It has always been thus. When you pass the gates of a stately home you might see a stone pineapple on the stone gate post. A pineapple was a status symbol, only the wealthy could employ gardeners to grow them in a greenhouse, using the heat from decomposing organic matter to warm the precious plants.
Good taste? To my eye the inside of a Bentley is extremely vulgar. Rolls Royce’s are very ugly too, with brutal “I don’t give a damn” exterior styling and vulgar interiors. It is as if the aim is to maximise cost and luxury without a nod to styling and elegance. Whatever happened to the restrained and beautiful Rolls Royce’s and Bentleys of old, especially pre WW2 ones.
Edited by Leif on 16/06/2018 at 10:16
|
|
'Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.' Be a boring world if we all liked the same.
|
|
|
Good taste? To my eye the inside of a Bentley is extremely vulgar. Rolls Royce’s are very ugly too, with brutal “I don’t give a damn” exterior styling and vulgar interiors. .....Whatever happened to the restrained and beautiful Rolls Royce’s and Bentleys of old, especially pre WW2 ones.
I seem to remember reading a quote from the designer of the 1960s Silver Shadow (which was criticised in a similar manner) along the lines of 'if they immediately like the styling, then I've failed'.
|
Worth, or value for money are such a subjective measurement. If you take the analogy of a pair of shoes for example, you can buy a pair for next to nothing, or you could have them hand made for a lot of money, or you could choose to buy some anywhere in between on the economic scale. In some cases paying more wouldn't gain you all the advantages you might think it should, but, might gain you some you hadn't thought of. In any event, for a while anyway, they'll all perform their basic function of being a pair of shoes.
Then there's the matter of what is a lot of money and how you define that. I've been through stages in life when even the cheapest of cars were a lot of money to me, and others when more premium models were reasonably easily affordable. I've pretty much never enjoyed economic stability having lurched wildly between income feast and famine all my life.
I've never ( well almost never ) bought a car I couldn't afford, but if I could afford it, and afford to run it I've bought what I wanted simply because I wanted it.
And that's still legal isn't it?
;-)
|
|
I think a good point is made above, about the watches and shoes. I like watches and have a few different inexpensive types. I wouldn't want to pay for a Rolex or Patek Philippe but if someone gave me one I'd appreciate the workmanship. With cars, there's also something else going on, called brand dilution, where makers of "prestige" cars such as Mercedes have gone downmarket to compete for volume with more mainstream makes. As an example, the A Class, a reasonable enough car but outclassed by a Golf, in all respects. To a lesser extent the BMW 1 Series, again ok, but nothing fantastic. Both cars from manufacturers capable of producing some very fine machinery. The cheaper offerings still have the so-called prestige badge which peo;le crave but lack the substance that sets apart the perhaps more accurately described, prestige E class, S class etc, higher up the range. I guess you get what you pay for.
|
I think a good point is made above, about the watches and shoes. I like watches and have a few different inexpensive types. I wouldn't want to pay for a Rolex or Patek Philippe but if someone gave me one I'd appreciate the workmanship. With cars, there's also something else going on, called brand dilution, where makers of "prestige" cars such as Mercedes have gone downmarket to compete for volume with more mainstream makes. As an example, the A Class, a reasonable enough car but outclassed by a Golf, in all respects. To a lesser extent the BMW 1 Series, again ok, but nothing fantastic. Both cars from manufacturers capable of producing some very fine machinery. The cheaper offerings still have the so-called prestige badge which peo;le crave but lack the substance that sets apart the perhaps more accurately described, prestige E class, S class etc, higher up the range. I guess you get what you pay for.
Interesting analogy re watches. A Rolex or Patek Phillipe is undoubtedly well-made but is either truly prestigious these days? Back in the day I was invited to a function in Geneva where I was chatting to the CEO of a truly ‘premium’ watchmaker. He told me that there are a dozen manufacturers of bespoke high-quallity time pieces that the majority of people have never even heard of. He was wearing a watch that was truly a work of art, you can have a similar one if you can afford it (and take the time to look beyond ‘brands’) but you can’t have an identical one. That’s ‘prestigious’ in my book.
|
Rolex is expensive compared to Timex but it’s not a top tier brand. One of the greatest watch makers was George Daniels, an Englishman who died a few years back and who is one of the few people to have invented a type of watch movement, and one of the few people to make every piece of a watch by himself. If you want a new top tier hand made English watch, Smith is the brand.
However, most so called premium car brands are mass produced, with plastics inside and pressed steel outside. I’m sure a Ford is better value as development and tooling up costs as well as advertising and administrative spend are spread over far more cars. I can see that a Porsche 911 or Boxster, or a Jaguar XF has its appeal.
|
Rolex is expensive compared to Timex but it’s not a top tier brand. One of the greatest watch makers was George Daniels, an Englishman who died a few years back and who is one of the few people to have invented a type of watch movement, and one of the few people to make every piece of a watch by himself. If you want a new top tier hand made English watch, Smith is the brand.
However, most so called premium car brands are mass produced, with plastics inside and pressed steel outside. I’m sure a Ford is better value as development and tooling up costs as well as advertising and administrative spend are spread over far more cars. I can see that a Porsche 911 or Boxster, or a Jaguar XF has its appeal.
I really liked the Boxster that I had as an indulgence and though it was pretty well made, comfortable and we must assume well-developed it was not, in my opinion ‘prestigious’.
|
|
The benefit of an E-class over say a Mondeo is not necessarily obvious when the cars are new. It's when they start to age that the better build, better materials and better design kick in. For someone like Alby doing 1,000 miles a week, a Mondeo would be a rattling mess in under three years, but an E-class will be almost as solid and fully functional as the day it was purchased. That results in better residuals.
Having gone from an S-Max to an E350CDi I can tell you I loved the Ford and would have it back today, but only as nearly new example. My Merc is now 6 1/2 years old and the experience is of a car hewn from solid. By contrast we have a 12 year old Volvo V70 on the fleet. It has been abused but has not taken to old age well at all.
|
|
I can echo that, having been lent a 2005, 185,000-mile BMW 320d while my 125i was in for a service and MoT - not a squeak or rattle and drove like a new car. Not all makes of car would be like that, although I agree a properly-looked-after Mercedes would.
But it's not just BMW and Mercedes: there are lots of old Toyotas still going as well as ever. Happy Blue, didn't you tell us about a much-abused Hyundai i10 in your firm's fleet which nevertheless stood up to the abuse unscathed?
|
The benefit of an E-class over say a Mondeo is not necessarily obvious when the cars are new. It's when they start to age that the better build, better materials and better design kick in. For someone like Alby doing 1,000 miles a week, a Mondeo would be a rattling mess in under three years, but an E-class will be almost as solid and fully functional as the day it was purchased. That results in better residuals.
Having gone from an S-Max to an E350CDi I can tell you I loved the Ford and would have it back today, but only as nearly new example. My Merc is now 6 1/2 years old and the experience is of a car hewn from solid. By contrast we have a 12 year old Volvo V70 on the fleet. It has been abused but has not taken to old age well at all.
I’d never call either marque prestiguous but I took two Subarus to over 120,000 miles in three years without a single problem, rattle or feeling of ‘bagginess’ in either. The v70 that I foolishly bought to replace the second was traded at 40,000 due to a whole host of problems and it felt like it had been to the moon and back.
|
|
You must have been unlucky with your V70. Ours has been great and at ten years old and drives really well. What problems did you have?
|
You must have been unlucky with your V70. Ours has been great and at ten years old and drives really well. What problems did you have?
Well, it was a while ago but two gearboxes, two sets of injectors, a high pressure pump and a whole host of suspension parts were on the list. More rattles than Mothercare was one description.
Above all my main memory is that it was poorly built and simply not good at being a tough estate.
Having had 240s and 740s in the 1980s it was a sad experience.
|
The benefit of an E-class over say a Mondeo is not necessarily obvious when the cars are new. It's when they start to age that the better build, better materials and better design kick in. For someone like Alby doing 1,000 miles a week, a Mondeo would be a rattling mess in under three years, but an E-class will be almost as solid and fully functional as the day it was purchased. That results in better residuals.
Having gone from an S-Max to an E350CDi I can tell you I loved the Ford and would have it back today, but only as nearly new example. My Merc is now 6 1/2 years old and the experience is of a car hewn from solid. By contrast we have a 12 year old Volvo V70 on the fleet. It has been abused but has not taken to old age well at all.
That could perhaps tell us more about Ford than Mercedes. I had an old style Ford Ka from new. It was scrapped after ten years and 160,000 miles due to rust, and had lots of small but expensive bits in the suspension fail during those ten years. I had a VW Up for 130,000 miles from new with not one single non wear item failing. It felt more solid despite being a small modest city car. And after 130,000 miles it drove like a new car, apart from worn brakes of course. I once saw a graph, which I have since lost, showing the number of cars on the road as a function of age. Fiat came out worst. Ford were middling. VW were excellent. I think Toyota were excellent too, and I think Mercedes, BMW etc did well. I was once told that Ford make items as flamsy as they can to save money, which may or may not be true, but the Ka did seem like that.
|
“ I was once told that Ford make items as flamsy as they can to save money, which may or may not be true, but the Ka did seem like that.”
American firms tend to think in the short term. It’s profit before quality, a sale today instead of another in a few years. That attitude killed GM in Europe with poorly made cars with dated running gear and bland designs. Vauxhall’s sold largely on discount and Saab’s were nowhere near the standard of other premium rivals, in fact their later offerings were woeful.
That said Ford have had periods of glory inbetween such as the late 90’s through to fairly recently with some fantastic drivers cars at modest prices often using Japanese engine technology. Sadly this is no longer the case with few engines that I’d trust beyond the warranty term and a range of blandly styled half developed cars that don’t come close to earlier models superiority. The current Mondeo is a blob and no challenger for premium rivals but the Mk I was genuinely a great thing.
Edited by SLO76 on 18/06/2018 at 15:57
|
I’ve had a number of Fords, Mondeo, Kuga and Fiesta. Mondeo and Kuga both ran into 6 figure mileage with no faults. The Mondeo in particular was very badly treated in often and regularly being taken to places and terrain it really wasn’t suited to. Fuse box never failed due to rust, alloys cracked, seat bolsters collapse, coolant leaks and other faults which my neighbour had on his X5 and Boxster.
Ford wouldn’t sell the numbers they do if they built cars as you suggest.
|
“Ford wouldn’t sell the numbers they do if they built cars as you suggest.”
Engine failure rates with 1.0 Ecoboost and 1.6 TDCi motors are far far higher than they should be and the Powershift gearbox is almost guaranteed to pack in at some point. The firm have been cost cutting for years to try and return to profitability and it’s the owners who are suffering.
Quality and reliability issues don’t cull sales as they should however. Sadly driver appeal has also dipped along with them too. I don’t really rate any current Ford, ST Fiesta and Focus possible exceptions but I’m not sure how well the new 3cyl 1.5 turbo will stand up compared to the excellent previous Yamaha 1.6 Turbo the last gen ST Fiesta ran.
|
|
You seem to have a bit of a downer on Ford and it would be interesting to see the stats about engine failure rates. Perhaps the public like what they see, if quality and reliability were all that mattered we'd all drive Japanese or Korean. Motoring press generally rate driver appeal of most of Ford products above others and if you really want driver appeal try a Mustang!
|
You seem to have a bit of a downer on Ford and it would be interesting to see the stats about engine failure rates. Perhaps the public like what they see, if quality and reliability were all that mattered we'd all drive Japanese or Korean. Motoring press generally rate driver appeal of most of Ford products above others and if you really want driver appeal try a Mustang!
I’m a bit wary of journalists. Bare in mind that VW, Ford et al spend an awful lot of money on lavish presentations, in sunny places, and fancy advertising. It certainly used to be the case that brands like Audi spent more on such items than Hyundai for example. As I think I said earlier, over a four year period 6-10 years back I drove many Fiestas when the press were raving about them, but I found them unimpressive, a bit noisy, slightly hard ride, cheap and tacky interior. I suspect they were good when driven ‘enthusiastically’ which I believe means too fast, and with a lack of caution, rather than normal day to day driving.
VW are probably overrated in the public eye as far as reliability goes, due no doubt to advertising, though they do feel well screwed together. I would have replaced my Ford with a Fiesta (despite what I wrote above) had the Ford garage not stuffed me. So I tried VW and now I’m on my second VW and I’m sold on paying a bit more for something a bit nicer, not necessarily VW, just not Ford, or Fiat. I think the market is very price sensitive, and the Fiesta does on paper provide a lot for the price.
|
|
Just noticed that a comparable spec. Fiesta is more expensive than a Polo.
|
“You seem to have a bit of a downer on Ford“
I do currently, particularly because I know they can do so much better. Ford have built some of the best drivers cars to grace our roads over the years yet ST and RS aside where’s the joy in their range today? Nothing they build today really appeals to me, it’s almost a return to the early 90’s with the Mk V Escort. They’re not trying hard enough and if GM are anything to go by that simply won’t wash in the longterm. You have to invest. Design and build cars people want rather than buy because they’re cheaper than rivals.
|
|
Ford have had their engineering mess ups recently but probably less so than VAG with their endless list of "models and engines to avoid" due to some basic engineering and design disasters.
All manufacturers have their weak spots, even Toyota.
I wouldn't say Ford are worse than anyone else but they struggle on the perceived quality. The current Mondeo for example looks good but the interior still feels too much like a Florida hire car and a well specced 3 or 5 Series is undoubtably a nicer place to spend 100,000 miles of driving.
The 1.6 diesel is a PSA unit but even that is less troublesome than some. I'd avoid any 2.0 diesel from VAG between about 05 and 12 far faster as well as some BMW/PSA petrols and be wary of some BMW diesels for example.
Edited by pd on 18/06/2018 at 17:36
|
|
Are you sure the 1.6T is a Yamaha? I have it in my Volvo badged as T4 and believed it was a Ford design along with FEV. Never read it being manufactured by Yamaha before, it has FoMoCo stamped on the block.
|
Are you sure the 1.6T is a Yamaha? I have it in my Volvo badged as T4 and believed it was a Ford design along with FEV. Never read it being manufactured by Yamaha before, it has FoMoCo stamped on the block.
It was designed by Yamaha for Ford, they don’t build it for them. The 1.6 Ecoboost is essentially an updated version of this engine with a turbo bolted on which first appeared in 1996 in the Fiesta. It’s a great wee motor with no real vices.
Edited by SLO76 on 19/06/2018 at 15:02
|
|
|
|
|
