General What is it with What Car?

Currently reading:
General What is it with What Car?

french bean

Bye Stilo, Hello Doblo
Joined
Oct 3, 2006
Messages
578
Points
166
Location
Neustadt Weinstrasse
A few days ago I read the report on the new Tipo estate in the ADAC magazine in Germany. Today I had a look at the What Car report. Are these guys really objective? Whilst ADAC said the car is cheaper than others, it's quality isn't bad and driving it is ok as well. When I read What Car it read like the car was the pits. They rated it badly against the Astra estate whereas ADAC had it comparable to the Astra and better than the Megane.

Surely these guys need to move into the 21st Century and start understanding that "Made in Germany" is actually not that good (VW as a prime example).

So how can we get these unimaginative clones to realise that their reviews seem to be a bit biased. After all Auto Express rate it better than the Skoda Rapid or Citroen C4. http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/fiat/tipo/97479/fiat-tipo-vs-skoda-rapid-vs-citroen-c4

Rant over, just feel What Car are forever knocking anything that isn't german.
 
To be fair the ADAC magazine article (on their website) criticises the tipo's fuel economy, poor interior materials and emotionless steering.

Auto express, while rating it higher than the skoda and Citroen, recommend buying a 3000mile golf for £1000 less.
 
A few days ago I read the report on the new Tipo estate in the ADAC magazine in Germany. Today I had a look at the What Car report. Are these guys really objective? Whilst ADAC said the car is cheaper than others, it's quality isn't bad and driving it is ok as well. When I read What Car it read like the car was the pits. They rated it badly against the Astra estate whereas ADAC had it comparable to the Astra and better than the Megane.

Surely these guys need to move into the 21st Century and start understanding that "Made in Germany" is actually not that good (VW as a prime example).

So how can we get these unimaginative clones to realise that their reviews seem to be a bit biased. After all Auto Express rate it better than the Skoda Rapid or Citroen C4. http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/fiat/tipo/97479/fiat-tipo-vs-skoda-rapid-vs-citroen-c4

Rant over, just feel What Car are forever knocking anything that isn't german.
Hear Hear
 
To be fair the ADAC magazine article (on their website) criticises the tipo's fuel economy, poor interior materials and emotionless steering.

Auto express, while rating it higher than the skoda and Citroen, recommend buying a 3000mile golf for £1000 less.

I had a Golf and when it started to play up, my local VW specialist said unfortunately they ARE all like that. VW know all about this problem but cannot sort it our. And so it proved. Needless to say I will not be revisiting the VW experience ever again. The Golf was really nice to drive but was the most unreliable and expensive mistake I have ever made. he worst of the 54 cars I have had over the years. I have had a total of 200,000 miles in Fiats with no mechanical problems at all. Everyone should have something in life they can rely on. Get a Fiat!
 
Last edited:
I had a Golf and when it started to play up, my local VW specialist said unfortunately they ARE all like that. VW know all about this problem but cannot sort it our. And so it proved. Needless to say I will not be revisiting the VW experience ever again. The Golf was really nice to drive but was the most unreliable and expensive mistake I have ever made. he worst of the 54 cars I have had over the years. I have had a total of 200,000 miles in Fiats with no mechanical problems at all. Everyone should have something in life they can rely on. Get a Fiat!



I had a fiat, I've had many fiats and although they are relatively cheap to run they are not what I would call reliable, especially if you start adding in any more technological options.

Your rant about golf is a load of rubbish to be blunt, I'm good friends with VW specialist (in Norwich) 70% of their business comes from broken Audis their are Vw faults of course but they ARE not all like, what ever the mystery problem you're ranting about.
Let's face it, biggest manufacture in the work by volume and the golf is one of the best selling cars the world over. If they are ALL terrible then those facts simply wouldn't exist.
 
To be fair, he was quoting his VW specialist on the generic issues, and recounting his own experience with his Golf, which is fair enough.

And I'm not hugely reassured about the amount of broken Audis, given the degree of parts-sharing between Audi and VW (unless the broken Audis all had smashed-up front ends, from getting too close to the car in front, in which case it all begins to make sense (y))
 
Last edited:
Every human as there point of view . But sadly most humans look at the badge of the car and that decides there opinion . Am sure if the fiat multipla had the vw badge it would be the best car ever made . Fiats are the best for me . Who cares what people say?
 
Ah, the Multipla. A wonderful idea, clumsily executed. A child that not even its mother could love. I'm no VAG defender, but VAG would never have taken a design so unresolved to market.
 
I had a fiat, I've had many fiats and although they are relatively cheap to run they are not what I would call reliable, especially if you start adding in any more technological options.

Your rant about golf is a load of rubbish to be blunt, I'm good friends with VW specialist (in Norwich) 70% of their business comes from broken Audis their are Vw faults of course but they ARE not all like, what ever the mystery problem you're ranting about.
Let's face it, biggest manufacture in the work by volume and the golf is one of the best selling cars the world over. If they are ALL terrible then those facts simply wouldn't exist.

I have had 3 VW'S, the last I admit a few years ago was a Golf MkIV GTTD, every month it had something but mainly issues with the Turbo and the engine going into limp mode. I had leaking door seals, both headlamps going at the same time as well. A friend of ours just a couple of years ago had a new Golf and I think she is now on her 3rd engine. VW/Audi have very good marketing and work on the premise that if it's expensive enough, people will think it is good quality. I need more than nice plastic inside and dampened grab handles from a car for it to be classed as a quality product.
 
I have had 3 VW'S, the last I admit a few years ago was a Golf MkIV GTTD, every month it had something but mainly issues with the Turbo and the engine going into limp mode. I had leaking door seals, both headlamps going at the same time as well. A friend of ours just a couple of years ago had a new Golf and I think she is now on her 3rd engine. VW/Audi have very good marketing and work on the premise that if it's expensive enough, people will think it is good quality. I need more than nice plastic inside and dampened grab handles from a car for it to be classed as a quality product.



I always love these types of reply. It usually consists of "I had an old car I bought second hand and it had problems" followed by a friend or a family member had x and they had nothing but trouble" that's fantastic two cars always proves the rule.

My friend with the VW specialist had a mk5 golf GTI an that had no end of problems caused by a bolt getting into the intake and damaging a piston and valves.....

Though it was his fault the bolt got in the air intake he left it there while doing so work and putting the air filter assembly back together, secondly he was thrashing the hell out of it over bumps which most likely allowed the bolt to move and the air flow to carry right into the engine.

But, you know, it's always the car's fault.

I had a punto hgt that ate it's own clutch, destroyed its duel mass flywheel then two weeks later threw the cambelt. But again fiats are perfect and non of this stuff ever happened.

If you go and have a look on auto trader there are 8 fiats with over 150k miles, do the same with VW there are over 600 cars for sale with over 150k miles

Only BMW has more 150k+ cars for sale and Audi are 3rd

I appreciate that fiat sell less than a third of the cars per year in the uk that VW do, but even factoring that it fiat should still have 180 some cars with over 150k miles if all things are equal. But obviously all things are not equal
 
Last edited:
I always love these types of reply. It usually consists of "I had an old car I bought second hand and it had problems" followed by a friend or a family member had x and they had nothing but trouble" that's fantastic two cars always proves the rule.

My friend with the VW specialist had a mk5 golf GTI an that had no end of problems caused by a bolt getting into the intake and damaging a piston and valves.....

Though it was his fault the bolt got in the air intake he left it there while doing so work and putting the air filter assembly back together, secondly he was thrashing the hell out of it over bumps which most likely allowed the bolt to move and the air flow to carry right into the engine.

But, you know, it's always the car's fault.

I had a punto hgt that ate it's own clutch, destroyed its duel mass flywheel then two weeks later threw the cambelt. But again fiats are perfect and non of this stuff ever happened.

If you go and have a look on auto trader there are 8 fiats with over 150k miles, do the same with VW there are over 600 cars for sale with over 150k miles

Only BMW has more 150k+ cars for sale and Audi are 3rd

I appreciate that fiat sell less than a third of the cars per year in the uk that VW do, but even factoring that it fiat should still have 180 some cars with over 150k miles if all things are equal. But obviously all things are not equal

Well.. there's not much point in getting into a Fiat vs VAG argument, especially with simplistic comparisons.

Fiat sells predominantly smaller cars so you're not going to get many 150,000 miler cars when most of the range has a 1.2 litre engine. BMW, Audi and VW sell predominantly larger engined cars so will tend to attract people who drive bigger distances.

These Germans will also tend to be used by a single exec' most of the time, for racking up a fairly gentle (mechanically speaking) 250 miles a day up and down the motorway, whereas your Fiat will be used for a lot of local journeys, more likely with kids in the back, through the cut and thrust of the urban streets. They're bound to have harder life and more bits will fail or fall (get pulled) off.

But... back to topic... the failing with the aspirant middle-class Journo's is that they forget that they're just supposed to be testing the car and telling us about it. Comparisons are valid up to a point (Golf has soft interior, Tipo has a simpler/more austere finish) but they then stray into subjectivity based on their own value judgements ... e.g. Golf is "better"...

Now... if I want a simpler more austere finish, at half the price of the Golf, then the Tipo rather whips it... so Golf is clearly not "better". It's just "different". :) I just need to know the differences please.. I think some of us anyway (not just buying the badge) can then make up our own minds.. :)


Ralf S.
 
Last edited:
I can only add that my 2006 5 door Stilo is a model of reliability and cost less than £10,000. The electrics are wonderful and the engine extremely well designed for long life. Mine has done nearly 100,000 miles. Why would I have spent nearly twice as much on a Golf? The relevance to this thread is that the new Tipo has the same engine (1.4 Star jet).
 
Last edited:
Can't leave this thread without another dig at VW.
VW's reputation as maker of high quality, reliable cars is a myth created by their marketing arm which has been amazingly successful. The reality has always been different, at least since the early Golf years, and you don't have to rely on owners' anecdotes to see it.. The Mk 1 Golf rusted badly, even on the tailgate (why?) and it's engines were billowing blue smoke after only a modest mileage due to poor quality top end components. Later came the fiasco with the chain drive OHC engines, switched to belt drive on account of multiple failures. It is reported that the chain maker was so pressed by VW on price that he couldn't afford to upgrade his machinery to make chains of the required tolerance. Then there was the problem with DSG gearboxes. Has any other manufacturer had such a poor record?
 
Interesting post.. a few years back the current Polo was a 3* rated car as was the launch review of the current Fabia.

However, overnight they became 5* cars... hmmm okay.

VAG seems to get continuous praise from the mags, and one recent review on autocar says that a Skoda is more involving to drive than a Mazda 3, which it's not.

I did a bit of digging around as it's suspicious. Anyway, Autocar and Whatcar are owned by the same company - Haymarket Publishing. Within Haymarket, their is a Haymarket Network company. And a look at this reveals..... VW as one of the companies paying Haymarket as a client.

http://www.haymarketnetwork.com/clients/volkswagen

So.... preferable reviews?? Possibly yes.

Also, I subscribe to Autoexpress and for months now I've been checking.. the first two pages of the magazine is always a double page VAG company advert, and then the 3rd page also tends to be a VAG advert... huge revenue coming in from that.

So..... VAG pays heavily, the public fall for it and think they are driving premium high quality cars, when the reality couldn't be further from the truth.
 
What gets me about VAGs is how low spec they are. I've got an 06 GP, which comes with so much more, electric windows, AC, remote central locking, side airbags, alloy wheels etc etc. Yet most of my friends seem to have brought Polos. Which for some reason cost twice the price and come with literally nothing! Also they all seem to misfire (yes maybe these are just isolated cases, but 4 of them? Really??) It makes no sense!
 
To be fair the ADAC magazine article (on their website) criticises the tipo's fuel economy, poor interior materials and emotionless steering.

Auto express, while rating it higher than the skoda and Citroen, recommend buying a 3000mile golf for £1000 less.

Buy your Golf and pay for the repairs. I have had both and I have found Fiat to be significantly more reliable and cheaper to run. Depreciation is another matter though and that is your biggest cost. The Golf was very good in this respect. Someone else was left to replace the turbo and repaint the whole car where the laquer was peeling off in very large sheets. But if they were willing to but it in that condition good luck to them. I will not buy another in a hurry even though it was nice to drive when it went.

In the Bravo I have done twice the miles at half the service and repair costs, and it uses less fuel too. I prefer to get there without breakdowns.
 
Buy your Golf and pay for the repairs. I have had both and I have found Fiat to be significantly more reliable and cheaper to run.


I did buy my golf, new! So well covered by warranty and no third year dealer only warranty to contend with. Service plan and AA cover for years to come.

The other thing is that mine was built in Germany unlike most golfs, at the VW Osnabrück plant, where a lot of the work is done by hand along side porsche, so I have no concerns over the build quality [emoji6]

Looking at the fiat 500 for example, they have no end of problems with wiring looms breaking, door handles breaking and the twinair engines are starting to show their week points with failed valve servos costing £1000 a time.

I'm not saying that VWs are completely impervious to failures but your belief that fiats are any more reliable than any other car is very much a myth.

I had my punto from 3 years old and in that time it needed new glow plugs, a battery earth lead and a new water pump, in 8 years of ownership that's pretty good for any car, but our HGT punto had failed cam tensioner failed fly wheel, no end of electrical gremlins and broken gear shift cables. So there is good and bad in anything.
Fiat's as a general rule are cheaply made and more likely therefore to see failures of cheaply made parts.
 
Well.. I don't think there's any disputing that some Fiats are cheap... and some parts are disappointingly short-lived... but the issue (I think) is that Fiat doesn't really pretend otherwise (although 500 probably pushes it).

On the other hand, some manufacturers (e.g. VW) set themselves up as being "Premium" because they put a damper on the grab handle or something of equally dubious value... but fit the same quality of cheap parts under the hood and then sell the whole dubious article from a more expensive showroom.

To me the elephant in the room is that both the dealer and the punter know that the car isn't all that great but they momentarily suspend their rationality and pay over the odds, because of the cleverly constructed perception that it's worth it "for the experience".

Most cars... Premium or Basic .. all end up in the scrap yard after 12 or 15 years. I don't see thousands more VW Golfs from the 1990's for example still running strong, even though they sold many times more of those than Fiat did Bravo's etc. so the damped grab handles and softy feeling plastics, and "more expensive" (rather than better quality?) parts don't seem to add anything to the life of the car. You pay that premium just for the privilege of scrapping something that was once expensive.

On the other hand.. a cheap/basic car may be easier/cheaper to fix.. that must work in its favour and increase its prospects of survival..? :)

Ralf S.
 
Back
Top