It's like on these forums. A hell of a lot of the input is bored salesman and dealer, manufacturer  employees. Anybody that gets personal like a child are prime suspects. 

18 minutes ago, Gmac983 said:

My old rover 200 was bullet proof😎

New Chinese MG's!

 

Yes my Rovers and BLs were very reliable good cars. One of the best was a company Montego 2.0 Mayfair. 120000 miles without a warranty claim. Had a few sets of pads  and tyres but still had it's original discs when it went back. Changing discs back then was rare. My favourite was my MG Metro, loved it. Got stolen same as Montego did, got it back though ! Then got a Escort Mk 4nd a MK1 Focus ST stolen. All within 10 years in 90's 00's 

Edited 1 October, 20196 yr by teescom09

17 minutes ago, Gmac983 said:

My old rover 200 was bullet proof😎

 

Cough*** K Series Head Gasket ***Cough

1 minute ago, logiclee said:

 

Cough*** K Series Head Gasket ***Cough

Yes a shame though as they were a brilliant powerfull engine ahead of most others in there day. Yet I had a MGS (400) with the 1.8 and a 416 and never had any problems whatsoever in about 30k between them 

Their .. .  sorry just seeing if iPhone changes it .... Cracking up. What am I on about, this is one of crappy android things. On wrong phone! 

Edited 1 October, 20196 yr by teescom09

27 minutes ago, Roottootemoot said:

Actually, just sit a few hours in a busy Skoda Dealership near the Service Desk staff as customers come in to hand in a car and collect keys for a courtesy car, and explain their issues.

 

You will hear the same issues time after time and the customer being told that is something they are not aware of.

The technicians will investigate etc, if you are there as people collect cars that had similar issues and have had them dealt with or not it is hard to not laugh, 

or go outside as they go to get their car and put them right.

Do the same in various busy Dealerships of different brands, you get to know what is what.

 

Arnold Clark owned College near Newbridge is an interesting place.    https://www.gtg.co.uk

 

I have worked for Arnold Clark. Years back when Sir Arnold arrived regularly at Branches.

http://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-18180095

 

 

 

Not disagreeing with you but how does that differ from dealerships of other manufacturers? I've owned many cars from different manufacturers over the years - they're mostly all the same.

 

Unless someone is doctoring these surveys then we have to respect their outcome because what else do we have to go on but our own experience?

 

Coming up for 2yr with Skoda and 3yr with SEAT and never had the need to go near the dealer other than routine servicing. But then again that was almost true with my both my BMW's, and when an issue did appear with one of them, the garage couldn't have resolved the issue better. And they came bottom!

 

Living in Scotland it's hard to avoid Arnie therefore I've been a customer of his on several occasions and well versed with their tricks. An Arnold Clark owned College? Didn't know that. I have an image of that film 'School for Scoundrels' starring Terry-Thomas.

 

 

I did have a 2.5V6 75 17 years ago and that was faultless for the time I had it.

 

 

 

 

4 minutes ago, logiclee said:

 

Cough*** K Series Head Gasket ***Cough

Nah mine was a 220 sdi so never had the kettle boiling. 

15 minutes ago, teescom09 said:

It's like on these forums. A hell of a lot of the input is bored salesman and dealer, manufacturer  employees. Anybody that gets personal like a child are prime suspects. 

Not guilty. 

Have never been involved in the motortrade, not unless you count skimming the odd brake disc or flywheel. 

Although was beginning to think you worked for Ford teescom09🤔

Skoda / Audi / VW / Seat 3 year standard warranties.

World wide recall on DQ200 DSG's in 2012 and a Service Campaign in Europe, 

In China there is the recall and an Extended Warranty of 10 years / 160,000 km then.

 

VW Group will not and can not put a 7 year warranty on DQ200's now 7 years later.

 

JD Power results in the past with Dacia & MG were odd with a high percentage of owners responding.

 

When Skoda was up top and i asked on this forum, year after year, did you do the survey, silence is the reply, maybe a couple say yes they did. 

Which / JD Power / Auto Express surveys are really odd in the results.

 

A bit like Mori Ipsos polls.    Now MORI are asking 1.5TSI EVO car owners about the Fix.  On VW Group behalf.

 It would be good if VW made the results public..

Edited 1 October, 20196 yr by Roottootemoot

For the record the Rover 200 was basically a Honda Concerto, the later 400 was an Mb civic.   The 600 was an Accord.  So, a good portion was actually decent and reliable.

Rover just put some of their own engines in and swapped some body panels...  the K, the T and L series.  K was excellent but vulnerable in cooling design which caused HG failure if there was a cooling issue.  

Much of the rest was direct Honda parts.

The 75 was very much BMW.

I loved my 200, but I got an earlier 1.6 with the Honda D series for reliability.   

So was the mk3 200 95 onwards independently developed by rover then? As it didnt resemble Honda at all, or did it use some parts/platform from Honda? Mine was a 96 p reg 220 sdi. 

The MK3 was very similar to a MK2 under the skin.

Many many parts were interchangable between them, brakes, front suspension, interiors, all sorts.

 

They basically designed a new, slightly shorter body and carried over as much as they could from the old one, including most things mechanical.

The agreement with Honda had ended so they had to source their own engines so they just did different capacity k series giving a 1.6 and a couple of 1.8s.  They dropped the t series due to emissions I think and swapped out the 1.8 PSA engine for the 2.0 L series diesel that was also in land rovers.  I think that's actually derived from the earlier T series petrol.

There's loads of MK3 T series turbos out there though as people could basically just reshell rusty mk2s into a fresh MK3 shell, everything just swapped over.

People would fit a MK3 dash into a MK2 as even the dashboard swapped over.

It was very useful as for upgrades and support on a MK2 stuff on the MK3 worked.  When the mg cars came out with bigger brakes it provided a perfect upgrade for all MK2 owners....  

Unfortunately they kept this all the way until their ultimate demise and you can can't sell a car in 2007 that's really under the skin a 1989 car and expect it to compete.

I mean, even the MG ZS was obviously an MB civic from 1995.

 

Shame as I loved that car of mine, was so much fun, easy to work on, reliable.

 

 

Edited 2 October, 20196 yr by Alex-W

Wow. Never realized that the Mk2/Mk3 were that interchangeable.

Always fancied a coupe back in the day, never managed it though. ☹️

Edited 2 October, 20196 yr by Gmac983

9 hours ago, Alex-W said:

The 75 was very much BMW.

 

Although it was mostly financed, jointly designed and signed off by BMW there was very little component sharing other than the diesel 4 pot.

 

BMW wanted it that way but it may have been better using a BMW platform.  Instead they used a bespoke FWD platform that was between the 3 and 5 Series for size.  Petrol models still used Rover units, the auto in mine was Japanese and bought in from Jatco. 

 

The talk was it would be the best handling FWD car available but by the time of release it had become a retro comfy cruiser, BMW didn't want competition for their own models but ultimately sealed the fate of MGR.

2 minutes ago, logiclee said:

 

Although it was mostly financed, jointly designed and signed off by BMW there was very little component sharing other than the diesel 4 pot.

 

BMW wanted it that way but it may have been better using a BMW platform.  Instead they used a bespoke FWD platform that was between the 3 and 5 Series for size.  Petrol models still used Rover units, the auto in mine was Japanese and bought in from Jatco. 

 

The talk was it would be the best handling FWD car available but by the time of release it had become a retro comfy cruiser, BMW didn't want competition for their own models but ultimately sealed the fate of MGR.

Indeed the 2.0 litre BMW diesel engine in the Rover 75 only had 136bhp at launch whereas the 3 series had 150bhp at the same time. Only when the 3 series was given a power upgrade did the Rover dealers offer a ECU upgrade to 150bhp for a fee of course.

45 minutes ago, shyVRS245 said:

Indeed the 2.0 litre BMW diesel engine in the Rover 75 only had 136bhp at launch whereas the 3 series had 150bhp at the same time. Only when the 3 series was given a power upgrade did the Rover dealers offer a ECU upgrade to 150bhp for a fee of course.

 

I didn't feel the diesel suited the 75, it was course and unrefined as most diesels were at the time and the 75 was supposed to be a refined cruiser. The 2.5V6 and the 1.8T petrols were pretty decent for the day.

TBH, I wasn't up on the 75s really, I just knew they were done under BMW and shared some of the stuff with various models.  I thought it went more than the engine mind, but maybe not.    They also chucked a 260bhp 4.6 V8 in from a mustang on some of them.  Both in the 75 and the ZT I think.

 

The 200/400/600 had far more of a following as they came with the T series turbo which was at the time a car that could embarrass an impreza or the like (a mate had a couple and it was very quick tbh).  Or, there were a few people who took the Honda engined ones and tuned the hell out of them as obviously there was a wealth of knowledge from the US on tuning those engines in civics.

 

5 hours ago, Gmac983 said:

Wow. Never realized that the Mk2/Mk3 were that interchangeable.

Always fancied a coupe back in the day, never managed it though. ☹️

 

Was my first car - £1300 back in 2004.   Loved it so much I bought a Honda after, lol.   

 

6 hours ago, Alex-W said:

 They also chucked a 260bhp 4.6 V8 in from a mustang on some of them.  Both in the 75 and the ZT I think.

 

 

That was a massive task.

 

The 75/ZT was FWD with a transverse engine and gearbox. 

 

For the V8 they had to change the platform to accept a longitudinal engine and gearbox and RWD.  

 

MGR gave the project to Prodrive who at the time were having a very successful time with Subaru in the WRC.  I was partially involved with the development of the WRC's car loaction and driver/co-driver urgent attention systems that were developed after Colin McRae's Focus crash. At the time the V8 was being tested on the same Prodrive test track that we were using and we got to have a good look at the development.

It really was a bespoke vehicle, they must have lost thousands on each vehicle when you factored in the development and build costs.

I'm guessing not as much as they lost on the MG SV though!  Never even seen one on the road, they sold so few.

To drag this back on topic...

 

We've had various Fords and a few Skodas in the family. 

 

The Mondeo up to the Mk4 were excellent. To deny this is to be perverse.

 

The Mk3 Octavia (1.4TSI) isn't bad - the engine is fantastic, it has space and comfort seats, but the ride, handling, back roads ability and road/wind noise are not up to the standard of the Mk3 or Mk4 Mondeo. The horrible booming noise over bumps when unladen is annoying. We have an old 56 Fiesta Zetec (with rear torsion bar) which rides better over rough roads. 

 

Had the Focus estate been a bit bigger I'd have been tempted by a 1.5Ecoboost.

 

Ps. In the mid 00s, I went from a quick (remapped) Mk1 Octavia vRS, which I enjoyed owning, to a Mk3 Mondeo TDCI and the Mondeo was vastly better in almost every way. 

Edited 2 October, 20196 yr by MC Bodge

I have no idea what version it was but back in 2007 I was looking to buy a diesel and the Mondeo was on the shortlist.

I was quite impressed by the overall finish, internal capacity, refinement and performance so I encouraged the wife to go and have test drive as well.

Her solo drive took her on an urban dual carriageway and she was in the 'fast' lane next to the heavily vegetated central divide when a large flock of pigeons few directly out in front the car and there was great carnage and many, many feathers .

Apparently no damage to the car but the look on the salesman's face when the car entered the forecourt was priceless.

Anyway we decided it was too dear and we eventually bought a A$10k cheaper mk2 Octavia which while a much lower spec was one we both loved driving.

 

 

On 01/10/2019 at 20:10, teescom09 said:

Toyota, Suzuki, Mazda, Volvo, Lexus, BMW for starters. No cars are unreliable but Skoda are not near the top. Average at best. Those surveys are bull****. 

 

On 01/10/2019 at 19:30, Roottootemoot said:

Dealership / Manufactures employees that have lots of time to complete surveys can be an issue.

 

There must be some real ****e out there if Skoda is in 2nd place honestly.

 

Skoda day one training.

'They all do that'. Never heard of that before',  'It is a characteristic',  'Now GTF and do not bother us!'

 

If indeed these satisfaction surveys are a "con-job" carried out by bored dealers and payed staff on behalf of the manufacturers then surely if that was the rule then Ford would be amongst the top few if not the very top, as haven't they got amongst the most main dealers across the UK to cheat on these surveys? 

Or are Ford far to scrupulous to participate in such behavior? 

Looking back over the last few years JD power surveys, skoda are consistently top 4 and on one occasion first, whilst Ford are mid table at best. 

By all means take the surveys with a pinch of salt but there will still be a ring of truth somewhere in there. 

Just for the record I'm not bashing Ford here, I grew up with Fords. My father was a die hard Ford man, he had mk1, 2 and 3 escorts, a mk3 Orion, a mk1, mk3 and mk5 Fiestas and a mk1 focus. Nothing more recent than that though... and my grandad had a mk1, 2 and 3 orions aswell.

Certain Ford models were real working men's heros however to say that skoda are "average at best" and what?... Ford are better, no freakin' way. 

 

Edited 3 October, 20196 yr by Gmac983

MG & Dacia have had good results and they are low volume sellers, but then so are Seat and Skoda.

Odd the difference that shows betwwn Skoda, Seat, VW and Audi but maybe based on expectations, or maybe actually on Skoda Dealership employees actuall turning away people with faults on the 'characteristic' rubbish.

 

VW might never cheat, imagine being caught deceiving the world,

Skoda fan boys and girls might, who knows.

http://thelocal.de/20140120/adac-boss-cooks-car-award-votes

 

 

 

Edited 3 October, 20196 yr by Roottootemoot

Who or what do you class as a Skoda fan boy/girl? 

Also jd power is based on faults per 100 vehicles. 

Personally the fact that "The survey is based on responses from more than 13,000 owners of one to three-year-old cars" makes it very specific and but overly helpful to many.

 

Initial problems at that point of a car's life is annoying but often minor.  Manufacturing or assembly defects etc.

As is described, it's often silly things about bits of tech breaking etc.

Pretty much nothing will be corroded, people will be on their first set of brake pads, the car hasn't even had an MOT.

 

I'd rather know about problems and reliability later on in life. Real problems, things based on wear, when seals start to go, electronics aren't properly rated and burn out etc etc.

 

As I say, I think many of the cars at the top of that list would fall off it after 10 years or so life and the top cars will would be probably jap stuff, maybe Mercedes too.  

 

 

Edited 3 October, 20196 yr by Alex-W