|
The only thing I could really think of would be the 1998-2004 Audi A6 (in estate form) with either 1.9 or 2.5 diesel engines and a manual gearbox.
Utterly solid. Unfortunately that engine didn't take well to the addition of a DPF.
|
|
Volvo 140/240/740, especially 740 estate with VW's LT van 2.4 turboDiesel under the bonnet, i'd buy one now if they were still made.
Honda Civic 2.0S type up to 2005.
Toyota Camry/Corolla/Carina 90's versions, though the same could apply to so many from Japan from that era, eg Mazda 626, Nissan Bluebird, later on Yaris.
Landcruiser 70/80 series, 70 series still available until last year, still live axles both ends, still on leaf springs at least at the rear, still unbreakable.
Agree with Cavalier 3.
|
|
|
|
|
240, 760, 850 Volvo estates. Strong, rust resistant body, strong mechanicals, large window area and good boxy load space. Excellent seating and ventilation.
Just improve the leaking heater matrix on the 850, bring the petrol price down, sorted.
|
|
I am still using a Mondeo 1999 fitted with a 3310 nokia hard wired hands free cradle and matching phone.Can it get any better than this.??
|
I am still using a Mondeo 1999 fitted with a 3310 nokia hard wired hands free cradle and matching phone.Can it get any better than this.??
Bought a 2000 W plate Mk II for the Rex to Nice banger rally a few years back. Brilliant thing to drive round those Alpine passes, far better handling and ride combination than most bulky modern equivalents. Cost £300 with 6mths Mot, 65k and a pile of service receipts and flogged with General Lee vinyl wrap and Dixie horns for £300 after 4,000 miles of abuse and antics. No Nokia phone in ours but surprisingly had working air con which was a bonus in Italy and South of France.
|
|
|
|
|
Audi 80 93-94 TDI with the long lived 1Y engine. Great fuel consumption, Galvanised body. Available in saloon and Estate form.
Public outcry in Belgium when it was replaced by the A4
which they believed didnt match the quality of the 80.
Sad day when mine was loaded on the transporter on the way to the scrapyard. Only wished I had sourced a new engine. Covered nearly 200k miles in perfect harmony.
|
|
My 'best' car was a Passat B4 Turbo (Not TDI) bought with 20k on clock. I did 65k miles , my wife 35k and my daughter another 35k before being advised to scrap it by a garage doing MOT due to a failed starter motor !
I think what I seek is the appropriate use of technology. There is no denying that electronic ignition is more reliable than Kettering ignition and fuel injection possibly better than carburettors (although I do recall that my Dad's Austin Seven used to do 45 mpg)
What car manufacturers have done is to pile technology and particularly electronics into cars for technology's sake. It all goes wrong and nobody has any clue as to how to fix it economically.
That three year old (out of warranty) cars are 'scrapped' is criminal. We have 30 year old jumbo jets flying round the world for heavens sake !
I despair, as I drive a 17 year old Golf GTI and my wife a 13 year old Passat B5. They are both getting very 'tired' (as we are) and we both need newer cars.
However I just cannot decide what to buy due to reliability (or lack of) and have therefore been following the following threads with interest:
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=116060
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=117658
|
|
As someone else said, the Mk 3 Cavalier was a tough car. Did 186k miles in mine (F842EUM), just had new alternator, new battery and never had any reason to disturb the cylinder head or transmission. It was a bombproof car.
Manufacturers today tend rush products to market without fully testing them (eg: DSG gearboxes, TSI engines, Teves ABS pumps) or ignore the 'faults' so that they are warranty and 2nd/3rd owner issues, making them face massive bills. I simply do not believe that many of the common faults in cars today never manifested themselves in testing, and because they are seldom safety related, no DVLA recalls.
But manufacturers have gotten cute on car longevity, making sure it will last for x years, and then down the line produce a newer model with more 'must haves'. When I worked at Jaguar, all the various changes for the next few model years were planned and under test, cars off under wraps to MIRA every week.
Jaguar also had a policy of getting a competitor car - BMW, Lexus, Mercedes - stick it in the foyer at the Whitley R&D site asking employees for comments, before taking it to the workshops to dismantle, learn and improve their own processes.
And then Ford bought Jaguar.......
|
As someone else said, the Mk 3 Cavalier was a tough car. Did 186k miles in mine (F842EUM), just had new alternator, new battery and never had any reason to disturb the cylinder head or transmission. It was a bombproof car.
Manufacturers today tend rush products to market without fully testing them (eg: DSG gearboxes, TSI engines, Teves ABS pumps) or ignore the 'faults' so that they are warranty and 2nd/3rd owner issues, making them face massive bills. I simply do not believe that many of the common faults in cars today never manifested themselves in testing, and because they are seldom safety related, no DVLA recalls.
But manufacturers have gotten cute on car longevity, making sure it will last for x years, and then down the line produce a newer model with more 'must haves'. When I worked at Jaguar, all the various changes for the next few model years were planned and under test, cars off under wraps to MIRA every week.
Jaguar also had a policy of getting a competitor car - BMW, Lexus, Mercedes - stick it in the foyer at the Whitley R&D site asking employees for comments, before taking it to the workshops to dismantle, learn and improve their own processes.
And then Ford bought Jaguar.......
Ford have "always" bought competitors cars, evaluated them, dismantled them and costed them - that's how they knew the original Mini cost more than it's selling price when even BMC didn't know that level of detail!
|
As someone else said, the Mk 3 Cavalier was a tough car. Did 186k miles in mine (F842EUM), just had new alternator, new battery and never had any reason to disturb the cylinder head or transmission. It was a bombproof car.
Manufacturers today tend rush products to market without fully testing them (eg: DSG gearboxes, TSI engines, Teves ABS pumps) or ignore the 'faults' so that they are warranty and 2nd/3rd owner issues, making them face massive bills. I simply do not believe that many of the common faults in cars today never manifested themselves in testing, and because they are seldom safety related, no DVLA recalls.
But manufacturers have gotten cute on car longevity, making sure it will last for x years, and then down the line produce a newer model with more 'must haves'. When I worked at Jaguar, all the various changes for the next few model years were planned and under test, cars off under wraps to MIRA every week.
Jaguar also had a policy of getting a competitor car - BMW, Lexus, Mercedes - stick it in the foyer at the Whitley R&D site asking employees for comments, before taking it to the workshops to dismantle, learn and improve their own processes.
And then Ford bought Jaguar.......
Ford have "always" bought competitors cars, evaluated them, dismantled them and costed them - that's how they knew the original Mini cost more than it's selling price when even BMC didn't know that level of detail!
This has been standard practise for at least 50 years..
I drive a Mark1 Jazz.. Virtually bombproof if maintained.. It is now 14 years old.. Apart from consumables, 4 glowplugs, 1 heater reistor and several sets of anti roll bar rubbers (now converted to Mark 1 Focus rear ones - more robust). Fully galvanused aoart from roof. No water leaks .. ever.
Edited by madf on 19/02/2017 at 10:41
|
|
|
|
|
"Manufacturers today tend to rush products to market without fully testing them (eg: DSG gearboxes, TSI engines, Teves ABS pumps)."
They will claim that they do test them - but they don't seem to manage to replicate the sort of use that Mr and Mrs Average Punter will put them to. They claim to test them to the limit - but I expect that the test drivers are professionals who have more 'car sympathy' than Arthur Punter who specialises in short journeys and the occasional vist to the senior Punters. Arthur Punter senior drives a 20-year-old Toyota and can't see what the problem is, because Toyota did test them properly in the first place.
They test them in far-flung parts of the world, presumably so that we won't see them (otherwise we'd stop buying the current model). One the new model is announced, as you say they rush it to the market because people want them.
I'm not sure what the answer to this is. With ever-more-complex electronics the problem is getting worse, not better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
