Car trouble :(
Comments
-
rake wrote:Escargot wrote:Proof positive that making a decent engine (if it was even that) is not the be all of making a good car. I think the fate of Rover says it all as the K-series along with most their other stuff was dire indeed.
I think it's old news that BMW drivers are *******'s but agree that their cars are a little out of most people's price range. Quality pays for itself though and I'm sure if you did the math there wouldn't be much difference between a BMW and a Pug when it comes to resale, repair costs etc.
However decent engineering need not be expensive. For a first attempt at a smoke box Honda produced a peach with the i-CTDi. Clean, reliable, economic and best of all non diesel sounding
i disagree about the value pays for i tself. and rovers downfall was the management.bmw obviously wanted to get their mits on it for the mini name and dont forget landrover. what they did on the budget they gave them was remarkable.first to do an all aluminium engine and the lowest weight to bhp of any engine how is that dire. not wanting to get sidetracked that was just a point of interest. and no i dont own a rover but my sister has a peugeot 407 diesel and i know a fair bit about the setup and i think theyre good. they cant be unreliable as you make out they won caravan towcar of the year.
Rover's demise wasn't so much to do with BMW (although was a factor) but more to do with the fact they made rubbish cars. Even before BMW got involved they made naff cars. Even when they went into a joint venture with Honda (Civic/214) they made a hash of it and whilst Honda produced another highly reliable Civic, Rover managed to produce another dull, unreliable piece of crap. Very sad indeed. Their poor design was yet again highlighted with the K-series, which Lotus ditched due to poor emissions and substituted with the Toyota 1.8l vvt-li.
I guess it all depends on what you want out of a car. I've always found Peugeots to handle well and have character but in terms of engineering they are near the bottom of the pile. The Japanese have got car manufacture down to a fine art nowadays and prove that it is possible to make reliable cars providing your goals are quality driven. Most other manufacturers aren't bothered hence the poor performance in various reliability and satisfaction surveys. Maybe your sister is lucky but I can guarantee you there are millions of others that are not quite so.
Just for info the 2009 JD Power league table is below.
0 -
it's true about putting your foot down evry now and again, i serviced the in laws 406 diesel at the start of the year when i was taking it back i put my foot down i left a black cloud behind me :shock: so i went for a little drive.
When he saw me a couple of days later he couldn't believe how responsive it was,
as bmw's diesel most of the trouble is with the 4 pot 320's blown turbo's and swirlflaps best off with a 330d 184bhp manual, they have no swirlflaps thats why i bought one 0 -
TAke it back to the garage you bought it from and take them out for a test drive UNTIL it replicated the fault. Write to the garage stating the problem to get it on the record. Speak to other Peugeot garages and explain the symptoms, if they think they're going to get work they'll tell you what's wrong.
I had 2 french cars and both were proper crap. I had 1 Rover and it blew a head gasket. My Aston is fine, so far.0 -
.0
-
I think you need to look at the table again rake :? It's not just Lexus/BMW etc that are top of the table. Skoda, Honda and Toyota are up there and their cars are not luxury. In fact the most reliable car for years has been the Honda Jazz and that's their cheapest car. Land Rover were shoddy too and I'm not sure I'd call a Disco cheap :roll:
Of course you're not going to see 6 series BMW's in council estates but you do see a lot of E36 Beemers and IS200's as they are still good cars.
Quality does pay for itself in the long run (I didn't say value as they are two different things). It's obvious or at least should be :roll:
Re the Rover thing I agree they were pretty revolutionary at the time but that means nothing if you can't back the engineering up with consistent manufacture and quality aftersales service. I did a study on Rover as part of my degree and the K-series was introduced due to Rover completely milking the old cast iron lump they'd been using for donkeys. They were pretty much forced into it as everyone else had moved on and were producing far superior cars/engines.
Whilst it may have been a good design in theory head gasket problems and poor dealer servicing meant a nightmare for many owners as Rover failed to acknowlege a problem. Nice :roll: I guess this is where we differ here as you regard the engine's revolutionary design but I personally think it counts for nothing if you don't have to quality in place to maintain reliability of manufacture/operation. You speak of minor slip ups but this alied with poor dealer networks is what counts to joe public when they've spent £thousands on a new car.
As I said in an earlier post, doing one good thing i.e. and engine, is not the 'be all' as there are many factors that go into making a decent car. You can see for yourself just how bad Rover were if you visit What Car and trawl through the past JD power surveys.
http://www.whatcar.com/search/jd+power/News/AR_DateTimePublished!1/abn/0 -
Peugeot forums are your friend here.
As someone said in an earlier post, before it became a debate over best diesel engine, 307 do have a known issue with the ECU.
Go to Peugeot forum and search there are plenty of posts on this problem.0 -
could be lots of things. .
you need to look here escargo.
http://www.sandsmuseum.com/cars/elise/t ... kingk.html
notice the power to weight compared to jap engines.they also nicked a lot of the tricks from them.0
