Budget 6-8k, engine 1.6, mission find me a car

breanoh

Just to take up on this again, I have had a 1995 306, and drove it for a year, trouble free, before giving it to my mum who also had no trouble until someone pulled accross in front of her and wrote it off. A lot of my friends have 206's and none of them have ever had trouble with them. My aunt had a mégane, and never gave trouble, a couple of friends also have méganes, clio's and one or two lagunas, also trouble free. I have never heard any problems with the 406, however the citroen's are another story, KEEP AWAY!
Skoda and Seat actually are better cars than their VW and Aude counterparts, better value for money and less on the service costs, they are also more reliable than the VW/Audi's, I would say keep away from anything with an Opel or Vauxhall badge, you're only buying trouble.
Toyota avensis vvti is giving engine trouble, Ford Mundano is giving ECU trouble, and has a generally low build quality, the immob also gives trouble.

scargill

Henry Ford III wrote:

French cars are amongst the poorest built and most unrelaible available. Bottom line.

I've heard that hundreds of times, but I've had the following cars....

88 Micra (Jap import)
92 Micra (new)
93 Peugeot 106 (2nd hand - travelled from Dublin to Cork twice a week)
95 Peugeot 106 (2nd hand)
98 Peugeot 306 (2nd hand)
01 VW Golf (new)
04 Audi A3 (new)

The only cars NEVER to give me any trouble ? the three Pugs !!! (and the Jap import Micra that I had for 6 months). In all reliability surveys French cars do crap and German cars do brilliant. My Golf gave me endless trouble !! I've had a few issues with the A3 too (touch wood - no probs in 2 years).

Now I know its not a scientific study but my experience with French cars has been very positive! And a lot of peoples opinions on cars are based on personal experience.

(While - I'm on it, the girlfriends father won't let any of his daughters buy a Ford cos he had trouble with a gearbox on a Cortina in the '70s some time !!!)

Henry Ford III

Hang on for a second folks.

J.D. Power's survey is based on literally thousands of drivers experiences of new and used models. It is as comprehensive and impartial as is possible.

The fact that one or two people here have had good ownership experiences is simply not relevant to the overall picture.

I think I'll leave it at that.

TempestSabre

How are Seat/Skoda better than the VW when they are essentially the same chassis, same parts? The only difference is the styling design. Engineering design is the same.

Germans cars are picking up in quality as they used to be very poor for a long time in all the surveys. The Jap cars are still the best in terms of reliability. Assuming of course you don't buy a lemon in the first place. You can do that with any brand.

I'd place more faith in the surveys (taken in context) then people individual experiences. As a "good" independent mechanic his opinion of certain cars. They generally will see most of the common problems.

bazz26

breanoh wrote:

Just a word of warning on the Avensis, don't touch the MK1 vvti, they have gone through engines like a fat chick goes through chocolate bars!

I have covered over 140k miles on these VVTi engines (50k miles on a 2001 model, 92k miles on my current 2003 model) and have had no engine problems. Yes there were some issues with the engine drinking excessive amounts of oil after 40k miles and it effected mostly the 1.8 VVTi engine back in 2000/2001, the majority of these engines effected were sold in the UK within a certain chassis number afaik. I did hear of some cases here alright but while Toyota didn't issue a recall they did replace any engine that was found to be burning excessive oil even outside of warranty without issue afaik. Most of this would have been done by now. Other than that the VVTi engines are very durable if a little thirsty on petrol.

BrianD3

Henry Ford III wrote:

J.D Power's 2004 survey would disagree.

http://www.whatcar.com/news-special-report.aspx?NA=207800&EL=3060983

The worst rated 3 cars in thi segment are all French. The Laguna is last and has it own sub class.

In fact out of 120 cars rated Scenic was 67th, Megane 77th, Clio 91st, Pug 306 92nd, Pug 406 94th, Pug 206 95th, Laguna 110th, Pug 307 118th, and Espace 119th.

I rest my case.

As has been pointed out many times in this forum that's a satisfaction survey not a reliability survey. Also, it's very subjective as it's based on Joe Public's perception of how satisfied he is with a car. Using JD Power to evaluate a car's reliability is only slightly more scientific than asking a taxi driver or some guy down the pub for his opinion.

It's actually very difficult to say with any certainty whether Brand A is significantly better than Brand B when it comes to reliability. I would suggest that most European makes are similar for relaibility with the Japanese having slightly higher quality standards.

It's easier to evaluate build quality. I see you say that Renault's have **** build quality. Which Renaults are these? When was the last time you examined a Renault to see how well screwed together it was

TempestSabre

Actually I think its more scientific if taken in context. By that I mean if you consider who fills in these surveys, how easily satisfied or demanding a driver is of a Nissan Micra is VS a Porsche etc. Certainly satisfaction is often linked to reliability. I can't image "the majority" of people being satisfied with unreliability.

Are build quality and quality the same thing?

Henry Ford III

BrianD3 wrote:

As has been pointed out many times in this forum that's a satisfaction survey not a reliability survey. Also, it's very subjective as it's based on Joe Public's perception of how satisfied he is with a car. Using JD Power to evaluate a car's reliability is only slightly more scientific than asking a taxi driver or some guy down the pub for his opinion.

It's actually very difficult to say with any certainty whether Brand A is significantly better than Brand B when it comes to reliability. I would suggest that most European makes are similar for relaibility with the Japanese having slightly higher quality standards.

It's easier to evaluate build quality. I see you say that Renault's have **** build quality. Which Renaults are these? When was the last time you examined a Renault to see how well screwed together it was

Pretty much all of them. Espace and Laguna are worst. I read surveys and opinions based on a wide sample so have no need to examine anything.

J.D. Power works for me and for many others too. Would you suggest we should simply discount it completely and base our opinions your own experience of the same thing?

Have a look at Honest John and/or Parkers. It's the same story there.

R.O.R

Drove a 02 1.8 Laguna on Tuesday - I'd rather VD than one of those.

Had a current shape Primera as a hire car for 3 days last year. 1.6 and it was worse than the Laguna.

Driven numerous Modeo 1.8's (LX and Zetec) and very good to drive. Used to have a 01 Zetec Diesel that I traded for €11,000 last year. Might be some of those around.

Laguna's are notorious for electical problems (I work in the fleet industry so have a large number of vehicles to base info on). No issues with the Primera, there are probably still loads of dirty 02 Diesels around, but just because it's reliable doesn't mean you want to drive one.

The Passat is underpowered and overpriced in a 1.6. Golf - same goes.

Personally - Mondeo all the way. 01 onwards and hope the 1.8 insurance isn't too much higher than a 1.6. Probably bring a decent one in from the UK for nothing and use the difference to pay insurance.

BrianD3

Henry Ford III wrote:

Have a look at Honest John and/or Parkers. It's the same story there.

Honest John is a pretty crap site actually. There is blatantly wrong information on there. It's also very hit and miss - they exaggerate some problems and fail to mention other ones which can be more common/serious.

japanpaul

ninty9er wrote:

Don't know if you're looking for a minimum age but go for a decent car if at all possible that will always have some value. Don't see a location so I'm presuming Dubl


http://www.carzone.ie/usedcars/index.cfm?fuseaction=car&carID=465399

The mileage can't be real on that, can it???

ianobrien

japanpaul wrote:

The mileage can't be real on that, can it???

If the milage on that was real, I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole!

if the milage is correct, the engine is probably all deposits, the rubber hoses in the car are delaminating due to lack of use. There is probably rust in the engine & gearbox as the car never heated up enough to drive out the water. Pistons and seals are stuck, and will break/leak when used (I'm thinking brakes here). And the car is not due it's first service on milage yet!

Basically, stay away!

maidhc

japanpaul wrote:

The mileage can't be real on that, can it???

€1 per mile.

ninty9er

I'd say there's a 0 missing on the end

ninty9er

On the 90K Audi it's less than 15k a year, quite average not high at all for an Audi in fact.

Vectra- My dad had one and so did a neighbour. Dad disposed of his because the plate was getting a bit old. Neighbour had a 2.0 Auto which was too heavy on juice for 1500 miles a week.

Otherwise no probs.


French reliability. Was bad then good up to 95/6 then bad.

And anyone who says that Peugeot are great but stay away from Citroën is talking through their hat. The PSA group existence means they share the same guts and innards.

Parents had a 77 Renault 5 - door spontaneously fell off in 83

Pug 205 - Great car -

02 Xsara. Stay away. No more Citroëns need apply here

JHMEG

My 2c:

Not often I agree with what Jeremy Clarkson has to say, but I have to agree with the line: "No-one buys French cars for their reliability".

Vectra is a grand car in some ways. They do give a reasonable amount of trouble tho. The timing belt tensioner you refer to is prone to breaking up and shredding the belt. But if the belt was changed at an Opel dealer the new metal-wheeled tensioner should have been fitted with the new belt, and solved that problem. Be prepared for other stuff tho, like front wishbone bushes wearing out, dodgy alternators etc. The good thing about Opel is that they're one of the cheapest makes to actually fix. Maybe that's a sign of how often they go wrong?

VAG cars based on the Passat platform up till recently (2006) wear out their front suspension bushes prematurely, and are expensive to replace. Other stuff goes wrong to, and it all seems to be expensive to replace. Their perceived reliability is way over rated, as surveys have shown (in 2005 Alfa was officially more reliable than VW for example!)

Focus has very good driving dynamics. Feels like someone's pushing it tho. I couldn't believe the lack of poke once you're past 2nd gear. Maybe it's the gearing, but I was left underwhelmed after driving my brother in law's for a few days.

Have you considered a 2001 model Civic? Good dynamics, good spec, and the 1.6 has good poke. Unbreakable too. Only complaint would be the over assisted steering lacks feedback, but then all Civic seem to suffer that complaint, tho it's fairly minor. Should be starting to come with your budget.

HashSlinging

JHMEG wrote:

surveys have shown (in 2005 Alfa was officially more reliable than VW for example!)
QUOTE]


According to who? Source please.