|
We drove the Jazz a year ago and rejected it on account of the ride which really bothered me. Having read that they had sexed it up (?) we gave it another shot a couple of weeks ago. I could live with it now but it's not a smoothie. Can Citroens really be all that bad. Surely they would be inundated with non-stop warranty complaints and need larger premises than other dealers! We're going to Whitechapel tomorrow to test drive the C3. Thought I might go next door to check out the Megane when I'm down there. We are retiring our Audi A4 Avant 1.8 auto - we don't need the space now and the fuel consumption was really diabolical. Utterly reliable though. Cars are just cars.
|
|
Yes Phillipo they have actually redesigned the suspension and claim to have improved the ride but I have tried the new one and I can not notice any difference at all.
|
I think people are getting a little confused here. You cannot possibly compare ride quality of a C3 with a Honda Civic and a Honda RV, you are talking about a different class. Lets get to the point.
I test drove the Jazz and the C3 1.4 HDi 16v without doubt both excellent cars. I've been accused of exagerrating whenever I've mentioned this fact; the Jazzs' ride is truly appaling. But that is the only thing that stopped me buying one. The C3 has a great ride for its class, and lots of boot space-think depth not length) I find it more comfortable in every way. Our model also has excellent performance with 65-70mpg. True its had to go back to the dealer to get some warranty items sorted, but these were done at its 1,500 mile service, so no extra hassle there.
Another factor was that the Honda dealer would only discount me £200, Citroens discounted me a total of £2,700! But irrespective of all that, I just could not live with the boneshaker ride of the Jazz.
Give them each a good test drive and see which suits you,
Regards,
Alf
|
I'd run away screaming from the Citroen! The reason Citroen discount so heavily is that that is the only way they can shift them. Often great design, but almost always poor execution. They just don't seem to be able to screw them together properly. If using my own money, it would be Japanese every time, and preferably Japanese built.
I bought a Honda rotovator last year and had to return it as the frame was twisted and the drive belt wouldn't stay on. It was made in France.
But each to their own, try them both and make your own mind up. You might get a good Citroen, reputedly they do exist!
|
Tough one this! It seems to me you perhaps need an alternative to both. I know you have shortlisted down to these two but from reading through your needs and circumstances I would look at a Fabia 1.4 16v Auto at £9650 list. A/C is a £500 option but I would think you could haggle a similar amount off the list.
For what it's worth, if you do choose from jazz or C3 I would go C3. £2500 is serious money. The C3 is better looking, better ride. And, I bet it is a lot cheaper to service.
|
|
Coming down in the world from an Audi made me look first at the Polo but the urban fuel consumption is 27 vs. 40 for the C3 and Jazz and the 0-60 is a rather drab 17 seconds. Fabia ditto. Polo Twist is a better deal currently than the Fabia. Can you believe that they still put cassette players in fairly high spec Polos and that remote central locking is an extra?! I mean.. come on VW!
|
|
|
|
I agree the crv is a differnt class of car.
What i was trying to say was that Citroen's aftercare service was poor and the Picasso, although cheap,was in my opinion poorly put together.
When i bought the Picasso i did not realise how much time a new car would spend back at the dealer.
My impression of Honda was that the dealer was trying that much harder to please and when i did take the car back a courtesy car was on hand, offered to me without asking.
look out for Citroen only handing out one remote keyfob.
The unofficial Citroen website now has a forum dedicated to the C3
www.citroencars.org.uk
Regards Bob
|
|
Well we managed to test drive the C3 but they had messed up the appointment and we couldn't try the automatic. It's a nice car and certainly smoother than the Jazz. I didn't find the interior particularly plasticky as reviewers have stated. After leaving Citroen we popped into Renault and I was very impressed with the new Megane. I'm fine with size - now it all starts again - should I get the Corolla because it's more reliable or the megane because it's safer? It was easier when there was less choice!
|
|
Unless you particularly like hanging around dealer service department then buy something Japanese and avoid anything French or Italian.
|
We can always rely on a reply like that, and you can always rely on a Cit fan to reply. Don't know why it winds me up so much but here goes. Have owned Cits since 1987 - 5 of them: 2 BX diesels, 2 Xantias and now a Berlingo. Mileage? 170,000, 147,000 (and still going strong), 92,000, 67,000 and 1400 respectively. I am about to pay my first visit to a main dealer (Berlingo's 1500 check up). Been a member of RAC all that time and (my wife) has called them twice. Once for a for a faulty starter solenoid and once for a broken accelerator cable - both on the old BX about 10 years ago. Otherwise they have never let us down. Big costs? New clutch on oldest BX at 100,000, (£85 fitted!) and on old Xantia at about 80,000. Those millions of electrical faults? Apart from the solenoid, a few headlamp bulbs on the oldest BX and a couple of number plate lights on the "new " BX. That troublesome suspension? Yep, a few new spheres and horror of horrors two new hydraulic pumps (new BX and old Xantia - £125 apiece)and a new "octopus" on the new BX (£23 and fitted myself) other than that ? Brake pads, discs and change the oil every 5000 miles.
Can you recognise a Cit - well most of them. What does a Corolla LOOK like? what's an Almera? Does the Civic have the most awful ride? - well my mate's does. Is Nissan a French car? Renault think so.
Incidentally, my son and daughter own Clios - are they reliable? Well for an L and a K reg yes. Flat battery and stone holed radiator on the motorway have been the really major problems.
So if you like the C3 go for it.
Me? I really fancy a Cit CX Turbo 2 or a 1967 Alfa Romeo Guilietta Sprint GT. Or perhaps I should get a Cedric, they were Jap, they must be good.
PhilW
|
PhilW
I've spent 30 years working on cars. For 30 years my father ran an independent garage and for 20+ of those years (late '60's to late 80's) I spent a good deal of my time fixing cars, day in, day out.
My heart always used to sink when I saw anything French or Italian. I cried trying to fix electical faults on citroens (confronted by all those green wires - everyone the same apart from the colour marks right at the end). The older citroen were an absolute nightmare and in the end we wouldn't touch them; you couldn't realisitically charge the customer for the number of hours you'd spent fixing the car.
As to electical faults - well, the XM, although 'after my time' was legendary in that respect (all those clever push-on earth connections). Then there were the Xantia's that couldn't meet emission spec. at their first MoT because of duff software in the ECU - a lot of unhappy punters there, and the s'hand values suffered.
Same with the Alfas - I can't count he number of 'sud output shaft oil seals I changed - I can still remember the price of the seal in 1983 - £13.60. Fixed plenty of Fiats too - changed many a g'box that expired before 25k miles; bottom balljoints shot after one year; ditto driveshaft oil seals.
I remember when we saw the first Jap cars in the late 1960's. The 1969 Toyota Corolla was the first one I saw. In the early 1970's we were servicing Datsun Cherries and 120Y's, Bluebirds (160/180B) and Violets. They were a real revelation - all the bits fitted together properly, no oil/water leaks and the engine compartment beautifully laid out with hoses and cables neatly clipped. Owners came in for a service, went away, and then back again for a service 6 months later. You didn't see them in between, the cars didn't go wrong. I remember that my Dad became convinced that by 1980 everyone would be buying Japanese and we would go bust because there wouldn't be enough repair work!
By all means buy French or Italian if you are enthusiastic about the marque and are prepared to treat ownership as a 'hobby' (I myself had a GTV for a while and was a member of the AROC) - but if you want a piece of machinery that just 'does the job' with minimum fuss and hassle then the Japanese deliver it. I'm sure that the French and Italian cars have improved over the years, but go to any part of the world where reliability is a matter of life or death and there's no main dealer for 200 miles and you'll find the Jap brands monopolise the market.
Personally I have had enough of working on cars, although I still work in the industry but as a consultant in a professional engineering capacity. I now just want a car that 'works' - I don't really care 'what it says about me' or whether other people recognise what it is. I think a lot of people just want that.
|
|
Well said, Aprilia. For me, you've hit the nail on the head. For an everyday car paid for with my own money, it has to be Japanese. FWIW, I love older Citroens, having had 2 CXs in the past. I'd love a CX Turbo 2 as a hobby car, but even as a hobby I've been put off by my experiences with the other CXs. When they are working, they're brilliant, if only Toyota or Subaru had built them!
|
Strangely, I agree with both of you! We all want a car "that works". My point was, although probably too verbosely made, that I had managed that with 4 Citroens on the trot over 16 years and mileage of about half a million (I won't count the Berlingo which has only done a few miles) so it was rather unfair to castigate all Citroens as unreliable and spending all their time in main dealers. Maybe I've been lucky! Not very fair to define all Cits using the CX as the example either Nick. Don't suppose we will ever agree though!
Enjoy your car whatever it is!
|
|
Phil, I think most modern cars are reasonably reliable, including Cits, but some are more reliable than others. You only have to look at the postings here and elsewhere to see which makes pop up most, even allowing for there being more of some makes compared to others. I also know people who have been happy with their Cit or Renault, I hope you continue to be lucky! I agree it was a little unfair to castigate Citroen based on my experiences with the CX. But those experiences were enough to put me off for a very long time. I just like to keep the odds stacked on my side so I'll stick to Subaru for the time being. It would be a boring world if we were all the same though!
|
|
OK thanks a lot everyone - you've certainly helped me a lot and today I announced at breakfast that I was going to get our A4's a/c fixed and hang in there with it (it's a '96) - by 4pm we had driven 40 miles to Hitchin and are now the proud owners of a one year old A3 with all the bits and pieces we wanted. We just couldn't bring ourselves to trust the Cit or go for Mr.Bumpy. I reckon that with the deal we got the depreciation won't be much worse than with the 'cheaper' cars and we get a proper guarantee from Audi. We saved £6000 over the new price with the extras and according to the book could sell it privately for more than we paid. OK I know it's a model change and that's why we got a good deal and we won't be the losers in two or three years time. This is our fourth Audi in a row. I used to buy 'cheap' from Exchange & Mart but after one seized up engine and one new auto box (£3500 10 years ago)and clocked mileage I will only buy from proper dealer. Cheers.
|
I can't quite see why Citroens get such a bad press. Look at the postings in the 'technical' section - lots of problems with Mondeos, especially TDCI. There is also an ongoing discussion on suspect VW quality. Cit problems are few and far between in comparison.My last car (Xantia) was the most reliable I have ever owned. The new C5 has now covered 20,000 miles - not a hitch.
Like all the great figures in history, Citroens are flawed geniuses - but geniuses none the less.
Graeme
|
|
|
|
