I bought a Renault Laguna Privilege 2.0 in January and have been having a battle with them since. The car does not perform as their brochure. Typically the car should be doing 34 mph in 5th gear at 1000 rpm according to their brochure. (A bit high I admit but nevertheless that's what their brochure says). My car does 23 mph.
The road speed through the other gears are likewise 33% down on the brochure.
Consequently the car cannot achieve anywhere near the fuel economy stated nor its maximum speed nor its acceleration (You have to go into 3rd gear to get to 60 mph)
Renault will have nothing of it and after 6 months of battling I have been advised to take the matter up with the Finance Company, which i am doing.
I have test driven another Laguna and it performs exactly as mine.
I had a Clio 1.4 as a courtesy car and it does the same road speeds through the gears as my 2.0 Laguna!
People like Watchdog and Top Gear aren't interested nor are the auto magazines.
Anybody else found the above situation and any advice?
|
Laguna 2.0 privelege
Number of Forward Gears 5
Gearbox Code JR5014
Vehicle Speeds (mph) - 1st @ 1,000 rpm 5.2
Vehicle Speeds (mph) - 2nd @ 1,000 rpm 9.5
Vehicle Speeds (mph) - 3rd @ 1,000 rpm 13.4
Vehicle Speeds (mph) - 4th @ 1,000 rpm 17.1
Vehicle Speeds (mph) - 5th @ 1,000 rpm 21.5
Vehicle Speeds (mph) - 6th @ 1,000 rpm Not Applicable
Gearbox Type Manual Gearbox
|
|
As a matter of interest the V6 does do 32.2 mph / 1000 rpm in 5th (according to the web site); so presumably the brochure managed to use the V6 figures for the 2.0. Doubtless there is a disclaimer somehwere in the brochure that says they can print pretty much anything; but you can't hold them to it ;-(
|
I'll have to check whether there is a disclaimer but 33% down on their stated figures is against the trading standards
|
|
|
|
Have they put in the brochure the usual paragraph about "subject to change without notification"?
My guess is that the brochure was done with a prototype car which was later found to be unsatisfactory, so they changed the final drive ratio for the UK market?
One last idea, are those the figures for the turbo diesel, not the petrol by mistake?
Gareth
|
|
No the turbo diesel has figures much higher. From memory in 5th gear at 1000rpm they claim 44 mph.
|
Sounds like it's the km/h figures quoted by accident!!!
Neil T
SEAT Leon TDi 150, Toledo 20VT Sport, Various Montegos...
|
|
|
|
Those speeds are from the Renault web site not their brochure.
What self respecting manufacture would lay claim to such poor figures?
|
|
|
|
Kevin, are you sure you're not looking at the figures for the turbo diesel, which would have longer gearing?
I would also avoid driving at such low speeds in 5th gear, you'll be labouring the engine at the speed and not doing it any good, such as wearing out the bearings.
Is it a 16v engine you have? If so then they are designed to be revved a little more than 8v engines, and a lot more so then diesels, so would have shorter gearing. I could quite image a 1.4 Clio having similar gear ratios as a 2.0 Laguna, don't forget the Clio is a lighter car, so the PWRs are similar, so the gearing is going to be so.
|
|
Just checked the French site, in case they do have different ratios for different markets; but the .fr site doesn't give gear ratios..oh well I'll try .de now...
|
If it's not for a different engine in the range, it sounds like someone at Renault converted from kph to mph incorrectly!
Gareth
|
|
|
|
Hi Dave
It's definitely the petrol version
I actually spot the road speeds at 2000 or 3000 rpm so I do not labour the engine. Thanks for the comment.
It is a 16V engine but the road speeds are ridiculously low. The Mazda 626 that was my previous two cars was doing 85 at 3000 rpm - the laguna does 65!
I appreciate that the Clio is a lighter car - my point is that my car cannot go any faster than a Clio and it is not what I ordered
|
|
|
|
You do not have a leg to stand on since the brochure states that the contents are subject to change without notice AND you did not specify in the order invoice which brochure you were basing your purchase on.
If this ever got to court you would probably lose.
But from a trading standards perspective Renault may have a case to answer if the performance is 33% down on the brochure.
|
|
Ok...I give up..tried half dozen Renault sites worlwide; the .co.uk one is the only one I can find that quotes gear ratios. The 2.2 dCi quotes 33.4 mph / 1000 rpm, on .co.uk, so that sounds like the best match to the figure in the brochure the OP mentioned.
|
|
D'oh...33.4 mph in 6th gear...I'll get my pardessus
|
|
You did test drive one before you ordered it?
|
21.5 mph * 1.61 km/mile = 34.6 kph.
Coincidence?
The brochure will almost certainly say E&OE (or similar) and subject to change without notice, and you will get no where.
Afraid you'll either have to learn to live with it, or chop it in and buy something else!
RichardW
Is it illogical? It must be Citroen....
|
|
|
Is it really worth all the grief?
At the end of the day you might find you would get maybe 3mpg more at different gear ratios. On average miles that would equate to maybe £60 a year difference.
I can understand you're miffed but what exactly are you trying to achieve? It sounds like a lot of effort for not a lot.
|
The grief is that an awful lot of buyers have been conned by Renault and the car is the worst I have ever driven. The engine and gearbox are such a mis-match that it is hard work driving it and you run out of power at the wrong time. I recently, in France, needed third gear power to overtake a HGV and at 60mph had to change gear!
I enjoy driving and I do not have enough money to be able to afford to throw away the cost of a new car.
No I did not have a test drive but it is not the sort of thing you would notice on a test drive on town roads.
I went through the brochure and it was the data in the brochure that convinced me it was going to be a good car.
I am dealing with the finance company as I can sue them but the intention is to let buyers know of the situation before they end up with rubbish
The costs actually work out at about £400 p.a. based on 10,000 miles per year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Try the Advertising Standards Authority.
I recently complained about 3 Video Mobile to them, and as a result 3 had to refund about 150,000 customers because the information on their website was incorrect.
You can complain online at www.asa.org.uk
|
Calling it a "con" is suggesting that it was a deliberate and dishonest act.
Also, from the original author's recent comments it appears that legal action may be in the offing.
With those two points in mind it is not appropriate for the discussion to continue here, and I have locked the thread.
Mark.
|
|
|
|
