That's OK - check the cars' spec against the Reviews/Car-by-Car section here so you can sure that the cars they are offering are actually the same in reality. Dealers (small independents or main dealers) can make mistakes over spec (Motorpoint did with my [del miles only] car, and compensated me accordingly), but some can be economical with the truth, especially when it comes to portraying a less well thought-after model as a better one (not necessarily in this case).

Essentially the rule is - look at the vehicles in person to be sure and compare the spec with what is given on this and similar websites. Belt cam engines are a relatively known quantity for VAG cars; chain cam engines seem to vary in terms of reliabilty enormously, unlike Japanese cars where such cars are normally near bomb-proof as long as they are serviced (esp/ oil changes) on schedule (no long service intervals with no oil changes for them). A shame some of the European makes never bother to learn that lesson and took shortcuts (in my opinion) to con potential customers into believing they were buying highly engineered products.

If you're going to keep your next car for a long time, then I personally would consider more standard engined cars, i.e. not small engined ones with turbos, as that technology is still relatively new and hasn't really been proven over a long time frame (7-10 years +) in terms of reliability as well as mpg. Just keep your options open.

I've had a quick check, and I think there is a version of the non ACT1.4TSI which is belt cam, but not sure whether it made it into the Leon.

It's fairly easy to spot the difference if you lift the bonnet (depending on how mant plastic covers there are) or you should be able to work it out from the CO2 emissions. A main dealer should know though, but if you're not totally sure ask the sales person to check with the service manager.

Possibly a factor, but luck plays just as much a part for someone like yourself - another person owning the same (or close to) set of cars might've experienced numerous major problems. As I said, even cars with low reliability records are still likely to have a 70%+ completely major fault-free life. I suppose our expectations of modern engineering mean that we believe cars should be largely fault-free over their expected life.

Ironically, as HJ himself has said on many occasions, many manufacturers (including Japanese ones apparently) now 'design in' a life expectancy of their cars (presumably referring to the structure), and to a lot less than years gone by. They probably do this precisely because cars are generally more reliable than they used to be, with a few exceptions along the way (e.g. DMFs etc).

I think some of the motor industry's more recent reliabilty woes have occurred because, other than adding more and more gadgets and gizmos on cars, there isn't that much that differtiates one from another - most (in the same bracket) drive reasonably well, are safe, secure and often quite similar in styling: so they are in a race to add the gizmos, whether they are fully tested (especially in concert with eachother) or not, then adding the stupid EU emmissions rules which force manufacturers to find 'creative ways' of reducing 'headline' (official) CO2 figures across the board in a short space of time without drastically increasing prices. A recipe for trouble if you ask me.

Sorry couldn't edit :-

When I took the 2014 petrol Superb on an extended test drive (drove the salesman to distraction) I had no back ache and was very comfortable (bigger doors on the Superb). The car had amazing space (for passengers and luggage), was really quiet, performed well and it was economical for a petrol ( even allowing for potential discrepancy with on board computer).

Oh - and it was cheap, nearly £5k away from a similar diesel at the same dealer (I didn't want a diesel). With my driving I calculated it would take 15years to spend more than the savings in extra fuel costs

Edited by Big John on 18/03/2016 at 18:32