|
I was interested like many others it now seems, but I had the same reservations as v0n, and personally I think that people are starting to take notice of Kia, BUT, I still think the depreciation will be quiet steep, although I think Kia have finally turned he corner, I think there whole range is starting to look very good. As another post mentioned I like it because it is simply a car without all the pretence of all other cars, and it does what it says on the tin. I shal certainly be keeping an eye on these over the next couple of years.
|
As another post mentioned I like it because it is simply a car without all the pretence of all other cars and it does what it says on the tin.
As is a basic Ford Focus.
With £11695 for a basic focus, and £11,545 for a basic 1.6 ceed, the ceed has to live or die on its showroom / test drive appeal. I wont comment either way never driven or sat in one.
------------------------------
< Ex RF, Ex TVM >
|
I'll buy a 3-yr old Cee'd over 3-yr old Focus anyday!
The major pain of old cars comes from labour cost - not the parts! A 3-yr old Cee'd will still have 4-yr warranty left [assumed maintained properly]. In an era when simply a diagnosis costs £50+, warranty definitely saves pocket.
|
Hi
Like Citroënian, I took one for a 3-day test drive and I liked it but I did feel that the ride was hard at low speeds (my test drive model was a mid-range GS with 16" alloys) but was just right at motorway speeds.
I liked the power steering (variable, very light to park and weights up at speed), the big door mirrors (I could see the kerb and behind without adjusting), the USB connector to plug my flash drive with MP3s in (although the speakers were a weedy even with the bass turned up full) and the 1.6litre petrol engine is very willing (mine had about 3K miles on).
But the thing that I noticed when I compared it to my P11 Primera is that it lacks the solid feel of the Primera. It's something that I can't put my finger on.
Take it for a 3-day test drive and see what you think.
Chris.
|
|
|
|
Hi RF TVM AE,
>>the ceed has to live or die on its showroom / test drive appeal
Not sure I agree, Kia have gone for the 7 year warranty as its main selling point. SWMBO couldn't care two hoots about how well a car handles or what the badge says - but she, and a lot of people who don't look at sites like this, know that 7 years without worrying about big bills is more useful than lift-off oversteer or torque.
You're right of course in that if it looked like a Ssangyong Rodius it would fail on the showroom appeal (beauty in the eye of the beholder and all that but you get my point) or if it kicked you in the ribs at every junction it would fail on the test drive.
But they've build a reasonable car that is fairly practical and inoffensive to look at.
Just think, shell out on one today and you'll not have to worry about bits falling off or it going wrong until 2014. The (perhaps considerable) downside would be the servicing - if they insist on using main dealers, it might work out pricey.
|
I can't see how they could insist on main dealer servicing.
Hyundai don't with their 5-year warranty, and indeed I just got my car serviced at a backstreet place -- the only insistence was the standard spiel about using genuine parts and getting the VAT-registered garage to itemise the parts they replaced each time. No quibbles when a wheel bearing became noisy at 4 and a half years old -- they just replaced it.
I would imagine Kia would be the same.
Anyway isn't the 7-year warranty now bumper-to-bumper for the full seven years?
|
> isn't the 7-year warranty now bumper-to-bumper for the full seven years?
And yes it is, from the Kia website...
> 7 years / 100,000 miles full manufacturers warranty
|
|
The warranty is very tempting but I can't see myself owning one. I would go for a Focus.
|
|
|
|
With £11695 for a basic focus and £11 545 for a basic 1.6 ceed the
This comparison is disingenuous in the extreme.
The basic Focus is a 3-door car with a 1.4l, 78BHP engine.
The Cee'd you quote is a 5-door car with a 1.6l, 120BHP engine.
Hardly apples with apples is it?
For a fairer comparison, the 1.4 5d S Cee'd is £10,995, with the equivalent Ford 5d 1.5 Studio being £12,295. So a saving of £1300. And it must be said that the 1.4 Kia engine is actually more powerful than the 1.6 Ford, with the 1.6 Kia being comparable with the 1.8 Ford. So it depends how far you want to take things.
Few people buy 1.4s or 3-door cars at this size, so for a real-world base-spec comparison:
The basic 5d 1.6 (120BHP) Kia is £11,545;
The basic 5d 1.6 (98BHP) Ford is £13,872.
The Ford is £2300 more expensive for a car with 20% less power and four years' less warranty (worth around £1000 at least for a decent third-party warranty).
The Kia simply is a much cheaper car than the Focus, taking all into account.
This of course does not take into account broker prices for the Ford, but that isn't the point anyway -- forecourt prices are all that most people will ever see.
|
FWIW broker prices (drivethedeal):
Ceed 1.6 LS £11430 (list £13295)
Focus 1.8 Zetec Climate £10950 (list £15545)
|
FWIW broker prices (drivethedeal):
Absolutely right. In the world of internet deals the Fords and Vauxhalls of this world will always come off best due to the bulk deals these companies strike with various parties. If I were buying a car in this way I'd choose the Ford every time (and there is no way I'd be buying a brand new car from a forecourt).
But the point is that few private buyers do this. The kind of people who buy based on showroom presence (as alluded to by AE) are usually not going to be then going off and buying from a broker. They do exist, but they aren't that common.
The broker prices if anything expose just how much of a rip-off these large companies really are in the main dealers -- nearly 50% markup over the broker price.
The other point to factor in here, as I have said before, is that the Cee'd is a new model. Of course the price cuts aren't going to be savage yet.
Give it two years though, when that same 1.6LS is going at Motorpoint with 400 miles on the clock for £7000, still with six plus years' warranty (and it'll happen, look at the Daewoo Lacettis on ther for £5700 at 6 months old), that's when I might just be tempted to jump on it.
|
|
|
|
For a fairer comparison the 1.4 5d S Cee'd is £10 995 with the equivalent Ford 5d 1.5 Studio being £12 295. So a saving of £1300. And it must be said that the 1.4 Kia engine is actually more powerful than the 1.6 Ford with the 1.6 Kia being comparable with the 1.8 Ford. So it depends how far you want to take things.
Spot on jase1, comparing like with like produces a someone different result.
The 1.4 SR is £10495 RRP and is the spec of the GS, so even better value, not an expensive car at all!
|
The 1.4 SR is £10495 RRP and is the spec of the GS so even better value not an expensive car at all!
Unfortunately jase1's comparison doesn't really work in real life. No Ford dealer I know of sells their cars at RRP. They are in constant promotion, in similar fashion to how DFS always runs their "sale", all year long. You can walk into any Ford dealer in the country tomorrow and drive away in Focus 1.6 Style for £10,995, not a word of haggling, which would save you £500 on Kia's best offer on their 1.6 Cee'd S. Our local Ford dealer will hand over keys to brand new Ford Focus 1.6 TDCi LX for £10,995 and I know they would shave further £200 and match brokers price. Incidentally, few weeks back they were advertising (in local rag) Focus 1.4 Studio, in 5 door edition, for £9,499. Brokers sell them for £9,000, and if my memory serves me correctly, you can even source one off the net for £8,582. Which punches with massive high street £1000 discount and computer generated £2000 saving on the best offer our local Hidsons can come up with on their limited edition Cee'd SR.
It's unfair game, I admitt, because it's one Kia dealer against 4 competing Ford dealers in 30 mile radius, but that's the reality. You would really have to look for no deal, for the Cee'd to be cheaper.
--------------------
[Nissan 2.2 dCi are NOT Renault engines. Grrr...]
|
SG Petch in the North East sell the 1.4 SR 5dr Ceed for a sticker price of £9995.
The engine in this is around the same output as the Ford 1.6. (slightly higher BHP, slightly lower torque -- on balance similar).
They will sell them for £9500 without any real prompting, according to one of the sales guys there I know well.
One of Kia's problems is of course the smaller dealer base, but in areas where Korean cars have traditionally sold well -- the North East, Scotland, Northern Ireland -- there are no shortage of dealers, and as a result prices are cheaper.
|
|
I rang SG Petch today to see what discount I could get on top of the scrappage allowance on a Kia Soul, the salesman was very abrupt and said 2k was plenty for a scrap car, when I said Ryedale were able to give me a further discount he said they must be selling at a loss, not believing that other dealers are selling cars for charity I was wondering if anyone new the percentage mark up kia franchises make on the RRP ?
|
|
Welcome to the forum Midnight, please note the prices in the post you replied to are two years old.
Edited by Old Navy on 06/11/2009 at 18:21
|
|
|
|
Incidentally few weeks back they were advertising (in local rag) Focus 1.4 Studio in 5 door edition for £9 499. Brokers sell them for £9 000 and if my memory serves me correctly you can even source one off the net for £8 582.
1.4 Studio, dire Engine, no aircon, no remote central locking, no alloy wheels, not even an indicator for low fuel !
Give me a Cee'd SR 1.4 for £9750 anyday.
|
Kia are currently running a Ceed promotion where 'you can get a cee'd diesel for the price of the petrol equivalent on all S, GS and LS models, saving up to £1,000', with a 3 day test drive.
www.kia.co.uk/
|
|
Couldn't possibly buy a car with such a cavalier attitude to punctuation.
|
According to the sales figures Kia sales have dropped 30% across Europe,perhaps its people realising what a load of crap they really are.
made with the cheapest of labour using seconhand bought in technology they should be half the going price and if they were they would still make a profit.
|
>>>>perhaps its people realising what a load of c**p they really are
Andy,
What exactly makes this car "c**p" ?
|
|
Its about as much charisma as a packet of soap powder hence the drop in sales.
|
But that doesn't make it a c**p car. Not working, being unsafe, being uncomfortable or unfit for purpose - that's grounds for being c**p.
Not having the cachet of a "badge" doesn't make it a poor proposition, it's no more or less charismatic than a Toyota Corolla/Auris and they've sold in huge amounts.
I'll declare an interest - I'm getting one and have driven a Skoda in the past. The Fabia was a better car (imho) than the MINI Cooper it replaced. Yes, I did get grief from folk for having a Skoda, but once they'd travelled in it, they came to realise it was usually a better than what they were driving.
The MINI had a "better" badge but was a poorer car than the Fabia.
|
You failed to point out Cit me old mate, that you are getting one because its free. ;)
Would you buy one is the question. IN fact its a question you can answer as you test drove one.
If I offered you a Ford Focus for free or a Ceed for free - which would you take.
------------------------------
< Ex RF, Ex TVM >
|
{sheepish}
Oh yes, and it's free...
{/sheepish}
Focus everytime if someone else was paying for it. It's much more charismatic.
--------------------
Citroen C4 Coupe, Mazda MX5 Mk2.5, Kia Cee\'d LS
|
Well if the figures are that bad -- this comes on the back of Kia having a better range of cars than they ever had before -- so demonstrates clearly the LACK of correlation between how good a car is and how well it sells.
As for "load of crap" -- lest we forget that Ford lived on 40 year old pink fluffy dice technology for ages and ages. And also ironically, they sell have a lower market share now than they did when their cars were useless, rusty carp.
Indeed, Nissan manage to sell 30% more cars in 10 years, by cutting quality back to Renault levels and building poorly made junk with nice dashboards. As VW have done for the last ten years as well.
Most buyers wouldn't know a well made car if it bit them on the backside.
Which is why I now just buy cheap -- they're pretty much all garbage now, thanks to the consumer. At least a Kia doesn't pretend to be something it isn't.
|
If Ford has made Focus so well then why aren't they offering 7 years warranty or even 5 years? Remember Kia is offering 7 years warranty on Cee'd which tells us how confident the company is about their new car!
I believe in this country we mainly buy cars due to their badge rather than how the car is or else more people would be buying Skodas/Seats than VWs!
|
If Ford has made Focus so well then why aren't they offering 7 years warranty or even 5 years?
2 years would be nice!!!!
Let's not forget that Ford only offers a single year of manufacturer's warranty with their cars.
The remainder is dealer-backed -- effectively an extended warranty effort with more holes than a Tetley teabag.
This, from a so-called world-class manufacturer (who, it seems, can't even turn a profit anymore) is nothing short of a disgrace, and hardly instills confidence.
|
>Remember Kia is offering 7 years warranty on Cee'd which tells us how confident the company >is about their new car!
BUZZZZZZZZZZ WRONG ANSWER
Kia is offering a 7 year warranty for marketing reasons. Nothing else. Its an attempt to make the whole cost of ownership of a brand new Kia look cheaper than it is. This is required because of very poor residual values making the cost of ownership too high.
You can berate the buying public, you can insult them and you can cajole them, but only one thing matters - Sales. and Kia isnt.
Jase you can have your opinions, thats fine but they dont really count as you are not a new car consumer. You have no skin in this game.
------------------------------
< Ex RF, Ex TVM >
|
You can berate the buying public you can insult them and you can cajole them but only one thing matters - Sales. and Kia isnt.
Care to explain then why Hyundai-Kia sold 1.35 million more vehicles than Renault last year?
Any why Hyundai alone is set to overtake Renault this year?
|
In the UK? We are in the UK you know.
------------------------------
< Ex RF, Ex TVM >
|
In the UK? We are in the UK you know.
In the world? We are in the world you know.
In the grand scheme of things, the UK is so small as to almost be an irrelevance.
If we are going to talk sales and profits; Renault are an also-ran in the grand scheme of things, with zero presence in the world's largest and richest market. Hyundai/Kia's market share is growing faster than most other companies' without them having to resort to financially-crippling takeovers (most takeovers end in tears eventually). Ford is on a slippery slope to oblivion -- knackered finances and falling sales from what was once the largest manufacturer in the world, and is now set to be overtaken by Volkswagen when they sell the few remaining profitable sections of their core business. Fiat are teetering on the brink; GM aren't far behind and the "bland" Toyota is about to become the largest car maker in the world.
Manufacturers who take solace in the fact that they are doing OK in one or two areas end up like Rover.
|
Lets not dwell on the fact the hyundai/Kia were government run, government financed (and still are - The korean government controls the banks that control the company). Just like Renault was in fact. Lets not also dwell on the fact the Kia and Huyndai had to merge to survive. Lets not also dwell on the fact the Kia Huynadai are shipbuilders and heavy plant and infratstructure engineers as well. Lets not even dwell on corruption keeping them profitable.
This thread is about buying the Ceed in the UK. New. Now I have not said iof the ceed is a good car or not. I dont know. Not tried it or sat in it.
You are getting (again) very defensive about buying new korean cars. I dont know why, because you stated you dont buy new cars. You buy cheap. This means that you are quite happy buying a second hand Korean car dirt cheap that some other poor sucker has lost a fortune on because of appaling residuals. This I think, makes your opinion and advice on buying a new car a little biased, possibly even corrupt, dont you?
------------------------------
< Ex RF, Ex TVM >
|
Lets not also dwell on the fact the Kia and Huyndai had to merge to survive.
Err, no. Kia had to be bought by Hyundai for Kia to survive, certainly. Hyundai were, how should we put it, "persuaded" to buy Kia for the sake of the banks saving face. They were doing perfectly well all by themselves thankyou very much.
Lets not also dwell on the fact the Kia Huynadai are shipbuilders and heavy plant and infratstructure engineers as well.
Wrong again. Hyundai are what you say -- and one of the largest electronics manufacturers in the world -- but these are all different Hyundais, and have been for some time. Kia were never heavy engineers.
I don't see what difference that makes anyway -- most of the Japanese companies are the same. Nissan are/were owned by the same keiretsu that own Hitachi for example.
>>Lets not even dwell oncorruption keeping them profitable.
I wondered how long it would take before that old chestnut came up. There is a lot of corruption in a lot of companies -- Ford included -- Hyundai bosses were just stupid enough to get caught.
This thread is about buying the Ceed in the UK. New. Now I have not said iof the ceed is a good car or not. I dont know. Not tried it or sat in it.
In case you hadn't noticed, most of what I have been saying on this thread has consisted of correcting stupid ignorant comments. Koreans are on slave wages -- Korean companies simply rebrand other people's old castoffs -- a 78BHP engine is comparable with a 122BHP lump etc etc.
You are getting (again) very defensive about buying new korean cars. I dont know why because you stated you dont buy new cars. You buy cheap. This means that you are quite happy buying a second hand Korean car dirt cheap that some other poor sucker has lost a fortune on because of appaling residuals. This I think makes your opinion and advice on buying a new car a little biased possibly even corrupt dont you?
Hyundai residuals are not as "appalling" as you seem to think. In percentage terms they are very similar to Citroen, Fiat, Ford or Vauxhall. Yes, people say, but a Citroen is never bought at list price -- well neither is a Hyundai. Traditionally Korean cars have been cheaper than the competition, but with a percentage depreciation comparable to some of the lower performing European or Japanese cars -- with better reliability and build than many of them.
So yeah, a 6 year old Accent (3 year warranty) may only be worth £1300 -- but then it cost half as much (£6000) as the typical 1.6 Focus, which is itself only worth around £2500 at 6 years old.
If the Cee'd matches that level of depreciation, it'll still be worth a similar amount of money as a C4 in 5 years' time -- and that's not factoring in the warranty.
Incidentally, having now owned a Daewoo I'm far from convinced I'd have another one -- Daewoo definitely do seem to fall into the stereotype of the backward Korean car -- probably not helped by the fact that they started off with US rather than Japanese backing, I'm sure. Not had any issues with the car, but it is unpleasant to drive compared with Japanese or Korean competition.
|
made with the cheapest of labour
South Korea is one of the most technologically-advanced nations on earth, and pay levels in the country for factory workers of this kind are about the same as they are in the UK.
|
using seconhand bought in technology
Actually I'm just wondering if Andy Bairsto can explain which 1.4 engine was bought in that produces 25%+ more power than the equivalent Ford unit?
And, if this is second-hand technology, and presumably then at least 5-10 years old, where does this leave Ford?
If a crummy, backward company can produce a 100BHP 1.4 engine, why the hell can't one of the largest companies in the world?
Put it this way -- Hyundai's 12-valve 1994 1300 engine produces around 5% more power than Ford's latest and greatest.
Assuming this engine was 5 years behind the times, this makes Ford's engine a full 20 YEARS behind schedule, does it not?
And as this is a current generation, it doesn't say much for Big Blue's engineers does it?
Or maybe, just maybe, Korean producers can produce a decent engine all by themselves after all, despite all those slave wages eh?
|
jase1, surely you can't mean that Hyundai/Kia, one of the fastest growing car manufacturers in the US and Australia, where people buy cars for reliability and value rather than vanity, actually makes their own engines! Shock, horror!
You mean the excellent CRDi diesel that wipes the floor with Renault's DCi was designed in-house? Or the excellent 1.4 litre petrol which is very quiet and flexible, might be better than Zetec carp? Or the interiors which are often criticised by reviewers are actually better quality than many more expensive European cars? And Korean workers aren't all 20p/hour slaves who eat cats and dogs?
Well, that sheds a whole new light on things! Especially given that the majority of the "I love Euroboxes" brigade have never even sat in a Kia or Hyundai before!
|
Ok, ok, enough of the screaming, heavy irony and mocking, let's not let it slip out of hand gentlemen. :)
Let's see what we've learned so far - if one was willing to spend in excess of 10 grand and was on the market for up to 7 year run in a bottom trim, lowest engine, Focus sized hatchback with boot smaller than most competitors and relatively unknown long term reliability and residuals but pretense to become premium badge - the Cee'd 1.4 is should be on the list to consider overpaying for. Mmmm... Fair enough.
--------------------
[Nissan 2.2 dCi are NOT Renault engines. Grrr...]
|
>>Focus sized hatchback with boot smaller
Can't resist that - the latest focus has a boot smaller than the Fabia. Went up a couple of classes of hire car to get a "bigger" car when camping in Ireland (flew in that time) and we couldn't get our rucksacks in the hatch. They easily fitted the Furby.
The Focus has a boot smaller than most competitors.
-------------------------
C4, MX5, Cee\'d
|
Can't resist that - the latest focus has a boot smaller than the Fabia. Went up a couple of classes of hire car to get a "bigger" car when camping in Ireland (flew in that time) and we couldn't get our rucksacks in the hatch. They easily fitted the Furby.
> The Focus has a boot smaller than most competitors.
I'm sure you must have confused models - Focus hatchback offers 385 litres of luggage space, and manufacturer specifically made sure it was of such dimensions that it would swallow without much problem typical household appliance, like washing machine or under worktop fridge, including packaging. In Focus class only Octavia offers more space in the boot (although one could argue, Golf based Octavia is as big as P11 Primera, thus belong more in Mondeo sector). Fabia, you speak of, on the other hand, has relatively narrow 260 litre boot, smaller than that of Ford Fusion and a tad bigger and easier to load than new Fiesta's...
--------------------
[Nissan 2.2 dCi are NOT Renault engines. Grrr...]
|
I'd have thought the longer warranty would be of interest to second and third buyers also. Obviously needs service history to remain valid - so maybe Kia are onto something there, i.e. revenue stream of servicing.
Two weeks ago Auto Express compared the Cee'd, i30 and Auris. The Auris came third.
|
Nope, no confusion.
Mine's a 75 litre rucksack, the other a 65.
Drove to the airport in the Fabia and they fitted easily. Flew, got the hire car and they didn't fit the focus. It might have more litres on paper, but they're not as usable in the car. Maybe the EIRE focus differs to/from a UK one, but that's the only car I have experience of.
And I happily got a full sized washing machine into the back of the Furby with the seats down and me driving (so seat all the way back).
Focus, big on the outside, big on paper, doesn't fit rucksacks.
:-)
-------------------------
C4, MX5, Cee\'d
|
It was a focus, honest!
groups.msn.com/honestjohn/2007album.msnw?action=Sh...7
-------------------------
C4, MX5, Cee\'d
|
I'd probably prefer a Focus - but only by a whisker.
I'm sure that the Kia/Hyundai product will be reliable and well built. The Koreans are very advanced, more so than the Europeans in certain areas (electronics and communications technologies, for example). Wages and factory conditions are now comparable with the West. Hyundai group certainly seem to be doing well in many markets (North America especially).
I don't think that depreciation will be a major issue after about 4-years - the Focus does not hold its value particularly well and I guess the Kia buyer will be looking at 4+ years of ownership. After 7 years then who cares? There's plenty of people out there who like Far Eastern cars and/or have been bitten by a lemon Ford or Vauxhall in the past and would go for the Kia.
The only thing that would really worry me about a Kia is the cost of routine replacement parts (brakes, exhaust etc etc) which are not warranty items and tend to be expensive on Korean cars (largely due to high importer mark-up I suspect) and slow to come through IME.
|
"Not having the cachet of a "badge" doesn't make it a poor proposition, it's no more or less charismatic than a Toyota Corolla/Auris and they've sold in huge amounts".
Unfortuneatly not the case they are both suffering from very poor European sales a massive sales drive along with some hefty discounts is now the order of the day.
|
|
Don't forget the C'eed is built in Europe for the European market. C'eed built in Slovakia and i30 will be eventually build in the Czech Rebublic.
|
>>Unfortuneatly not the case they are both suffering from very poor European sales a massive sales drive along with some hefty discounts is now the order of the day.
Are you referring to Kia/Ford or the entire industry? A quick glance down the "target price" column in the car mags would suggest that no-one in their right mind pays full list unless it's for something very special. There's not much in the Focus size that fits that description.
I've lost track of the argument - A Toyota Corolla has never been an interesting car but it has sold in ridiculous numbers worldwide.
-------------------------
C4, MX5, Cee\'d
|
I've lost track of the argument - A Toyota Corolla has never been an interesting car but it has sold in ridiculous numbers worldwide.
Its probably because in most of the countries people buy cars to travel from A to B. But in this country most of the people buy car based on the image of the car.......and who builds up or creates that image? I think its the motor media, the hype created by different channels etc..
|
""The Focus has a boot smaller than most competitors. """
As the owner of an 05 model, I have to agree with this statement. Barely adequate to get a weekly shop in. I read somewhere it was due to raising the floor to get a full size spare in, as an afterthought. Fortunately it's a second car for us but if it was our main family car, it would be inadequate.
I've said before, it's vastly overrated, great for a quick blast down twisties but after an hour you can't wait to get out of the thing...the noise, the harshness, is sooooo tiring. Can't wait to change it, oh and the economy... high 30s max, even gently driven on a long run, my 2 litre astra sri was better than it!
|
Ok ok enough of the screaming heavy irony and mocking let's not let it slip out of hand gentlemen. :) Let's see what we've learned so far - if one was willing to spend in excess of 10 grand and was on the market for up to 7 year run in a bottom trim lowest engine Focus sized hatchback with boot smaller than most competitors and relatively unknown long term reliability and residuals but pretense to become premium badge - the Cee'd 1.4 is should be on the list to consider overpaying for. Mmmm... Fair enough.
It just happens that the chapest trip (SR) is as well spec'ed as other brands mid spec cars, residuals for kia products are some of the highest in the industry, you're just using a percentage figure which is a poor way to work it out! Great value car, kia's problem are the little things they are not so good at yet, such as the quality of the leather on the gear stick, placing the indicators on the right for the first cars. Very few cars in may family have had no problems, 2 Corolla's and the so far a Kia Cee'd. The Ford's, Citroen, Fiat, VW's and Rover didn't manage that in the first few weeks, Nissan and Mitsubishi good just not outstanding, the Kia is the best built car we've ever owned.
|
It just happens that the chapest trip (SR) is as well spec'ed as other brands mid spec cars
Well, we've been through that already in this thread. You can pretty much buy Focus Zetec Climate for the price of 1.4 SR, up to 1.8 engine size. It might be the best 1.4 engine in the world with the coldest air con and the niftiest USB socket but you would really had to be set on not owning Focus to go for Cee'd in this comparison.
residuals for kia products are some of the highest in the industry you're just using a percentage figure which is a poor way to work it out!
Residuals for Kia are actually artificially sustained, because majority of second hand units remain within dealer network.
Great value car kia's problem are the little things they are not so good at yet such as the quality of the leather on the gear stick placing the indicators on the right for the first cars.
Kia is the best built car we've ever owned.
That might be, but none of these things matter in real world. Renault Megane and Clio are widely known as unreliable, badly build quirky cars
but they outsold their sister companys more reliable and better value Almera and Primera month after months till the end of production. Our market is full of ultra reliable, well put together cars that never gain credibility among buyers. The Mitubishi Lancers, Suzuki Lianas, Proton Gen2's of this world have no chance of standing up to the leaders for few very tiny, very simple reasons.
In 2006 the three best selling cars in Ceed's sector on the first and second hand market in UK were:
Ford Focus 137,694 new and 217,027 used cars changing hands
Vauxhall Corsa 73,923 new and 142,182 used sold
Ford Escort with whooping 195,809 units still changing hands on second hand market
That alone should stop the presumption that UK market is "image driven" or "badge driven" forever. It's not image driven. Vauxhall Corsa and Ford Escort - the mockeries of driving experience with appalling handling, shoddy design and awful set of engines paired with most bizarre trims. What does that tell us? Car buying public doesn't watch Jeremy Clarkson, doesn't read Honest John, they don't care about reliability, handling, onroad presence, extras or USB sockets. They want devil they know, car they can feed at Tescos pump, service for £15 at Nationals, get spares for at Kwik Fit and roof rails at Halfords. And they want it cheap. They won't buy Lancers or Lianas, because at that cost in market slot there is aready Focus. And if it handles well and steers like a pro, then it's just additional advantage, not requirement. If it's a choice between Hyundai and Honda for the same money, it's going to be Honda, regardless of how many extra buttons Getz have to offer. It's as simple as not buying Asda's coffee for the price of Nescafe.
So - general public won't buy it for the price of Focus, because, well, why would they, if there is already Focus and Astra there. Car enthusiast won't buy it because, well, if you had 10k to spend would you really spend it on 1.4 korean car that doesn't excel in anything particular. Which leaves the manufacturer with that small niche of people looking to keep the car for 7 years, live close enough to dealer to maintain availability and take advantage of that warranty and are willing to pay premium for it.
--------------------
[Nissan 2.2 dCi are NOT Renault engines. Grrr...]
|
All very fair comment v0n -- and I note that you recognise that Kia's position is shared with a lot of other producers -- Suzuki, Mitsubishi, (old) Nissan and so on.
It makes you wonder if Hyundai/Kia should really be bothering with the UK/European market, when they're already making such in-roads into more enlightened markets, as well as the poorer ones.
And your comment about Escorts and Corsas being cars that people want to service for £15 at National Tyres, should surely put the nail into these cars as options for anyone who does care about reliability, build, handling and so on. Who wants a car that no-one has cared about?
I'm perhaps a weirdo in this regard -- where most people will buy a cheaper car like an Escort and neglect the poor old thing with intermittent servicing and Tesco's fuel, I, for all my protestations, am basically like the rest of you. Regardless of what I choose to buy, I'll treat the result like it's made of gold.
It wants a new cambelt? It gets a new cambelt. Odd rattle coming from underneath? Jase gets it sorted, often going to 2 or 3 garages before monkey finally agrees that something isn't quite right, and Jase was right all along.
Most older cars I've driven that belong to others have noisy brakes, rattles everywhere, dings on every panel, lights cracked and sometimes not working. I don't know how they do it.
The question has to be, though -- is the UK the freak, or is the rest of Europe the same? Judging by their expansion plans, Hyundai thinks the former -- we'll have to wait and see I guess.
As I keep reminding the people I know who knock my car choices, I was the one backing Skoda for great things 10-15 years ago, and no-one would listen then.
|
V0n,
don't want inflame what has already become a widening argument, but what do you mean by
willing to pay premium for it.
Are you thinking the premium is in terms of value of the car at year 5/7? If we agree the cars have similar prices/specs then this is all I can think of as _perhaps_ being a difference.
I'm sure though anyone looking at a four year old car will view one without a warranty in less favourable terms than one which has the same warranty cover as a brand new competitor. Won't this help residuals?
>>doesn't excel in anything particular
Can't see what either the Focus or the Astra excel in. Ubiquity? :-)
-------------------------
C4, MX5, Cee\'d
|
> Ubiquity? :-)
Nail. Head.
1990s Nissan Primera vs 1990s Vauxhall Vectra.
Which was more reliable? Nissan.
Which drove better? Nissan.
Which looked better? Well both as dull as ditchwater, call it a tie really.
Which had lower maintenance? Expensive cambelt changes on Vectra, plagued with reliability problems for years, clutch change complex -- result, an easy win for the Nissan.
Which sold? Vauxhall.
Why? FLEETS.
That's what it comes down to -- cheap fleet sales. All of these low cost Fords and Vauxhalls come from fleet overpurchasing, which pushes down prices before the manufacturer would like.
Result? Bargain cars, but very little in the kitty for GM and Ford.
If people genuinely went for the best cars for the money, Ford and Vauxhall would have been dead long ago. For too many years they survived on lacklustre efforts. Vauxhall still do.
For build quality, you bought VW. For reliability, you bought Nissan, Toyota or Honda. For flair you bought French, for fun you bought Alfa.
For sheep-like following the pack, you bought Ford and Vauxhall. The fact that the Focus is a good car these days is pretty much incidental -- Ford could rebadge a Proton Impian as their next Focus-sized car and it would sell in the millions. Fact.
Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised if that turns out to be exactly the kind of thing that happens in the next few years if Ford doesn't get its act together financially.
|
don't want inflame what has already become a widening argument but what do you mean by "willing to pay premium for it."
I mean what I said from the beginning of the thread. At the end of the day, regardless of how good and modern their engines are and how much work did they put into details at Slovakian plant, in UK, on this market, Kia Cee'd is slightly more expensive than comparable model from so called "market leaders". You have to pay premium for not willing to be yet another Focus or Astra driver in the 'hood.
I'm sure though anyone looking at a four year old car will view one without a warranty in less favourable terms than one which has the same warranty cover as a brand new competitor. Won't this help residuals?
7 year warranty will serve a treat to anyone who intends to keep the car for 7 years and treat it like it was their baby. That's very, very, very small percantage of Britons. The fact is - it doesn't take a lot for that warranty to be void. Isn't that why they flog cars in US with 10 and 12 year old warranties, because they know Jo Shmo from Little Pikatchoo, NY is just bound to skip proper service schedule at some point in a decade and just make it void? Cars in UK change hands on average every two, three years. Presuming warranty is transferable, at 4 years old Ceed will be potentially worth less than £1400 as part exchange, presumed half bangernomic item and the owner will still be tied into manufacturer specified servicing in proper intervals, every third service being major service and all that. I wonder how many owners will do their numbers, take it for oil change, stop collecting stamps and loose FSH together with warranty? Let's not forget it's 7 years in a country where 7 year old W or Y plate car has almost no value. Not to mention the fact all campaign is run on presumptions. Kia presumes YOU know their cars are reliable choice, they presume we know what they are doing and it's not just another trick before they go down like Daewoo. They presume we will treat them like premium brand, and not Dacia Logan of this side of Romania, because somehow everyone should know they are big name in Asia, and not just another Proton, Perodua or Tata to John Smith down the pub. Ask yourself, if you don't intend to keep car for 7 years in dealerships 100 miles apart - is it worth Astras money? Is it worth Focus' money? There it is - in front of you - Fongpeng trainers instead of Nikes. Lingkook tyres instead of Bridgestones. The former item at slightly higher price than tried and tested. But manufacturer sticker guarantees "me run long time". Are you buying? ;)
>>doesn't excel in anything particular Can't see what either the Focus or the Astra excel in. Ubiquity? :-)
Oh come on, Focus is reckognised benchmark for hatches for years, handling, boot space, even reliability. I might not buy it, you might not like it, someone else might be (wrongly) confusing its luggage space as being smaller than that of an old Astra, but let's be serious and give respect where it's due.
--------------------
[Nissan 2.2 dCi are NOT Renault engines. Grrr...]
|
I think some people are losing track of the fact that Hyundai are playing the long game.
It took Japanese manufacturers almost 30 years to be genuinely accepted in this country, and followed a similar path to the Koreans, who have been around a little shy of 20 years now.
In the 60s, the Jap cars were a tiny minority, a bit of a joke, inappropriate for the European market and largely ignored.
In the 70s, they started to sell well because they were very cheap, until they got ideas "above their station", put prices up, and sales went down.
In the 80s, they conquered America, but were still sniffed at in Britain. Still a little backward in some ways, savvy buyers came to realise that they were offering much better value for money than Ford, Vauxhall et al.
In the 90s, they finally turned the corner in Europe.
The Korean manufacturers are following a similar path; the 70s equates to the late 80s in Korean terms; the 70s to the 90s, and they're more or less at the Japanese 80s level now.
Given that, in the meantime, the formerly very complacent big guns of Europe have bucked their ideas up big-style, the fact that a relatively small number of Korean manufacturers are selling as many cars as they are (around 100K+ in the UK as of last year) is remarkable -- it has generally taken much longer for "new" makes to make the same level of impact, in less competitive markets.
The main problem they face is that they don't have the same USP as the Japanese in the 80s, which was reliability an order of magnitude better than the domestic manufacturers.
These companies are here to stay, and for those buyers who either manage to find cut-price Ceeds and i30s (and they'll be around soon enough), or get them second-hand, will find themselves with a car much better than they've a right to expect at the price.
I tend to agree though -- £12,000 for ANY car of this class with a 1.6 engine is too much, and especially for an "up-and-coming" marque. Having said that, the really silly people in all this are the like of an ex-colleague of mine who paid £17,000 for a 1.6l BMW 1-series. Now that's overpriced, let's get things into some perspective here!
|
>>Kia presumes YOU know their cars are reliable choice
No, I wouldn't care. It comes with a seven year warranty. If it's not working, they'll fix it. Try taking your Astra to a dealership in year six with a broken electric window motor
>>it's not just another trick before they go down like Daewoo
It's a possibility but as you see Ford & GM selling off their silverware to pay the company pensions, don't assume they're around for ever either.
>>Oh come on, Focus is reckognised benchmark for hatches for years, handling, boot space, even reliability. I might not buy it, you might not like it, etc
Oh, no you(!) come on. The Focus was a leader with their suspension when it was launched back in the 1860s. I actually prefer the old passive rear steer of the ZX to the Focus. Boot space (not numbers, but actual usefulness) in the Focus isn't the best in the class, not by a long chalk. Reliability? the 2005 What Car survey had it well below even the Fiat Brava and Rover 45, hardly earth shattering.
But then I don't mind the Focus. Driven plenty of them, they haven't done me any harm. To me, they're simply transport. The dials with their arial typeface sum them up. Well, you need to know how fast you're going, here's the most boring way we could think of to present that information.
The Kia is just a car. So is the Focus. If I wanted a hatchback without having to use my brain I'd not go far wrong with a Focus. Or an Astra. Or an Octavia (is that still a hatch?) or a Golf. Or a Cee'd. Or a 130d. Or an A3. Or a Grand Punto. Or a 307.....
I don't think we live in a world where there really are "bad" cars anymore - Lancias don't oxidise overnight, your Czech supermini will start in the winter no problem.
To think the Koreans aren't building modern cars, or cars that are somehow substandard to the Euro competition is just wrong. The Japanese were laughed at in the 70s when they started for much the same reasons I'm reading here about the Koreans.
And a lot of the problems Ford and GM are having are down to the volumes shifted in their bigger markets by the Japanese and Koreans.
-------------------------
C4, MX5, Cee\'d
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
