Is it shit? : your car reviews

[Split_Pin]

4 hours ago, Jerzy Woking said:

Tuned Saab 9-5 Aero HOT

2005 pre Edna model. I bought it with the following mods all done:

Noobtune Stage 3

Abbott large intercooler

Abbott 2.5 inch turbo- back exhaust system

Uprated Garrett turbo

Bilstein shocks and springs

Maptun 360mm front brake discs

Maptun 6 piston front brake calipers

Re calibrated rear brake compensators

Lightweight Revolution wheels

Apart from a Pioneer DVD player and speakers, the interior wax standard, two tone leather.

It produced just over 300 bhp, which isn't that impressive, but it was the way it put that power on the road. I could spin up the wheels in third with no issue.

Never had an issue with it in the 5,000 miles I drove it. The "slipping clutch under power" was diagnosed by the Saab mechanic as cheap tyres and wheelspin.

The only rust it suffered was at the rear of the sills where they joined the wheel arch. Repairs were £200 in welding and repainting.

Insurance was cheaper than the bog standard 9-5 I had immediately before it, the insurer stating that modified cars were generally looked after better.

Biggest expense? Tyres for some reason....

<Homer Simpson Salivating Noises/>

[Matty]

22 hours ago, Split_Pin said:

The Rover 75.

I've had 3 so I'll keep it broad.

First impressions inside are what it lacks in build quality it makes up for in style. Richard Wooley's exquisitely fluid forms, especially inside are hard to ignore although opinions on it are polarised. The more you look at it, the more cues you notice that nod to Rovers of the 1950s and 60s.  Early cars had a personal line option where you could get the leather in some interesting colours and are really true to the prototype drawings. The soft backlit glow of the dials in winter is comforting to all except those with a swinging brick for a heart. Whilst the fit and finish is nowhere near Audi levels, the doors and handles are still reassuringly heavy. All the buttons on the dash are nicely damped, some beep and illuminate too. 

Even the basic Classic has plenty of seat adjustment. The cloth seats are more comfortable than the leather, unless you have a ZT or Contemporary spec which have completely different sculptured sports seats and are much more supportive.

Specs are decent across the Rover range but disappointing on the ZT (unless the first owner chose a lot of options) , most have A/C, electric windows and a decent stereo. The Harman Kardon system is an excellent upgrade.

The saloons aren't as roomy as you'd expect, the windscreen is shallow and beltline quite high. There's room for 5 as long as you aren't over 6 foot. The boot is on the small side due to the car's tapered buttocks. Tourers are much bigger and have a nifty hinged rear window for quick access. Load lip is low and the opening is wide.

On the move is where a tired example will disappoint.  Ride should be like a magic carpet. It's no handler but should feel weighty and satisfyingly planted. Steering is actually fairly heavy but its a good thing as it makes up for the lack of feel.

I've never driven a V6 but it is one of the creaminest sounding engines I've ever heard.

1.8 N/A is underpowered, 1.8T is meant to be better. They will break but the reputation for HGF is down to the small capacity cooling system. Even a short drop in level will mean the system is starved of coolant.

Diesels are unrefined but incredibly tough and give few significant issues. Not ULEZ compliant though, far from it.

Manuals can have a clunky gearchange and the clutch can be quite heavy. Often, once the silly plastic concentric slave cylinder fails (it's inside the bellhousing too), replacements are never the same and can fail again soon after. The Jatco auto is very basic but does have a winter mode. It's a lazy box that likes to stay in top as much as possible.

Rust isn't really an issue unless its lived next to the sea in Scotland its whole life. Sills can rot out around the jacking pads and in rare cases, the area around the front subframes rearmost mounts can corrode. Rear suspension arms can perforate but they've now been remanufactured and aren't ruinous to replace. The whole car is made of quite thick metal, no expense spared there.

Make sure the chamber that the ECU sits in, under the passenger side scuttle is not full of water, otherwise you'll get very odd electrical issues.

Are they shit? Definitely not. I've encountered a fair few jingoists in Scotland who think they're a gammon's motor, but most normal people now appreciate them to a greater or lesser degree.

I can see why Rover did not survive as they were priced above Mondeos and Vectras but although very stylish, the tide had already turned on D-segment motors after the Granada. This fell between those and a BMW/Audi/Merc and frankly, folk just thought these premium brands were worth the extra. I can't argue with that but will they have a following in 20 years? Absolutely not. 

Fiddly in some ways, graceful and comfortable in others, but definitely never dull.

 

I liked them on period. As time goes on I've grown to absolutely love them. MG or a Conny v6 for me if it was going to happen.

[vaughant]

Mk3 golf 2.0 GTi:

No pros, just complete rubbish, don't ever be tempted you'll be so disappointed, especially if you've had any of the other models, even the MK4 which wasn't fantastic.

Slow, like badly slow, they were something dismal like 115bhp out of the factory.

Handled, well ok maybe the only thing it did averagely.

Under 30mpg.

Rust like fuck.

Plastics horrible.

Interior uncomfortable.

Pretty fugly in truth.

Almost every manufacturer at the time made a better hot hatch.

Swapped my beautiful Audi 2.3e coupe for one and hated every second of it, couldn't believe my luck when the guy swapped it back.

Podium finish of worst cars I've ever owned.

[FakeConcern]

1 minute ago, vaughant said:

Mk3 golf 2.0 GTi:

No pros, just complete rubbish, don't ever be tempted you'll be so disappointed, especially if you've had any of the other models, even the MK4 which wasn't fantastic.

Slow, like badly slow, they were something dismal like 115bhp out of the factory.

Handled, well ok maybe the only thing it did averagely.

Under 30mpg.

Rust like fuck.

Plastics horrible.

Interior uncomfortable.

Pretty fugly in truth.

Almost every manufacturer at the time made a better hot hatch.

Swapped my beautiful Audi 2.3e coupe for one and hated every second of it, couldn't believe my luck when the guy swapped it back.

Podium finish of worst cars I've ever owned.

I had one of these when it was two years old and loved it, not fast (slower than the XR3i I had before) but very comfortable and handled pretty well. Had two small kids and all the stuff needed fitted it fine. Mine had all four electric windows electric sun roof, central locking with total closure etc. The diff exploded at 150k miles and I had the gearbox replaced with one from a Mk2 GTI which had lower gears. Can't say it seemed much noisier but a lot quicker in all gears.

Mine did have a bit of rust by the time it was written off at 175k miles and nine years old.

[grogee]

On 6/19/2023 at 1:25 AM, Mrcento said:

Spaceship Civic (Mk8) 2.2 cdti.

Pros- Insanely practical, very reliable, nice engine giving a serious turn of pace, nice gearshift, seat material wears well. Generally very well built interior wise. Fantastic multi tier dash design. Looks (especially the front).

Cons- A ride so unsettled it potentially ruins the car for many. It did for me. Part prices, for a common car that was assembled in the UK, it is utterly insane how much is hard to get hold of, and how much of it is at 'Has to come from Japan M8' prices. Rot potential at the back end (it killed mine), Electrical problems (random overnight battery drains and jump starting a near impossibility, even with the key out the ignition, it would usually wipe the codes for the immobiliser). Poor rear visibility.

I kind of view it as Japans take on a wacky Citroen. It nails so much of that brief, yet fails utterly miserably in one key one, ride.

Overall rating- 5/10. A car i wanted to love, that is so close to being a fantastic every day car made unlivable by the decision to give it next to no compliance in the ride, especially at low speed. When i say it's abysmal, i mean it. Wouldn't have another.

This could have been written about my Legend. Brilliant in so many respects but the ride was punishing. 

[grogee]

On 6/19/2023 at 9:21 AM, sierraman said:

you’d see them sat outside Matalan with a man inside dressed in George looking like the clothes were holding him together. It was so sensible. I built up an image in my head, if it were a person it would go to a chain pub once a month for gammon and chips because it was £6, it would only have one pint of Carling once a week that would be flat and lifeless. It wouldn’t have any strong opinions on anything

"What did I say Roy?" 

[chancer]

On 6/22/2023 at 11:37 AM, wheel nut said:

Mini with 1 litre engine

Good points - great fun to drive, especially round town

Bad points - rust, tiny boot

Mini Park Lane, one of many special editions that are highly collectible now. But disposable not very long ago. Guessing this one was bean cans long ago?

[wheel nut]

16 minutes ago, chancer said:

Mini Park Lane, one of many special editions that are highly collectible now. But disposable not very long ago. Guessing this one was bean cans long ago?

Yes, sadly killed by rust. If it had only been localised rust in sills, floors, etc then it might have been welded up for a few more years at least but this one seemed to be rusty everywhere including weirdly bits like windscreen surround and as this model had a plastic trim covering the roof gutter, the roof gutter was so rusty that I wasn’t sure how much metal was left holding the roof to the rest of the car.

scrapped around 2001-2002 I think, but almost all parts were removed and sold on so hopefully helping keep other minis alive.

[chancer]

10 minutes ago, wheel nut said:

scrapped around 2001-2002 I think, but almost all parts were removed and sold on so hopefully helping keep other minis alive.

Around the time my younger brother had me driving scrap minis home from all over central Scotland. Little shit broke them for parts, built good ones from bad ones, and still has a few squirrelled away that are most likely worth a few quid now. Pity I was just the driver

[Spottedlaurel]

Possibly not the review expected from me, but it was something I borrowed earlier in the year and I had the words typed-up for Flickr:

2009 Vauxhall Astra SXi 1.4 Twinport. I've referred to our Auris once or twice, a 2010 1.6 model which would have been selling in a similar market when new?

I thought it went well, initially I wondered if it was a 1.6 until I looked on DVLA. The 1.4 felt quite torquey lowdown, more so than the Auris, but still revved well if not quite so freely. Didn't have it long enough to check economy.

I was surprised by the low gearing, little more than 20mph per 1,000 rpm meant the engine was spinning at nearly 3,000 at 60mph, which was what I'd expect from 4th let alone 5th. No 6-speed gearbox here, which would have nicely dropped the rev's at higher speed (the Auris does have one).

Steering, handling, ride and brakes all seemed decent on the local country roads, the latter were particularly strong.

So far, so good. However, inside I felt it didn't work anywhere near so well and there were things that were either poorly designed or that I would struggle to live with on a daily basis.

The gearlever seemed a couple of inches too short to fall easily to hand and who decided that burying the HVAC controls so low down was the best place for them? Difficult to reach or see, but at least they were rotary dials - those in the Auris are fiddly push buttons, but placed higher up. When the key was in the ignition it poked out like another column stalk, it had the indicator controls that flick rather than move and there was no temperature gauge.

I didn't feel like I would want to take a long drive in it, even after my short journeys I was starting get the odd twinge, but perhaps I hadn't spent long setting up the seat to suit me.

Legroom in the rear was minimal behind me as a relatively tall driver, I struggled to drop my bags in the footwell there. The Auris definitely has more room for rear seat occupants, with the bonus of a flat floor - why does a FWD car like the Astra need a central tunnel?

The reverse slope on the rear door was annoying, it felt like something that would get in the way and it nearly caught my shoulder a couple of times when getting stuff in and out of the back.

My conclusion was that dynamically it worked well, and I can see why they perform so well on the banger track, but as an overall package the softer, smoother feel of the Auris is preferable to me.

For completeness, here's the Auris:

We bought it in 2015 from a main dealer, with 25k and one-owner from new. It was about £6,000 from memory, can you imagine being able to buy a five-year old, low mileage car now from a main dealer for that money?! Had a quick look, the equivalent would now be at least £13k and the hybrid models are even more.

Some thoughts not offered above.....

It's a very competent, smooth-driving car. Not much torque but the 1.6 VVTi engine revs well. Now it's doing some longer A-road journeys every day it's getting around 43mpg. The 6-speed 'box lets it sits at reasonably low revs once cruising along. Ride and handling are decent.

Lots of room inside, and I like the flat floor in the rear. Gearlever falls nicely to hand, sitting on a raised portion of the centre console. As ours is the facelift model it has the normal handbrake release button - the early model had a weird slider that felt like it was designed by a 17-year old gamer and I can't imagine it went down well with many of the original buyers.

As mentioned above the HVAC controls are fiddly and not very logical. The stereo doesn't have much oomph.

Overall it has a typical well-engineered Toyota feel and we have no plans to move it on at present. It may not be as dynamic as a Focus or Astra but it just gets on with doing a good job. If anyone wanted a roomy family car I'd recommend it highly.

[Split_Pin]

There follows a predictable review, but again, as I'm on my 3rd, I feel qualified to give it a bash.

Vauxhall Cavalier MK3:

Some say its 'peak car', I'd say its more 'peak an car'.

What was once ubiquitous street furniture is now one of those cars that surprises people when they see it because they realise how long it's been since they last saw a Cavalier.

Inside, the build quality is good. Every 90s Vauxhall I have owned has been well screwed together, with most things still in good order. Headlinings will droop and the plastic fillet between dash and windscreen can crack up. Seat bolsters on sporting models are quite pointy and can car a bit worn or saggy with age.

Most controls are conventional with the exception of the HVAC system.  Unusually its entirely devoid of rotary knobs, with just one fornthe fan speed. The direction and heat is controlled by a nonsensical array of sliders which I still haven't really worked out. 

Specs can vary but generally, the later the car, the more generous the equipment and upholstery.  Avoid a late base 'Envoy' which is the exception and is a sea of grey plastic and coarse fabrics, as are early lower range models.

On the road is when you understand why these cars were so popular. All the controls are very light and smooth. The steering is direct which accentuates the boat-like suspension on standard cars. It suits me, but a set of Eibachs might be in order for a more discerning driver. All round visibility is fantastic thanks to the deep belt line and large glass area. Only a convertible with the roof down beats it on this point. Seats are comfortable, only GL/S models get an adjustable steering column.

Sporting engined models are now priced somewhere around Pluto but cooking models are still cheap. The later 1.6/1.8 big block engines are one of the simplest and easy to work on engines I have encountered. For example, they use proper nuts and bolts and not the male/female torx fixings of later Ecotecs.  They're not fast but quite torquey and refined. It's easy to accidentally break the speed limit on the motorway and you can see why reps loved them. Turbo diesels are quite slow and fiddly to work on. They're robust but HGF is not unknown.

Thier achillies heel is rot, which occurs anywhere. Key spots are the bulkhead, rear spring seats and inner wheel arches.

Get one from anywhere below Sheffield and you might not have a rot box!

[Metal Guru]

4 hours ago, Split_Pin said:

There follows a predictable review, but again, as I'm on my 3rd, I feel qualified to give it a bash.

Vauxhall Cavalier MK3:

Some say its 'peak car', I'd say its more 'peak an car'.

What was once ubiquitous street furniture is now one of those cars that surprises people when they see it because they realise how long it's been since they last saw a Cavalier.

Inside, the build quality is good. Every 90s Vauxhall I have owned has been well screwed together, with most things still in good order. Headlinings will droop and the plastic fillet between dash and windscreen can crack up. Seat bolsters on sporting models are quite pointy and can car a bit worn or saggy with age.

Most controls are conventional with the exception of the HVAC system.  Unusually its entirely devoid of rotary knobs, with just one fornthe fan speed. The direction and heat is controlled by a nonsensical array of sliders which I still haven't really worked out. 

Specs can vary but generally, the later the car, the more generous the equipment and upholstery.  Avoid a late base 'Envoy' which is the exception and is a sea of grey plastic and coarse fabrics, as are early lower range models.

On the road is when you understand why these cars were so popular. All the controls are very light and smooth. The steering is direct which accentuates the boat-like suspension on standard cars. It suits me, but a set of Eibachs might be in order for a more discerning driver. All round visibility is fantastic thanks to the deep belt line and large glass area. Only a convertible with the roof down beats it on this point. Seats are comfortable, only GL/S models get an adjustable steering column.

Sporting engined models are now priced somewhere around Pluto but cooking models are still cheap. The later 1.6/1.8 big block engines are one of the simplest and easy to work on engines I have encountered. For example, they use proper nuts and bolts and not the male/female torx fixings of later Ecotecs.  They're not fast but quite torquey and refined. It's easy to accidentally break the speed limit on the motorway and you can see why reps loved them. Turbo diesels are quite slow and fiddly to work on. They're robust but HGF is not unknown.

Thier achillies heel is rot, which occurs anywhere. Key spots are the bulkhead, rear spring seats and inner wheel arches.

Get one from anywhere below Sheffield and you might not have a rot box!

Never owned one but drove quite a few as pool cars and hire cars , mainly 1.6 or 1.7TD. As you say very easy to drive and I always felt comfortable very quickly when picking one up, which is very useful when it’s not your own car.

I had a Sierra and a Mondeo ( both 1.8TD) during this time. The Cavalier was much nicer than the Sierra but not as good as the Mondeo. The replacement Vectra didn’t close the gap at all.

[Andyrew]

The vauxhall astra mk4 ec04 1.7dti

Is it shit? 

Boring and basic yeah, but shit? No. 

The 1.7dti rattles along nicely. With the eco4 having a longer ration box the revs can be a bit in the wrong place for certain speeds.  70mph is arround 2250rpm so it cruises the motorways lovely. Boost is low but it pulls nicely.

Fuel economy is mega (to me anyways) with 50mpg being the minimum and my highest being 73mpg iirc. 

Handling i find nice, the larger 80 profile tyres have some lean in the sidewalls but i wouldnt give this up as they soak up the bumps and holes nicely. I fitted sri spec springs and this dropped the car a bit and reduced the body roll. 

Interior i find very comfortable but many complain the seats are too hard.  The dash and instruments are very basics but solid and hardwearing amd easy too use. 

Would i buy another? I already have the silver cars replacement in the same eco4  spec so yes, yes i would.

 

 

 

[artdjones]

On 6/22/2023 at 8:55 PM, Split_Pin said:

The Rover 75.

I've had 3 so I'll keep it broad.

First impressions inside are what it lacks in build quality it makes up for in style. Richard Wooley's exquisitely fluid forms, especially inside are hard to ignore although opinions on it are polarised. The more you look at it, the more cues you notice that nod to Rovers of the 1950s and 60s.  Early cars had a personal line option where you could get the leather in some interesting colours and are really true to the prototype drawings. The soft backlit glow of the dials in winter is comforting to all except those with a swinging brick for a heart. Whilst the fit and finish is nowhere near Audi levels, the doors and handles are still reassuringly heavy. All the buttons on the dash are nicely damped, some beep and illuminate too. 

Even the basic Classic has plenty of seat adjustment. The cloth seats are more comfortable than the leather, unless you have a ZT or Contemporary spec which have completely different sculptured sports seats and are much more supportive.

Specs are decent across the Rover range but disappointing on the ZT (unless the first owner chose a lot of options) , most have A/C, electric windows and a decent stereo. The Harman Kardon system is an excellent upgrade.

The saloons aren't as roomy as you'd expect, the windscreen is shallow and beltline quite high. There's room for 5 as long as you aren't over 6 foot. The boot is on the small side due to the car's tapered buttocks. Tourers are much bigger and have a nifty hinged rear window for quick access. Load lip is low and the opening is wide.

On the move is where a tired example will disappoint.  Ride should be like a magic carpet. It's no handler but should feel weighty and satisfyingly planted. Steering is actually fairly heavy but its a good thing as it makes up for the lack of feel.

I've never driven a V6 but it is one of the creaminest sounding engines I've ever heard.

1.8 N/A is underpowered, 1.8T is meant to be better. They will break but the reputation for HGF is down to the small capacity cooling system. Even a short drop in level will mean the system is starved of coolant.

Diesels are unrefined but incredibly tough and give few significant issues. Not ULEZ compliant though, far from it.

Manuals can have a clunky gearchange and the clutch can be quite heavy. Often, once the silly plastic concentric slave cylinder fails (it's inside the bellhousing too), replacements are never the same and can fail again soon after. The Jatco auto is very basic but does have a winter mode. It's a lazy box that likes to stay in top as much as possible.

Rust isn't really an issue unless its lived next to the sea in Scotland its whole life. Sills can rot out around the jacking pads and in rare cases, the area around the front subframes rearmost mounts can corrode. Rear suspension arms can perforate but they've now been remanufactured and aren't ruinous to replace. The whole car is made of quite thick metal, no expense spared there.

Make sure the chamber that the ECU sits in, under the passenger side scuttle is not full of water, otherwise you'll get very odd electrical issues.

Are they shit? Definitely not. I've encountered a fair few jingoists in Scotland who think they're a gammon's motor, but most normal people now appreciate them to a greater or lesser degree.

I can see why Rover did not survive as they were priced above Mondeos and Vectras but although very stylish, the tide had already turned on D-segment motors after the Granada. This fell between those and a BMW/Audi/Merc and frankly, folk just thought these premium brands were worth the extra. I can't argue with that but will they have a following in 20 years? Absolutely not. 

Fiddly in some ways, graceful and comfortable in others, but definitely never dull.

 

I've only ever driven two, a 1.8, and a 2.0 V6 manual. Yes, that ,V6 is smooooooth. Very refined from the NVH standpoint.

[The Vicar]

I’m currently on supply in Wales, and have been kindly given this 2016 Suzuki Baleno to scoot around in for a month while here. It’s only my second day but I’ve done about 200 miles in it so getting a good feel for it. 

It’s got a 998cc boosterjet lump under the bonnet and a 5 speed box, and it’s really good. It’s a 3 cyl engine with 110bhp and I’m not afraid to admit that it sounds fruity and has egged me on a few times at lights and on backroads. 

Inside, to my mind, it’s no worse than a similar year and spec Yaris or Jazz in terms of build quality and feel etc. Electric windows all round, electric and heated mirrors, mfsw, cruise control that beeps when I get too close to the car in front etc.

There is an infotainment screen that could be from 2005, and I think the car would be better off without it. Sat nav is easy to use (why bother though when Waze/GMaps etc exist) but slow to load, Bluetooth connectivity just doesn’t respond at all when I press the button, radio is too complex and has to be used through the screen or mfsw, but has DAB.

Loads of space for driver and front & rear passengers. Boot is huge and very deep (320 liters according to t’internet, which is more than a Ford Focus).

Again I don’t think it’s any worse than a Yaris or Jazz on the motorway. A small bit noisy but perfectly manageable.

Shite? Maybe in 20 years time. A really decent little “an car” in the meantime though. 

Feast your eyes:

Little 3 cyl looks lost under the bonnet. Lots of room:

Not a great pic, but it’s huge back here, and the seats fold 60/40:

[EyesWeldedShut]

1 hour ago, The Vicar said:

I’m currently on supply in Wales, and have been kindly given this 2016 Suzuki Baleno to scoot around in for a month while here. It’s only my second day but I’ve done about 200 miles in it so getting a good feel for it. 

It’s got a 998cc boosterjet lump under the bonnet and a 5 speed box, and it’s really good. It’s a 3 cyl engine with 110bhp and I’m not afraid to admit that it sounds fruity and has egged me on a few times at lights and on backroads. 

Inside, to my mind, it’s no worse than a similar year and spec Yaris or Jazz in terms of build quality and feel etc. Electric windows all round, electric and heated mirrors, mfsw, cruise control that beeps when I get too close to the car in front etc.

There is an infotainment screen that could be from 2005, and I think the car would be better off without it. Sat nav is easy to use (why bother though when Waze/GMaps etc exist) but slow to load, Bluetooth connectivity just doesn’t respond at all when I press the button, radio is too complex and has to be used through the screen or mfsw, but has DAB.

Loads of space for driver and front & rear passengers. Boot is huge and very deep (320 liters according to t’internet, which is more than a Ford Focus).

Again I don’t think it’s any worse than a Yaris or Jazz on the motorway. A small bit noisy but perfectly manageable.

Shite? Maybe in 20 years time. A really decent little “an car” in the meantime though. 

Feast your eyes:

Little 3 cyl looks lost under the bonnet. Lots of room:

Not a great pic, but it’s huge back here, and the seats fold 60/40:

Previous driver left her brolly?