The C'eed might have won over some to the Korean improvements, but I'd still stick to an Octavia...:-)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
|
|
Took one on a three day test drive last weekend and covered a good few miles in it.
We had the LS range topper which had alloys, climate, half leather as standard. Was surprised that it didn't have cruise control but the engine was willing enough.
The seats were excellent, very supportive and comfortable and the car had a feeling of solidity I wasn't expecting in a Kia (but then for £13k, it should be properly screwed together). Did a trip to Liverpool and back in the rain in comfort.
The cee'd is a funny sort of car - it must be the most anonymous way to travel there is. SWMBO followed me home from the garage and drove past me twice, not realising the silver car was the one with me in it. Found it to be a very relaxed place to be. Can't put my finger on why but it was a calming environment to be trundling about in.
The LS comes with 17" alloys that look nice but make for some tramlining - think 16s would be better.
It's interesting to compare it to the C4 as our other car is a C4. They're very different things. Despite the cee'd being a newer car, the C4 feels more modern making better use of technology. The soft seats and ride in the C4 win hands down on our knackered roads and the handling in the C4 is more relaxed but still capable. The cee'd doesn't handle the ditches that pass for streets these days quite as well (maybe the alloys?) but it does feel more sporty when throwing it into bends. Good if you're holding the steering wheel, not so good if you're a passenger.
The cost of the cee'd is what will kill it for a lot of people. You could get a decently spec'd Peugeot, Focus, Astra or Citroen for the money they're asking. The warranty is a major draw, but would probably make more sense in a three year old used car, which has probably depreciated nicely but will still have a four year warranty to look forward to (and yes, I know the coverage drops as it ages).
So, decent car - too expensive, would be a good buy 2-3year old.
Only they're so new there's none that age
-- Biggedy biggedy bong
|
why do people always point to the cost of this thing?
It's only just out! Give it a few months and it'll be slashed in price -- just as the C4 was.
|
why do people always point to the cost of this thing? It's only just out! Give it a few months and it'll be slashed in price -- just as the C4 was.
Because at present it is relevant. If Kia want to sell the Ceed in large numbers it will have to slash the price. It will be interesting to see just how long it takes to do this.
|
|
|
why do people always point to the cost of this thing?
I guess that's how it always should be.
Listen to yourself saying "This thing drives like Golf, it feels just like Astra, it's equipped like Focus but it cost me %% less!"
Sounds good. Right?
Now say "This thing drives like Golf, it feels like Astra, it's equipped like Focus and I paid as much or maybe even a small premium for it"
Doesn't work as well, does it?
--------------------
[Nissan 2.2 dCi are NOT Renault engines. Grrr...]
|
That is true for now.
As I have said before though, Kia/Hyundai never keep their book prices for long. Folk were saying very similar things about the Rio not so long ago, and lo and behold it's now down at the sub-£7k mark for the diesel, with frankly very little to touch it at that price level.
When Citroen pulls the same trick (and I like Citroen for the same reason!), no-one dismisses the car as "too expensive" right off the bat, do they? No, they say "that's going to be cheap in 6 months, bargain".
And so it shall be with the Cee'd. Patience.
|
When Citroen pulls the same trick (and I like Citroen for the same reason!) no-one dismisses the car as "too expensive" right off the bat do they? No they say "that's going to be cheap in 6 months bargain".
I hear what you're saying. But the difference is - Citroen is the "prime candidate", not the "next best thing" marque. Leader rather than follower/copycat. This is the case of George of Asda suit costing more than Armani equivalent etc. It doesn't create aura of prestige. It simply alienates.
Now.. there were Rios under £7k you said... (looks around, noone's watching, whispers) got a linky?
--------------------
[Nissan 2.2 dCi are NOT Renault engines. Grrr...]
|
Interesting in that we perceive the Kia to be somehow a "lesser"brand, myself included, I may add. How much of that is true and how much of it is influenced by clever marketing strategy of the mainstream players, I would really like to know. Certainly Hyundai are a well-respected brand in the US and do very well in JD Power etc. I suspect a lot of it is badge snobbery. I am old enough to remember the 70s and the advent of mass market Japanese cars. Back then, we quietly scoffed at those odd Sunnys, Cherrys, Civics etc, while we drove past in our Cortinas for our 6 monthly camshaft renewal. I suspect we are seeing the same with the Korean brands and that in 10 years time, we'll all be driving them!
|
|
|
Citroen is the "prime candidate"
Not sure I agree with that to be honest -- Citroen are "cheap PSA" like Kia are "cheap Far-Eastern" or Skoda are "cheap VW". Haven't been "leading brand" for quite some time.
Now.. there were Rios under £7k you said... (looks around noone's watching whispers) got a linky?
Give me a sec -- DavidHM had a link to them the other day...
|
Give me a sec -- DavidHM had a link to them the other day...
Ah shoot, it was a second-hand (56 plate) one. Thought that price was a little too good to be honest lol.
It has to be said though that the notion that the Hyundai group are not a "leading" brand is a falsehood, at least on the international stage. They're bigger than Renault (on its own), Fiat, Mazda and Mitsubishi, and closing in on PSA. It's a bit like saying that the mighty Toyota Corporation is an also-ran, simply because they're not top three in the UK.
|
Just in case some people aren't aware, Kia was acquired by Hyundai nine years ago but, before that, Kia was building the Peugeot 604, Fiat 132, the Kia Pride was sold as the Ford Aspire in America and its Avella as the Ford Aspire. There are other examples, including Mazda models.
Before the death of the company founder about six years ago, which led to the spin off of many of its divisions, Hyundai Heavy Industries was one of the largest groups in the world.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
Not sure I agree with that to be honest -- Citroen are "cheap PSA" like Kia are "cheap Far-Eastern" or Skoda are "cheap VW". Haven't been "leading brand" for quite some time.
Well, look at it this way - you will easily meet people and fleet managers searching specifically for C5, or kids yearning specifically for Saxo or C2 VTR. You will have a hard time finding a fleet guy insisting on Magentis or punters drolling around tarted up Picanto with whale spoiler on McDonalds parking lot. I agree Citroen aren't neccessarily 1st league of family hatchbacks, but it is still a brand you choose specifically because you r wife wants Plurier or you want C4, rather than "some Focus size car, with long warranty".
Ah shoot, it was a second-hand (56 plate) one. Thought that price was a little too good to be honest lol.
That's what I thought, most Kias have about £1000 wiggle in their official vs street price bracket from the very beginning.
[quote]It has to be said though that the notion that the Hyundai group are not a "leading" brand is a falsehood, at least on the international stage. They're bigger than Renault (on its own), Fiat, Mazda and Mitsubishi, and closing in on PSA. It's a bit like saying that the mighty Toyota Corporation is an also-ran, simply because they're not top three in the UK.[/quote]
It's not as much about the size, as what the brand stands for. So far both Hyundai and Kia were two companies behind ugly, badly driving and unremarkable in every aspect shopping trolleys and weird saloons at premium prices with little, if not none, market development behind it. The product was just plain bad. I don't think Elantra or Sonata would ever make it to mainstream market no matter what badge was on them. It wasn't the label. They were just bad cars with bad engines and bad value for money. Full stop. The corporation is now slightly wiser, product development is in the right spot, but Getz or Cee'd are still product from a companies behind Trajet or Shuma, companies with no market presence in Europe to speak of, no media achievement to their name, dealerships that come and go, products that don't exist in terms of popularity, parts availability or second hand values and that is something you simply can't shake it overnight. It doesn't matter if it's Kia, Dodge, Daihatsu or Lada. If there is nothing to recognise you by, nothing behind your name, you can't just turn around and pretend to be premium brand. In other words - it takes Volkswagen to pull Skoda trick.
--------------------
[Nissan 2.2 dCi are NOT Renault engines. Grrr...]
|
Compare like with like, rrp or discounted price for discounted price. To many people on this formum compare one cars RRP with anothers discounted price.
If we are talking prices lets look at the market as RRP:
Ford Focus Studio 1.4 5Dr £12,122 - No air con or remote locking and 1.4 isn't a great engine
Vauxhall Astra 1.4 5Dr £11,560 - No air con
VW Golf 1.4S £12,627
Citroen C4 £12,055 - i.e. £9995 with silly discount scheme that never stops. Aircon - the works
Kia Cee'd 1.4 SR £10500 with most things the C4 has bar Cruise control
So the citroen wins on price and it wonderfully equiped, but I've had eperience of Citroens before and the reviews still aren't encouraging as to the quality.
|
Well look at it this way - you will easily meet people and fleet managers searching specifically for C5 or kids yearning specifically for Saxo or C2 VTR. You will have a hard time finding a fleet guy insisting on Magentis or punters drolling around tarted up Picanto with whale spoiler on McDonalds parking lot. I agree Citroen aren't neccessarily 1st league of family hatchbacks but it is still a brand you choose specifically because you r wife wants Plurier or you want C4 rather than "some Focus size car with long warranty".
That is all fair comment, and I concede the point.
However, what you are referring to is branding and brand recognition -- and as far as I am concerned those who base their purchases on branding deserve all they get when their "recognised" car keeps going wrong.
This country is ALWAYS ten years behind the rest of the world, because we have our own little small ideas and won't embrace new things. More fool us.
Not that it bothers me -- the better the Korean cars get, and the more superior they become to their "image", the bigger bargains I will get when the cars are a few years old.
It has to be said as well that the Citroen vs Peugeot thing is exactly the same. More fool the planks who spend £1500 on a ten year old 306 vs £400 for a ten year old ZX.
|
>> Citroen is the "prime candidate" Not sure I agree with that to be honest -- Citroen are "cheap PSA" like Kia are "cheap Far-Eastern" or Skoda are "cheap VW". Haven't been "leading brand" for quite some time.
Yes, Citroen's are cheaper than Peugeots, for which I am very grateful. However, they are not 'cheap' compared with Peugeots with regard to quality. Have you looked at a C4 and compared it with a 307 for instance? I can't understand why anyone would pay more money for the equivalent 307. In addition to which, the C4 diesel is available with the new EGS gearbox, as well as a tiptronic auto, both of which, for some odd reason, can't be had with the 307 (as far as I know).
So, where is the cutting edge to be found in PSA products? Not in models like the 307 for sure.
|
|
Having said that, I have just checked the prices of the C4 and the 307 on drivethedeal.com and there is not a lot of difference in the discounts available on both cars.
|
Yes Citroen's are cheaper than Peugeots for which I am very grateful. However they are not 'cheap' compared with Peugeots with regard to quality.
My point exactly.
Citroen are no worse than Peugeot (indeed, as you point out, they're probably better in many respects at the moment). But then neither are Skoda inferior to VW, and likewise -- and this is the key point -- neither are (the newer) Kias in any way inferior to most Far-Eastern brands.
It's all about perception.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
