Leafing through the "What Car?" reliability surveys it is noted as ever that the prestiege marques came out very low down the table while some more budget brands came very high up. Since these surveys do not take account of just full breakdowns but also of little niggles that keep the car off the road, could this possibly be because of different owner expectations. E.g. I test drove a new Fiesta Diesel and it had a couple of creeky dash panels with just a thousand miles on the clock. If I've paid £10k for the car I'm not gonna complain too much about that. If I've bought a Jag/Merc/BMW/Audi/Range Rover and the CD is a little noisy as it slides into the player then I might.
How much of it is that genuinely the prestiege cars don't live up to their badge, how much that a Daewoo owner is less liable to complain about a creaking dash, and how much due to Japanese cars being so dull to drive and be in that their owners avoid driving them and fill in reliability surveys instead?
Regards
Chris
|
|
Perhaps what's required is a detailed reliability survey of current reliability surveys :)
|
|
|
This point has been made in just about every thread on reliability in the Backroom.
Nothing illustrates this more than the discussions on VW/Seat/Skoda reliability/satisfaction. Essentially they are constructed from the same parts on the same platform, yet in the BR VW get slated and Seat/Skoda praised.
There is a valid argument that Seat and Skoda represent better value - at least in the short term - and that VW main dealers are pants. However Seat/Skoda still have an image of being a down market VW and having bought the former many owners are at pains to bolster their image.
|
|
|
This is an old chestnut and basically not true.
I have been working on Mercs since the 1970's and still buy/sell and service a few. The latest ones do have more problems that the older ones ever did. Merc. owners are not being 'picky' when they find rust bubbles on their two year old car. There are a number of websites dedicated to owner complaints from the like of BMW, MB etc. and if you look at some of the problems they have you'll find that they can be fairly major.
As to the Japanese cars - well, my impression is that many people buy Japanese cars expressly because they are reported to be so reliable. If there is even a minor fault then they complain like mad. I remember a couple of months ago an Accord owner asking me about why his 'check engine' light was on. The car was four years old and it was a duff lambda sensor - his first fault. He was angry and distraught.
I never understand comments about Japanese cars being 'boring' - does that mean boring because they don't break down? Try driving a few recent Japanese cars, they're mostly nice to drive and some are exceptional (MR2, Subaru's etc.).
|
I remember asking a while ago why people thought there seemed to be a difference between the VAG models, but can't remember getting any clear answer. I offer the following to try and give as objective a comparison between two VAG brands as I can.
I own a Seat Leon and a VW Passat. I bought the Seat as a brand new import, the VW as an "Approved Used" car. There isn't a gulf of quality between them, and what differences exist are small. What goes against perceived expectation is that I've found my Leon to be better built than my Passat. That means that the amount of creaks, squeaks and rattles is greater in the VW. The Passat might look like the lower half of the cabin uses better quality material, but it rattles from the dash and from the B-pillars. The cabin in the Seat doesn't make any noise at all now. The dash used to creak a bit until that was sorted under warranty.
It's true that the soundproofing is slightly better on the Passat, resulting in less road/tyre roar, but that means the Passat is even quieter (in that respect) than the Leon, not that the Seat is loud. N.B. the same brand and size of tyres is on both cars. I find the ergonomics slightly better in the Seat due to the positioning of the footrest and clutch pedal. I also found that the ride and handling were superior in the Seat until I replaced the suspension kit on the Passat with non-standard components (Koni). Now, the Passat handles better, but only slightly, and the mudflaps scrape going over speed humps. Obviously, direct comparisons in this area are difficult due to one car being in a different class from the other.
Seeing the Passat is nearly three years older than the Seat, I don't think there's much point in drawing comparisons for reliability - if I did, it's true the Passat would come off worse, but it has covered more than double the mileage. What I will say is that if the Seat gives the same amount of annoyance at the same mileage, I will be disappointed.
As for equipment levels, the Seat just about has the Passat beaten by a small margin - there's a proper seat belt for the middle person in the back, the trip computer has a few extra functions, and it has front foglights, while the Passat has lumbar adjustment for the front seats and an arm rest. As for dealers, my experience of two VW franchises has been very unsatisfactory, while the local Seat dealer is very helpful.
I don't really care about badges and wasn't aware enough of cars before the late 90s to think of Seats as being "downmarket" - or even be aware of their existence! I guess I'm saying that I'm not trying to bolster its image - I honestly don't feel the need to. For me, the question is which is the better ownership prospect? As I've pointed out, according to my experience the differences between the two in terms of quality/perceived quality are small-scale, with the Seat having the edge. It has fewer niggles overall, model for model they're cheaper, the dealers seem to be better, you get more kit for your hard-earned.
--
andymc
Vroom, vroom - mmm, doughnuts ...
|
Nearly all Passat dashes seem to creak after a couple of years, as do A4's. Its very annoying (well, for me anyway).
I have R&R'd an A4 dash to stop is squeaking - its been OK for over a year now, so I guess we fixed it.
The basic problem is that there are inadequate dash supports and fixings for the weight of the dash moulding.
|
|
|
Andymc,
A reasoned appraisal of the 2 cars. However it boils down to the 3 year older,(with more than twice the mileage) slightly quieter VW having more creaks, squeaks and rattles than the Seat.
I personally wouldn't think that makes the VW less reliable - but that is simply my definition of reliability. Which illustrates the problem with owners reporting on their car's reliability.
C
|
well my experiences of upmarket cars have been mixed:
2 BMWs I have owned/driven were 100% fault free with no rattles etc - one secondhand 50k, 1 new
the only Audi I had A4 was very prone to faults squeaks etc. Lovely cabin but pants reliability.
Every Ford I have had has been 100% reliable with odd squeaks - udually fixable in 30 minutes.
Peugeot has been of variable reliability, good trim
Mercedes: poor quality and reliability.
I apply the same standards to each car...
madf
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have raised this before, but in the German reliability reports which are actually manufacturer independent but have their limitations, the VW Golf does better than its Seat Leon and Skoda Octavia siblings which themselves fair better than the Audi A3. As these vehicles are mechanically fairly identical I put this down to a number of factors:
1. Seats and Skodas are bought on a budget and are not serviced as well as VWs.
2. A3s are generally loaded up with highly unreliable electronic kit.
3. You can interpret whatever you want into reliability reports.
|
|
|
