I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - Enoughalready
(headline corrected)

I was looking at changing our spare estate car (T reg mondeo) that only covers about 4k a year, for something a little bit more stylish. It is used to lug stuff around but sometimes I do take it to clients (companies) as our main cars are impractical for carrying everything.

Budget for this vehicle would be around £2500.00

I thought about a new shape Mondeo as they are coming down now. Also considered a C5 but a bit scared on the reliability front. I then noticed that a Saab 9-5 is a possibility and checked them out on eBay just to get an idea.

Why are there so many engine problems on these cars? Lots have had recon engines fitted and many others describe engine failure symptoms. Admittedly the mileages on these are around 142k but is that a lot these days? I don't think so.

I might have to rethink that C5 again. Any other suggestions?

I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - SjB {P}
A Swedish colleague has just had major engine and gearbox surgery performed on his year 2000, 60k mile, 9-5 Aero. I don't know the details beyond most of the issues being "well known" failure items but thankfully he has a full SAAB Sweden service history, so they have absorbed a large proportion of the cost. He's still a grand and a half out of pocket though.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - tintin01
Look at the Saab Owners Club or Saabscene for advice. There is a whole load of stuff on the forums about oil sludge in the sump and DI cassette failures. There has been some talk of Saab replacing for free engines that have this problem as long as they have been fully serviced, but I'm not sure what the situation is at the moment. My husband has a 2001 95 estate. We thought long and hard about buying it due to all the reliability issues - we have had 2 C900 turbos and a 9000 in the past and loved them all. We bought from an established Saab independant, the car had FSH and they cleaned out the sump. We had owned it for six months when the DI cassette showed signs of failing. Took it to local Saab main dealer who said it may have damaged the cat - £1500 to replace both items. They offered to take it up with Saab - result was DI and cat replaced for free.

The 95 estate auto is a great car to be chauffered around in. We decided to risk it because we love Saabs and it seemed to represent much better value for money than other cars in the same class. I sometimes feel guilty that I talked him out of buying a primera estate, though. (The 95 had done 100k when we bought it, I should add, but the indie said the later cars are better than a low milage early 95).
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - drbe
I don't know why you thought Saabs were bullet proof.

It's a rebodied Vauxhall after all.

What about a Mazda? Which? names it as a best buy. If you want reliability, which? says - 1. Honda. 2. Toyota. 3. Lexus.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - commerdriver
It's a rebodied Vauxhall after all.

>>

here we go again!!

Any car with 100k+ miles cannot be described as bulletproof unless you did these miles yourself.

Buying a secondhand car of any kind at that sort of mileage you are reliant on past owners having treated the car properly, not run it low on oil, not having put petrol in a diesel or whatever.

I ran my last Saab for over 100k miles without a hiccough and whoever has it now has got a good bet for the long term but I've seen cars with far less on the clock that I wouldn't bet on, knowing how they have been treated.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - Enoughalready
Thanks for all input.

The reason I singled out Saab is because other vehicles don't seem to have anything like the problems suffered by the 9-5 - the Saab only model I looked into. Quite a few recon/rebuilt engines were done pre 100k and that to me is pretty bad if a quality car suffers frequently with major engine problems.

I guess bullet proof is wrong but I always thought they were certainly better than average.

I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - artful dodger {P}
For arround £2500 you could buy a very late (X reg) low mileage Fiat Marea Weekend with a JTD diesel or large petrol and lots of extras. These are very practical and nice to drive - I have a 2.4 turbo diesel.

Load space is good, may be a tad smaller than a Mondeo, and has a rear lip to the load area that folds down - very useful if you need to carry a door or two. To make people really guess what it is you could try de-badging it - I doubt if they say Fiat.

The only 2 major things you need to watch are the cam belt (60,000) and clutch. The cam belt will cost from £250 to £450 depending on which engine and the clutch usually means removing part of the front suspension and a bill of about £800 (I had mine changed so I know!).

More to the point I would have no hesitation in buying another one.


--
Roger
I read frequently, but only post when I have something useful to say.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - tintin01
We are big Saab fans, but if you read the forums there are lots of reports of sludged up engines at relatively low milages (eg 50k). Ours is an ex-Saab car and we are still very happy with it, but I think Toyota and Honda seem to be the one to go for if you are cautious. I don't know if any modern car can be regarded as 'bullet-proof' . I felt like our old Saabs were, but they were relatively simple - seems to be so much more to go wrong on modern cars. At least Saabs are cheap second-hand.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - Enoughalready
Yes I just looked at tintin's link to Saabscene. Clearly major problems with sludge build-up leading to engine failure regardless of milage and correct servicing. Saab themselves have been quite compassionate about it but it doesn't look good for older models.

Right, I'm off to look into the suggested Fiat now. Thanks for that.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - type's'
I thought they were bullet proof as well until I owned one.
I have never thrown so much good money after bad.
Funny how a theory develops.

My brother has not long had a new 9-3 estate thingy or whatever saab choose to call them.
In his first 1300 miles it left him on the road side 5 times waiting for the recovery man.
After grumblings to 5th recovery man on what a piece of absolute rubbish his vehicle was the man did reply that most of his call outs are to Saabs and Renaults (of all ages).
Not a detailed piece of research I admit but the view of someone who seems to recover alot from breakdowns.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - Aprilia
I quite like the 9-5's and I think they are comfortable and good to drive. The 2.0T with autobox (paddles on the wheel) is a lovely drive. I don't think they are especially reliable though and locally I've heard of both failed turbo's and gearboxes at under 100k. The DI units are also a common failure and not a cheap item!
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - madf
I don't know why anyone thinks SAABs are either relaible or cheap to run. We had a few company turbos in lates 1980s and early 1990s until they were taken off the lists as horrendously expesnive to run by our Transport Manager. Later ones just continued the tradition...and GM engineering cutbacks/philisophy in Europe has a checkered history with regard to engine design and long life..(compared eg to Ford: compared to toyota they are rubbish).

I read a Car Mechanics article on buying used SAABs in past 2 years .. basically long lists of weak spots due to poor design..
madf
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - jase1
After grumblings to 5th recovery man on what a piece of
absolute rubbish his vehicle was the man did reply that most
of his call outs are to Saabs and Renaults (of all
ages).



I know a couple of RAC/AA callout technicians and they say the same thing. Renaults and Saabs to be avoided (and old Peugeots good, new ones bad seems to be the other pearl of wisdom that always comes out). When I asked about the rebodied Vauxhall thing, they agreed and couldn't come up with a reason why they should be less reliable, but apparently they are.

Funnily enough another AA man (a total stranger; I'd called them out as I'd locked the keys in the car, doh) volunteered the same info about Saabs without prompting. He told me this in the same sentence as a comment about this being the first Hyundai he'd seen in 18 months, make of that what you will.

So either this is a line they're being told to say (highly unlikely) or Saab/Renault really do have a serious problem with their cars going bang and leaving owners by the side of the road.

To be honest to me Saabs have always been about individuality and safety -- reliability has never really figured as a particular strong point (although I personally don't know of any horror stories, and Saabs do seem to last a long time).
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - barchettaman
....Saab/Renault really do have a serious problem with their cars going bang and leaving owners by the side of the road....

This happened at the opera here last month, a colleague had borrowed his girlfriend´s lowish mileage 2000 Saab 9-5 to drive up from Munich, cambelt went snap, engine went bang, he nearly missed curtain up for the show.

Quote for a replacement engine ?6k. Ouch.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - GregSwain
....Saab/Renault really do have a serious problem with their cars going
bang and leaving owners by the side of the road....


I recently asked an AA patrolman which cars he'd recommend, and he said "anything except a Saab or a Renault". Says a lot. He even reckoned new Fiats are more reliable than Saabs.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - jase1
... add another one to the list then Greg (see above).

If multiple AA engineers are saying that Saab and Renault are junk, then it must be so.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - lordwoody
How come the cam-belt went snap? Saabs are chain-driven. I've had a 9-5 for 3 years, apart from a turbo ( common problem at about 80k with light-pressure Turbo) it's been faultless.
In fact it's had far fewer problems than our A6.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - lordwoody
'Funnily enough another AA man (a total stranger; I'd called them out as I'd locked the keys in the car, doh) volunteered the same info about Saabs without prompting.'
Yeah, right! You call out an AA man and he immeadiately, completely un-prompted, suddenly starts denigrating another make, for no reason. Yor 'avin a larf incha?
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - jase1
Yeah, right! You call out an AA man and he immeadiately,
completely un-prompted, suddenly starts denigrating another make, for no reason. Yor
'avin a larf incha?


Unprompted in the sense that I did not ask him "so what do you think of Saabs then?". I had of course asked him about what cars he sees most of, well the actual question was something along the lines of how do these Hyundais compare given that they're cheap, at which point he said he hadn't seen a Hyundai in 18 months, and that all cars these days are pretty good(the usual "there are no bad cars anymore"), just Saab and Renault seem to give trouble etc.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - Aprilia
I've had
a 9-5 for 3 years, apart from a turbo ( common
problem at about 80k with light-pressure Turbo) it's been faultless.


That's hardly a strong recommendation is it?!
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - Xileno {P}
Complete unrepresentative nonsense. I don't know about Saab but Renault use the AA as their standard breakdown package when you buy a new Renault, so they are bound to see more Renaults. Only would be representative if all manufacturers used the AA.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - Xileno {P}
Regarding Saabs, my brother runs them and hasn't complained of any problems other than routine wear and tear items. He had a 9-3 and now has the 9-5. He would complain about the time of day given half a chance.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - commerdriver
Saab also use the AA as the standard breakdown service for first 3 years from new

Incidentally I have also spoken to 2 AA men this year who saw I had a Saab (both times when son's cars have had problems & dad has gone to help) neither has said anything about unreliable Saabs.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - runboy
Complete unrepresentative nonsense. I don't know about Saab but Renault
use the AA as their standard breakdown package when you buy
a new Renault, so they are bound to see more Renaults.
Only would be representative if all manufacturers used the AA.


True, but if Renault offer 3 years of AA cover on a new car, I would hope that in the first 3 years of owning a brand new Renault I wouldn't have to take up their offer of AA assistance!

If Renault only offer 1 years free AA cover on new cars its even worse if your new Renault breaks down in the first year!
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - Xileno {P}
Renault offer three years AA cover on a new car.

I would indeed be annoyed if my Renault broke down in the first three years - but then I would be with any make.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - GregSwain
I'd be disappointed having to call out the AA for anything. My membership is purely so I won't be stranded away from home with a flat battery etc - I don't expect anything else to go wrong with my car, which is 6 years old. My last car was 16 years old when I got rid, and that never needed an AA callout. If AA technicians are saying that Saab and Renault are the least reliable cars, how can anyone say "rubbish - i'm buying one anyway"?! I do drive my girlfriend's Renault, which hasn't broken down yet (touch wood), but the DCi engines don't have a great track record, so it's only a matter of time....

Incidentally, the AA bloke I was chatting to was when my mother's Vauxhall Vectra died. I mentioned I'd just bought an Almera, and he said "we never come across them to be honest". He said his own car was a Mitsubishi, and his wife's was a Nissan. Funny how he doesn't drive a Saab or a Renault isn't it?!
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - Aprilia
He said his own car was a Mitsubishi, and his wife's
was a Nissan. Funny how he doesn't drive a Saab or
a Renault isn't it?!


You'd be surprised how many people in the motor business drive Jap cars as their own cars.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - audiaudi
Hi

As a member stated here already - sabs are/were more safety concious, but now days all major car makers are.

About 20 years ago my father had a sab and that shape still looks good today with here long bonnet, and that car was the orginal bullet proof car.


Why not consider an Audi 80E avant/estate as shape does not look old, and that model was built upto 95/96 and with a service history and about 120k on the clock, you should still get VFM.


The Audi I recently sold appeared to be of good build quality but only covered about 10k and no probs, but not certain how it would compare to the 80E. The Merc I now have, the suspension is not built for Londons pot holes and speed humps - even when driving carefully, I've had the car in for warranty repairs to the bushes several times, and footbrake/handbrake rachet jammed, winow motors messed up and cars front passenger side tyre o/s edge wears out double quick.

I'm considering buying another Audi. Did consider a Sabb sport saloon becuase not many around, but have read about turbo probs.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - Mike H
I feel almost apologetic about being a voice in the gloom that this thread seems to have invoked.

Firstly, the chances of picking up a 9-5 estate for £2500 (your budget) are slim, even on ebay, for a half-decent car.

Secondly, my 9-5 saloon has covered 165,000 - just a kid really. Original engine, turbo, everything. No items other than service items have been replaced - clutch at 100,000, front brake discs at 65k and 140k, rear discs at 150k. The DI cartridge at 120k was the exception. The exhaust apart from the rear box is original. The sump has never been off. It has been the most reliable car I've owned, despite the chip upgrade fro 150bhp to 192bhp at 93k. The only special treatment is gets, and only since it got past the 100k mark, is fresh Mobil 1 and oil filter every 6000 miles. I don't simmer the turbo very often as I usually forget.

Let's face it, you only hear the horror stories. Why else would Saab have one of the highest owner loyalties? Buy a well-maintained car, the newest you can afford, and it will serve you well.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - cheddar
You want a reliable spacious estate to do around 4k miles a year, reckon a late MkII Mondeo should do it, perhaps around T plate ;-)

Better the devil you know!
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - Benjurs73
Horrible cars....I got one through my works car scheme (9-5 2.2 TID) as I wanted something safe for the missus to drive her 80 mile round trip per day in.

Whilst they look good both inside and out, we had the AA out 3 times in the first 3 weeks (engine kept going into limp home mode, air conditioning failed, complete interior lights failure) and over the next 4-5 months I reckoned we spent more time in EuroCar replacement cars than in it! Back in for engine management 'reset', windscreen wipers not functioning....you name it it happened. What a piece of junk.

I worked then for a large firm of accountants and although it'd was a 'unallocated car' i.e. the previous driver had quit his job before the lease was up (a common occurance at that sweat shop - anyway I digress) it'd only done 38,000 miles over 2 years and had the full servicing as required.

I quit and handed it back (not due to the car!) and the fleet manager said that they would rather it spent the remaining 6 months of its lease in their yard as it'd cost them more to keep it going then what they'd get from the employee's monthly payments.........Funnily enough I hear that the monthly pricing of these cars through the car scheme has gone up by £100 per month.....wonder why!

It's a shame because I think they look quite 'different' and the interior was nice but no way would I own one privately.

Just my T'pence
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - lordwoody
As a long-time Saab owner I'm always ready to jump to the marques defence but I may have to eat my words now. I thoght I'd just check out some reliability surveys to back-up my arguments as last time I looked at such things Saabs were somewhere in the middle. However the first 2 I found ( What Car and an American one) Saabs were second from bottom, Land Rover occupying the bottom position. Surprisingly Audi were third from bottom in the What Car one.
I may have to eat my words dammit! I must say that I still like mine however, and I belive that Saabs do retain their customers better than average, but on the figure I've found that may not last either.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - Enoughalready
tinyurl.com/lkz6u
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - Roly93
A work colleague of mine had a blown engine in his 95 after only 95K miles.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - cheddar
>>Horrible cars....I got one through my works car scheme (9-5 2.2 TID) >>

My current car was my company car before I bought it as part of a redundancy package, when I chose it four years ago I had a budget of (IIRC) about £21k based on list price however the company had a corporate deal with Saab giving me about £27k to spend, CO2 based BiK had just been introduced so I was after a good diesel, I seriously considered a 9-5 Vector estate 2.2 TiD however the engine was uncompetitive in power and torque stakes for it's MPG/CO2/BiK and was so unrefined, I would have gone for a 9-5 if I could have had the 3.0 TiD in reasonable spec.

Subsequently after a fair number of co car drivers had opted for Saabs the company withdrew them from the list due to much higher than average service and repair costs.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - drbe
I have just re-read the Which? magazine article (I posted earlier in this thread).

The AA man ( but what would a man at Alcoholics Anymous necessarily know about cars anyway? ) had it about right - Which? says the bottom two makes are :-

Last ---------------Renault

Last but one---- Saab

Strange that!
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - lordwoody
I've just ordered a Toyota as a second car so I can be smug now.
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - lordwoody
Going back to the OP. I'd still much rather have a Saab estate than a Mondeo, reliability issues or not.
Mondeo estate, ugh!
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - cheddar
I've just ordered a Toyota

Mondeo estate, ugh!



Look at that reasonable taste (unless it is a Prius) and poor judgement in but two posts ;-)
I thought Saab's were bullet proof! - Xileno {P}
I will get my gun out tonight and see if Saabs are indeed bulletproof. We can then put this festering issue to an end.
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - Lud
Yes Xileno, I too had been wondering why there weren't more ill-maintained, ill-driven matt khaki ones about...
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - Enoughalready
I was thinking towards the Mk3 mondeo. Of course I would prefer the Saab....as long as I didn't have to sell it for scrap with 12 months because it was uneconomical to repair. This thought has scared me off!
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - Xileno {P}
Not really, but it proves the AA man can read ;-)
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - Enoughalready
MikeH: "Firstly, the chances of picking up a 9-5 estate for £2500 (your budget) are slim, even on ebay, for a half-decent car."

They appear to be going for £1600 - £2000 for the saloon model so it might be realistic. I bought my last vehicle from BCA auction making sure it was one owner fleet owned so there might be a possibility. However, I was only investigating this possibilty and didn't even get as far as seeing how much the estate model differs because there were so many major engine faults or previous repairs at lower milages that prompted me to cease further investigation and start this thread.



I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - lordwoody
I quote from HJ car by car breakdown.( selectively admittedly, but I am a Saab fan)
"Super-safe estate version from early 1999 usurps Volvo as probably the safest estate car you can buy. Year 2000 model achieve highest ever NCAP crash safety score of 91% overall. 14th from top in 'R' reg J.D. Power Customer Satisfaction Survey. "
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - Lud
Nothing safer than a car that won't go, except for the owner's blood pressure :o)
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - lordwoody
"I am unhappy with Ford Motor Company regarding the repair of a common fault on the current Mondeo range, namely rear suspension / sub frame bushes"
I rest my case!
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - cheddar
I rest my case!


Just what case is it exactly that you are resting then?
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - tintin01
The good safety reviews helped persuade us to get a 95 estate. I still think that a good 95 is a sound second-hand proposition. They are cheap to buy and felt like a classier car than similar priced stuff (way cheaper than Audi, Merc, BMW, though I guess some people would not put Saab in with this group anyway). It helps if you have a good independant specialist locally too, as main dealers are expensive.
I might have to rethink that C5 again. Any other suggestions?


I have been tempted by how cheap C5's are too and I really like the shape. There was an 02 diesel with 60k at our local Citroen dealer for about £4k. As I only do 5,000 miles a year this seemed like a good buy. Looking at peachorlemon.co.uk, and Parkers owners reviews it seems like people either love or hate them. The stuff about the electrics scared me off a bit. Funnily enough, my husband was thinking of getting a Fiat Marea estate to replace his £100 Volvo which was a stop-gap car that lasted 18 months. They are really cheap on Auto Trader. I persuaded him to move away from bangers though and get something more modern for camping holidays. Actually, he has the right approach to car buying. He doesn't care what he is seen in and image means nothing. A friend at church was bragging about his £50 Hyundai - my husband showed him his £100 Volvo saying, "Yes, but if you want quality you have to spend a bit of money."
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - midlifecrisis
Reliable or not, would you be seen in something with those ridiculous chrome headlight surrounds!

I still think the designer must have been a refuge from Max Power on a YTS scheme!
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - lordwoody
For 2.5k don't imagine he's intending to buy the latest 9-5 somehow. ( must admit the new lights are not good)
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - barchettaman
They´ll be at 2.5k in about 18 months ;-)
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - lordwoody
That's why Saabs are good 2nd hand buys.
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - Chad.R
HJ's auction report from today;

SAAB 9-5 2.0LPT SE, 1999T, 109k miles £1,050 s

Assuming the car was in good/fair condition isn't that good value?

I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - lordwoody
It's brilliant value! Even if you had to allow money for some repairs ( Saabs being so unreliable etc etc) you'd get a very comfortable cruiser with a degree of image ( OK, not BMW image, but image nonetheless) that would last for quite a few more years for near petty cash money.
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - akr
I reckon if I put a thread on this website entitled "I thought *******s were bulletproof" (insert any make in the gap) you'd get a similar list of responses (with the possible exception of Jap cars).
Which all means such a thread is a load of nonesense. I think it's all about personal experience. I've been pleased with my Saabs - some clearly aren't. Regulars know I wasn't pleased with my VWs but many clearly are
All of which makes it entirely anecdotal.
When I have work colleagues saying that they won't look at a new shape Corsa because they once drove one in 1994 and won't buy a Skoda because they're "sheds" I would personally ignore what anyone syas and buy what you like best. And until you have a bad experience with a particular make you'll probably stick with it.
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - prm72
I reckon if I put a thread on this website entitled
"I thought *******s were bulletproof" (insert any make in the gap)
you'd get a similar list of responses (with the possible exception
of Jap cars).
Which all means such a thread is a load of nonesense.
I think it's all about personal experience. I've been pleased with
my Saabs - some clearly aren't. Regulars know I wasn't pleased
with my VWs but many clearly are
All of which makes it entirely anecdotal.
When I have work colleagues saying that they won't look at
a new shape Corsa because they once drove one in 1994
and won't buy a Skoda because they're "sheds" I would personally
ignore what anyone syas and buy what you like best. And
until you have a bad experience with a particular make you'll
probably stick with it.


Totally agree, thats why i drive Vauxhalls.
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - lordwoody
At last, common-sense!
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - Enoughalready
Whilst I agree with you up to a point the thread was started on my perception that SAAB's were way above average good reliable cars and my surprise at just how I was wrong. Looking at used cars available many, in fact too many had new engines early on or they were shot at the time of sale. These aren't just minor niggles but huge costs. Almost as time goes on uneconomical to repair.

Whilst looking at other models like Mondeos or even C5's they didn't show any history like SAAB's do. I was shocked. I like SAAB's & couldn't believe that they were nearly within my reach for that money but am dissappointed on my findings. Can I afford to gamble? That's what it would feel like....still if the right one came along!
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - Aprilia
If you look at the very latest Which? car-buying guide then Renault are at the bottom of the table for reliability and SAAB are second from bottom. I have a lot of confidence in Which? because over the years their information has correlated with my own experience.
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - type's'
Enoughalready - I thought it was a very good thread to start and they were also my perceptions of Saab at one point.
At the end of the day it had 59 responses so it was well discussed.
Just ignore the miserable so and so who thinks it is pointless to debate these things - if everybody agreed with him we would all be driving Honda's like me and that would be a boring world.
I thought SAABs were bullet proof! - Marc
I also like SAAB but have been put off them by reading owner's comments on Saabscene. You have answered your own question above, they're cheap because they have they have reliability issues and the main dealers charge an arm and a leg to fix them.

As a brand they're trading on their reputation from the 70s and 80s when they used to make solid, some would say "prestige" cars. The latest facelift of the 9-5 is laughable and a Vauxhall Vectra is a better built vehicle using superior trim materials.
 

Ask Honest John

Value my car