Reliability..........the big myth(s)......

Biro

I'll say it again. Will people STOP equating good car = reliable car and bad car = unreliable car. It's the logic of a non-car person, and I would take their opinion on a car following that assumption with a pinch of salt.
F40's wouldn't be known for their bullet-proof half a million miles without a hitch reliability, but does that mean that an F40 is a far worse car than a Micra? Get some sense people. I'd rather drive a Punto any day over the hideous Micra that's dull to drive.
Actually, Fiat and Alfa are actually assembling their cars very well these days. Look up close at the new Bravo. Panel gaps like you'd expect to find on a car from today. The 159 seems devoid of problems 2 years into it's life.

mukki

Max_Damage wrote: »

I'd be more inclinded to say Renault's are the worst, however Fiat's are fairly bad too (with the exception of the Panda).

I worked in a FIat/Alfa garage before (not as a mechanic mind you), but the Grande Punto from what I saw was poorly built, plastic trimmings falling off, body panels not fitted properly and out of alignment, boot and bonnet release cables breaking, and so on. And it happened to more than one car too. And as for the Stilo, utter rubbish, electrics were constantly failing on them.

if renault only made the clio they would have a great rep, the laguna really drags them down.

E92

And FIAT diesels are supposed to be very reliable too.

As Biro says a good car can be very unreliable, while a bad car can never let you down. That said a car that will be reliable will definately interest me more than one that's not.

I'm surprised with the problems with the Grande Punto, they look very solid to me inside in them.

I've never heard about issues with the current Opel Corsa and that car and the Grande Punto share a common platform. You'd think that if there is something wrong with the nation's best selling supermini that we'd have heard about it by now.

I'm glad that the 159 is as good as people say it is too for reliability. A big problem for FIAT/Alfa is the dealers. I've no personal experience of them, but they certainily have a less than enviable reputation from what I've seen here on Motors.

L1011

Decent Fiat dealers are few and far between in the UK or Ireland because they've all been battle hardened from the 80s and 90s to refuse that theres anything wrong with then rust buckets they sold

I've changed which one I use for work a few times now, Rialto Fiat were probably the best - and are now gone.

A lot of Fiat dealers are also GM dealers from the era of the 'partnership'/potential merger. You don't hear much about GM dealers being bad though...

Henry Ford III

green123 wrote: »

going on this information a punto is more reliable than a fiesta No it's not. Punto scores 86 vs. Fiesta 50. Fiesta wins.........

For example. I didn't bother comparing the others. I think you are misinterpreting the stats.

ambro25

Looks like Top Trumps all over again

JHMEG

Biro wrote: »

I'd rather drive a Punto any day over the hideous Micra that's dull to drive.

I don't like needlessly wasting money, so I'd take the Micra.

zilog_jones

JHMEG wrote: »

Biro wrote:

I'd rather drive a Punto any day over the hideous Micra that's dull to drive.

I don't like needlessly wasting money, so I'd take the Micra.

I'd take a Fiesta (and I did) - not dull to drive, and not particularly unreliable either. However I don't really like the newer ones (2002 onwards) - the seating position is insanely high in comparison to the Mk. IV, and the thicker pillars between the windows and boot leave massive blackspots (that's "safety" fer ya :rolleyes:). It seems all newer superminis are like this though, so I guess I don't like any of them

astraboy

Biro wrote: »

I'll say it again. Will people STOP equating good car = reliable car and bad car = unreliable car. It's the logic of a non-car person, and I would take their opinion on a car following that assumption with a pinch of salt.
F40's wouldn't be known for their bullet-proof half a million miles without a hitch reliability, but does that mean that an F40 is a far worse car than a Micra? Get some sense people. I'd rather drive a Punto any day over the hideous Micra that's dull to drive.
Actually, Fiat and Alfa are actually assembling their cars very well these days. Look up close at the new Bravo. Panel gaps like you'd expect to find on a car from today. The 159 seems devoid of problems 2 years into it's life.

Well said! Some people that equate a car with a washing machine, ie it is there to do a job and get me from A-B and nothing else, will whine on about reliability and MPG, and never wash the car or look under the bonnet. My 156 may not be the most reliable according to common folklore, yet I have yet to have major issues in my 9 months of owning it and IMO it IS a great car, great to drive, great to look at, great to just sit in. If a "great" car is a toyota corolla that goes for 1M miles, shoot me, because I will never own a "great" car. I buy my cars with a combination of my heart and my head, others buy them like they buy a fridge.

The scoring of that survey may be a bit off, perhaps they should have done the average repair as a percentage of the original cost price of the car? Obviously a 3.6L engine on a porsche might cost more to fix then a 1.4 VW.

Actually, how did VW fair? Surprised at Subaru, though I would still not doubt their reliability too much. They have had to do a recall on certain Impreza turbo models in the US due to Turbo issues recently though.

cancan

There is no way that BMW's have better reliability than subaru.
I know of numerous BMW owners, one of who was chief of the local bmw club, who moved over to subaru's for reliability reasons alone.

In the US, BMW offer a free servicing packing for the first 50,000 miles as a way to try and placate owners who got sick of spending fortunes keeping them on the road.

Most bmw fans won't touch one once the warranty/free service deal is up, and shifting them second hand once this barrier has been broken is tricky without a big discount.

In club racing, every subaru owner I know never has issues, and these are heavily abused cars, while there is a litany of BMW issues from the same club members.
The only subarus that give trouble are normally when idiots start adding blow off valves and pointless rubbish like that, use the wrong fuel, or don't change the oil when they should. They are bulletproof when maintained properly, and can take plenty of abuse.

astraboy

I think the "chocolate pistons" stories on the Subarus came from import Impreza's mapped for higher RON fuel, the owners then tuned them or drove them hard on the wrong fuel and hence the melted pistons. I don't think I've even heard of much trouble on the imports once mapped correctly for 95Ron fuel.

JHMEG

It's funny that people are saying "I'd take great drive over reliable any day".

There are cars that are great drives and ultra reliable (tho I'm not gonna put any Alfas or Fiats in that category yet as I don't believe they are ultra reliable).

astraboy

Ya but then price plays a factor.

fast and cheap = not reliable
cheap and reliable = not fast
fast and reliable = not cheap

JHMEG

astraboy wrote: »

Ya but then price plays a factor.

fast and cheap = not reliable
cheap and reliable = not fast
fast and reliable = not cheap

Not true. There are good driver's cars out there that are ultra reliable and fairly inexpensive. Think Mazda, Honda, Nissan, and even Toyota.

Biro

astraboy wrote: »

Well said! Some people that equate a car with a washing machine, ie it is there to do a job and get me from A-B and nothing else, will whine on about reliability and MPG, and never wash the car or look under the bonnet. My 156 may not be the most reliable according to common folklore, yet I have yet to have major issues in my 9 months of owning it and IMO it IS a great car, great to drive, great to look at, great to just sit in. If a "great" car is a toyota corolla that goes for 1M miles, shoot me, because I will never own a "great" car. I buy my cars with a combination of my heart and my head, others buy them like they buy a fridge.

The scoring of that survey may be a bit off, perhaps they should have done the average repair as a percentage of the original cost price of the car? Obviously a 3.6L engine on a porsche might cost more to fix then a 1.4 VW.

Actually, how did VW fair? Surprised at Subaru, though I would still not doubt their reliability too much. They have had to do a recall on certain Impreza turbo models in the US due to Turbo issues recently though.

Hurrah for a true enthusiast! Few and far between on these pages!
If you look hard enough, you'll probably find a good car in every car make's history.

unkel

Recent reliability surveys that report the average number of faults show that the least reliable cars have about one fault per year or something like that. Not as reliable as other cars. But can we call that car unreliable in absolute terms? I think not. Ergo all modern cars are reliable...

Biro wrote: »

Will people STOP equating good car = reliable car and bad car = unreliable car. It's the logic of a non-car person

Well said!

green123

Originally Posted by green123
going on this information a punto is more reliable than a fiesta

Henry Ford III wrote: »

No it's not. Punto scores 86 vs. Fiesta 50. Fiesta wins.........
For example. I didn't bother comparing the others. I think you are misinterpreting the stats.

what are you talking about ?
dont tell me i am misinterpreting the stats .
you are the one who is wrong not me

i am looking at the overall positions in the top 100

punto is 50th
fiesta is 61st
corolla is one of the worst coming in at 91st

unkel

green123 wrote: »

punto is 50th
fiesta is 61st
corolla is one of the worst coming in at 91st

Those ratings are all very well. My point is that cars that have a fault every 3 years are as reliable in real life as cars that have a fault every 4 years. The former might come in 91st position, the latter might come in 50th position in that list...

congo_90

MYOB wrote: »

...and there are the words of someone who hasn't driven or in any way experienced a modern Fiat Auto group car...

Recenlty drove a fiat doblo... can say it was scarey to say the least a nightmare. poor brakes. poor electrics, ergonomics, owner reported engine problems twice, gear box felt like it was put together by somebody in first year metal work in secondary school along with brakes and just about every part of it tbh.

also drove a fiat punto (07) this was worse to say the least. Same as above but with worse consequences... gear box fell out and exhaust fittings near silencer fell off too. a real 'fix it again tomorrow.'

Please don't stand up for these cars. they're hit or miss at best :rolleyes:

Henry Ford III

green123 wrote: »

what are you talking about ?
dont tell me i am misinterpreting the stats .
you are the one who is wrong not me

i am looking at the overall positions in the top 100

punto is 50th
fiesta is 61st
corolla is one of the worst coming in at 91st

The stats you are quoting from refer to reliabilty claims over the last 10 years. Read the notes.

Go into the specific cars individually and you'll get an entirely different outcome.

muletide

Gooooooooooooooo Mazda

green123

Henry Ford III wrote: »

The stats you are quoting from refer to reliabilty claims over the last 10 years. Read the notes.

Go into the specific cars individually and you'll get an entirely different outcome.

well why is there a difference ?
you would imagine that the top 100 listed is just that.

i dont understand why cars that everybody knows are reliable such as the corolla (91) are so low in the top 100

Balfa

astraboy wrote: »

I buy my cars with a combination of my heart and my head, others buy them like they buy a fridge.

I take issue with this statement. My fridge is a 26.5 cubic foot side-by-side LG with titanium doors, backlit ice and filtered water dispenser and digital LCD display. Excellent fit and finish too... you'd find bigger bodywork gaps on an Audi. That's the heart side. Of course in the head side, its 600W motor purrs quietly and smoothly. Parts are expensive, but I change the filter on it myself, so I've never had it in to the dealership. No trouble whatsoever.

JHMEG

If your fridge were a car it'd have an 8.3 litre V8 with a 2 speed auto box, leaf springs, live axle, and do 7mpg. But it would look awesome.

galwaytt

cozmik wrote: »

If we all rode motorbikes our A&E departments would implode.

no it wouldn't............by dint of 2/3rds of all m/c accidents being the fault of car drivers, once you remove the car drivers............it's all good !! Win-Win, really...

p.s. got a TDM850 Friday, so the move is on.........:D

Oh, and to the comment about the Mazda dodgy diesels - you're dead right, ours is kaputt at 88k miles...........7k to fix. And I'm not alone, either.......

Scooby gets dragged down not by breakdown rate, but by cost of the repair when it does go AWOL...........don't understand why Mazda isn't getting caught the same way, either.........

Panda Moanium

congo_90 wrote: »

also drove a fiat punto (07) this was worse to say the least. Same as above but with worse consequences... gear box fell out and exhaust fittings near silencer fell off too. a real 'fix it again tomorrow.'

Please don't stand up for these cars. they're hit or miss at best :rolleyes:

Wow, gear box fell out! Just like that! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:. Hope the cars following behind managed to avoid it. How far did you go before you realised it was gone?

Biro

Panda Moanium wrote: »

Wow, gear box fell out! Just like that! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:. Hope the cars following behind managed to avoid it. How far did you go before you realised it was gone?

I hate when the gearbox falls out. I'm always left with a few "spare" parts when I put it back together...

Panda Moanium

Lucky it was a Fiat he was driving 'cos he could fix it again tomorrow. Any other make of car and it would probably take weeks!

ambro25

galwaytt wrote: »

Scooby gets dragged down not by breakdown rate, but by cost of the repair when it does go AWOL...........don't understand why Mazda isn't getting caught the same way, either.........

Well, in fairness.. they are a tad more complicated 'underneath' than your bog standard FWD hatch, irrespective of brand
(not a gripe or a dig, just a straightforward case of want-more-then-pay-for-it)

Mazda, I'll not say - could just be an isolated case of bad engineering/mech design for a particular series, as they have traditionally been just as bullet-proof as Subaru or Toyota or Honda (but not so much in amongst the "collective psyche" as Toyota or Honda).

We've had an MX5 over 6 years (it's 10 now years old), and it's only ever taken petrol in (save as to oil/filters/brake pads at standard servicing intervals). Same with some friend's workhorse 15 year-old 323, that's been nicked + recovered 4 times (:eek:) and vandalised more than that, and yet still starts every morning and takes them from A to B and back, so...

L1011

congo_90 wrote: »

Recenlty drove a fiat doblo... can say it was scarey to say the least a nightmare. poor brakes. poor electrics, ergonomics, owner reported engine problems twice, gear box felt like it was put together by somebody in first year metal work in secondary school along with brakes and just about every part of it tbh.

also drove a fiat punto (07) this was worse to say the least. Same as above but with worse consequences... gear box fell out and exhaust fittings near silencer fell off too. a real 'fix it again tomorrow.'

Please don't stand up for these cars. they're hit or miss at best :rolleyes:

If the 'gear box fell out' on an 07 Fiat, you wouldn't be driving it - Fiat would have replaced the car rather than repairing it as you're looking at effectively replacing most of the drive train in that case - good chance the engine would be damaged beyond easy repair too. The cars have 5 year warranties so you can't even give me 'it was a January 07 car and it happened in February...' or anything similar.

So, basically - I don't believe you. Fiat don't even make gearboxes, by the way - they use Fuji ones (Subaru basically).