Vectra - Brand snobbery or truly awful?
Discussion
LuS1fer said:
All I can add is that I thought the Cavalier was a great design and that the Vectra was an ugly beast in comparison. It is aslo one of the few cars I ever got in, looked at the dash and thought "Ugh" but I've not driven one and would never rule one out until I had...but I don't like the interior at all so it would remain unlikely.
The dash of both Vectra and Astra was a bit "different"; not my cup of tea either tbh.Certainly not bad enough to have put me off mine though.
What sold it to me was the build quality, the toys (it had everything) and that it was damn quick - not many family hatches have pinned me back in the seat like that one did!
Thirsty though....
V8Wagon said:
I've now got a Honda Accord which is in every way a much much better car.
That's the way I went; Vectra C to Accord Tourer but the 2.4 iVtec felt pretty flat after the Vx 2.8V6 Turbo engine.The build quality of both was very good IMHO.
The Accord Tourer was a great driving car though; handling was superb for such a big car.
Oh yes, the headlights on the Vectra were mediocre but the Accord headlights were fooking awesome! Bright white OEM Hid's with razor sharp edged light beam patterns, fantastic and easily the best lights I've ever had on a car.
Edited by Kentish on Thursday 19th September 17:04
I think everyone looks for different things in a car so you're going to get varying opinions.
Personally, I've found the ride and handling on most Vauxhalls to be pretty poor, although as with many generations of Fords it's significantly better on the smaller models (easier to damp a small body mass perhaps?).
Secondly, I've found Vauxhall quality to be lacking; we used to run Vauxhall pool cars and they were forever going wrong; everything from full on blown engines to one of the generations of Astras blowing headlight bulbs every few months. A friend's Astra automatic delivers the jerkiest gear changes I've ever known - my wife mentioned my friend's bad gearchanges and then looked confused when I said the car was automatic! The final thing is if you look for hints of what the cars cost to build vs what they're sold for (for example, look at the discounts available, especially to fleet buyers or hire car companies) - you can see that manufacturers vary between this value and the RRP to a customer off the street, and Vauxhall have one of the biggest differences out there.
The other way of looking at all of the above is simply to drive or look closely at the competing cars from Honda, VW, Toyota etc and notice the huge difference in build quality, ergonomics, ride, handling etc, often at the same price point.
To answer the OP, I think there'll always be brand snobbery around (working both ways...), but largely the Vectra is a pretty poor car, yes.
Personally, I've found the ride and handling on most Vauxhalls to be pretty poor, although as with many generations of Fords it's significantly better on the smaller models (easier to damp a small body mass perhaps?).
Secondly, I've found Vauxhall quality to be lacking; we used to run Vauxhall pool cars and they were forever going wrong; everything from full on blown engines to one of the generations of Astras blowing headlight bulbs every few months. A friend's Astra automatic delivers the jerkiest gear changes I've ever known - my wife mentioned my friend's bad gearchanges and then looked confused when I said the car was automatic! The final thing is if you look for hints of what the cars cost to build vs what they're sold for (for example, look at the discounts available, especially to fleet buyers or hire car companies) - you can see that manufacturers vary between this value and the RRP to a customer off the street, and Vauxhall have one of the biggest differences out there.
The other way of looking at all of the above is simply to drive or look closely at the competing cars from Honda, VW, Toyota etc and notice the huge difference in build quality, ergonomics, ride, handling etc, often at the same price point.
To answer the OP, I think there'll always be brand snobbery around (working both ways...), but largely the Vectra is a pretty poor car, yes.
Edited by RobM77 on Thursday 19th September 17:09
Matt UK said:
IME back in 2000, nothing to do with brand snobbery just a truly awful car. Did nothing better than the competition but was unreliable, the dealer wasn't able / couldn't be arsed to help keep the POS on the road and didn't like the rain.
speakign from personal experiance from nearly a decade of various ownership I can honestly say Ive never had any big isses with any of mine. I bought my GSi with a slipped cambelt which took the engine out, but that was due to neglect rather than anything else. Ive replaced servicable items of course over the years but my v6 had over 100k on it, the 2ltrs had 130k and 160k and the diesel is still going after over 200k!Ive never found an issue with rain either. What model did you own?
I had a Mk1 Vectra Arctic from new.
In the 8 months/11k miles I owned it, the following items were replaced (I may not remember them all as this was 1998):
Gearbox
Clutch (twice)
Exhaust (whole system)
Power Steering
Driveshaft(s)
Brakes
I can't remember some of the others but for me this was pretty fundamental.
The worst part was when the engine got warm (sat in M6 traffic most Fridays) the gearbox/clutch decided they'd had enough, and I could only move the car by forcing the gearstick with 2 hands into 5th (the only gear it would select) and moving to the hard shoulder and letting it cool down......
Conversely when it was taken back by Vauxhall and replaced with a new Astra SRi, it had no issues of any description other than regular consumables while I had it and it was in the family for 6 years and 50k miles in total.......
Consequently, I would describe the Vectra as truly awful and the Astra as a great car!
In the 8 months/11k miles I owned it, the following items were replaced (I may not remember them all as this was 1998):
Gearbox
Clutch (twice)
Exhaust (whole system)
Power Steering
Driveshaft(s)
Brakes
I can't remember some of the others but for me this was pretty fundamental.
The worst part was when the engine got warm (sat in M6 traffic most Fridays) the gearbox/clutch decided they'd had enough, and I could only move the car by forcing the gearstick with 2 hands into 5th (the only gear it would select) and moving to the hard shoulder and letting it cool down......
Conversely when it was taken back by Vauxhall and replaced with a new Astra SRi, it had no issues of any description other than regular consumables while I had it and it was in the family for 6 years and 50k miles in total.......
Consequently, I would describe the Vectra as truly awful and the Astra as a great car!
Devil2575 said:
An End of term review of the Vectra VXR from EVO magazine.
http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evolongtermtests/2...
Sounds like a different car to the one mentioned on here!http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evolongtermtests/2...
tali1 said:
Spyder5 said:
My experience is the same as above. Reliable, comfortable and generally mediocre at everything it does.
Touch wood - its been faultless for 30k
Mine is very low spec (SRI) and really needs traction control for pulling away in the wet. The handling is fine on half decent tyres.
Err ...SRI is def not "very low spec" Touch wood - its been faultless for 30k
Mine is very low spec (SRI) and really needs traction control for pulling away in the wet. The handling is fine on half decent tyres.
Manual winding rear windows, no traction control, manual Air Con, no heated washers, no heated seats, 6 speaker stereo (which is crap too).
Its a decent enough car, but there is a reason its so cheap.
Spyder5 said:
Its absolute poverty in comparison to my wifes midrange 1999 Golf (SE)
Manual winding rear windows, no traction control, manual Air Con, no heated washers, no heated seats, 6 speaker stereo (which is crap too).
Its a decent enough car, but there is a reason its so cheap.
I could't care less about winding windows up or climate control. Heated washers would be useful though.Manual winding rear windows, no traction control, manual Air Con, no heated washers, no heated seats, 6 speaker stereo (which is crap too).
Its a decent enough car, but there is a reason its so cheap.
Fundamentally they're reliable, durable and cheap.
A Golf is a white goods car too and doesn't seem any more reliable. Is it really true you have to take the front bumper off to change the headlight bulbs on a Golf?
spats said:
Matt UK said:
IME back in 2000, nothing to do with brand snobbery just a truly awful car. Did nothing better than the competition but was unreliable, the dealer wasn't able / couldn't be arsed to help keep the POS on the road and didn't like the rain.
speakign from personal experiance from nearly a decade of various ownership I can honestly say Ive never had any big isses with any of mine. I bought my GSi with a slipped cambelt which took the engine out, but that was due to neglect rather than anything else. Ive replaced servicable items of course over the years but my v6 had over 100k on it, the 2ltrs had 130k and 160k and the diesel is still going after over 200k!Ive never found an issue with rain either. What model did you own?
CDP said:
Spyder5 said:
Its absolute poverty in comparison to my wifes midrange 1999 Golf (SE)
Manual winding rear windows, no traction control, manual Air Con, no heated washers, no heated seats, 6 speaker stereo (which is crap too).
Its a decent enough car, but there is a reason its so cheap.
I could't care less about winding windows up or climate control. Heated washers would be useful though.Manual winding rear windows, no traction control, manual Air Con, no heated washers, no heated seats, 6 speaker stereo (which is crap too).
Its a decent enough car, but there is a reason its so cheap.
Fundamentally they're reliable, durable and cheap.
A Golf is a white goods car too and doesn't seem any more reliable. Is it really true you have to take the front bumper off to change the headlight bulbs on a Golf?
You don't need to take the bumper off - although that was VW's workshop method in '99 when I worked for them.
Didnt expect this debate to go 4 pages haha
Had mine just over a month now and pretty pleased with it.
Agree with the acceleration in 3rd even the auto keeps it in past 70 joining the motorway. Conversely my daily trip involves the sweeping bend on the m53 yet to get near a brown pants moment as potentially suggested.
I also guess it depends what you've just got out of too. I went from x reg 1600 s40 to this 2.2 sri and they are poles apart. Again 7 years and 50(maybe 40) bhp will usually show up some differences. The s40 was a proper hateful thing cack at cruising probable down to the woeful lack of go, terrible in town and wallowly (sp) on twistys. It ate tyres and bent its timing valve twice in 2 years. Im also Surprised by the fact the vec is better on fuel but again probably down to the fact 70 or so was an effort.
Had mine just over a month now and pretty pleased with it.
Agree with the acceleration in 3rd even the auto keeps it in past 70 joining the motorway. Conversely my daily trip involves the sweeping bend on the m53 yet to get near a brown pants moment as potentially suggested.
I also guess it depends what you've just got out of too. I went from x reg 1600 s40 to this 2.2 sri and they are poles apart. Again 7 years and 50(maybe 40) bhp will usually show up some differences. The s40 was a proper hateful thing cack at cruising probable down to the woeful lack of go, terrible in town and wallowly (sp) on twistys. It ate tyres and bent its timing valve twice in 2 years. Im also Surprised by the fact the vec is better on fuel but again probably down to the fact 70 or so was an effort.
Spyder5 said:
tali1 said:
Spyder5 said:
My experience is the same as above. Reliable, comfortable and generally mediocre at everything it does.
Touch wood - its been faultless for 30k
Mine is very low spec (SRI) and really needs traction control for pulling away in the wet. The handling is fine on half decent tyres.
Err ...SRI is def not "very low spec" Touch wood - its been faultless for 30k
Mine is very low spec (SRI) and really needs traction control for pulling away in the wet. The handling is fine on half decent tyres.
Manual winding rear windows, no traction control, manual Air Con, no heated washers, no heated seats, 6 speaker stereo (which is crap too).
Its a decent enough car, but there is a reason its so cheap.
SE is sort of top spec as all Golfs above are sporty ones
As for Vectra (i assume a mk2) only Elite and Gsi/VXR sit above Sri
You could get an Elegance model which has rear electrics ...for £400 less
Ross1303 said:
Maybe Im a bit misled due to mainly owning vauxhalls and my dad having a number of them but I simply dont get the negativity surrounding the last version of the vectra.
Maybe I'm not ph enough but for a decent sized family hatch it ticks all the boxes I need.
Cheap to buy, on par with similarly priced and sized looks wise, eats miles without a grumble, pushes along well enough when asked and swallows all of our family luggage.
So is it simply case of vauxhall having a certain image or am I completely missing something?
I've sold quite a few and have no issues with them. They are as cheap as chips. Bought an 08 1.8i petrol with 75K miles on it, years MOT, timing belt done and FSH for £1750 including fees at auction. Maybe I'm not ph enough but for a decent sized family hatch it ticks all the boxes I need.
Cheap to buy, on par with similarly priced and sized looks wise, eats miles without a grumble, pushes along well enough when asked and swallows all of our family luggage.
So is it simply case of vauxhall having a certain image or am I completely missing something?
The 'standard' cars are desperately average though. Driving a Vectra is the motoring equivalent of saying "i've given up"
Had a few Mk1's and the subsequent slightly 'restyled' ones with work. They weren't bad. 16v engines were quite revvy. Dashboard was a bit uninspiring and the seats were over firm.
Also had a later 2.2 Dti Elite Auto. Now as much as it was ultimately compromised, I really enjoyed wafting around in that one.. Very comfy and easy to drive.
Also had a later 2.2 Dti Elite Auto. Now as much as it was ultimately compromised, I really enjoyed wafting around in that one.. Very comfy and easy to drive.
Ive had a X20XEV Vectra B SRi that was comfortable but utterly gutless, 130bhp in a car that size is horrendous. I changed this for a Vectra C SRi with the Z22SE lump that was brilliant. I loved it but I got hit 3 times in 6 months, it had to go.
I do however find it funny how many people rate the Saab equivalent? I have a Saab 9-3 Aero that runs a Vauxhall engine (well it doesnt run at all atm but thats another story), Vauxhall suspension & running gear and electronics. The only difference is the body work and interior. Yet everyone rates the 9-3 Aero as good to drive?
I do however find it funny how many people rate the Saab equivalent? I have a Saab 9-3 Aero that runs a Vauxhall engine (well it doesnt run at all atm but thats another story), Vauxhall suspension & running gear and electronics. The only difference is the body work and interior. Yet everyone rates the 9-3 Aero as good to drive?
nipsips said:
Ive had a X20XEV Vectra B SRi that was comfortable but utterly gutless, 130bhp in a car that size is horrendous. I changed this for a Vectra C SRi with the Z22SE lump that was brilliant. I loved it but I got hit 3 times in 6 months, it had to go.
The C was the 2.2 right? I've got the later direct one. Not too sure what the difference is but do think its a good engine. Absolutely panic after googling it and got back all sorts of cam chain issuesGassing Station | VX | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff