anything but a paper and a pack of polos while in the newsagents
|
>> The savvy car buyers (owners of the i30 Octavia and XF in the list) are
>> more likely to have done their research and convinced themselves that their purchase would be
>> satisfying therefore their opinion of the car would be higher to begin with. >>
And perhaps having done so, would not admit to any faults with the car that would undermine their 'savviness' in chosing the right car??
|
>> Also not(e) that for the top 5 cars drivers are happiest with all round are
>> all European apart from the Hyundai.
And the five 'worst' cars are all European too, bar none - your point being what, exactly?
As for the i30, an awful lot will have been bought via the scrappage scheme. Jumping from a 10 year-old car into anything new will distort one's perceptions.
|
|
My perceptions were distorted yesterday at a BBQ and jolly good it was too.......I think!
|
I always take these surveys with a pinch of salt these days.
I have a Polo and a Golf (Mk VI). The golf Mk VI came 4th overall with an excellent reliability score - well, it only came out about a year ago so its hardly fair to compare it with a 5 year old Astra.
I think owners perception weights these too much as well. I would guess a typical Polo driver expects absolute reliability so the slightest fault will make them unhappy, whereas the average Fiat Panda driver half expects a couple of niggles along the way.
|
I think it is a bit of both. An I30 is probably much better than most cars sold 10-15 years ago which had been scrapped.
A Panda may well fall short of certain cars made 10-15 years ago. The performance of a 1.1 Panda is never going to match a 2.0 1995 Mondeo for example.
I think you can draw some conclusions but with any statistics they can only be treated with a pinch of salt.
|
|
I also think that these surveys tend to bring out the really happy or really unhappy. If you have had a few bad experiences then you may be more inclined to complete the survey, whereas joe public who treats his car like a washing machine and has no problems is unlikely to bother
|
Some of my friends (the ones I go out with every week have the following cars)
2009 Fiat Panda Eco Active - Owned for nearly a year and no faults at all. He loves and paid £5000 on scrappage.
2001 Peogeut 206 2.0 GTI - Owned since 2004 and has done 70,000 miles in it, apart from brakes, tyres and a mid box the only thing to go wrong with it is an injector which cost less than £100 to fix. He is very happy with it. The car has now done 100k and the engine still sounds like new. He needs to get the cambelt done though. He paid £6000 for it.
2004 - Clio 1.2 16V Dynamique - She bought the car four years old with 34k ont he clock for £3500 of a friend who had it since new. The car has now hit 69k. It needs some routine service work done it now but she has done 33k in it and spent less than £300 in total in repairs/MOTs/servicing. It is a very cheap car to run and she is more than happy with it. It needs a new cambelty now though!
Another friend also has a more basic 1.2 16v Clio 16V this time a 2005 model, again she is more than happy. It is still a low milleage example though.
So all the above will go against the surveys as french cars always score badly but my friends with french cars all love them. I had a Corsa B (99) which shared many parts as the Corsa C and spent almost as much time being repaired than on the road so I agree with the suvey placing the C at the bottom!
On the other hand I drove my friends Clio once and found the handeling to be a bit wooly and the gearchange felt like it was on a 1985 Yugo it was so notchy.
Last edited by: RattleandSmoke on Mon 19 Apr 10 at 19:59
|
Small French cars are usually popular with owners in my experience too. My aunt is on her third successive Clio, and reckons unless Renault do something crazy with the formula, she will never drive anything else.
I think historically that small French cars seem to lack the electronic complexity of the bigger ones, and hence prove more reliable.
|
All three of those french boxes are very high spec though, the first Clio and 206 has digital climate control, trillions of airbags, traction control etc etc. Even the more basic Clio is still very high spec.
The 206 of course was built in the UK.
Mind you despite the problems we have had with the Fiesta (bushes, wishbones, CV joints etc) I am sure my dad would still buy another Ford because they don't break down.
My dad used to have one of earliest of the last shape Escorts (95 N) and that was a very reliable more less trouble free car which he did 60,000 miles in. It did 95k in the end and the engine still sounded like brand new but it was stored in a damp garage and the rust killed it.
|
>>> I think historically that small French cars seem to lack the electronic complexity of the bigger ones, and hence prove more reliable. <<<
I bought a 1.4 16v Clio a few years back, mainly for the fuhrer to drive,
but it proved to be unreliable so I outed it (electrics).
|
not had any agro with clios. We have had 1s, 2s and a Mk3
all been good. the ones and twos were pretty simple.
|
The AutoExpress Driver Power surveys are not, perhaps, the most helpful of surveys, but they are not meaningless. The big question is to find out exactly what they do mean.
I've not actually got a copy myself, but one or two things jump out at me.
In AutoExpress surveys, French cars NEVER get into the top 10. Never. They rarely get into the top 50.
The fact that the new Megane is in 5th place tells you something.
Add to that the fact that the Megane easily beats the Honda Civic and the Toyota Auris, and you have something very interesting.
It seems to me that the times just might be a changing.
|
Only those who have reason to complain do so, the remainder (by far the largest and overwhelming proportion) are perfectly happy with their purchase and rarely comment.
It applies to cars, hi-fi, TVs, cameras or anything else you care to mention.
I'm very surprised that Vauxhall cars are slated - the early Corsas, for instance, might not have have the best suspension around, but build quality and reliability are rarely an issue (at least to the extent of which I'm aware) with the marque.
Last edited by: Stuartli on Mon 19 Apr 10 at 23:19
|
|
With the Corsas I think the older 8vs engines were more reliable BUT the last ones were made in 1997-8 so they are very rare now.
|
>> not had any agro with clios. We have had 1s 2s and a Mk3
>>
>> all been good. the ones and twos were pretty simple.
>>
Clio 1 was quite simple though the 2 has ABS, aircon, EFI, sophisticated electrics etc.
|
>> though the 2 has aircon
>>
your one might have, ours didnt.
|
"A fair number of buyers of popular, mainstream cars (307, Astra, Fiesta in the AE list) are disengaged from cars and driving in general and just buy whatever the adverts/ the car supermarkets/ their dad tells them to"
Given that it is an AutoExpress survey, presumably it's only people interested in cars who would have taken part
P.S. Isn't the Hyundai i30 European by design and manufacture, or are Jaguar and Land Rover now classed as Indian.
|
>> P.S. Isn't the Hyundai i30 European by design and manufacture or are Jaguar and Land
>> Rover now classed as Indian.
>>
How is a cars "nationality" established? Company ownership, manufacturing nation, component source?
And what is my KIA ceed, designed in Germany, built in Slovakia, Parts from Europe, and Korea? For example the entire diesel injection system and engine management is made by Bosch.
|
>> your one might have ours didnt.
>>
Not all Clio IIIs have aircon either, the point is that the Clio II has contemporary and sophisticated electrics thoogh is nevertheless generally very reliable.
|
|
I'm not surprised at Vauxhall's dire performance, I've had 5 of their cars in the past and they ranged from merely unreliable to dire, customer service was atrocious, their only redeeming feature was that they were all economical with fuel. I will never buy a Vauxhall again, ever....
|
|
And yet I saw (somewhere - Warranty Direct?) that the last Astra was the most reliable company car (whilst the Vectra was the least reliable). Doesn't tally with the AE survey.
|
|
I would have though that they would have been similaer, becasue apart from design, probable suspension and drivetrain componants, The engines and associated Electronics will be near enough indentical
|
On new cars cars which score well on warranty direct do some for three reasons probably:-
1) The dealer was fixed the car under warranty
2) The repair might be so cheap it was not worth claiming
3) The repairs are so cheap overall costs to the warranty company is low.
|
|
This is interesting, since volumes sold and other feedback belies these figures. From another place, re the Corsa C: "Generally a reliable little car with few faults reported for the large volumes sold. A RECOMMENDED used buy". I'm sure there are other divergent opinions. Autoexpress readers may not, perhaps, be representative.
|
The Corsa forums will tell you that there is plenty of problems with the C. The biggest problem people have had with them is not springs or camshafts but failing gearbox gaitors. It is made out of plastic and lasts 50k.
MAFs seem to fail on them as well by about 80k, funny how Bosch can't make them which last but the Ford system seems to last for ever.
People on the Corsa site seem to think the B's and the higher spec Ds are the best Corsas ever made.
Head gaskets are also an issue with the chain cam Corsa engines although probably no more so than most modern engines.
|
>> The Corsa forums will tell you that there is plenty of problems with the C.
"Where people go to get advice on their car problems". No problem, no 'net search, no report of problem, nor of satisfaction.
|
Autoexpress Driver survey - results - Dave_
