I also read this aforementioned mag with some disbelief. But i do think that many mags tend to take things pretty much at face value. I mean, the Laguna looks sexy, so that's pretty much all that matters! I certainly wouldn't chose a car based on an article in one of the mass-market mags. They're too biased to the whims of motoring journalists who neither pay for the car in the first place nor run it long enough to evaluate the more critical factors such as reliability, dealer service satisfaction, running costs etc. The real info is in sites like these, some notable motoring columns, plus the well-managed consumer surveys like "Which". I sometimes wonder whether some mass-market motoring writers are cuddling up a bit too close to the manufacturers PR departments. What does HJ think? (Not that I categorise his good self as this!)
Baz
|
|
Totally agree. In addition, as a used buy, isn't the Mondeo a lot cheaper model for model? I've been looking at estates in the last two weeks and Lagunas are at least £2000 dearer. How does that make them a better buy? It's not as if they are a better car either from what i can see.
|
A huge problem with the old laguna is reliability, clutches, gearboxes ,heater matrixies etc. I just wondered is the new laguna so much different and so much better. Are all the new gizmos on the new car just a ticking time bomb to go wrong, or are these things proving reliable? Anyone out there got one?
Ben
|
The Laguna II is a nice enough car, but utterly undistinguished alongside its rivals even when new. I could understand an argument which said it was the best used 'buy' in the sense of the deal you get on a 6/12/18 month old, but what's a lower price than everyone else telling you?
As for the best used car in terms of long-term cost and reliability - absolute nonsense! Where were the Hondas, Mazdas, Toyotas, Fords, Vauxhalls etc in this survey?
The Laguna got good marks for safety (though the Swedes have been quietly suspicious about the value of the NCAP tests) but that's its sole claim to fame
|
I consider the Laguna 2 estate car quite stunning in the looks department, but would never by one due to the appalling history of unreliability, as for being a second hand bargain buy,it should be, who wants one?
|
|
Have a look at Laguna II in Car-by-Car Breakdown and then wonder which planet Autoexpress's team was on when it drew up its list...
|
Thing is, the prices on the Laguna aren't even that low. It's a nice enough car, though nothing special, but the prices are all over the shop and long term depreciation is likely to be nothing short of abysmal once the high milers are feeding through the supermarkets and pushing the prices of newer ones down in a big way. I give it a year to 18 months before that starts happening and then today's prices will seem frankly ludicrous.
In any case, there are so many question marks over the Laguna's electrical reliability that I am bewildered as to why they'd recommend it at all. I like French cars, but the used car of the year has to be a safe, almost risk free buy with bulletproof long term residuals, excellent reliability and a good discount from new. To an extent that's asking them to square the circle but they only have to find one car that can do all of that, or most of it and I'm sure the Laguna isn't it.
Yes, I guess you could get a good deal on one, but sometimes it's possible to get stitched up like a kipper as well.
|
|
|
|
Couldn't agree more, these magazines do get carried away sometimes, they seem to view change as more important than progress. It not unknown for a car for car to win a magazine award in its first year and be slagged off by the same journal two or three years down the line.
It used to be even worse when we had a lot of British cars being designed; worldbeater one day also ran the next.
|
Magazine articles? My faith in them was destroyed when the Fiat 128 was voted Car of the Year (in around 1978?).
Piece of carp.
Anyone who trusts any journalist (car or political or otherwise) to be accurate and in possession of the facts and fair, believes in the tooth fairy:-)
madf
|
|
Fiat 128: around 1970 I was a passenger in one, in Germany ( visiting the wifeys' pen-friends). Seemed pretty good then, albeit spartan. Only sold the duff ones in th UK?
|
|
|
While I can uderstand your swipe at Car of the Year, which was in the past terribly distorted by nationalistic considerations, I think you're being more than a little harsh to characterise all journalists as intrinsically untrustworthy.
Commercial considerations influence all publications from local newspapers upwards, but one of the key factors in those considerations is having a paper or magazine which readers like - if readers don't like it, advertisers won't support it. Believe me, car companies are as much in favour of unbiased opinion as you are because if a mag with a reputation for being independently-minded talks up a car its recommendation is all the more likely to be taken seriously.
That said, mags which concentrate on new or nearly new don't define used vehicles in the same way that you or I might do. And one of the reasons for that is that garages retailing older used cars don't make huge amounts of money, don't therefore spend much on advertising...QED.
People in the know would happily spend £2-5k on an older, high-mileage used car because they know its pedigree. Most punters don't and when there's a mountain of nearly new used cars to shift (i.e., over-production of new cars) no one should be surprised when a mag which is aimed at the general reader and gets a lot of new car advertising defines a good used car as one which was ony launched as recently as 2001.
I think there are some decent mags out there, some poor ones too. There are also a lot of journalists who do a decent job but write for particular markets.
|
|
Also why would it be a good thing that there are so many "new" used lagunas about after only a year or so of being in production? Surely if it was so good the original owners would want to hang on to it not sell so soon?
|
|
|
|
Ox - I'm not saying that motoring journalists necessarily write carp, but I am certain that the number of brilliant new models out there is nothing like as high as their reviews suggest. It's not often that a writer can slate a lemon as strongly as it deserves, and get away with it - at least not until it has been around for several months.
|
If we, as the CONSUMER of magazine articles, are not being told the truth, then the writer is unworthy of being read.
Any suggestion of commercial influences changing what is written means the magazine treats CONSUMERS as mugs.
I treat magazines like that by not being a consumer of them..
Most motoring journalists write rubbish: all the talk of high powered cars as if they are usuable.. and the refusal to discuss well known brand failings .. just inexcusable in this day and age..
The best used car is one that is much cheaper than new, and is reliable and cheap to run.. So any discussions of Citroens on that list is just ruled out by their reliability record .. for a start...
madf
|
|
Jeremy Clarkson wrote an extremely informative article in the Sunday Times recently on the very subject of freebies and perks offered to journalists, who are flown to exotic locations, wined and dined in some considerable style, and then expected to write favourable reports on a company`s latest model. Thankfully Clarkson is now established both journalistically and finacially, that he no longer needs to accept these invitations, and can write what he truly believes. His verdict on the Renault Laguna are largely unprintable, - so at the end of the day you question which companies are providing advertising revenue to these magazines, and draw your own conclusions !!!!!
|
|
Maybe JC is no longer susceptible to blandishments, but even he can still only report on one or two examples of a given model, and tell you whether he likes it. I doubt that he and I like the same cars, so his opinions are of limited interest or value to me personally. Reviews of new models cannot reveal whether they are reliable, by definition. So if you must have a new model, pay your money and wait and see!
|
|
|
|
To paraphrase a famous civil servant, truth is a difficult concept. All I'd say is that if you spend your life driving news cars and writing about them, your perspective is always likely to be somewhat different to that of the person who has one car and changes it every few years. Now, some mags do try to compensate for that but I'm not sure they're always successful.
Some magazines try quite hard to be consumer-oriented (What Car, for example) others almost come across as cheerleaders for certain cars or manufacturers. I've never quite got my head round the obsession with TVR at some performance magazines. Great looking, sure, awesome in a straight line...but to live with day in, day out?
I'd love to know what your favourite read is, madf, but I think you're making a sweeping generalisation to say that 'most motoring journalists write rubbish'. There are plenty of magazines which tell it exactly like it is. Car recently carried a generally favourable report on the new Jaguar XJ, but then lifted the lid on the efforts Jaguar had been going to in order to prevent comparison tests before the launch.
As for the Auto Express awards which started this thread off...to qualify for this used car of the year awards, a car had to be 'available to buy new for at least 12 months'. This puts their definition of used into perspective.
There are some Hondas and Toyotas in there, but when I tell you that they're used 4x4 of the year was the Land Rover Discovery you can all draw your own conclusions about the somewhat short memory this particular award seems to have...
|
OK, I have to leap to the Lagunas defence here. I have been in the fortunate position of having to choose a new company car. Having a good fleet department, I was able to get extensive test drives on all the cars in my chosen range. By extensive I mean none was less than three days, and I did no less than 200 miles in any of them. I had a primera, mondeo, laguna dci120, scenic dci, focus tdci estate all on test and went to the new vectra launch last year at millbrook and drove it there. From the outset I was minded to get another Scenic, and the Laguna was only added as an afterthought. I chose the Laguna, It turned out to be a fairly easy choice. I wont go into all the reasons for rejecting the others and choosing the Laguna unless requested. It has to be said it comes out favourably in every road test I have seen and my own experience indicates that to be fair.
So Gentlemen, If you have tried all the modern equivalents back to back and still hate the Laguna, then fair enough. If you drive a new Laguna and hate its guts then again thats fair comment. I suspect tho that most of the comments here are not based on experience or first hand knowledge.
(puts on kevlar helmet and ducks behind sandbags)
|
As I think everyone has said, there's nowt wrong with the Laguna as a new or nearly new car; it just doesn't stahd out as being noticeably better in any particular area.
Here, we're judging used cars and the point is that Auto Express's definition of used appears to be something that's five minutes old.
|
Ok, specifics here. Stands out in its class:
It is probably the best motorway cruiser, quiet comfortable refined.
The 1.9dci 120 power plant is a gem. smooth, and delivers its torque and power over a wider rev range than i have ever know for a diesel of this size. Powerfull and economical. Delight to drive.
It is very well equiped even at poverty level spec.
Looks, (ok subjective this) It is a classy looking piece of kit, better than mondeo, primera, vectra, et all.
Ok so there are my 4 items were it stands out as being better.
I do agree that the definition of used car does apear to be "nearly new"
|
Another good point is it's NCAP result.
However, build quality and electrics reliability leave something to be desired.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
