ROVER 200'S!!!!!!
Forget the car/engine problems what about the brakes? Discs inserted in to a space between the caliper and wheel but NOT pinioned, thus when the discs got thin you hit the brake pedal and they whooshed through the gap and out the back of the car. Happened to me once on the Kings Road on Saturday afternoon!
Vowed there and then never to buy Rover again.
|
|
I disagree on that one.They were as good as any other car.the fact you may not have heard the warning sounds is not the cars fault.The pads have to wear extremely thin to fall out.I have not heard of it before but then most replace before the pads wear that far?
|
You've not heard of it before but you know all about it. Hmm...
You do not consider that a brake pad that is not actually pinioned is not a design fault or even a problem. Hmm...
You think that replacing pads before they wear out is a good thing. Hmm...
You didn't design this monster by any chance?
|
I have no intention ruining this thread.But do not agree that a non pinioned brake pad is dangerous. In case you forget safety is of the utmost importance as the pads on any car. From your reply kinda gather if the pads were pinioned you would have carried on driving. And what annoyes you is you had to buy new disc pads. again that is not the cars problem. That would go for any car.
>>>You think that replacing pads before they wear out is a good thing.<<< .Don`t you?
|
You are deliberately mis-interpreting what I wrote. Obviously I expect to replace consumable items such as brake pads.
What annoys me is that this car contains a design fault that means that the pads can be ejected from the car when the brake pedal is pushed. This is OBVIOUSLY highly dangerous.
I examined the whole matter in detail and concluded that brake pads had to be replaced when between 1/2 and 3/4 worn to avoid any possibility of this occuring, and this is what I would have done if I had not got shot of the car pronto. I am happy that you can afford to replace consumable items on your car when they are only part used, I can not.
Before buying the car it would never have occurred to me that anyone could build a car in this manner, nor to ask 'is there some device by which the brake pads are secured to the car'.
Can you tell me any other car that is built in this manner, I really wish to know so that I can avoid them.
|
You are deliberately mis-interpreting what I wrote. Obviously I expect to replace consumable items such as brake pads.
I have no reason to think so.But do from the post think not replaced before manufactures recomendations.ie around 3mm minimum wear.?
What annoys me is that this car contains a design fault that means that the pads can be ejected from the car when the brake pedal is pushed. This is OBVIOUSLY highly dangerous.
I have no reason to believe this car has a design fault unless anyone else can correct me on this.If so I will apologise.
I examined the whole matter in detail and concluded that brake pads had to be replaced when between 1/2 and 3/4 worn to avoid any possibility of this occuring, and this is what I would have done if I had not got shot of the car pronto. I am happy that you can afford to replace consumable items on your car when they are only part used, I can not.
>>I am happy that you can afford to replace consumable items on your car when they are only part used,<<
As a matter of interest I didn`t say that.The figure`s you mention and not me.Is a rough guide.
Before buying the car it would never have occurred to me that anyone could build a car in this manner, nor to ask 'is there some device by which the brake pads are secured to the car'.
the pads are secured safely to the brake calliper the fact that
you mentioned bad wear on the disc plus bad wear on pad is no reason to blame the car most replace disc and pad as a matter of safety before any severe wear occurs.we all say we cannot afford it but what would you say to another person that had no brakes that crashed into you.There are those that don`t.And try to make it out as a design fault.I don`t doubt you are sincere but should look closely at what manufacturer or manual says.
|
This exchange does seem to be becoming pointless.
If you wish to defend this car that is your right. For me any car where it is possible under any circumstances for the brake pads to be ejected in such a manner is inherently unsafe. Simple as that.
|
|
|
|
As previously mentioned, 1996 Ford Fiesta Classic *Quartz*
As if putting 'Quartz' on the end improved it!
1.1 litre 44bhp means 0-60 in 17.9 seconds, top speed quoted as 88mph (although 110mph was briefly seen once on a biiiiiiiig hill), it feels like you sit 'on' rather than 'in' the seat....
However i passed my driving test in my mum's one, as the whole car was so loose to drive compared to the new BSM ones it was more or less impossible to mess up gear changes etc.
Also it hasn't had many reliability problems...
Ok, i'll change my nomination to 'Worst DRIVERS car in the last 10 years'
|
|
Vauxhall Vectra for me. It frightened me at the way it felt totally disconnected from the road on fast corners, whilst offering rubbish seats and negligible springing on the SRi I was unfortunately given as a hire car whilst my own car (not a Vauxhall) was in the dealership long term. I've never hated a car so much.
|
|
Absolutely. A Vectra was inflicted on me while my car was in the workshop. It was the only car that I have ever felt carsick in while driving.
|
|
|
|
1997 Vectra V6 SRi. Mike H, I agree with your every word. The memory of the "disconnected" steering and cornering instability still haunts me after six years.
|
What about the new Vectra? It nearly deserves the title purely for those indicators.....
Out of interest, odes anyone know of a crash caused by them? I can't imagine there hasn't been one.
|
|
Got to be the Yugo 55"A" the "A" stood for American spec, Americans have never heard of Ladas but the Yugo....You bet!
|
THE 12 worst second-hand cars on the market have been exposed in a survey of drivers.
Almost 33,000 motorists were asked by the Consumers' Association to rate their vehicles for reliability, safety, performance and security.
The "dodgy dozen" to avoid are: Citroën Saxo; Fiat Brava; Fiat Bravo; Ford Galaxy; Mitsubishi Carisma; Peugeot 106; Peugeot 406; Renault Laguna; Seat Alhambra; Vauxhall Omega; Vauxhall Vectra; and VW Sharan.
The Peugeot 406 is lambasted as "almost certain to let you down", while the Citroën Saxo stands accused of "failing to make the grade for safety, security or performance".
The Vauxhall Vectra has "lots of problems", according to the report in the CA's Which? magazine.
The VW Sharan, Seat Alhambra and Ford Galaxy have "very poor reliability", while the Renault Laguna is singled out for "exceptionally poor reliability".
Among the best buys identified by the survey are the Toyota Yaris, Ford Focus, Honda Jazz and Audi A4.
|
Nissan Serena - especially Diesel
I had a 2.3 diesel as a company 'car' (the only 7 seater in my price range - I'd have been better having one of the kids put down). Slow as a snail, noisy, hopeless in cross-winds, with a name which tries to suggest Serenity!!!!!
|
I despise the Metro and the Maestro is ugly but harmless. But at least they offer budget motoring for those unconcerned with image.
For me, the Vauxhall Frontera is the worst affront to motoring of recent times. Those adverts of it being dragged up waterfalls drive me mad. Owners are happy if it gets to the end of the high street without one of the myriad documented faults rearing their uglies.
It's a cynical lifestyle excercise for people without style and very little life. Bottom of a JD power survey, it's only saving grace is my feeling of 'serve you right' as I whizz past another owner stranded in the rugged wilderness - of the hard shoulder.
I could go on, but I'm not sure it's healthy.
|
On the subject of the Frontera, is it true that due to the plethora of electrical faults that sometimes they used to burst into flames? I'm sure I heard of one of my Dad's colleagues buying a new one only to find 3 weeks later that it was a big fire risk when it did in fact...catch fire... Nasty
--
"Give Way"? Wait....I know this one...give me a minute
|
.....worst car? I know it's breaking the rules but can I mention the new Golf?
Reason: Sheer Ugliness...and does anyone else think that at some angles it looks like what you'd expect a Corsa to look like next year? Especially the headlights....No? Just me then.
--
"Give Way"? Wait....I know this one...give me a minute
|
"Nissan Serena - especially Diesel"
0-60 time in minutes.
I once followed one of these off a roundabout on to a straight NSL single carriageway and I could have stopped for petrol in the time it took the Serena to get up to speed.
|
almost all BMWs for looks: such brilliant engineering let down by plain, bland or downright ugly styling..
Now just look at any E36 BMW 3 series now it is secondhand: do they appeal? Would you want to be seen in one? (dead or alive)..
Course not.. if you are a driver of taste and refinement who likes a car to look appealing..
As for the X5, a bus on wheels.. the New 5 series from the side looks as if someone missed some panels on the boot where the rear lights are...and the 7 series proves people who buy them have more money than taste.
madf
|
Citroen Saxo
Any age
Because it's not really a car, it's a car shaped pile of PFD and people until it was replaced were paying good money for half a car. Nothin was good about it, it looked awful, inside and out, drives terribly and seemed rather reluctant to stop. I had the misfurtune of learning to drive in one for a while, it nearly put me off driving.
Oh and neds like them, need I say more? No your car is still a horse's intestine content and it's gunna go even slower now you've weighed it down by neon lights and stupid extra body work, me pushing a fireplace backwards could go faster.
Truely the 'modern' Maestro
Oh, and it broke down, quite a bit... [which was a good thing, as you didn't have to drive it and you hopefully got a hire car...]
Kev
|
Kangoo.
The precision handling of a hot air balloon, the thirst of a stoker on the Titanic, the interior of sensory deprivation cell and (for a car designed for city centres) a tailgate that requires six foot of clear space if you want to open it without getting a thump in the knackers if you're standing behind it.
|
Come on Kev, stop beating around the bush and say what you mean!
Terry
|
|
Frontera and Merc V-class, cynically marketed third-rate products both.
|
I've changed my mind.... the Vauxhall Zafira. It lacks something.....oh yes - everything that makes a car a car. I do believe as well that Top Gear said it was the worst car ever many years ago and although I disagree with everything (almost) that Jeremy Clarkson hates and likes, he was onto something when he voted for the Zafira. Sorry...
--
"Give Way"? Wait....I know this one...give me a minute
|
I thought it was the Vectra that Clarkson so famously disliked, making him persona non grata in Luton.
A quick Google reveals that he actually damns the Zafira with faint praise: he grudgingly admits it's not a bad car but he would be embarrassed to be seen in one. See tinyurl.com/ytlrq .
|
Well almost 4 years ago when my Zafira was new someone came up to me and asked what its most exciting points were. I'm still trying to think of an answer!
I suppose its a bit like me, boring. But the big mistake is that people equate boring with bad. In the Zafira's case boring is practical and sensible, no its not a race car, but then it can carry all six of us to the mother-in-law's with all the junk that four kids need all inside the car, and then we can take her out with us when we are there. On second thoughts maybe that is not a selling point.
The worst car, never, the best car, judged on what you need, rather than what you want, quite possibly.
|
hxj - many, many people who have bought Multiplas, Scenics etc etc would agree with you wholeheartedly.
IMHO, this thread is not seeking nominations of cars that are a disappointment to those who want driving thrills. It seeks cars that are aimed squarely at a particulary segment but fail spectacularly to meet the needs of that segment.
Thus, an MPV or estate would be at risk of nomination if it had no space inside, not because its handling was lacklustre and its performance was glacial. Likewise, a sports car would be nominateable (is that a word?) if it didn't go fast, but not if its boot was tiny or even absent.
So, in that spirit, my vote is for the Montego. A mid-range repmobile that lacked both style and reliability and which (in my experience) couldn't keep up on the motorway, all of which are prerequisites for its niche.
|
Another vote for the Nissan Serena, this time the 2.0 petrol which I used to drive occasionally. Stunningly dreadful in every respect, dynamics that put one in mind of a jelly sliding off a plate, and I can only imagine the awfulness of the even slower versions. Reliability the sole +ve attribute.
The fact that, after driving it, I was always pleased to get back into my own crime against automotive design, a 1991 1.3 Escort, says it all.
|
|
I don't know if its a really bad car or just plain sad,but i would have to nominate the Vauxhall Signum,what is that all about?
|
OK, what about the AMC Pacer?
I remember Motor magazine's headline - "We test the Pacer and wish we hadn't"...
I think it only produced about 120bhp from its 4 Litre engine; now that takes some doing!
Would love to drive one to experience the naffness!
|
|
OOPS - sorry, that was more than 10yrs ago, but never mind...
|
|
Also over 10 years old but bears metion as a totally idiotic bit of "thinking" - a Montego with the 1.3 engine out of a Mini! I bet they didn't sell many and I bet the residuals were typical Rover ie low!
|
|
Mercedes V Class for sure. The Caravelle is much better but will cost a couple of grand less than a boxter.
|
Citroen Saxo Any age
Okay, lots of Saxos are tarted up, but they are still a good basic small car. Lots of fun to drive, even the 1.1\'s, brakes need to be properly adjusted to be good, when correct emergency stops at over national speed limit should be stress free.
I owned a Saxo for 10months, it wasn\'t 100% reliable, but it was fun. Even today having owned a Xsara and a C5 (spot the pattern) the Saxo is a delight to drive, sure many cars beat it for speed, handling, comfort, safety and looks but the Saxo still makes all 6\'3 and size 14 feet of me smile.
Everyone else says I shouldn\'t fit, but I do!
|
I nominate any SUV.
Thirsty and wasteful, less comfortable than a real car, dangerous to others in a crash, and usually dangerous to occupants as well, too high for others to see over.
I suspect SUV drivers won't like that answer :(
|
|
|
And, in recent years, when did the CA or their tweed-capped geriatric subscribers ACTUALLY have any idea what they were talking about???
|
Hmmm,
'Good' cars: Yaris, Focus, Jazz, Lexus IS200, old Primera...
'Not Good' cars: Bravo/a, Laguna, Vectra, SharAlaxy, Serena...
Seems to me that the CA seem to agree pretty well with other such surveys by JD Power, Top Gear, Auto Express etc, and the general consensus of BackRoomers' recommendations when people ask "Should I buy X, or Y?"
I might wear a tweed cap, but I don't think I'm quite geriatric yet at 38.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hawesy1982.
the correct Bhp is 50bhp.
Fiestas are very good cars to drive.
I have driven my wife\'s car around the country e.g. from london to scotland on more than one occasion and it goes faster than you quote.
I have i admit done 95 on the motorway before in it with still more to go and the speed is correct before i get any people asking as i have done a speed test with another car and driver.
Iam sorry to act like this iam only defending what has to be a good car.
Kind Regards.
Martin Winters
|
Martin (Ford Dagenham)
Whilst i don't doubt your pedigree with a username like that, but i just dug the manual out, and it does indeed state 88mph top speed and 44bhp - it is a '96 N just pre-facelift 1.1 Classic Quartz - hope that helps.
Note that i did alter my tone slightly towards the end in stating that it does nothing disastrously badly as a shopping cart, but i promise you that on a flat motorway it could not hold 90mph (i did try!), and often could not go fast enough up a hill to keep up with the fast lane traffic!
|
Hello
Iam sorry but you are wrong the engine power is 50bhp i have all the brochures i collect them.
I have held 95 on a motorway easily (pre injection model).
Those newer models were heavily laden with catylists and airbags etc.
But i can promise that the engine power is 50 because the carb version is 54.
The 1 litre (999cc is 45bhp)
Check the car by car breakdown for proof.
Regards
Martin W
|
hello again.
Read it carefully as the brochure for that year and a few fellow car dealers/mechanics that i know state 50bhp for the 1.1i and 54BHP for the carb model.
Regards.
Martin Winters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
