|
The Forfour might justify its higher price if it holds its value better than the Twingo. The mechanicals are Renault's, but Arthur Punter doesn't know that and thinks he's getting a Mercedes.
|
The Forfour might justify its higher price if it holds its value better than the Twingo. The mechanicals are Renault's, but Arthur Punter doesn't know that and thinks he's getting a Mercedes.
I'd be thinking I was getting a Smart unless there was a Mercedes badge on it.
|
The Forfour might justify its higher price if it holds its value better than the Twingo. The mechanicals are Renault's, but Arthur Punter doesn't know that and thinks he's getting a Mercedes.
I'd be thinking I was getting a Smart unless there was a Mercedes badge on it.
You might do but most people see Smart cars at the Mercedes dealer and think they are getting a little Mercedes...why brand is so important to a company. They can sell essentially the same car for more money.
|
|
|
|
|
Never even considered a Twingo - there's more to buying a car other than cost.
Once you look at detailed specifications the difference in cost between the two models is not huge.
|
Now had it three months and 1500 miles, mostly school run or local trips usually in rush hour. Averaged 42 mpg.
Great for zipping around, really quick off the mark and not so slow at other times. Trick rear seats are useful as one is always folded down so handy to put shopping bags on.
Used no oil in that time.
Its always the small things with cars which grab me and one feature I do like is the radio doesn't turn off until you open the driver's door, even if you remove the key from the ignition.
One reason I've done the update is I did a double take today as at school pick up a forfour came into the car park. It was exactly like ours and realised it was the one I test drove before selecting ours from about 6 the dealer had.
A friend of ours has bought it for running her kids around rather than the family Merc GLS. She has 3 children she takes to school and they all fitted with no problem!
|
Latest update.
I’m afraid it was a short lived affair.
From Christmas we have had real problems with it, the Renault DNA became evident.
First off the dash lights started playing up. The handbrake on light sometimes worked, sometimes didn’t, sometimes worked, then went off then worked again. Into dealer who said they had fixed it, they hadn’t.
Satnav was hit and miss. Often saying no maps when the SD card was in situ.
In Feb yellow engine light. AA out no codes recorded, then it went into limp mode twice. Into dealership. Failed turbo actuator, now looks like ours wasn’t an isolated incident as I’ve read of others having the same. 8 weeks later car back. Car returned with other problems due to sloppy workmanship. Handbrake light still not fixed.
Mrs Daveyjp had had enough. Whilst not doing mega miles, she needs reliability, this car didn’t have it.
She looked at
Suzuki Swift
Mazda 2
Toyota Yaris
The Yaris won the day. A 1.5 icon, facelifted version. It was the best value of all three, she had had an Aygo for 5 years so was happy going back to Toyota. Hopefully this is more reliable!
|
|
That sounds like a good move - let's hope all goes well. My elder daughter had four 1.3 Yarises: as long as you avoid the 1.0 litre, the Yaris is much livelier and better to drive than the magazine road tests would have you believe. Hers were all totally reliable as well.
She changed to a Hyundai i10 only because it was several thousand pounds cheaper. It;s smaller than the current model Yaris but not much smaller than the old ones.
|
|
|
|
Sensible shortlist and (hopefully) a good choice made. Rare for a Yaris to give grief.
|
The 90bhp 900c turbo returned 52 mpg over the day. Zero road tax and a reduction in insurance premium.
Not great mpg over a 150 mile trip is it. Both our 1.4 140 PS Leon and 150 PS Superb have managed just over 50 mpg on a run to the coast and both are way bigger than a Smart, way quicker and still only £30 VED.
The wifes current 1.2 98 PS Nissan Note will do over 55 mpg mpg on a trip to her mothers in Yorkshire and is again way bigger than a Smart. And its £0 VED.
Hoping for nearer 60 mpg (based on the test drive dash display) when she gets the 1.0 110 PS Fabia but the dash display may have been telling lies, they do you know. If it matches the Note we will be happy since its more powerful and quite a bit faster.
|
|
Be interested to see how you get on with this fabia, as it looks a very nice car. Maybe u can give updates of average mpg and a general opinion after a few weeks & months.
|
A good friend and neighbour, is a (very) senior manager at Bentley. He's an engineer and is one of the guys who test drives the latest models on ice lakes etc. Like others who work for them, he gets a very good deal on VAG cars as part of his contract. He can have more or less anything he likes from the group's range at either no charge as a company car, or if it's a particularly posh model, he has to make a nominal monthly contribution.
He, like many of his colleagues, always chooses Skodas. He swears that they are every bit as good as the VWs and AUDIs. Currently he's got a Kodiaq, although he changes them every six months, and the last couple have been Superb estates.
|
|
Hey Alby, I'm sure I've heard somebody else talking about that neighbour a while back, or maybe on the interweb somewhere. Do you believe in reincarnation? ;-)
|
|
|
|
"He swears that they are every bit as good as the VWs and AUDIs."
I'd agree. Good to hear that, as he has no particular axe to grind, and he is obviously highly qualified to make that statement.
It's good that although many VAG cars are mechanically identical, there is at least some significance in the difference between the marques, unlike the meaningless BMC badge engineering of the 1960s.
I'd have been very happy to have two Skodas on the drive, but as it happens we have the A1 (because when we got it in late 2016 you couldn't have a Fabia with the 1.4 petrol engine, and a Q2 on order (because the Kodiaq is bigger than we need, and the Karoq's sliding rear seats don't fold flush with the boot floor; also it can't be had as a 2.0 litre).
But that's just our particular needs: for the majority there will be a Skoda to suit. 'Some Kind Of Downmarket Audi' perhaps, but not that far downmarket.
|
because when we got it in late 2016 you couldn't have a Fabia with the 1.4 petrol engine
You cannot now and it very nearly put us off trying the Fabia. But once out in the 1.0 TSi we soon realised it suited the car extremely well and even on the hill of the peak never struggled, n fact it felt positively lively. That was a 95 PS version, I tried a 110 PS very briefly just to check it had no odd charisteristics and that is the one we ordered (more for the 6 speed box and 25 torques than the 15 PS).
Considering the Superb weighs in at about 1365 kg's and had 184 torques and the Fabia weighs in at 1080 kg's and has 148 torques there is not that much in it, in fact the Fabia has a slightly better ratio. Add in a couple of people and it does turn to the Superb's advantage.
Still to be convinced that the 1.0 TSi would be a good idea in an Octavia or Karoq but will keep an open mind until I prove it either way, not likely in the near future since we are not serial test drivers. Might ask if they have a Karoq 1.0 as a cutesy car next year when we go for a service.
|
|
A good friend and neighbour, is a (very) senior manager at Bentley. He's an engineer and is one of the guys who test drives the latest models on ice lakes etc. Like others who work for them, he gets a very good deal on VAG cars as part of his contract. He can have more or less anything he likes from the group's range at either no charge as a company car, or if it's a particularly posh model, he has to make a nominal monthly contribution. He, like many of his colleagues, always chooses Skodas. He swears that they are every bit as good as the VWs and AUDIs. Currently he's got a Kodiaq, although he changes them every six months, and the last couple have been Superb estates.
I find this a very odd statement from someone who works in the motor industry and more importantly, for VAG. Presumably he knows that all the important parts are shared, floorpans, engines, transmissions, suspension etc, so why would he think anything else.
It amuses and exasperates me that there are still a lot of people out there who think of Skoda as some kind of poor relation, and still think of them in the same light as the old rear engined one's. And even then, from a reliablity point of view, they were nothing like as bad as some would have you believe. A case in point being that rear engined Skoda's won their class in the old RAC rally something like 20 years on the trot. That simply wouldn't be the case if they were as unreliable and generally rubbish as various comedians of the time (Jasper Carrot?) would tell you.
There was another post recently of someone asking about a car for her son. One answer suggested VW up, Skoda citigo or Seat mii. The OP answered that they never would have considered a Skoda, obviously not bothered about the other two, despite them being the same car but with very minor styling differences and different badges!.
|
And even then, from a reliablity point of view, they were nothing like as bad as some would have you believe. A case in point being that rear engined Skoda's won their class in the old RAC rally something like 20 years on the trot. That simply wouldn't be the case if they were as unreliable and generally rubbish as various comedians of the time (Jasper Carrot?) would tell you.
That comment shows just how little most people know about competition cars and how wonderful a marketing tool rally wins can be.
The Skodas that won their class in the RAC rally were not cars off the production line that had extra lights and a sump guard bolted on. There were cars that were individually built in the competition department by highly skilled specialists starting with a strengthened shell to which were bolted either specialist competition components or if the rules did not allow that selected and highly modified standard components. From memory I think I read that the windscreen and door handles were the only Estelle components that were interchangeable between road and rally cars.
At the end of each rally the cars would be stripped and rebuilt replacing many compenents along the way.
Like with all brands there is no way you can equate rally sucess with the quality of the road cars. Even the famed Imprezza was a total dog in the showroom class. The gearbox was made of either chocolate or cheese, either way drivers had to baby the thing to get it through rallies.
|
This is not unique to VAG.
Most Peugeot models are priced £1k more than equivalent Citroen models despite being 95% identical.
I have never understood why ??
|
This is not unique to VAG. Most Peugeot models are priced £1k more than equivalent Citroen models despite being 95% identical. I have never understood why ??
It's called brand positioning, and as someone who spent over 25 years in a career in Marketing, I can tell you it's mainly b******s!
Would you expect a brand leading bleach or toilet cleaner to have the same stuff in the bottle as a cheapy one sold to the discount stores? Well, it is. Tiny changes to the amount of fragrance or more usually the bottle design is enough to differentiate the two for the average man/lady in the street. Plus the brand leaders spend silly amounts on "consumer insight", which used to be called market research in my day. Do we really need to know what socio-economic group ABC1 consumers are thinking when they clean their toilet?
Rant over.
|
This is not unique to VAG. Most Peugeot models are priced £1k more than equivalent Citroen models despite being 95% identical. I have never understood why ??
It's called brand positioning, and as someone who spent over 25 years in a career in Marketing, I can tell you it's mainly b******s!
Would you expect a brand leading bleach or toilet cleaner to have the same stuff in the bottle as a cheapy one sold to the discount stores? Well, it is. Tiny changes to the amount of fragrance or more usually the bottle design is enough to differentiate the two for the average man/lady in the street. Plus the brand leaders spend silly amounts on "consumer insight", which used to be called market research in my day. Do we really need to know what socio-economic group ABC1 consumers are thinking when they clean their toilet?
Rant over.
Its the same reason why a white t-shirt with a tick on it costs twice as much as one without one.
|
And even then, from a reliablity point of view, they were nothing like as bad as some would have you believe. A case in point being that rear engined Skoda's won their class in the old RAC rally something like 20 years on the trot. That simply wouldn't be the case if they were as unreliable and generally rubbish as various comedians of the time (Jasper Carrot?) would tell you.
That comment shows just how little most people know about competition cars and how wonderful a marketing tool rally wins can be.
The Skodas that won their class in the RAC rally were not cars off the production line that had extra lights and a sump guard bolted on. There were cars that were individually built in the competition department by highly skilled specialists starting with a strengthened shell to which were bolted either specialist competition components or if the rules did not allow that selected and highly modified standard components. From memory I think I read that the windscreen and door handles were the only Estelle components that were interchangeable between road and rally cars.
At the end of each rally the cars would be stripped and rebuilt replacing many compenents along the way.
Like with all brands there is no way you can equate rally sucess with the quality of the road cars. Even the famed Imprezza was a total dog in the showroom class. The gearbox was made of either chocolate or cheese, either way drivers had to baby the thing to get it through rallies.
This is an extract from rallygroupbshrine.org regarding the (estelle) 130LR rally car, such as the one's which would compete in the RAC as well as numerous continental events.
"The car's main strength's were it's light weight and good reliability",
it then goes on to list the modification's of the rally car engine over the standard production version,
"Upgrades over the standard car included the use of twin Weber carburettor's, larger diameter intake manifold, Lobro crankshaft, modified headwork and a dry sump system"
Given you are clearly the expert here, perhaps you could tell me which of the above would make the car more reliable than standard, rather than just more powerful?.
In addition, this is an extract from Wikipedia,
"Alongside western cars in the same classes, the Škodas were increasingly dated in technological terms. However, they were very reliable, the team was experienced and many of the works drivers were very talented. Consequently, Škoda Motorsport was very successful, especially on long rallies where reliability mattered. Škodas frequently won their classes on world events, and were notably successful on the RAC Rally in Great Britain, in which they took the under-1300cc trophy for seventeen years running. They also scored some high placings overall, among them eighth on the Acropolis Rally in 1973 and 1979, and sixth in San Remo, in 1986. On European Championship events they frequently finished in the top ten, and on events behind the Iron Curtain they were often contenders for outright victory, although against relatively limited opposition."
Key point here being "long rallies where reliability mattered", i.e, rallies where the car would not be in a service area at the end of a 60km stage, but may have gone 100's of km's before getting to a service area and where the inherant reliablity of the car, along with the actual strength of it, was crucial.
Skoda motorsport of the time was a 'department' within the main factory, and not a seperate outfit. Also, a strengthened shell has nothing to do with the reliability or otherwise of the car's drivetrain.
I have to say i am surprised, i know you are extremely argumentative, but i didn't think you'd be arguing with my opinion on how good Skoda's are!
|
|
I think skidpan and badbusdriver need to meet for a beer.
|
I have to say i am surprised, i know you are extremely argumentative, but i didn't think you'd be arguing with my opinion on how good Skoda's are!
Thats for that compliment, did not expect it from you.
Also, a strengthened shell has nothing to do with the reliability or otherwise of the car's drivetrain.
Not directly but since a strengthened shell flexes less it keeps all the major mechanical components where they should be with less flexing it thus reducing stress on them.
I am not saying that the Estelles achievements were not significant, they were. Its a record that will probably remain unbeaten and every year supposedly better oposition failed to beat them.
But the simple fact remains that every works competition car bares very little relationship to a showroom model. They have the best of the best fitted into them by the best mechanics and while the works Skoda team had much less money than the works teams competing for outright victory they made the most out of every Koruna they had and obviously they had some very talented staff.
Lets not forget one other fact, the Estelles only redeeming feature in the UK was its low price. Compared to just about every other car on the market (excluding Lada's, Yugo's, Dacia's) it was rubbish and when introduced was pretty much declared to be dangerous unanimously by the motoring press.
The Skoda's we buy today have nothing in common with their ancestors other than the fact that the Fabia has had a successful rally career.
|
I had three of the Estelle variants, a 120L which was basic, a little noisy on the motorway but completely reliable. This was followed by a 130LSE with semi trailing arm rear suspension which was much quieter with the same levels of dependability, my last was a 16 Rapid which was a superb little car which could had superb handling and was much praised by Autocar back in the day.
None of them I would class as rubbish, the only unreliable Skoda I ever owned was a Felicia 1.6. All the bits which had to be replaced [mostly cooling system and various electrical components) had a VAG stamp on them. Refinement w a improved but it seemed to coincide with the built in obsolescence of vital components.
|
I had three of the Estelle variants, a 120L which was basic, a little noisy on the motorway but completely reliable. This was followed by a 130LSE with semi trailing arm rear suspension which was much quieter with the same levels of dependability, my last was a 16 Rapid which was a superb little car which could had superb handling and was much praised by Autocar back in the day. None of them I would class as rubbish, the only unreliable Skoda I ever owned was a Felicia 1.6. All the bits which had to be replaced [mostly cooling system and various electrical components) had a VAG stamp on them. Refinement w a improved but it seemed to coincide with the built in obsolescence of vital components.
I'd love an old rear engined Skoda, and i do remember how complimentary the motoring press at the time were on the handling of the last of the rear engined one's, particularly the 136 rapid coupe, which was likened to a budget 911 in the way it handled!. But i actually prefered the looks of the saloon.
I was just looking at this (rather older) 1000MB on carandclassic.co.uk, quite expensive (though still £6.5k less than the only other one for sale on the site), but what a lovely thing!
www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C911140
|
|
I never had any handling issues with any of mine. I believe the swing axle versions bore the brunt of criticism from the press. I was always respectful of the configuration of the 120L, but as long as you went round corners “on the throttlle”, as we were taught back in the day it could be hustled along nicely. The 136 Rapid was a a superb and much underrated little car. The steering on all Estelle 2’s was rack and pinion which only went 2.5 turns lock to lock, very light and precise with lots of feel. DIY maintenance was a doddle too.
|
|
|
|
we have had real problems with it, the Renault DNA became evident.
This may be a Renault DNA issue - but Mercedes have plenty of similar DNA themsleves, they spent 15 years building absolute tat that rusted away with Renault-like dodgy electrics toboot. Still, stick a shiny star on the bonnet and the usual mugs come knocking. In your original post you spoke of a A class which was starting to get tired after 5 years, that's all you need to know about modern Mercs. Still, they have turned things around somewhat lately but aren't as durable as Mercs of old. 'Er indoor's Suzuki SX4 is now 9 years old - it has absolutely no faults - none, nor has it required any repairs depite only receiving an annual oil change and occasional brake fliud change (no other servicing).
|
Agree about Mercedes, not sure which German premium marque is more unreliable Audi or Mercedes?
BMW do seem to be ahead but are far from perfect (local BMW dealer and BMW UK tried to fob off a friend who had engine failure on his 64 plate 3 series despite being under warranty with full main dealer history).
|
Once again, I guess we can all only speak as we find, but for what it's worth, I ran an E Class estate from new in 2011 until May '16 when it had by then done 180,000 trouble free miles, and replaced it then with my current E220 which has been similarly reliable up to its current 70,000 miles. I look forward with some informed confidence to it going on to serve me well for some considerable time yet. The "old" one appears to be on 225,000 now, but of course I can't say whether it got there from 180,000 without problems.
Internet forums really are great places to hear from the "tooth suckers", I remember clearly when I had two Mondeo TDCIs in a row. I was assured here at the time that the clutches would lunch themselves every five minutes or something, the first one went up to 150,000 without so much as a light bulb needing to be replaced, and the second one to nigh on 200,000 with no problems at all.
|
Once again, I guess we can all only speak as we find, but for what it's worth, I ran an E Class estate from new in 2011 until May '16 when it had by then done 180,000 trouble free miles, and replaced it then with my current E220 which has been similarly reliable up to its current 70,000 miles. I look forward with some informed confidence to it going on to serve me well for some considerable time yet. The "old" one appears to be on 225,000 now, but of course I can't say whether it got there from 180,000 without problems. Internet forums really are great places to hear from the "tooth suckers", I remember clearly when I had two Mondeo TDCIs in a row. I was assured here at the time that the clutches would lunch themselves every five minutes or something, the first one went up to 150,000 without so much as a light bulb needing to be replaced, and the second one to nigh on 200,000 with no problems at all.
I do think that your cars have an easy life Alby. Long runs coupled with good driving technique - I reckon you're easy on your clutches. An ideal person to buy from, even at high mileage.
Can I ask what diesel fuel you buy? Standard or premium?
|
|
Supermarket diesel mainly. We don't actually have a branded fuel station near us so it's either Sainsburys or Morrisons usually.
|
|
|
|
In your original post you spoke of a A class which was starting to get tired after 5 years, that's all you need to know about modern Mercs..........'Er indoor's Suzuki SX4 is now 9 years old - it has absolutely no faults - none, nor has it required any repairs depite only receiving an annual oil change and occasional brake fliud change (no other servicing)
It seems every marque has its diamonds and dogs. I cannot contribute to this thread's title, only once (38yrs ago) having bought a new car (FordFiesta). But 9 yrs is no age - the average age of our three cars (TR7, AudiA8, Focus) is 22. I suspect many low mileage (8k per annum) readers of this site who like to spend as little as possible on a wasting asset would appreciate opinions about cars which are likely to last another 9 years (like our Focus) without expensive repairs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
