|
Dirven one then ?
|
Been in a few, I am thinking I have not been in a car this badly buillt since my dad had a Lada while the owners are spouting on about how crap Fords are.
The newer A classes seem to be a lot better though!
|
The newer A classes seem to be a lot better though!
On what sample size was that conclusion based?
Edited by L'escargot on 12/01/2010 at 09:40
|
|
|
|
puggly
We drove the first 'A' class when it came out in 1998 from memory - as that was the year i got my first brand new car ever a ford mondeo ST - to me the drive was ok, but i could not relate it to my dads 230E and other mercs i'd been in.
however, got to drive the new a class last year, a diesel think. i felt embarrassed in it as i'm used to driving large-ish cars. (car was loaned for the day for free as the other half wanted to try it)
I intially though it was the B class. sat in a commanding position. Very big on the inside, and imo, handeled well and could actually relate to most MB's I've been in.
however, we did not buy as the other half felt it was too big. not sure re relaibility but i guess its no better than the other mercs.
|
I first saw an A class in '98 when working in Munich.
I didn't really think much about it then, though I do remember Munich was heavily adorned with posters of the A class and Elk tests :) Can't imagine why...
I have driven a few A class and they do the job.
What always impresses me is the interior space, much roomier than a C class.
What confuses me is how I can get comfortable in an A class where a B class just annoys with its flat footwell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hehe thats my experience, you can actually see all the bits of trim rattle all over the place just like it did on my dads Lada. Went in a newer one the other day and it seem more solid, actually I didn't notice the car at all which suggests it was rather boring, which is no bad thing.
|
|
|
|
Sounds like a lot of stereotyping and hate there....
|
Indeed :) I hate perceived luxery cars which cost a lot of money but are actually worse than cheaper products. The people that buy them buy them for the snobbery value. I didn't like the MK4 Golf for this reason and not many owners did either. The following Golfs I have no problem with because they were much better cars in their own right.
I am talking about the original A series here, the newer one does seem to be a lot better built.
Don't worry I used to hate Corsa's too and would stereotype Corsa drivers for being slow and I ended up buying one!
|
|
Don't worry Rattle - my post was aimed at JCoventry and not yourself :)
|
|
I had an A160 for a couple of months and 1500 miles or so, early '99 as I recall, one of the first, S plate it was. I quite liked it at the time though it seems that the first gen ones are a nightmare to work on.
|
We're actually planning to buy a Mercedes A class - the W168 type - original shape - diesel A170 - or if we can find one the longer A170L.
I've heard some people love them and some hate them - but that's the same for any car. I've heard the horror stories about maintenance and repair, but we've got VW's and before that we had a Peugeot so we know all about that sort of thing!
I think the original Mercedes A Class is one of the best looking small cars, apart from slight awkwardness around the rear side windows.
Speaking of snow chains on the rear of an A class - I remember seeing a BMC 1100 with 'Town and Country' tyres on the rear only - same sort of mistake!
|
Sofa spud, I assume you have driven a W168 A170?
Did the noise, vibration and hard ride not put you off?
I agree the interior space is genius ala mini standards, and it does still look the part.
|
|
|
My wife had an A170 Avantgarde for a while. T-reg whenever that was. It never gave us any bother and was quite a useful thing. Servicing at an indy was not expensive. She didn't keep it all that long though as she decided at the time she wanted something bigger.
Couldn't knock it though other than the silly semi-auto gearbox her one had. I like manuals and I like proper autos. That just seemed to be the worst aspects of both.
It was very frugal. I think we used to see 60mpg sometimes. Clever features included an auxiliary interior heater which warmed the cabin up lickety split in winter. All the seats except the driver's one could be removed although they were fairly heavy but when they were out it was remarkable how much it could hold.
Wouldn't rush to have another but it was OK.
|
|
Nice enough motor unless they go wrong, hope it works out SS, i just don't have the luck of the Irish to which i'm entitled and the one i got would be the car from hell.
|
|
|
|
Mercedes gradually improved the A class over the years, but they are all a nightmare to work on and some jobs take 3-4 times as long as on other small cars because of need to drop engine.
|
Mercedes gradually improved the A class over the years but they are all a nightmare to work on and some jobs take 3-4 times as long as on other small cars because of need to drop engine.
Not cheap to repair either.... personally although I like the space, and fairly good handling/ride, I wouldn't touch one (W168) with a barge pole, far too much goes wrong, and never a cheap fix.
|
|
|
|
Yep, agree with WT, nightmare to work on, inbuilt trouble with electrics etc & just a quote for fitting a starter at merc should be enough to warn you off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry harib but what I said is true. The older A Class was terrible, and this has been repeated already by several other posters. And the people who buy used ones of this age only consider it because of the Mercedes badge, ignoring the fact these were badly made. The new one isn't the best small car either - there are Fords and numerous other makes which are better for less money.
|
Sorry harib but what I said is true.
It was more the remark about everyone who drives an A class being an amateur driver. Seemed a strange thing to say to me.
|
|
|
|
|
I have 2 MK4 Golfs and drive my mothers 51 plate merc 170 LWB
Please someone put me out of my pain....................................
I've also ordered 1000 bottles of Gummi Pfledge and the weathers warmed up and the thaw has set in
Call me Mr Lucky ;o)
|
And did you pay £4k for a 52 reg 100k miller one? That is how much garages want for old clapped out rusting MK4s round here. Or you could have a just as well made Astra for half for price, or a better built (where it counts) Focus for a lot less.
They are nice cars in many ways but build quality and reliable is not good enough to reflect their high prices. Its all based on image.
|
They are nice cars in many ways
What ways are those then? To me they always looked like the dog turds people have found they are.
|
I have nothing but praise for the mk4 Golf.
We've had our 52 plate GT TDI 130 for coming up a year, and it's been nigh-on faultless. Bought with 88k on the clock, now on 97k and it's needed nothing more than a service, a CV joint gaiter and new rear brake pads. Good to drive (major suspension mods from 2002MY onwards), ridiculously quick in real world driving, 50 mpg+ in daily use, comfy, well specced, and I know this is subjective, but a lovely looking car inside and out IMHO, much more so than the mkV that replaced it.
I agree they are well overpriced on the used market (we paid £4200 for it in March last year), but looking through Autotrader, we could still get £4k back for it tomorrow. £200 depreciation, near perfect reliability and 50 mpg make it a very cheap car to run, and personally speaking, if anything major does go, I know a VW tech who will sort it for mates rates.
I'm a big fan of the Focus 1, but in a decent spec 115 bhp TDCi Focus 1 of equivalent age/mileage would only save about £500, and the 1.8 Ford engine isn't anything like as grunty or responsive as the PD. Anecdotally, it isn't anything like as reliable either, and it won't be as easy to sell on.
I actually think a good, used mk4 PD 130 Golf, initial investment aside, is one of the cheapest cars to run that's available today.
Edited by DP on 11/01/2010 at 04:09
|
|
|
|
I can't think of any way in which a Focus is better built than a Golf Rattle; better to drive, yes, by all accounts (though the ride of the Focus leaves a lot to be desired IME). Care to enlighten us? I always found Mk 1 Focusses to be rattley (sorry...) old things; even when new the interiors felt cheap - I can't imagine they've improved with age ;-)
I'm also not sure I've ever seen a rusty Mk 4 either...and don't forget that all car prices are to a greater or less extent affected by image so I'm not sure that comment makes much sense either...
Peter
|
Peter I don't know what you're talking about. My dad's Focus is almost ten years old - no rattles, still drives like new, never had any trouble with it in over 70,000 miles. Still on the original battery, still starts first time, even in the cold. It is rock solid and hasn't even got any rust. You cannot say this for many 10 year old cars.
Obviously not every Focus is in the same condition as the one my dad has, but neither is every Golf.
Interiors felt cheap? Well the plastics they used in the Mk1 Focus are a lot nicer than the ones in the Mk3! Very hard wearing seats, very comfortable.
Last time I was in a VW, it was a 2003 Polo and the interior looked dismal compared to the Fiestas of same age.
|
I'm not saying they're all bad; I've not driven one since '98. But at the time, to me, it was a disapointment compared to the alternatives :-)
I expect there are a few more years in your Dad's Focus though...in my experience it's the way a car is looked after that has a greater influence on its longevity once out of warranty.
I'd hope that any 10 year old car would still be be rust free (save for a Mercedes or a KA ;-)); that only takes us back to 'V' reg doesn't it? I have an old BMW 325 Touring as a run around/station/tip car. It's 22 years old ('E' reg) and only has a little bubbing on the sunroof panel and tailgate, but it does have a full service history...
Peter
|
|
|
|
A customer of mine has just scrapped one, (MK4 Golf), chassis was rotton. Ok probably an unusual case but considering he paid a fortune for it just three years ago he is very annoyed about it.
HJ seems to agree with me that the Focus is better built too.
Focuses are not as classy but don't confuse that with build quality. I think the MK4 Golf is one of them cars which will always prokoke strong opinion from both sides. To me it is nothing more than a euro hatchback, I just don't see where the the premium is.
|
That certainly sound like an exception Rattle - previous accident damage by any chance? I thought the Gold had a 10 year anti-corroison warranty? Mind you, I also thought the whole attraction of the Golf was that it was classless, not classy...but maybe I'm not the target customer.
Perhaps you're trying to highlight the difference between 'perceived quality', for which the Mk 4 Golf was rightly praised - interior lighting, soft touch plastics etc etc, and build quality in terms of the underlying engineering. At that level I suspect there's little difference between any mass market car - at the end of the day they're all just appliances :-)
I drove a then new Focus in '98 for 3 months while waiting for a company car to be delivered - a National Car Rental 1.8LX IIRC. To me the whole Focus Mk1 'thing' was a bit emperors new clothes; the press said it handled well (which it did), so it was 'the' car to have in the class. But how many people actually drive their cars anywhere near the limits? I realise that the mix of people on motoring forum may disproportionately lean towards the handling aspects, but for your average Focus driver the difference between the handling of a Golf, Focus or Astra is surely just not an issue.
And FWIW I've never owned a Mk4 Golf, though have driven the 1.6 SE, GTI (1.8T) and V5 derivatives on multiple occcasions when new or newish. In my opinion it was a far nicer place to spend >200 miles at a stretch than Focus, as was the equivalent Astra. But then the equivalent A3 (same 'chassis') was nicer still. Still, we all have different opinions, so it's good there's a choice :-)
Peter
|
In my opinion it was a far nicer place to spend >200 miles at a stretch than Focus as was the equivalent Astra.
I would agree with that, Peter. There's not much wrong with the way the Focus is put together, but the seats (in LX trim which mine was) are truly abysmal, and the cheap, shiny brittle plastics don't look radically different to those adorning the dashboard of my old Y-reg Sierra. Don't get me wrong, I like the Focus. I did 100k in one in 3 yrs with one minor trivial fault only. But it can't hold a candle to the Golf's interior ambience, comfort, or material quality.
I also don't think for most people there's enough of a difference in handling between a revised (02MY on) Golf IV and a Focus for that to make any difference. And frankly neither chassis is a patch on that of a Peugeot 306 from the mid 90's anyhow ;-). I was always a little bit disappointed with the Focus in that respect. Hailed as the best handling mid-sized hatch ever, it frankly wasn't if you'd ever had a 306.
|
I'd completely forgotten the 306 (and I owned a 205 GTI for a while too, making it all the more unforgiveable!!); fantastic handling car!! Where did Peugot go wrong - or should that be why?
Peter
|
I will never forget the way the 306 offered such fantastic handling with a lovely supple ride. Even the XSi and GTI-6 would soak up potholes and sunken manhole covers without any crashing, yet the body control at speed or when flinging the car through a series of tight corners was little short of flawless. The steering was perfectly geared and weighted, and the turn-in pin sharp. You could even play with the attitude of the car mid-bend using the throttle, and make the tail break away completely if you were in the mood.
I find it amusing that so many modern equivalents, particularly those from German manufacturers handle tidily, but ride like skateboards. A friend has a new Audi A5, and it handles well, but the ride is just appalling. You can feel every grain of tarmac, and the road noise is abysmal. The damping finesse and polish of those old Pug chassis put everything since to shame IMHO. The Focus was indeed good, but somehow just that bit less agile, with a coarser ride, and with the feeling of a little more "rubber" in between you and the mechanical bits. It also didn't offer the throttle adjustability or sure fired knowing that the damn thing would just turn into a corner, even if you were overcooking it a bit. The 306 always would.
I miss my XSi. Nowhere near the quickest car I've ever had, but so much fun. Even after three years, I'd still take it out just for a blast, and come back grinning
Edited by DP on 12/01/2010 at 21:14
|
|
|
And did you pay £4k for a 52 reg 100k miller one? That is how much garages want for old clapped out rusting MK4s round here. Or you could have a just as well made Astra for half for price or a better built (where it counts) Focus for a lot less.
I paid £17,700 for her daily driver TDi hatch 9 years ago next month, I paid £1120 (with 6 months tax on) for my daily V5 estate 18 months ago with 128K under its belt.
Most of the spannering I do myself, most fixes are well known and cheap if you buy parts from the right places.
The hatch has had, one MAF £80), one brake light switch (£8), 2 rear axle bushes (£24), a pair of front disks ( OE £60), one set of pads all round (£80 EBC Greenstuff) and is awaiting better weather to fit a widow regulator repair kit (£26)
|
Quote:.."Sofa spud, I assume you have driven a W168 A170? Did the noise, vibration and hard ride not put you off?"" I Haven't tried one - obviously if we don't like it to drive or ride in we'll change our minds and look for something else. I know they have a fairly hard ride but one of our current cars is a VW Golf Mk 3 which has a very wallowy ride, so the change might be welcome!! Our other car is a VW Passat B4 1.9 TDI, so we're used to vibration!
Edited by Sofa Spud on 11/01/2010 at 11:39
|
It's not the Mercedes badge that appeals to me particularly - I've never had any desire to own any other kind of Mercedes! I just think the one-box styling is neat and it's a cute little car.
I think the W168 A-Class will become collectable one day, like other flawed classics such as the Triumph Herald or Hillman Imp, on the strength of its unusual but pleasing appearance alone.
Edited by Sofa Spud on 11/01/2010 at 11:49
|
|
|
Imagine a gocart on stilts, over poor undulating roads the cabin and occupants get rocked from side to side, the oddball steering column on RHD cars clunks a little (the rack is LHD so the column goes right to left accross the bulkhead) and they are horrible to work on.
I can really whip my mothers car around side streets like a hot hatch, no rattles of note.
51 plate A170 elegance LWB CR diesel 26K miles with leather (very good for people with knee / hip problems as they can slide in / out)
|
The "A" class may have a Merc badge on the front, but I was shocked at the lack of quality in this car (having owned a 1964 Fintail and a 1980 123 series)
Mind you, anyone daft enough to buy an A was probably more worried about brand snobbery than driving a decent car.
MVP
|
What do you drive MVP?
Edited by Dox on 11/01/2010 at 14:10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Everyone I see in an A Class makes themselves look like an amateur driver.
They probably are, just like most of us here.
|
A Forester
We looked at Mercs when buying the Subaru new in 2003, but they were a lot more money and didn't feel like they had the quality engineering of the Subaru (although much flashier).
This seems to have been proved correct, as the only expenditure on the Subaru in nearly 7 years, except for routine servicing, has been wiper blades.
We loved our old Mercs, it's sad to see such a great marque be devalued by tat like the A class.
BTW, a friend bought a 2nd generation A, and wishes that he hadn't (numerous breakdowns and problems with a vibrating foot pedal)
MVP
|
The A class was bought by my father purely because it suited their needs, being in their mid 70s small outside, large inside, high seating position, leather seats etc as both he and mum had arthritis and struggled getting in and out of their previous Golf (that replaced a Laguna, a Sierra, a Bluebird, a Stanza, a Polo, A MK4 Zephyr, a MK3 Zephyr...................... so no badge snobbery here).
The fact that you wish to distance yourself from the A class and newer models suggests a bit of badge snobbery by yourself?
;o)
|
My grandad bought one of these a cdi 04 plate with 54k although not from the same stable as the other c class etc it's a really nice car to drive does 90 mph with ease 1.7 turbo engine manual been serviced regular had it now 3 yrs and still drives well but it does only 4k a year what it would be like with 120k is another matter still a nice car.
There not for everybody & not for me but can understand why folk like them but the c class is not for me much preffer the audi A6.
|
|
|
Looking at the ADAC 2008 report then the A class seems fairly average in terms of reliaibility. Perhaps somebody who reads German a lot better than me can confirm, but I believe these figures are callouts per hundred members of each particular model i.e. a low number is good. ADAC is the German AA equivalent I believe.
tinyurl.com/ylf755g
|
I still want to try an A Class! Possibly it's a case of heart ruling the head - anyway it's intended as a second car, and we're not planning to spend more than £4000 on it.
Returning to the original subject, snow chains on the rear of a front-drive car....
Slightly related - I saw what must have been one of the worst cars for use in snow today - a Suzuki X90 - that sort of very soft-roader 2-seater bobbly looking thing. One of these was having real trouble moving around in a snowy car park where all ordinary cars were managing OK. It was slipping and sliding all over the place - hardly able to move.
Now, I know the thing looks like a 4x4 and some of them are 4x4s, but the basic version is a mere 4x2. I would have guessed front-wheel drive - but no, they are rear-wheel drive - with presumably not much weight over the rear wheels - no wonder it was having trouble!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
